T-Mobile Executive Calls For End to Cell Phone Subsidies

rated by 0 users
This post has 10 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,402
Points 1,192,670
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Fri, Mar 9 2012 3:30 PM
T-Mobile's Chief Marketing Officer Cole Brodman has an interesting idea for revamping the mobile industry -- and it involves killing the subsidy plans that have driven smartphone adoption over the past five years. Brodman was participating in a round-table at the Geekwire tech summit; other speakers included Jon Irwin, the president of Rhapsody), Mike McSherry, CEO of Swype, and David Bluhm, CEO of Z2Live.

Asked what one thing he'd change if he had the power to do so, Brodman pointed to subsidy programs. “It [device subsidies] actually distorts what devices actually cost and it causes OEMs, carriers — everybody to compete on different playing fields," the CMO said. "I think it is really difficult, especially from a consumer perspective, because it causes consumers to devalue completely the hardware they are using…. It is amazing hardware, but it has become kind of throw away. So, it is unfortunate, you’ve got dual-core, multiprocessor devices with amazing HD screens that get thrown away at 18 months.”

That's an interesting position for a marketing executive to take, but Brodman's comments on the irregular playing field and hidden device costs got us curious about what the differences are between subsidized and unsubsidized pricing. Here's AT&T's pricing on the iPhone 4S, the recently released Galaxy Note, and HTC's Titan. The A777 is an older feature phone, the HTC Titan is powered by Windows Phone 7 and was released in Q3 2011, and the iPhone 4S needs no introduction.  Here's what we found:

Brodman isn't kidding about an irregular playing field. The HTC Titan is the most subsidized device on our list -- Microsoft is obviously desperate to gain market share in mobile -- but both the iPhone 4S and the Galaxy Note carry $400+ discounts. The cheapest smartphone AT&T offers without a subsidy is the thoroughly mediocre HTC Status, for $349. To add insult to injury, it's only available in mauve.


The face of despair

The question is, is AT&T's unsubsidized price model a fair example of what phones should actually cost?  It depends on how you define a smartphone. Hop over to NewEgg, and you'll find "smartphones" much cheaper;  the Galaxy Y is just $166, while the A777 is $59.99. The Galaxy Y, however, is only a smartphone by the kindest definition of the term. It's built around a single-core ARM11-class processor that's weaker than the Cortex-A8, offers 290MB of RAM, and 158MB of internal storage (a microSD card can boost this up to 32GB). Performance-wise, it'd be somewhere between an iPhone 3G and 3GS, but with a weaker GPU and slower storage.

The Samsung Galaxy Note, on the other hand, is $699 at NewEgg -- $50 more than even AT&T's unsubsidized price. Between the two sources, we've got at least a rough feel for what an unsubsidized phone model would look like -- and it's not a pretty picture.

The Pros and Cons

Huge subsidies are what allow manufacturers to push the envelope and continue offering better and better specs at breakneck speeds. Carriers are willing to pay them because, from T-Mobile or AT&T's point of view, they're going to make $360 off just your data plan ($20 minimum at 18 months). Messaging Unlimited (a virtual requirement on all AT&T plans) is another $20, while the minimum plan for non-seniors is $39.95. Total amount paid to Ma Bell works out to $1439, before taxes, fees, and overages.

From AT&T's perspective, giving you an iPhone 4S for $199 is a great deal.

The downside to the current model, of course, is that carriers and manufacturers have zero reason to invest in software upgrades or feature improvements. The Ice Cream Sandwich rollouts are proof that companies invest in such updates as little as they can get away with. The entire focus of the cycle is on the next set of customers who have upgrades to spend -- once you've updated and signed your new contract, you're locked in and irrelevant.

A more realistic price model would upend this structure and force manufacturers to invest in phone updates. Consumers who paid $600 for a phone aren't going to be so willing to toss it away, and as Brodman says, they'd be more irritated if software updates weren't delivered in a timely fashion. The reason that's not going to happen is simple -- any attempt to move away from subsidies would force customers to pay drastically more for lower-quality devices. Compare Samsung's Galaxy Y at $169 against the iPhone 4S at $199 and the gap is pathetic.

It's an interesting idea, but practically unworkable as far as the mass market is concerned. AT&T and its ilk have built a market structure in which consumers gladly accept a new bauble every 18 months in exchange for paying for text messaging (which literally costs carriers nothing) and overage charges in which 300MB of data for $20 is a fair market value.
  • | Post Points: 95
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 3,236
Points 37,910
Joined: Mar 2010
AKwyn replied on Fri, Mar 9 2012 9:09 PM

I have to agree; we are so adapted to buying phones with subsidiaries that there is no way we can't live without them... I mean sure, he does have a good point but unless phones manage to get cheaper then there seems to be no point in buying an unsubsidized phone. I mean just look at the variety of phones we can get; the number of high end phones, the number of medium-end phones. Sure, all of them result in being locked down in a contract but who cares about that when we have a fancy new phone in our hands.

A shame, yes; but I guess it's the way of life for many of people.

 

"The future starts with you; now start posting more!"

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 468
Points 7,045
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: United States
AjayD replied on Fri, Mar 9 2012 10:07 PM

It's inaccurate and misleading to deem the reduced prices as subsidies. A subsidy is a grant or gift. Cell companies have constructed their business model around the fact that they sell many of their phones at a loss. They recoup these loses by inflating the price of their minute/ data plans and by making data plans mandatory on smart phones.

While costumers may not pay the full purchase price for new phones up front, the remaining balance is simply amortized across the duration of their contract. Make no mistake, the customer is indeed the one paying for the cost of the phone in its entirety.

 

***** Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted. *****

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,694
Points 104,420
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Fri, Mar 9 2012 11:02 PM

Don't forget that the Cell companies already make a screaming crapload of money off of our subsidized phones and the skewed plans that accompany them. This clown just wants ~more money~ in the form of profits and that's not surprising in the least. If greed was a color, he'd be pooping it out.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2012
mdvx replied on Sat, Mar 10 2012 10:39 AM

I just tossed my DroidX which was on contract with Verizon, in exchange for a $630 unlocked Galaxy Nexus on T-Mobile. Even after paying the ETF for the last 4 months of my Verizon contract it was cheaper for me, to break it the contract than wait 4 months. Now i'm with T-mobile with no contract and paying $28 a month for 5GB of data and 100 minutes.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2012

Haven't tried their service but Ting.com has an interesting a la carte approach. You pay for the handset up front and then pay for voice, text and data separately. They are a Sprint reseller. If you just want a smart phone and use minimal voice, text and data it's a pretty good deal and you could save enough in a year or less to pay for the phone. If you mostly use WiFi for data that would be a perfect fit.

No, I am not a paid shill for Ting, but found it interesting to see a real-life "unsubsidized" business model.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 4,838
Points 45,830
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kennesaw
rapid1 replied on Sat, Mar 10 2012 9:11 PM

mdvx you have the right idea to a degree. I moved to T-Mobile because I had tho have a smartphone so I could accept credit cards, of course they also offer the best monthly with free wifi (which is also almost a must to accept CC's as that is the way it (Square card reader) prefers to transmit), and the data etc is totally acceptable even when your phone is subsidized. I have a Sensation and Sarah now is on T-Mobile as well as my mom and my teenage daughter Amber. The crazy thing is we pay 50% of what we did on Verizon without smart phones and texting as well as minutes. My separate bill for me and Sarah alone was under $70 this month and we both have unlimited texting wire -150 in minutes if not more and each have 200Mb of data which if we go over all T-MO does is throttle us, the thing is we never go over (I actively manage data but still) so we don't even get throttled.

OS:Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit
MB:ASUS Z87C
CPU:Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 4770 ***
GPU:Geforce GTX 770 4GB
Mem:***ingston 16384MB RAM
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 2
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2012
JWorleyII replied on Sun, Mar 11 2012 7:14 AM

Actually I just bought the ZTE Warp and switched from Verizon to Boost Mobile and its every bit as good as the Droid Razr, except its cheaper and I have no contract.

I win.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 35
Joined: Mar 2012
IWelch replied on Sun, Mar 11 2012 12:47 PM

so why does T-Mobile not even offer a plan that has a lower monthly cost where I bring my own cell phone?? if this plan cost $1,000 instead of $1,439, I could even use my old iphone 3GS and switch to T-mobile.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,694
Points 104,420
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Sun, Mar 11 2012 1:06 PM

IWelch:

so why does T-Mobile not even offer a plan that has a lower monthly cost where I bring my own cell phone?? if this plan cost $1,000 instead of $1,439, I could even use my old iphone 3GS and switch to T-mobile.

They wouldn't be able to ~bathe~ in your money that way and they really want to get as much of it as possible, so they will not be cutting you any slack.

 

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2012
ZeroG1 replied on Sun, Mar 11 2012 2:43 PM

It's called the Value plan. It has a lower monthly payment when you bring your own phone. I brought over my phone from AT&T and pay about $20/line less.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (11 items) | RSS