Of course they will never do this. But just like carriers offer 2 different prices on the phone…one w/ contract, one w/out contract, they should do the same for the service.

Then the consumers could at least get a feel for what those subsidies really cost them.

However, there are huge costs associated with this practice, which most consumers overlook. Let’s face it: consumers eventually pay for those subsidies in the form of higher monthly service fees. The carriers are not giving anything away.

In essence, it’s a buy now and pay later plan. But all of those consumers out there who are out of contract using their old phones…guess what? They’re still paying for subsidies they are not using. There’s no discount for keeping your current phone for a longer period of time. The same goes for those who buy unlocked phones to use on US carriers.

But here’s the real rub. This is a form of installment purchasing, complete with financing costs. However, unlike other financing plans, there’s no required disclosure on the financing costs. Do you think it really takes a carrier 2 years to recoup their subsidy on a phone?

I think if we the consumers knew the true cost of the financing of their subsidies it would shock everyone.

The difference, as Mel pointed out, was that I paid over $600 for a device that would have probably only cost $200 if it were subsizided by AT&T.

As Prof Tim Wu articulates, we need wireless net neutrality. We need the equivalent of the FCC Carterfone ruling for wireless, whereby devices and service are effectively decoupled.

Keep in mind that at one point you could only use ATT landline phones on their landline service. Carterfone broke that monopoly open. After that, not only did we have better competition and selection among landline phones, but you had other unexpected developments that would never have happened if ATT had remained the gatekeeper for the devices attached to their network, namely the fax machine and more importantly, the modem, which of course was key to the spread of the internet.

Sad but true. But then again RIM and the other manufactures can certainly do their part to keep the service providers from screwing up their hardware and products.

Verizon’s Open Development Initiative? So Far It’s A Joke
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizons-Open-Development-Initiative-So-Far-Its-A-Joke-100102

verizon’s upgrade to LTE is a positive for consumers, verizon having access to all of Alltel’s GSM footprint is a positive for consumer IF verizon does the right thing. However one shouldn’t need to be reminded biggest is not better when it comes to the verizon walled garden.

By the way, the “economic mess” you refer to was also made possible by Clinton’s deregulation of the banking industry.

I don’t believe Obama opposed these mergers; and I would be very surprised if Verizon & ATT&T don’t buy more carriers during his tenure.

And their power over companies like RIM only increases.

The differencies between Clinton., Bush Jr & Obama are minimal.