Sprint Realizes That People Hate Forced Contracts, Early Termination Fees
from the making-it-a-choice dept
It's become quite clear that people absolutely hate the forced two year contracts and early termination fees from mobile operators. It appears that some of the operators are finally getting the message. In discussing how it's going to offer its eventual WiMax offering, Sprint is now saying that there will be no mandatory contracts with early termination fees -- instead, it will be voluntary, based on a sliding price scale. In other words, if you're willing to take a longer contract, it'll be much cheaper. If you don't want a contract, that's fine, but you'll pay more per month. That seems perfectly reasonable and fits with typical pricing systems that lets the customer figure out how much the flexibility is worth to them. It's about time someone started offering this. Hopefully the other operators take the hint and start offering something similar for their regular phone service.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Subsidies by Anonymous Coward on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 10:29am
If contracts are designed to recover costs associated with subsidizing the handset, why does this proposal involve a monthly service price change. Can't they just stick with making the phone more expensive for a shorter contract?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by ballstein on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 10:29am
Also, i left sprint because of this. I am now with verizon and I couldn't be happier. Hopefully every operator will get the hint....
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
A lookback at Sprint by TasMot on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 10:37am
If you look back, in 1978 when I first got a Sprint phone, there was no contract at all (it was advertised as a benefit of being a Sprint customer). Now, they just charge more if there isn't one. Funny, if there service was good enough then why would anyone not want to stay. Oh well, I waited out the contract and then changed. I even called them to find out the exact date my contract was over.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
what by Meoip on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:06am
I've always been able to do this. Verizon, sprint, ATT / Cingular / back to ATT. They rip you apart cost wise for it but it's always been possible.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
half the issue... by spurioustruth on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:12am
Agreed that the n-year commitments are terrible for the customer (after all--if the vendors service levels drop off during those two years, I'm going to leave, and I don't want to get penalized for my vendor and their every changing capabilities).
But, In terms of marketing data plans in general (and the coming WiMax in particular) I'd like to suggest not following the playbook of AT&T/Cingular...
They have 38 distinct data plans that mostly vary on the kind of device you are using.. Did you know that your smartphone eats a different kind of data than your Windows Mobile phone does? Your direct connect laptop card? You do now... (to note: some of the features are quite understandable: additional fees for Microsoft direct push, Good services, etc make sense for differentiation but for the data-is-data part of the game it leads to pure confusion).
I believe simplification of the *entire* product menu is in order. AT&T used to have that with the "digital one rate" plans back in the day (albeit without the data part).
Here's hoping the vendors start swinging back that way.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: A lookback at Sprint by Anonymous Coward on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:38am
1978? Sprint PCS appears to have debuted in 1995...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
verizon by Archie Andrews on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:43am
For anyone on Verizon that may have been late on bills, They use, or have used a crooked New Jersey law office for their collections...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
sliding price scale by Michael Long on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:50am
If they're going to do it on a sliding price scale, then base it on usage. After all, it's only fair that the people who use the system the most pay for that use.
Though such a thing won't make the torrent crowd happy...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:51am
This doesn't directly apply, because we don't have wireless phone service, but I work for good-sized telco (although not a giant one) that offers phone, internet, and digital TV services. All of our services are risk free with no obligation, no contract, no nothing. If somebody wants to get our ultimate internet package on a promotional deal for $20 a month for three months, and then cancel it right before the three months is over, that's perfectly fine. Our goal is not to lock people into our services, but instead convince them that we have the best services to offer, and that if they try us, they will probably like us. I wish that was the mentality throughout the industry, because it really is a win/win situation. Let the product sell itself, not the contracts. If your product or service is good enough, you will be rewarded with sales. If not, it means you have some more work to do.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: half the issue... by Anonymous Coward on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 11:58am
It's not so much the service dropping off. It's more the fact that they don't rev the technology. Who wants to be locked into 2 years of AT&T's EDGE when someone else offers EVDO at the same price?
Being able to take your phone and instantly hop over to someone who provides something BETTER is key to forcing them to keep improving things. Why would AT&T need to move quickly with an affordable WiMax play; they have millions of people locked into EDGE and digital cable.
At some point, this will be moot. Your phone will continuously and instantly negotiate rates with providers on the fly and will seamlessly switch between them. All they'll be is connectors between endpoints. A commodity.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
SPRINT by Anthony on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 12:06pm
That would appear to be the only thing that they do right. Horrible coverage, horrible sound quality, horrible customer service, nothing ever goes right with them. I can't wait to escape thier contract with it expires.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: sliding price scale by matt on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 12:16pm
just a fyi, charging a premium for higher use would lose customers in any business - the reverse of a "volume discount" doesn't exactly create business or cater to customers - its like a big FARK YOU to your face, really.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Maybe it has less to wising up and more to do with by MRG on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 2:26pm
Just a thought but the State of Minnesota just announced this week that they are suing Sprint/Nextel for deceptive practices concerning their cancellation policies. I wonder if dropping the charges may have something to do with the lawsuit. The State of Minnesota is suing because they get the largest number of complaints concerning Sprint/Nextel. Apparently they extend people's contracts without letting the customer know they are doing it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: sliding price scale by Michael Long on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 3:18pm
I can think of plenty of examples like bandwidth, electricity, water, toll roads, etc.., where if I use more I pay more. After all, my utility company doesn't give me a quantity discount on electrons.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: verizon by RandomThoughts on Sep 28th, 2007 @ 5:19pm
Archie, why do you say "crooked New Jersey law office"?
Isn't the crooked just assumed? You are being redundant.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sprint Sued by MN AG by Bob Weiss on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 6:18am
Sprint is being sued over this very issue by the Minnesota Attorney General. People who make the slightest changes - like ordering a new battery - are having to extend their contract terms. I think it is interesting that they "now" want to let people choose when and how much of a contract therm they want.
Hmmmmm......anyone?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sprint by Woadan on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 9:47am
I have to admit that I haven'tooked up the details, but I seem to recall in the past week of hearing about how Sprint was not going to subsidize the cost of the device with the WiMax offering.
If this is true, or at least that is what they are saying, then I think they are misleading. If I sign up for a 3-month plan and buy device A for $100, and my monthly fee is $75 x 3 months, I paid $225 for the service. If I sign up for a 6-month plan and also buy device A for $100, and my monthly fee is $50 x 6 months, I paid $300 for the service.
3 months = $225 + $100 = $325/3 = $108.33 per month svc/dev
6 months = $300 + $100 = $400/6 = $ 66.67 per month svc/dev
All they're doing, if this is how it works (and I don't know for sure that it does), is shifting where the money goes.
I don't doubt for a minute that the difference in monthly fees will be sgnificant if you compare a 3-month term to a 1- or 2-year one.
It's a step in the right direction, perhaps, but what still remains to be seen is whether you have to buy a Sprint-branded device to get on their network. And also whether you can use the device on a competitors WiMax service, too.
I'm all for no lock-in as long as it really is no lock-in. But if the device is still tied to the network/carrier, then all that's being done is shifting the subsidy. And that is really no change at all.
Woadan
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Woadan on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 9:49am
Another thought: How will you pay? Will you pay all of the costs up front? Or will you be charged a monthly fee?
Woadan
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: SPRINT by Matt on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 11:14am
All of this chatter about contracts and early termination fees are... meaningless. If you're not happy with your service, then it's your God-given right to call your company's customer service line and vent your righteous frustration out to the person on the other end of the line.
THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE THERE FOR.
Complain often enough, and you've completely blown the profit margin that they typically would have made off of you. At that point, you are a liability to the company, and they'll politely ask you to take your business elsewhere. And since they're asking YOU to leave, it costs nothing, and you should be able to port your number with you should you desire to do such a thing.
They're counting on you not complaining. If you don't complain, then nobody is holding them to task for the lousy coverage, poor call quality, and technologies that lags behind most of the industrialized world. Not happy? Call those bastards and LET THEM KNOW.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sprint service & phones by Tanya on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 12:27pm
I'm one of the few who are happy with Sprint....BUT I would like to know about this so-called "Iphone" clone they are coming out with in December....anyone....? Information....? email me at Spitfire56@aol.com...thanks a bunch!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
new business model by WMark on Oct 1st, 2007 @ 8:58am
Wireless companies require contracts when they subsidize devices...you want a free phone? Want a Treo for only $199? The carrier has to make that money back, so you're on the hook for two years. Don't want a contract? You can get that today by paying full price for a phone.
What's behind the change to "no contract" business is the removal of subsidies for devices in the Wi-Max space. Fortunately, Wi-Max chips are likely to be pretty inexpensive, so they are cheap to inbed in a wide range of devices. You won't have to pay much of a premium for a Wi-Max device and you'll be able to go "contract free" for the connectivity...but don't forget about the applications...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: A lookback at Sprint by tc1uscg on Oct 4th, 2007 @ 3:28am
TasMot.. When my contract ran out. My plan didn't go up. When I switch plans, they didn't change my contract. I still didn't have one. Only when I wanted to get a new phone was I told that I would have to sign a 2 year contract to get the max money off, 1 year to get half the money off. I bought the phone out right and stuck with no contract. If people would stop being so blinded by the idea of that new cool 500.00 phone for 199.00, they would just pay the full price and not get a contract. But people expect 110% customer survice while getting everything else for free. Not going to happen. VZ is so sure of itself by not extending contracts, people fail to see they are more expensive and last time I checked the fourums all over, they are as bad if not worse then Sprint or AT&T for customer service. They just by enough advertising to stay out of the lime light of big media. Been there.. had that.. got smart and went back to Sprint. The grass is green on both sides and they both need to be mowed every now and then.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: sliding price scale by tc1uscg on Oct 4th, 2007 @ 3:33am
Too funny but right. Don't forget, there are those (cable and Verizon) who will boot your behind if you use TOO MUCH of that service while only paying for what they consider unlimited.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: SPRINT by tc1uscg on Oct 4th, 2007 @ 3:35am
No.. something more simpler and less stress full. Just pay the ETF and go somewhere else with your cheese and wine. I'm sure some other provider would just LOVE to have you.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sprint by tc1uscg on Oct 4th, 2007 @ 3:43am
Not really. Don't assume device "A" is 100.00 out the door. Lets say it's 300.00 with NO CONTRACT and your monthly wimax plan is 50.00. Now, If I want the same device for FREE but sign a 2 year agreement, I get the plan for 30.00 a month.
300.00 + 50x24=1500.00 no contract
300.00-300.00 + 30x24=720.00 w/contract
So, would you rather pay double not to have a contract? It's like insurance. Is it fair for a insurance company to consider your policy based on what the vehicle cost new in 1985 but will only pay out book value if it's a total loss? Statefarm does this on motorhomes and I know.. they do it to me.. but they are still cheaper then anyone else. Guess it's a no brainer. For some.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sprint service & phones by tc1uscg on Oct 4th, 2007 @ 3:46am
It's the HTC touch. http://www.htctouch.com/
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Feb 13th, 2008 @ 10:16am
what i hate about sprint is the coverage. plans are alright. and also u cant send ringtones to any other phone. this sucks!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Feb 13th, 2008 @ 10:20am
what i hate about sprint is the coverage. plans are alright. and also u cant send ringtones to any other phone. this sucks! sprint phone suck! all the cool phones arrive at all the other phone carriers. they charge too much for early termination!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by mike wesdon on Apr 10th, 2008 @ 2:14pm
I posted my at&t family plan on www.adioswireless.com to save $250 in early termination fees. Just found someone to take over my wirless contract.It cost $19.95 but no more plan.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment