3 ms·

This is a naive comment, there are complexities in many peoples lives where even someone on a reasonable income may be caught short when 500-1000 dollars is ded

This is a naive comment, there are complexities in many peoples lives where even someone on a reasonable income may be caught short when 500-1000 dollars is deducted from them without warning.

Johnny555 8y ago
No doubt -- $1000 is a lot of money to many people. Those are the people that shouldn't have purchased a $1000 phone. A $150 Moto G6 may not be as fast as a flagship phone, and may not have a great screen or camera, but if paying to price of the phone upfront means the difference between putting food on the table or not, buy the cheap phone and build up your emergency fund. What happens if their unaffordable phone is lost or stolen?
- imtringued 8y ago
  I don't get this. $1000 is not a lot of money if you spread it over 2 years or even 5 years. I still use a 5 year old flagship. In other words it can be the sensible choice if you're willing to plan ahead, compared to just buying the cheapest stuff you can find and then throw it away after it breaks due to the lower quality. My micro USB port is wearing out and it is difficult to charge the phone. I will most likely have to get a new one in 2019. Features like wireless charging or waterproofing that would extend the life of my phone are mostly only available to flagships. On top of these benefits you also simply get a better phone. So now suddenly a company screws over people and it affects poor people disproportionately. Of course it's the fault of those poor people because they failed to plan their finances correctly and shouldn't have bought an expensive phone. Except they can afford the advertised plan and perhaps they even have chosen a phone according to the points I mentioned above because it will save them money in the long run. So why are we blaming the customers and defending the company's disgusting behavior? Do you really think it should be normal that companies are screwing you and it should be the responsibility of the customer to defend himself against what basically amounts to fraud?
- King-Aaron 8y ago
  What's naive is thinking that a person who gets seriously inconvenienced by a thousand dollars disappearing is immediately the same as someone who struggles to put food on the table - I feel there is a disconnect in your view of the kinds of middle income earners who we're describing here. I think the legs on your horse may also be too high. If someone has a mortgage, kids, other large outgoings etc, they are sill easily able to afford a flagship device. However a sudden hit to the monthly budget that's an order of magnitude larger than normal will ruffle most (i.e. easily over 50%) of borrowers.
  - Johnny555 8y ago
    It wasn't my suggestion that this would make people unable to buy food, I was replying to this comment: Not to mention inability to buy food, gas/transport to work, etc. If a $1000 phone is an order of magnitude over your monthly budget, then your monthly budget is only $100. ...still easily able to afford a flagship device. If they can't pay upfront, it doesn't sound like they can easily afford the device. I'm not wealthy by any stretch but my automatic overdraft protection on my checking is over 2x my entire monthly budget. it's not free to use but it would keep me from bouncing checks until I can transfer money from my emergency fund. If I had an unexpected $1000 charge it would come out of that overdraft protection.
- marak830 8y ago
  And maybe those same people worked hard to be able to afford said phone on a payment plan. But the issue here is said payment plan didn't work as advertised
- x0x0 8y ago
  Have you ever bought a car, even a reasonably priced one that you could well afford? What would have happened to your finances if, eg, you signed a 3 year car note for $800/mo and yet the entire $25k was removed from your accounts all at once?

This is a naive comment, there are complexities in many peoples lives where even someone on a reasonable income may be caught short when 500-1000 dollars is deducted from them without warning.

Johnny555 8y ago

No doubt -- $1000 is a lot of money to many people. Those are the people that shouldn't have purchased a $1000 phone. A $150 Moto G6 may not be as fast as a flagship phone, and may not have a great screen or camera, but if paying to price of the phone upfront means the difference between putting food on the table or not, buy the cheap phone and build up your emergency fund. What happens if their unaffordable phone is lost or stolen?

imtringued 8y ago
I don't get this. $1000 is not a lot of money if you spread it over 2 years or even 5 years. I still use a 5 year old flagship. In other words it can be the sensible choice if you're willing to plan ahead, compared to just buying the cheapest stuff you can find and then throw it away after it breaks due to the lower quality. My micro USB port is wearing out and it is difficult to charge the phone. I will most likely have to get a new one in 2019. Features like wireless charging or waterproofing that would extend the life of my phone are mostly only available to flagships. On top of these benefits you also simply get a better phone. So now suddenly a company screws over people and it affects poor people disproportionately. Of course it's the fault of those poor people because they failed to plan their finances correctly and shouldn't have bought an expensive phone. Except they can afford the advertised plan and perhaps they even have chosen a phone according to the points I mentioned above because it will save them money in the long run. So why are we blaming the customers and defending the company's disgusting behavior? Do you really think it should be normal that companies are screwing you and it should be the responsibility of the customer to defend himself against what basically amounts to fraud?
King-Aaron 8y ago
What's naive is thinking that a person who gets seriously inconvenienced by a thousand dollars disappearing is immediately the same as someone who struggles to put food on the table - I feel there is a disconnect in your view of the kinds of middle income earners who we're describing here. I think the legs on your horse may also be too high. If someone has a mortgage, kids, other large outgoings etc, they are sill easily able to afford a flagship device. However a sudden hit to the monthly budget that's an order of magnitude larger than normal will ruffle most (i.e. easily over 50%) of borrowers.
- Johnny555 8y ago
  It wasn't my suggestion that this would make people unable to buy food, I was replying to this comment: Not to mention inability to buy food, gas/transport to work, etc. If a $1000 phone is an order of magnitude over your monthly budget, then your monthly budget is only $100. ...still easily able to afford a flagship device. If they can't pay upfront, it doesn't sound like they can easily afford the device. I'm not wealthy by any stretch but my automatic overdraft protection on my checking is over 2x my entire monthly budget. it's not free to use but it would keep me from bouncing checks until I can transfer money from my emergency fund. If I had an unexpected $1000 charge it would come out of that overdraft protection.
marak830 8y ago
And maybe those same people worked hard to be able to afford said phone on a payment plan. But the issue here is said payment plan didn't work as advertised
x0x0 8y ago
Have you ever bought a car, even a reasonably priced one that you could well afford? What would have happened to your finances if, eg, you signed a 3 year car note for $800/mo and yet the entire $25k was removed from your accounts all at once?