3 ms·

T-mobile supports unlocked phones. Asking people to pay for the phone they choose is not a termination fee. They get to keep the phone.

by gowld 7y ago

ocdtrekkie 7y ago
This is not different than Verizon, and never was. (It was hard to get a phone that supported Verizon from anywhere else due to band differences largely, but if you had an unlocked phone that could run Verizon's network, they were and still are legally obligated to activate it.) T-Mobile just claimed their payment plan, which shafted you if you canceled service, wasn't an ETF (it is), and Verizon just said their early termination fee was part of the plan, though it was really paying off the rest of the phone (which it did). In both cases, you're paying off a phone you bought, and keeping it after ending service. The only real difference was that in the past, you were "paying for the phone" on Verizon monthly even if you didn't actually upgrade/buy a phone from them. But since the vast majority of people buy phones from their carrier, it really impacted the bottom line very, very little. The HN crowd over-represents in the tiny group of people that would bring an outside phone to their carrier. A change which materially impacts less than 5% of your customers isn't game-changing, but T-Mobile marketed it like it was important to 100% of their customers.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  Verizon and Sprint didn't even have SIM cards for the longest time, so a Verizon phone and Sprint phone were always restricted to their networks. As an international traveler, I've never even considered Verizon or Sprint as I would never be able to pop another SIM from a different country.
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    Verizon and Sprint were primarily built on CDMA networks, which generally didn't use SIM cards. They wouldn't work internationally largely because they were incompatible radios. The phones have the unique identifiers hardcoded into the phones, but could be added to a compatible carrier's network. (Bear in mind, a SIM is really just a hardware manifestation of a unique identifier and some settings. It's not impossible to do these things entirely digitally, and now with eSIM, that is happening on GSM/LTE networks as well.)
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      Technical reasons aside, it still meant Verizon/Sprint phones were effectively locked to their networks until recently.
      - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
        But that had nothing to do with T-Mobile or Legere. It was the shift to LTE networking and some mandates by the FCC related to spectrum auctions.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- gravitas 7y ago
  > The HN crowd over-represents in the tiny group of people that would bring an outside phone to their carrier. IMHO, not really - HN is niche compared to everyone who was using HowardForums to hack on their Motorola and Nokia phones back in the day, myself included. T-Mobile was on the 900/1800 (?) spectrum which matched Europe and other places you could buy eBay phones, and T-Mobile was always free and open to people doing this. You could call support and get someone to help you with adding the right APNs and whatnot, they were always the "un-carrier" to many of us.
- Talanes 7y ago
  Even if the functional difference is minimal, I'd still argue that it is a net positive to present the deal in a straight forward way. There's also a lessened urgency to upgrade phones under the T-Mobile model. There's still the Jump program, for those who do want to keep on a trade-in cycle, but if you're happy with you're phone you get rewarded with a lower bill at the end for sticking with it until you aren't.
- scarface74 7y ago
  But since the vast majority of people buy phones from their carrier, About half of all phones sold in the US are iPhones and probably more on the major carriers. Apple sells a lot of phones both online and in their retail stores and have their own payment plans. You can buy an unlocked phone from Apple and optionally have it registered with one if the major providers.

T-mobile supports unlocked phones. Asking people to pay for the phone they choose is not a termination fee. They get to keep the phone.

by gowld 7y ago

T-mobile supports unlocked phones. Asking people to pay for the phone they choose is not a termination fee. They get to keep the phone.

ocdtrekkie 7y ago

This is not different than Verizon, and never was. (It was hard to get a phone that supported Verizon from anywhere else due to band differences largely, but if you had an unlocked phone that could run Verizon's network, they were and still are legally obligated to activate it.) T-Mobile just claimed their payment plan, which shafted you if you canceled service, wasn't an ETF (it is), and Verizon just said their early termination fee was part of the plan, though it was really paying off the rest of the phone (which it did). In both cases, you're paying off a phone you bought, and keeping it after ending service. The only real difference was that in the past, you were "paying for the phone" on Verizon monthly even if you didn't actually upgrade/buy a phone from them. But since the vast majority of people buy phones from their carrier, it really impacted the bottom line very, very little. The HN crowd over-represents in the tiny group of people that would bring an outside phone to their carrier. A change which materially impacts less than 5% of your customers isn't game-changing, but T-Mobile marketed it like it was important to 100% of their customers.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
Verizon and Sprint didn't even have SIM cards for the longest time, so a Verizon phone and Sprint phone were always restricted to their networks. As an international traveler, I've never even considered Verizon or Sprint as I would never be able to pop another SIM from a different country.
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  Verizon and Sprint were primarily built on CDMA networks, which generally didn't use SIM cards. They wouldn't work internationally largely because they were incompatible radios. The phones have the unique identifiers hardcoded into the phones, but could be added to a compatible carrier's network. (Bear in mind, a SIM is really just a hardware manifestation of a unique identifier and some settings. It's not impossible to do these things entirely digitally, and now with eSIM, that is happening on GSM/LTE networks as well.)
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    Technical reasons aside, it still meant Verizon/Sprint phones were effectively locked to their networks until recently.
    - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
      But that had nothing to do with T-Mobile or Legere. It was the shift to LTE networking and some mandates by the FCC related to spectrum auctions.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
gravitas 7y ago
> The HN crowd over-represents in the tiny group of people that would bring an outside phone to their carrier. IMHO, not really - HN is niche compared to everyone who was using HowardForums to hack on their Motorola and Nokia phones back in the day, myself included. T-Mobile was on the 900/1800 (?) spectrum which matched Europe and other places you could buy eBay phones, and T-Mobile was always free and open to people doing this. You could call support and get someone to help you with adding the right APNs and whatnot, they were always the "un-carrier" to many of us.
Talanes 7y ago
Even if the functional difference is minimal, I'd still argue that it is a net positive to present the deal in a straight forward way. There's also a lessened urgency to upgrade phones under the T-Mobile model. There's still the Jump program, for those who do want to keep on a trade-in cycle, but if you're happy with you're phone you get rewarded with a lower bill at the end for sticking with it until you aren't.
scarface74 7y ago
But since the vast majority of people buy phones from their carrier, About half of all phones sold in the US are iPhones and probably more on the major carriers. Apple sells a lot of phones both online and in their retail stores and have their own payment plans. You can buy an unlocked phone from Apple and optionally have it registered with one if the major providers.