That just so CDMA carriers can sell their phones for major profit while assing out their customer base. Good job Verizon and Sprint! Companies like you dserve the cockbags of the cellphone world award (ATT got cockholster BTW).
I believe the REAL issue was that Google would not let them lock the phone down and charge extra to restore the functionality, a trick that all carriers use to pad their bottom line.
I got modded down heavily last time I said that, but it is the most logical reason for the nixing of the phone. Both carriers will certainly sell phones WORSE than the Nexus1 in their lineup, so their "better phone" excuse makes no sense at all.
Actually the markup on cell phones is usually less than 10%, so they dont make a lot on phone sales. However their angle is haveing the phone that EVERYONE wants and are willing to sign a long term contract in order to get.
If the EVO's retail price is $599 without a contract then Sprint probably paid between $530 and $550 for it. Then by the time they sell it for $200 on a two year contract, they have actually lost money. The average turn around time for profitability on a new customer is about 10 months by the time you factor in marketing, and labor, and regular cost of doing business. So the reason why these companies dont want to support a phone that they user gets from the manufacturer is that they cant bind you to a contract and they then have no guarantee of recurring revenue. Once a customer has made 10 on time payments they start to be profitable to the carrier, hence the reason why a contract is nearly mandatory.
I was a manager of a Sprint store for 3 years and had worked in the industry for 3 years before that, before getting into the IT/ Networking field.
On a side note: I cant wait for the EVO. I will be buying one on July 1st when my contract is up!
Only until Sprint offers the 1 GHz CPU on a Cell will I see any use to buy an expensive phone. Might as well buy a net book and just use VoIP with Blue Tooth earpiece. At 4G speeds, I am hoping to get a data plan, and then just use VoIP.
If you read about what Google has to say about the Nexus One, I think it's far more likely that they just didn't want to put HTC through developing and supporting a CDMA device that wouldn't sell that well. They are already moving on to the Nexus Two. Really, Google is just being honest about the fact that the Nexus One is great, but not all that any more. I think they are happy about that. They also have a wonderful partner in HTC, and now they will likely move on to a Nexus Two without the same experiment so HTC can actually make a lot of money this time :-D
[citation][nom]geo4it[/nom]Only until Sprint offers the 1 GHz CPU on a Cell will I see any use to buy an expensive phone. Might as well buy a net book and just use VoIP with Blue Tooth earpiece. At 4G speeds, I am hoping to get a data plan, and then just use VoIP. geo4it[/citation]
The EVO 4G has a 1 Ghz Snapdragon processor, I suggest you check up on the new phones coming out.
+1 for contracts being the main source of money, without them a company makes very little, hence why phones have such high prices off or mid contract. If you don't think a cell company makes money on contracts, just take a look at cancellation fees and think about it.
They make money off a single month of service. Why would anyone think they don't? If the carrier sells a phone cheaper then cost sure they need a long contract to make up for the loss. Why they are not willing to give you month to month service on a phone is pure greed. If they can't make money off one month of service then how can they make money off of 12 or 24 and recoup the money on a cheap phone sale?
[citation][nom]RaptorX1[/nom]They make money off a single month of service. Why would anyone think they don't? If the carrier sells a phone cheaper then cost sure they need a long contract to make up for the loss. Why they are not willing to give you month to month service on a phone is pure greed. If they can't make money off one month of service then how can they make money off of 12 or 24 and recoup the money on a cheap phone sale?[/citation]
They "make money" each month, but only after the first 10 or 12 months do they break even after selling you a phone for 300-400$ cheaper that it costs for them to make/buy from a manufacturer.
Essentially it's like the bank giving you a loan. They give you say 100$, and they've "lost" that money. You then pay them say 20$ a month until you've payed it off, but since you borrowed their money they make you pay interest, say another 20$ so in the end you payed them 120$. A cell plan is the same way, they make an investment in you by selling you a phone cheaply, and in return they reap in $$$$$(lots) as you pay for the contract over the next 2 years. Contracts last 2 years because this is how long it must go for them to make a decent buck after they break even. Does that make enough sense?
("Decent buck" is used loosely, I would agree with a lot of people that they make a LARGE amount of money in the long run.)
Its basic double entry accounting practice what they are doing. They get to take a loss on the phone and thus have a write off, while breaking that loss up over the contract term of the service, which in turn leaves you with a different entry for your account which has a value assigned to it also divided up. Therefore on their statements, they DO show a profit EVERY month, which they in turn filter into quarterly reports released to share holders. This is but one end of it, but it will affect in a positive fashion their share price, thus pleasing the share holders.
Any CPA's reading this, I realize this is the short, SHORT version (spaceballs reference)
I'll have to see if Sprint charges differently for 4G compared to their current data/3G plans.
If I can get an HTC EVO 4G using one of the already existing and priced data plans currently offered, then I say this is a win.
Otherwise, it would have been nice to see the Nexus One on the cheaper 3G plans.
[citation][nom]brendano257[/nom]Essentially it's like the bank giving you a loan.[/citation]
That's the thing. I don't want a loan. I want to be able to buy my phone at full price, choose my carrier and have a monthly plan I can get out of whenever I choose. That's a lot more important to me than getting a phone at $100 or $200 and be stuck with a crappy signal and tons of dropped calls for 2 years.
Obviously telcos don't want us to be able to do this. It would open the door to competition from small startups and quickly bring prices down.
These things do not cost any where near what they charge. I work in Manufacturing Nothing in this world costs what you pay.. all over priced. Charge what the market will bear not fair market Price. Go Capitalism