HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log in  
Share | 
 

 Smartphone News

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:13 pm

I'm pulling my balding follicles out.

The USA is the contract leader. That's what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about the world. The entire world isn't instituting a stupid law where people are getting fined $500,000 or prison time for hacking their phones to switch carriers. This is only limited in discussion, scope and value to the United States of America. I should have used fine print, because we're the contract lovin' SOB's. Laughing
$700 phones is not what we pay here, directly. Value NOT determined by a consuming public, but by artisan contract designers. Meaning, if you want a phone, you pay $700, get rung up at the register and have a great time. That's not what happens in the USA, people would shit skittles if they had to pay for a phone with a price tag of $700 up-front. If you have that kind of action, it's a TracPhone like Richard suggested, and it's not $700. Like I said before, $200 is less than $700, so people are like, "Oh, golly-gee, I can do that!"

In that light, the Internet service providers have yet to jump on this bandwagon as a whole. You can still buy whatever router to whatever service you choose, depending on their network connections, and it works well. Eventually, they may start leasing out computers, iPads, etc for service (meaning, you get it for "free" or low cost) but if you skip out on the contract, you pay the full price. $400 iPads and $700 laptops will become $1200 iPads and $3000 laptops, thanks to contracts. People enjoy thinking they pay less and are getting more, and the system is the opposite.

Which is why laws like that come about, protecting the interests of the cellular companies, providers, network holders and probably somewhere in the line, the component/end user products.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:16 pm

That's why I said every five years for usability, you poof. Razz I sure hope your sold phones aren't being hacked and used to on different carriers, PeeB, that'd make you an accessory. Laughing The cell companies would much rather you just give 'em to THEM so they can make you feel good about phones not getting caught in an endangered sea turtle's throat, which is a huge problem, I bet.

You can find old-ass phones at thrift/junk stores for $2 a pop. Have at it, brother.

PS, I have reconsidered my figures: Less than 1% of folks buying cell phones up-front cost raised to 4% due to the plausibility of eBay storefronts. Fine. You got me. Laughing

Cool
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:28 pm

It's legalised extortion, guys.

Same bullshit as requiring TV stations to dump analogue broadcasting so nobody could watch it for free anymore.

Now it's ALL digital. Which means some scumbucket telecom gets to charge you extortionate rates to let you access it.

The same scumbucket outfits that were supposed to raise the US internet delivery to . . . third world standards. But never did because it wasn't lucrative.

It's like you're so hypnotised by the "contract" idea you can't see the noses in front of your faces.

Which is that the whole system's straight Fascism. Company profits are first and foremost ; the actual people they're serving exploiting can go eat shit.

What a Face

Back to top Go down
kaiser83

avatar

Age : 34
Location : Wherever the smoke clears
Registration date : 2012-02-22

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:52 pm

Sleep

Companies want to make money. People want to save money while having nice crap. The companies win out every time because people are selfish. People say "it isn't fair" while the companies say "bend over and take it". Life sucks and then we die. It's just a stupid phone, if our lives stopped revolving around phones and the internet and these online forums of crazy folks we'd be better off, yet here we type while the birds chirp outside (or the snow falls). Sicken, enlighten, anger, please, whatever it is in life you expect these companies to give you...they want to make money more and for one person who says "eff the system" and steps away from it all another 10 jump into it (okay probably way more). Regardless....it's a stupid phone.

Go smoke a pipe and drink a glass of Old Number 7 while listening to the birds because in that you will find happiness that a phone will never give you.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dshpipes

avatar

Age : 33
Location : Durham, NC
Registration date : 2011-03-06

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:34 pm

Kyle Weiss wrote:
I mean, no offense, Dave, but I'm not going to discuss vehicle engineering and design with the salesman. It's just not what they do.

No offense taken, but I'd be a pretty lousy salesman and manager if I didn't have some idea of how things operate, just like I wouldn't trust a car salesman who didn't know how a combustion engine works. I mean no offense here either, my friend, but can you talk circles around me about the engineering, design, and manufacture of cell phones? Considering your knowledge of all things random, I wouldn't be surprised, but I am curious. Smile

Yak wrote:
It's legalised extortion, guys.

Same bullshit as requiring TV stations to dump analogue broadcasting so nobody could watch it for free anymore.

Now it's ALL digital. Which means some scumbucket telecom gets to charge you extortionate rates to let you access it.

The same scumbucket outfits that were supposed to raise the US internet delivery to . . . third world standards. But never did because it wasn't lucrative.

It's like you're so hypnotised by the "contract" idea you can't see the noses in front of your faces.

Which is that the whole system's straight Fascism. Company profits are first and foremost ; the actual people they're serving exploiting can go eat shit.

What a Face


The digital signal that comes to my house is free. I don't pay for cable television (don't have it) and I don't pay for digital broadcast channels (which I do have).

On the whole, I'm just befuddled by what I'm hearing and it sounds like you and Kyle are too. I'm really not sure how to get on the same page. I'll argue my point in response to you guys but I'm not sure we're seeing eye to eye or are going to. I'll preface by saying that I think the size of the penalty is ridiculous but that the penalty itself is not because a 2 year, legally binding contract is involved. Now, if you don't like the contract, buy a phone at full retail, bring in an old phone, buy a phone online and activate it or buy a prepay phone like RB. No contract required, no disconnect fees, and no issue taking the device to another carrier.

The general public of the US does not understand that these devices are more expensive than what they pay with a contract. Granted. They probably would pay those retail prices, though, if there were a better understanding of what they were buying. The market share of smartphones would likely decrease, so there's little impetus for cell phone companies to change their tack. Example: the iPad. No contract for that device. You pay full price at $650 for the device and you pay for monthly service if you want it. One of the hottest and highest selling devices over the holiday. The main thing here is that no one is accustomed to paying more for a phone and since "Smart Phones" are still considered "just phones" by many, people see them as such and presume they should be cheaper as a result of a lack of understanding.

Let's say I sell stickers. My stickers are in demand and therefore a little more costly than other stickers. I sell a page of them for $10. Someone approaches me and says, "Damn, those are some amazing stickers! Sucks though, I don't have $10." I say, "Tell you what, pay me $2 now and over the next two months you can pay me back." They agree and tell their friends about the great deal I'm offering on my stickers. People come flocking. Only problem is, I realize that about half of the people who agree to pay me back don't. What do I do to recoup my costs? I'd probably get the law involved with some kind of binding agreement which would legally insure that I'd get paid back. What I wouldn't do is demand a $500,000 fine for people who didn't pay me back. Although it is a great deterrent.

Does all this mean that my stickers are only worth $2? I could sell them at $10 a pop, but then my customer base would get smaller. It behooves me to take a small payment up front in order to secure more customers in the long run.

What that law is doing is preventing people from breaking their legal contract. I don't think it unreasonable to include and discuss the contract in this conversation. I also don't think the contract unreasonable. No one is signing away their children, they're just agreeing to stick with a single phone carrier for two years.

I don't really understand why a legal contract, or any part of the system in which cell phones are bought and sold, is fascism, legalized extortion, or anything like either of these. Is signing a legal contract for a mortgage in the same category?

I'll reiterate: if you don't like the contract, buy a phone at full retail, bring in an old phone, buy a phone online and activate it or buy a prepay phone like RB. No contract required, no disconnect fees, and no issue taking the device to another carrier.

So at the end of the day, if you don't like the system, then protest it by not participating.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.dshpipes.com
dshpipes

avatar

Age : 33
Location : Durham, NC
Registration date : 2011-03-06

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:35 pm

kaiser83 wrote:
Sleep

Companies want to make money. People want to save money while having nice crap. The companies win out every time because people are selfish. People say "it isn't fair" while the companies say "bend over and take it". Life sucks and then we die. It's just a stupid phone, if our lives stopped revolving around phones and the internet and these online forums of crazy folks we'd be better off, yet here we type while the birds chirp outside (or the snow falls). Sicken, enlighten, anger, please, whatever it is in life you expect these companies to give you...they want to make money more and for one person who says "eff the system" and steps away from it all another 10 jump into it (okay probably way more). Regardless....it's a stupid phone.

Go smoke a pipe and drink a glass of Old Number 7 while listening to the birds because in that you will find happiness that a phone will never give you.

Wisest thing any of us have said, if you ask me. Here here!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.dshpipes.com
BigCasino

avatar

Age : 49
Location : North of Pittsburgh pa
Registration date : 2012-11-27

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:37 pm

Yak wrote:
It's legalised extortion, guys.

Same bullshit as requiring TV stations to dump analogue broadcasting so nobody could watch it for free anymore.

Now it's ALL digital. Which means some scumbucket telecom gets to charge you extortionate rates to let you access it.

The same scumbucket outfits that were supposed to raise the US internet delivery to . . . third world standards. But never did because it wasn't lucrative.

It's like you're so hypnotised by the "contract" idea you can't see the noses in front of your faces.

Which is that the whole system's straight Fascism. Company profits are first and foremost ; the actual people they're serving exploiting can go eat shit.

What a Face


I have both a satelite dish and a tv antenna I get A whole pile more stations now than I ever did over the air now that over the air broadcasts are in HD, and yes they are still FREE
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.bcpipes.net
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:10 pm

You just bought the dish & the antenna, hooked them up, and there you were ?

No monthly bill(s) ?

It's looking like I must not understand this after all . . .

What a Face
Back to top Go down
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:29 pm

Keep pulling your hair folicles..


its a $700 phone.. period. The cell company pays $500 of it for you if you sign a contract.
taking the phone they just dumped $500 on and running off to another carrier is stealing. Feign outrage, be mad, stick your head in the sand.. I don't care.. but if someone was taking $500 out of your pocket you'd want the law to protect you too.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:34 pm

puros_bran wrote:
Keep pulling your hair folicles..


its a $700 phone.. period. The cell company pays $500 of it for you if you sign a contract.
taking the phone they just dumped $500 on and running off to another carrier is stealing. Feign outrage, be mad, stick your head in the sand.. I don't care.. but if someone was taking $500 out of your pocket you'd want the law to protect you too.

*sigh*

Mad? Outrage? No, brother. Not at all. I have no dog in this fight, it's just a funny concept on my end. It isn't a $700 phone, it's a phone with a "suggested retail value" that only sees the light of day on breach of contract in vast majority cases involving cellular phone consumption in the USA. No more than my 4Runner is a Mercedes, because I change the hood emblem and go complain to someone because some guy was only willing to give me $1000 for it. Since the money was never in my pocket, no one is out anything. Counting eggs does not guarantee chickens. Imaginary eggs included via contracts. I suppose I could be really smart, which I'm not, and convince the guy he can drive it for two years for only $100 a month, because wow, only $100, not $1000...that'd be alright. If he breaks contract, take the stupid jerk to court. He signed the document. I would need someone to fight for me, then. Poor me. Laughing

Uber wrote:
No offense taken, but I'd be a pretty lousy salesman and manager if I didn't have some idea of how things operate, just like I wouldn't trust a car salesman who didn't know how a combustion engine works. I mean no offense here either, my friend, but can you talk circles around me about the engineering, design, and manufacture of cell phones? Considering your knowledge of all things random, I wouldn't be surprised, but I am curious. Smile

Well, of course, but there's a pretty big, wide and deep rabbit hole beyond what many salespeople of any goods really knows about them--or they wouldn't be salespeople. I've talked to enough car sales guys that couldn't tell the difference between a piston ring and a seat cover, that isn't really a good example...I'm sure you know a little beyond which end to talk in to the phone, which helps in your line of work. Laughing The engineering, design and manufacture of cell phones are like any electronic device, with a few different components. Yeah, I know a few things about them, but specifics? No. They're microcomponent radio devices with viewscreens and digital software operating systems, and resistors, capacitors, diodes and IC's are so small that they're beyond human repair; thus, disposable...they ain't an old tube radio or a synthesizer. Beyond that, they'd take searching and geekery far beyond what I give a crap about with cell phones, and since designs and features change every six months, that's bad enough. I went through that as a PC tech/network admin as chips/memory/operating systems/datasets/cabling changed, if you weren't on it, you were lost. Laughing Lame job. Rocks are less complicated, and change a little slower.

Cool

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:51 pm

This is all fascinating to debate, but I really don't care. We can keep going on about supposed $700 phones. Razz Maybe we could turn this into a discussion about how all business contracts must be fulfilled no matter what, especially to recoup suggested loss, because most of that circus has little to do with the goods/prices involved, but the contract itself. That would be far more interesting.

(kidding) No

Cool
Back to top Go down
View user profile
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:55 pm

And I'm telling you that it's a $700 device.. not a $700 MSRP Device. Go prepaid and check the cost (and trust me it's far greater than the imaginary 1% statistic you made up that do this).. Go buy an unlocked and check the price. Go outside the states and check the price.

There's a company that signs on owner operators and only charges them $1.25 for diesel fuel. They pay the remainder (theoretically via fuel surcharge but in actuality that plus percentage skim on billable miles) The company will terminate the contract if they catch them selling fuel off their card or fueling personal vehicles with it.. Why? Because $1.25 is not the price of diesel fuel and using that fuel for anything besides the contractual agreement is theft.


I won't shut up here...lol
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:12 pm

Besides diesel fuel being a commodity that is refined several times from a raw product here in the States, and is bought/sold/traded several times before it goes in a rig, it has little in common (besides the contract) with the cell phone scenario on a domestic consumption level. Please, don't shut up, I swear I'll believe you, but convince me, dammit. Laughing I love you

So I threw out 1%; find me the actual number of full-market price transactions paid for a phone versus those who acquire a phone via contract, just for shits'n'gigs. Yeah, I guessed. I bet I'm closer than you could be, though. I'll even stand by my 4% changed estimate. Razz

Your $700 phone can sit 'n spin. Laughing MSRP isn't even mentioned in phone contracts (a static number at the time of the phone is purchased via contract) because they know the "value" of the phone, as it ages in two years (average contract) will change based on what people are willing to pay, and that hedges against further loss...accountants are smarter than you and me, PeeB. And if it depreciates (changes) that much, the only time it's a $700 phone is to the dummies who buy them the first day of release without a contract. Next month? Oh, it's now a $650 phone. Quick, $50 just got taken out of the consumer's pocket! Arrest someone! Razz

Cool



Back to top Go down
View user profile
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:16 pm

I've showed you a half a dozen links.. your to dumb to click 'em... you can lead a horse to water...........
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:18 pm

puros_bran wrote:
I've showed you a half a dozen links.. your to dumb to click 'em... you can lead a horse to water...........

None of those links gave me any relevant purchasing percentages. Minus points for eBay listings. Ham sandwich. And you only gave me half a half dozen links. Razz



Last edited by Kyle Weiss on Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:19 pm

whatever..

Product for x $$$ doesn't show pricing? Damn, you have been reading to much Yaks stuff.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:20 pm

I can go list a phone on eBay for $1,000,000,000 and link back to it. Referencing it as actual value will make me about as right as I am Mexican.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:25 pm

Amigo.. go look at the completed listing..
Back to top Go down
View user profile
tgwilt



Age : 64
Location : Kissimmee, Florida
Registration date : 2011-12-25

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:50 pm

OK, so what happens when a person finishes the two year contract with company A, is not satisfied with the service of said company and wants to take his phone to company B?

Does company B automatically unlock it or does B say, 'too bad, so sad, you have to commit to a 2 year contract with us and get a different phone'?

Lucky for me, I unlocked my phone before this provision went into effect. I may be wrong, but is it still legal to do if you bought your phone before the new year?

Personally, I like my iPhone 4S and my carrier is ok, not great. I will finish out the contract this November - I have some moral scruples after all, but would like to check out a different network.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Slide



Age : 55
Location : Benton, Louisiana
Registration date : 2011-11-23

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:53 am

Breaking the contract has penalties. Usually it is enough or more than enough to pay for the full cost of the phone.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
lifeon2



Age : 43
Location : Denver Colorado
Registration date : 2013-01-29

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:20 am

This all makes me glad I still have a stupid phone. cheers
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:50 am

There are some mental gymnastics involved in viewing the matter at issue as a contract that involves a phone.

And I don't see where the earlier analogies (Colt, Spaulding, Ford) are invalid because some weasel re-cast it in terms essentially alien to common practice and traditional expectations.

What a Face


Last edited by Yak on Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:54 am

tgwilt wrote:


Does company B automatically unlock it or does B say, 'too bad, so sad, you have to commit to a 2 year contract with us and get a different phone'?


Company B can't unlock it.. You either have to hack it up or get the original carrier to unlock it. XDA is your friend.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
puros_bran
Nightrider
avatar

Location : Brandenburg, Ky
Registration date : 2007-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:10 am

Yak wrote:
There are some mental gymnastics involved in viewing the matter at issue as a contract with a phone attached.

And I don't see where the earlier analogies (Colt, Spaulding, Ford) are invalid because some weasel re-cast it in terms essentially alien to common practice and traditional expectations.

What a Face
Some people pay cash for their car and buy it outright... others put them on payments.. A subsidized phone is essentially making payments.. Your just doing it while also paying for the service.

There are three factors involved in the anti argument. #1 The penalty for the crime is excessive and violates the constitution of The United States of America. The fact that it is theft remains. #2 The carriers ARE culpable because they have convinced us that They are $100 and $200 phones by not being transparent about the matter. #3 It appears as Government passing arbitrary laws for the corporate masters. If it was a law punishing the Corporation for theft We'd all be cheering (and yes they do commit theft in their pricing, but two wrongs do not make a right)

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kyle Weiss

avatar

Location : Reno, NV
Registration date : 2011-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Smartphone News   Thu Jan 31, 2013 3:45 pm

(I had a lot of fun writing this, it may be bullcrap or missing a few details, but it was a good exercise in comparative thinking.)

A scene at an auto dealership:

A man walks in, and is greeted by a salesman.

"Howdy, sir, this Mustang is $15,000, or, you could sign a 5 year lease with us and drive it home today for no money down and $299/mo. How's that sound?"

"...well, salesdude, what's the final cost of the car?"

"I don't mind telling you that, good sir, it'll be a 5% loan, so we're lookin' at a final cost of around $21,000, give or take, with taxes, yadda yadda."

"...so it's cheaper if I avoid the contract?"

"Sure, sir, you're only paying for the loan amount."

"My cell phone company doesn't work like that."

"Sir?"

"Well, what I mean is, I see a phone, they say it's $99, and I have a two year contract with them, and I pay about $150 a month. If I want to cancel, I have to pay what they call a "penalty" and I suppose that's to recoup the phone cost, but they said it was $99, and I even read the fine print...which said nothing about the cost of a phone, just a penalty. They also listed an MSRP next to the phone..."

"...MSRP, sir?"

"Sorry, salesdude, that's 'Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price'....anyway, it said the phone was $699. So I figured I was getting one hell of savings, right?"

"Sure sounds like it!"

"Of course! Now, say, here at USA Car Sales you came up to me and said for $5,999, I could drive away that Mustang over there, but I'd have to pay $600/mo for five years in order to do so. The sticker cost on the car is $30,000..."

"...wait, sir, but our Mustang isn't $30,000, it's $15,000..."

"...ah, but that's not the point, kind salesperson. The point is to make the contract a sweet deal, so the price is lofty by design...we both know the car is a $15,000 car. In fact, if I do my math, I'm owning that mustang at $36,000 after all is said and done, due to the contract."

"That's outrageous, sir!"

"Not only that, if I back out early on the contract, I have a $30,000 penalty...never mind what I've already invested in the car."

"Can they really DO that?"

"Of course, my good salesperson. That's because for some reason, when a lack of zeros at the end of a monetary figure exist, usually less than four, people think of it as 'affordable.' More than five, then it's pretty much out of their reach, and they merely ignore it as an impossibility. But, someone were to shroud those numbers in other numbers, suddenly, you get them past the 'big numbers' they're afraid of, and a company can earn more profit."

"That sound deceitful, if you ask me, sir."

"Some might call it theft, salesdude, and there's a law claiming that if you want to use your phone in someone elses' network, that's theft to."

"Come again, sir?"

"Here's the deal...we have this here Mustang. Let's say we can only drive our Mustang on highways with even numbers...but you want to drive it on a street with an odd number. The company that sells the Camaro has a car that you can drive on odd numbers, but not even. You're expected to throw away, recycle or turn in your Mustang, or simply buy a second car (the Camaro) so you can drive on the streets you want. Anything else is not only nearly impossible to do, if it were to be done, it'd be considered illegal."

"It is? That's rough! Why would someone design a system like that? What if someone were to...you know...just jump on the wrong street with the wrong car?"

"Money, my good man, money. Well, nothing, according to a dealership like yours. One way or the other, you're making your money via a contract for a $30,000 Mustang. Do you have used cars here?"

"Well, of course we do sir, would you like to see them?"

"Not right now... my point is, your used cars aren't from the same company as the Mutang, but you still sell them. Imagine if your company was not the only company that sold mustangs...but your competitor did too, or something almost identical to a Mustang."

"Why would they do that? That sounds like they'd be undermining their own sales, between the companies!"

"For the same reason gas stations pop up right across the street from one another. It regulates the market, and 'price fighting' is a natural part of that. Now, imagine further, the streets we drive on are also owned by your company and your competitors, and it was totally okay to drive along all the streets no matter what car you drive...but all you had to do was keep the car's original name badge on it."

"Sounds fair, but I'm getting confused...I thought certain cars could only go on certain streets?"

"Well, salesguy, that's the truth, but it's come about in this story that they've decided to let anyone use their streets no matter who they are, because they have deals with each other that they agree to, and even buy access from totally different companies that own special streets."

"Special streets, huh? This is sounding like a tall tale."

"Not really. Say for example your wife goes out of town to visit her grandparents, but she took your Mustang here. For some reason, out of the blue, she discovers she can't get to Grandma and Grandpa's because the street exists on that pesky competitor's set of streets, and to get there would require her to walk, rent a bike or catch a cab...for a 50 mile journey. Silly, right?"

"Right."

"What if she knew all she had to do to get to her destination all she had to do was remove the 'Mustang' name badge and put on a 'Camaro' name badge and she could get there...no muss, no fuss."

"Sounds reasonable, sir."

"Ah, well, that's where it gets tricky. While the companies might not care, the government does. In fact, they want to fine her a million dollars and put her in prison for it."

"Are you kidding, sir?"

"No, as a matter of fact, they think she's a crooked thieving miscreant, and because she already owns the Mustang, and just called it 'Camaro' to get to Grannys means she stole from the company that owns 'Camaro."

"How did she do that?"

"Because of the agreements between the companies and the government."

"How much did she actually steal, then, sir? Is it that bad of a crime?"

"I'm not sure, that's a matter of who you ask. Since the Camaro is $30,000, and she never bought it, but claims she has a Camaro, that company is apparently entitled to $30,000. Stealing $30,000 is a big deal, according to some."

"...but isn't the Mustang the same price as a Camaro, $15,000?"

"Yep. It's the contract that makes it $30,000, or in actuality, $36,000."

"Where'd that extra $21,000 come from, sir?"

"It came from the contract. As did the illegality that said that you cannot change the name of the car from one to the other, even if it means you get service/availability to streets you did not have before. Would your customers pay more than $15,000 for a car, salesguy?"

"Only if they leased it."

"Right, and that lease amount is based on money you borrowed to own the car, not the car itself, right?"

"Right, sir. Right again."
f
"Back to reality, salesguy, what if the government were the ones that actually owned the streets, but leased the streets in our fictitious little car/street scenario, that they were the ones that built and maintained them, but someone else was collecting the rights to use them? We call that the 'FCC' and they control the frequencies we talk on with our phones."

"That's kind of weird."

"Not at all. Now you see why the contract is so important to the car companies and the government, especially on a funding standpoint. It's all designed to keep a neat, tidy and what most would assume is a consumer-driven system that no one really complains about."

"I have a question, sir."

"Ask away, good salesdude."

"If I bought my Mustang outright, for this new MSRP of $30,000, can't I use it on any street?"

"Well, yes, you can, but only once. And not every Mustang or Camaro or any car will necessarily work, you are limited to whatever is a current model because of compatibility. You get to choose whatever system you want, but once it is there, you can't change it. So if you want features of the Camaro, you have to get a Camaro, and if there's that rare street you can't get onto, you either have to buy a Camaro or 'illegally' change the name."

"So what does the $30,000 actually get me, and why the compatibility? And what happened to my $5,999 car?"

"A Mustang, or a Camaro. That's it, but it'll be a NEW one. Some people do that, but not very many here in the good ol' US of A, paying full-price for either car, which price was based upon a contract, and now becomes the 'value' because people really have no choice, and on top of that, have to follow the rules, and compatibility set by the car company and the government. The car companies make it so that old cars can't be used on the system, because they upgrade the system (whether it's needed or not), or more to the point, make new cars not only desirable, but the old ones obsolete. Not only that, the old cars are to be turned into the car companies themselves for recycling, but you can also sell them and try to recoup some of your losses...no pun intended. You're still at the whim of all the rules and cost. It isn't $5,999, nor $30,000...it's still $15,000, but that world doesn't exist in this hypothetical one, remember."

"Makes me not want to buy a car. Or a cell phone."

"Ah yes, but you will. It's become such a convenience and a daily-life product that you'd be outpaced and out-traveled by those whizzing past you...and that would not only make you feel bad because people would look down upon you, it'd seem like you were standing still, or at least going very slowly. Fortunately, there's a few companies that also allow you to buy disposable cars you pay for every time you use them, but they often lack the 'cool factor' and newness of a real Mustang or Camaro, and since that's not what the majority people 'want,' it isn't really an issue for the big car companies. You're paying for a name, and maybe a few extras, like a windshield wiper warmers...all the rage, but next year, it'll be something else. And that partially justifies the cost and contracts involved. Cell phone with their new releases, faster this-n-thats, or car with windshield wiper warmers."

"I see...but windshield wiper warmers? Who really needs that?"

"No one, really, but you'd think you'd die if you didn't have them if you ask some people that are fans of them."

"So were stuck in this world you speak of, sir?"

"We're stuck, my good man. Be thankful your Mustang here is only $15,000, or with a contract, a around $20,000. Be thankful our cars aren't run like cell phone companies. Say, does your company sell vintage motorcycles?"

"No, why?"

"I think I need one of those rather than a Mustang after talking about all of this."

Cool






Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
Smartphone News
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Global News, 16:9 - Cyber Seduction Documentary (42 Year Old Mom & Teacher Turned Internet Predator)
» Breaking News: 4-Year-Old Boy Stabbed To Death At SE London Family Home
» McCann's Outburst Towards Press - Guerrilla Democracy News
» On Sky News this morning
» SKY/Breaking news

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Brothers of Briar :: Community :: The Round Table-
Jump to: