Will you still buy the evo with the additional $10 monthly charge?

[dbpaddler]

nothing wrong with opinions. just pointing out that people here act like they are the majority, when in reality they are the minority so when they speak for the people (so to speak) it's really not the case. I'm as vocal as the next guy, but I know my opinion isn't going to influence what Sprint does one bit.

So whats your point? Im on a forum giving my opinion about a phone with others who have the same interest in the phone. Its a forum for discussion, you heard my voice, so I am being heard.

PS I voice my opinon to sprint via a different communication. I voice my opinion here not for sprint but for other users like myself. It seems to be working as intended!

 

[dbpaddler]

deleted some info. safe to say the $10 is mandatory for every evo phone out there. Let's just say the good news is the price plans will be decreasing by a specific amount that should make all of the whiners very happy. I've seen the proof. So no worries people.

 

[exempli_gratia]

I've got 1X data speeds and I hope the $10 fee is optional. I'm still getting the EVO though

I've heard that Sprint roams over onto the Verizon network. Is it that you don't have Verizon in your area? Or is it that roaming doesn't happen as long as you have any Sprint signal at all, even it it's only 2G? Very curious how/if that works.

 

[exempli_gratia]

deleted some info. safe to say the $10 is mandatory for every evo phone out there. Let's just say the good news is the price plans will be decreasing by a specific amount that should make all of the whiners very happy. I've seen the proof. So no worries people.

Can you elaborate, please?

 

[mobilemaniac]

Ok, so let's do the math:

Currently the poll says 111 people will get the phone regardless of the extra $10 charge and 33 will not (I'll leave out the 10 "others" because I don't know what that means).
So assuming that all 144 (111 yes + 33 no) would have got the phone at the $69.99 rate we see Sprint would have got:
144*$69.99 = $10078.56/month
a the new rate of $79.99/month Sprint will get:
111*79.99 = $8878.89/month

And this is among EVO fanatics! Might want to run that one by market research again Hesse.
Ok, now back to name-calling and belittling.

 

[vikingjunior]

Ok, so let's do the math:

Currently the poll says 111 people will get the phone regardless of the extra $10 charge and 33 will not (I'll leave out the 10 "others" because I don't know what that means).
So assuming that all 144 (111 yes + 33 no) would have got the phone at the $69.99 rate we see Sprint would have got:
144*$69.99 = $10078.56/month
a the new rate of $79.99/month Sprint will get:
111*79.99 = $8878.89/month

And this is among EVO fanatics! Might want to run that one by market research again Hesse.
Ok, now back to name-calling and belittling.

Good analogy!

I just don't see how Sprint wins with this $10 TAX.

 

[dbpaddler]

I'll elaborate more when I get some more confirmation. Just reading a few things that lead me to believe there could be a price decrease that could even things out come June 4th.

If I can get more clarification, then maybe hess wasn't lying when he said we wouldn't be paying more for 4g. In the end, our plans with 4g stay the same, just separated out differently. They maybe attract some new customers on the 3g side with cheaper plans, and ultimately the premium customers will all be 4g and they'll be back at the same rate they're paying now anyway.

Can you elaborate, please?

 

[clambert1273]

well I don't think its a "cap removal" this is my bill... pretty regularly every month

Line - mine:
Sprint Data Unlimited 17,185 (used)

Line - hubby:
Sprint Data Unlimited 5,196 (used)


No extra charges... ever


I am a moron LOL forgive me... I have children and they suck my brain dry (KB.. good lord I need a drink)

 

[dbpaddler]

Just because you don't go over the cap, doesn't mean a cap doesn't exist. and whether or not they enforce it is another story as well.

 

[mobilemaniac]

well I don't think its a "cap removal" this is my bill... pretty regularly every month

Line - mine:
Sprint Data Unlimited 17,185 (used)

Line - hubby:
Sprint Data Unlimited 5,196 (used)


No extra charges... ever


I am a moron LOL forgive me... I have children and they suck my brain dry (KB.. good lord I need a drink)

Don't sweat it. The average user never comes close to the 5GB cap. It's not easy to do on a phone unless you're tethering.

 

[bendispo]

Ok, so let's do the math:

Currently the poll says 111 people will get the phone regardless of the extra $10 charge and 33 will not (I'll leave out the 10 "others" because I don't know what that means).
So assuming that all 144 (111 yes + 33 no) would have got the phone at the $69.99 rate we see Sprint would have got:
144*$69.99 = $10078.56/month
a the new rate of $79.99/month Sprint will get:
111*79.99 = $8878.89/month

And this is among EVO fanatics! Might want to run that one by market research again Hesse.
Ok, now back to name-calling and belittling.

I posted this in a related thread, but it equally applies here:

You're making the mistake of assuming that whatever revenue Sprint earns from its customers can be treated as pure profit. Instead, you should take into account the fact that each customer also costs Sprint money (network infrastructure, customer service representatives, bills and promotions, facilities, etc.). Additional customers also means additional costs for the company. Thus, you need to base your calculations on the actual profit Sprint would make off each customer, not just upon revenue.

Profit margins are pretty tight for a telecommunications company like Sprint, which has such a large national footprint while having attempted in the past few years to appeal to the value-conscious crowd. Sprint has been consistently losing money not only because it hasn't brought in enough revenue (customer acquisitions and retentions), but also because revenues have overrun costs. Sprint needs to both add new customers as well as increase increase its ARPU (Average Revenue per User) and decrease its costs. At the moment, the average Sprint customer is actually generating a loss for the company.

Consequently, adding customers alone isn't going to fix things. I'm assuming that Sprint knows all this and that the extra $10 fee is just enough to make sure that the average Sprint customer (and definitely the EVO customer) begins to create a profit for the company.

At the end of the day, I'm disappointed about having to pay an extra $10 for service I may not use. However, while a lot of people the last few days have been calling Sprint greedy, I think we we should withhold our judgment until the company at least become profitable again: There's a big difference between being greedy and clawing for survival. Sprint has to at least start garnering enough profit to begin paying off its sizable debts. Sprint's surviving will continue to generate competition in the market, and even with the extra EVO fee, I'll still be paying much less than I would at any other major national carrier. ;-)

 

[Caloy]

I preordered the phone, but I have 30 days to see if it's infact worth it. If I don't get 4G coverage at my home and work. I'm going back to T-Mobile and probably just buy the HD2. I only use about 100-150 minutes of calls a month so I guess I don't need unlimited minutes to any mobile to any mobile. Never really took that into consideration until the $10 add-on.

69.99 + $10 + tax = almost $100. And with T-Mo it's 59.99 + tax would be less than $80. Only difference is that the Evo will have 4G. Would $10 be worth it for me? We will know the moment I use the phone and how I use it. I've never used an Android device and don't know how much usage I'll be getting out of it. But at least I get to try it out for 30 days before I can finally decide if $10 is worth it, or should I just go with T-Mo and buy the HD2 outright, and wait for the Samsung Galaxy S.

 

[RedWingsFan]

deleted some info. safe to say the $10 is mandatory for every evo phone out there. Let's just say the good news is the price plans will be decreasing by a specific amount that should make all of the whiners very happy. I've seen the proof. So no worries people.

The even better news is my friends, friends, uncle who works at the Sprint kiosk in the mall said Sprint is going to stop charging people for service and give it away for free. I've seen proof.

 

[Caloy]

The even better news is my friends, friends, uncle who works at the Sprint kiosk in the mall said Sprint is going to stop charging people for service and give it away for free. I've seen proof.

LOL!!! Sorry I just have to react! - Good one!

 

[eieio]

Don't forget, Sprint needed to add subcribers so $10 is the lowest hurdle they could think of that would get people to come aboard or stay. I hope it's the low watermark for any 4G intros because you can bet other carriers are not happy Sprint didn't charge more for their 4G. With the premiums being paid now on VZW and ATT for 3G devices and CEOs on record saying they want to see more and higher prices for tiered data, I'd love to be in their meetings as they launch LTE and devices thinking uh-oh remember what Sprint did. And by then, I hope Sprint's done this with a few more devices and exerted some downward pressure. Might not happen, but that's what I hope.

This was extremely refreshing to read..

The EVO data pricing is a segway into the additional cost for Wimax among other improvements..

Sprint is spending Billions on 3g and 4g improvements, they have to recoup the money..

They have to generate cash to complete the 4g and 3g build outs..

Wimax will cost less than LTE to build out..

I can't wait to see what Verizon and ATT are going to charge for their 4g services..

If you guys think Sprint is bending you over stick with ATT and Verizon and post back when 4g rolls out on the other networks with pricing..

Yeah the fees suck but for the eventual coverage, features and comparison to what it will cost on other networks it will be a steal..

There is nothing to compare it to right now because. Sprint is the only network that has it..

Trying doing the price comparisons when the other networks finally get 4g services..

 

[RedWingsFan]

I think everyone understands the cost behind putting up a 4G network, the problem is they are charging customers who don't have 4G now and probably won't in the near future for the 'upgrade'.

 

[Lukehluke]

I hope this comes to the UK as its a pretty amazing bit of tech.

 

[eieio]

I think everyone understands the cost behind putting up a 4G network, the problem is they are charging customers who don't have 4G now and probably won't in the near future for the 'upgrade'.

I partially agree..

They are also subsidizing the cost of the phone..

The 4g and 3g upgrades are part of doing business for Sprint.

Unfortunately like all business they are passing the cost on to the consumer to recoup them, yeah that sucks but its how corporate America rolls..

As a business owner we pay more for some of the exact same services that Sprint charge consumers less for. Is that fair?

 

[exempli_gratia]

I partially agree..

They are also subsidizing the cost of the phone..

The 4g and 3g upgrades are part of doing business for Sprint.

Unfortunately like all business they are passing the cost on to the consumer to recoup them, yeah that sucks but its how corporate America rolls..

As a business owner we pay more for some of the exact same services that Sprint charge consumers less for. Is that fair?

They should own up then, and charge more for the phone. Instead they try to hide the price and claim it's for "Advanced network features".

Even more to the point, is that they're upset that customers are focusing more and more on data, moving away from voice. While all their plans (and the other carriers') are still heavily voice centric. This is a back-door way to raise the data service fee. No one likes being misled. That goes double when the services you claim to be adding are not available to most of the folks being asked to foot the bill.

 

[tokuzumi]

They should own up then, and charge more for the phone. Instead they try to hide the price and claim it's for "Advanced network features".

Even more to the point, is that they're upset that customers are focusing more and more on data, moving away from voice. While all their plans (and the other carriers') are still heavily voice centric. This is a back-door way to raise the data service fee. No one likes being misled. That goes double when the services you claim to be adding are not available to most of the folks being asked to foot the bill.

This isn't unlike the Sprint vs Verizon TP2. Sprint originally charged $350 on contract, and Verizon charged $200, on contract. But when you factored in monthly plan costs for voice/data/text on comparable plans, you were paying a ton more on Verizon. You just had smaller upfront costs with Verizon, which is what most users look at first. Which was why Verizon was selling out of their TP2, and Sprint didn't have that "issue". Verizon hid the true price of the TP2 in their monthly service fees.

It would have been nice if the $10 was an add-on code, to use the 4G data. That way, Evo users in non-4G cities wouldn't get screwed. Now that gives you incentive to move to a 4G city I think the true test will be when we see AT&T and Verizon roll out their LTE networks. What will they charge? Free (yeah right)? $10? $15? $20? My guess will be $20/mo.

 

[exempli_gratia]

This isn't unlike the Sprint vs Verizon TP2. Sprint originally charged $350 on contract, and Verizon charged $200, on contract. But when you factored in monthly plan costs for voice/data/text on comparable plans, you were paying a ton more on Verizon. You just had smaller upfront costs with Verizon, which is what most users look at first. Which was why Verizon was selling out of their TP2, and Sprint didn't have that "issue". Verizon hid the true price of the TP2 in their monthly service fees.

Sprint fans here keep harking on Sprint being so much cheaper in general. But that's primarily just the bundled SMS. Not everyone is a big SMS'er, and for those that are, Android/Google Voice is making that a smaller issue (like Google did with Navigation). TP2 did not have that Google factor.

 

[mobilemaniac]

I posted this in a related thread, but it equally applies here:

You're making the mistake of assuming that whatever revenue Sprint earns from its customers can be treated as pure profit. Instead, you should take into account the fact that each customer also costs Sprint money (network infrastructure, customer service representatives, bills and promotions, facilities, etc.). Additional customers also means additional costs for the company. Thus, you need to base your calculations on the actual profit Sprint would make off each customer, not just upon revenue.

Profit margins are pretty tight for a telecommunications company like Sprint, which has such a large national footprint while having attempted in the past few years to appeal to the value-conscious crowd. Sprint has been consistently losing money not only because it hasn't brought in enough revenue (customer acquisitions and retentions), but also because revenues have overrun costs. Sprint needs to both add new customers as well as increase increase its ARPU (Average Revenue per User) and decrease its costs. At the moment, the average Sprint customer is actually generating a loss for the company.

Consequently, adding customers alone isn't going to fix things. I'm assuming that Sprint knows all this and that the extra $10 fee is just enough to make sure that the average Sprint customer (and definitely the EVO customer) begins to create a profit for the company.

At the end of the day, I'm disappointed about having to pay an extra $10 for service I may not use. However, while a lot of people the last few days have been calling Sprint greedy, I think we we should withhold our judgment until the company at least become profitable again: There's a big difference between being greedy and clawing for survival. Sprint has to at least start garnering enough profit to begin paying off its sizable debts. Sprint's surviving will continue to generate competition in the market, and even with the extra EVO fee, I'll still be paying much less than I would at any other major national carrier. ;-)

You're really overthinking it. Based on our (unscientific) poll, Sprint will be collecting less revenues on the increased price. If it's true that Sprint is losing money on each customer at the $69.99 rate, then they need to cut operating costs, because based on our poll they will not increase revenues at the higher rate.

Of course, it's not true that Sprint takes a one to one loss for each customer they add because they don't have to improve infrastructure for every new customer. Once they hit a certain threshold of subscribers, they start turning a profit. This is why the goal of every cell phone provider is to add subscribers.

I have no emotional reaction to Sprint being "greedy". They are in business to make money. They are supposed to be greedy. I wish them all the luck in the world to make as much money as they can. That said, it's clear that their strategy is failing. In my opinion, they had a slam dunk with the EVO at their current rate plan. They finally got a decent handset to match their unbeatable price. However, at $80/month they are about the same price as the competition and if you're not in a 4G market (almost everyone) then they offer no advantage. They are still cheaper if you need unlimited talk and text, but the majority of people don't.

Furthermore, many people are going to balk at paying the same price for 3G as others paying for 4G. It's like going to a restaurant and paying a fixed price. While the guy next to you is eating steak, you are given hamburger.