Android News
Verizon Hates Upgrades, Not Fond of You Either
January 4, 2011 | by Michael Heller
Android News, Uncategorized, Verizon
Verizon is about to change their upgrade policy to make things more annoying for you. Luckily, in an effort to smooth the transition, Verizon is calling the change a “simplification”. Basically, instead of being able to upgrade your phone in months 13 to 20 of your 2-year deal, you’ll be forced to wait until month 20 do make an upgrade. This new policy is set to go into effect on January 16th. The “New Every Two-Years” program is set to be phased out as well.
Likely, this change won’t completely prohibit upgrades, but will probably just add another early upgrade fee into the mix or change the current early upgrade fee policies. What will be interesting is if this changes how manufacturers deal with software upgrades. Manufacturers could drag their heels more on software upgrades, because consumers will be locked into their current phone anyway. Although, on the other side of that, manufacturers may have more reason to push upgrades, since consumers will likely make more noise without the option to buy a newer phone more frequently.
With the speed at which smartphone hardware and software is iterating, this move by Verizon is a push to get more cash. The change will either force consumers to choose a one-year plan and purchase phones with less subsidy, or opt for being locked into one device for 20 months, but getting a larger subsidy on the phone cost. The trouble with Verizon is that unlike T-Mobile, there is no per month price difference between buying a phone full price or on subsidy. So, these changes are simply giving consumers fewer choices and more costs at every turn.
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
More about this app
Grrr. Stupid Verizon.
Wonder how and if this will affect annual upgrades on the primary line of a family plan which currently allows you to upgrade annually at the 2 year pricing every year if your plan is 69.95 or more.
it doesnt affect it from what the verizon rep told me when i asked about it.
anyone who has ne2 keeps it. and anyone who gets a new phone before the 16th gets ne2. after september 2012 it will no longer be a thing. but the primary annual upgrade and 1 year contracts are unnaffected.
its really not that big of a change. it does simplify it quite a bit. you werent able to upgrade for the same reduced price untill 20 months were up anyways you just had to pay extra for months 13-19 they are just taking that away.
you are still better off being the main line on a family plan or getting 1 year contracts.
I was just thinking about carriers, OEMs and the upgrade cycle this morning. I don't think its about trouble upgrading the software at all. If groups like the CyanogenMod folks can do this stuck in weeks for multiple devices across OEM's surely a team of paid devs working full-time can get it done. No I think they are trying to feel out just how much consumers care about not having their devices upgraded. If we don't complain they won't do it believing that we will simply go out and buy the next phone when our contract is up. If we were used to getting upgrades we might hang on to that old hardware longer.
We have to make noise about this but problem is theres not much of a way to do it. We can't vote with our wallets because at most we're changing carriers or platforms. The same OEM's still make the phones so a platform change doesn't bother them. People probably won't change carriers as much so the only entity that gets hurt is Google and Android and they aren't the problem. So I guess its count on the modder community or buy new phones to get the new features.
Fact-checking, anyone? The current 13-20 month early upgrade plan already *does* have an early upgrade fee involved. And it's only available to qualifying lines (certain price points, for example, secondary lines on family share plans are not eligible).
The New Every Two is an additional discount (again, for the same price points eligible for the early upgrade) if you wait the full 20 months before getting a new device, and was already scaled back from $100 or $50 (depending on your price plan) to $50 or $30. With the expected dramatic drop in handset prices predicted here and pretty much everywhere else (reported upcoming $120 retail Android handsets ringing a bell?), I don't see this as being a major issue for most consumers.
Also, one-year plans do NOT require a full-retail purchase price. They get one-year subsidy pricing.
Fortunately, amid all your speculation, half-truths, and blatant disinformation, you did manage to spell Verizon's name right. So it wasn't a total fail.
I made some changes as per your suggestions. I had looked into Verizon's current policies when writing this, but unfortunately they don't make things very easy to find. For example, I found no one-year pricing subsidy options on their website at all. The only options listed are full price and 2-year contract subsidy. I apologize for any inaccuracies, but it doesn't seem to be in Verizon's interests to make this stuff easily accessible or understandable.
That said, yes, there will be much cheaper Android handsets coming to market soon, but consider what the likely hardware specs will be on a $120 handset. Would that be a device someone will want to be locked into for 20 months?
The $120 pricepoint that has been bandied about is retail price, not contract. Only one device has been launched at this pricepoint thus far, but speculation is rampant that prices are going to plummet soon: http://www.pcworld.com/article/190271/theyre_here…
As for Big Red hiding 1-yr pricing, I went to verizonwireless.com (and without logging in), hovered over "phones and devices", clicked on "smartphones", then clicked on the link for the first phone I saw (the HTC Incredible). Over to the right, there's a drop-down list labeled PRICING FOR:
You can select retail, 1 yr, or 2 yr in that list, and the pricing is $529, $319 (with $100 rebate), and $249 (with $100 rebate), respectively. That information didn't seem very hard to ferret out at all. Fairly easy to access, and fairly easy to understand, no?
I'm hardly a Verizon shill, but I am a formerly-disgruntled AT&T customer who couldn't be happier since leaving their terrible network. Verizon's coverage is better, their customer service is better, and for the most part, the devices they offer are better. The changes they are purportedly making are due to the changing dynamics of the wireless world, not an effort to screw their customers. That's AT&T's job. Haha!
EdDroid- SO are you saying the annual upgrade on the primary line should remain? My wife and I have been switching off as the primary line every 6 months in order to upgrade annually. Though, with her X she's happy but I'm not with my D1!
I don't know what the annual upgrade policy is going to be in the future, Seth. I know what it is now based on what I've had in the 5 years I've had Verizon as my carrier. The original post had some incorrect facts (and the changes seem biased, but I've not been a T-Mob customer, nor have I researched any per-month difference in price for service on a contract vs. non-contract phone, so I have nothing to add to that discussion), and that's all I was addressing. The early (13-20 month) upgrade already HAS a fee associated with it, so the original statement that they were going to add a fee for early upgrades was, simply put, ludicrous. I didn't even go into the whining that people love to do over signing a 2-year (that would be 24 months, according to my calendar!) contract, and "only" being able to upgrade every 20 months without any early upgrade fee. People, you can buy the newest, greatest phone out there at ANY time. Just don't expect your wireless carrier to pay 75% of the cost every time you get the itch!
Next, we'll undoubtedly hear about how people are upset that they bought a device with a ONE YEAR manufacturer's warranty, but they're going to complain that because they signed a TWO YEAR contract for wireless service, their wireless provider owes them a brand-new phone when their device craps out in month 18.
::rolleyes::
Frankly, I'm throughly shocked that Verizon gets as much business as it does. I'm just going to chalk it up to habit and easily-lead consumers, but their service has consistently been terrible (I'm a former 4-year customer who travels a lot, so I've got plenty of experience and range comparisons with them). Add that to the lawsuits and shady contracts, it baffles me they get business at all. (Never mind the internet vs. Verizon's version of the internet, and the ridiculous hot mess known as "V-Cast") I guess if you rob your customers you'll stay afloat.
EdDroid, your argument isn't so much "ha-ha" funny as it is "isn't it sad when cousins marry" funny. It misses the larger point that Verizon is a nuisance to its own customers, and it looks to get worse.
Jason, unless you have a "feature phone", Verizon's version of the internet is the same as everyone else's. Mobile Web (and the later incarnation, Mobile Web 2.0) sucked. That's one of the main reasons I went from an EnV2 to a Droid.
If you can't find the "real" internet on a Verizon smartphone, you're not trying very hard.
As for your ridiculous claims of service being terrible (as a well-seasoned traveler), I'd be really interested to hear what network provides you with better coverage. Like it or not, Verizon's network coverage is far superior to any other carrier's.
My story is simple. After Hurricane Katrina, the ONLY people I knew who had cell service were Verizon customers. I was on AT&T at the time, and they gave me a bunch of hemming and hawing, but could never commit as to when I'd have service again, nor would they credit me for lost service, as "something like a hurricane is out of our control and we can't be expected to provide service in those conditions." I ate the ETF, went with Verizon, and the only time I *ever* have signal problems is when I'm in the middle of BFE. The town I lived in until 2 months ago had EVDO service for a couple of years before I got there. AT&T finally got off its butt and got their users off of EDGE and onto 3G about a month before I left. Neither of the other majors had anything but extended network in the area.
You don't have to like Verizon, or their policies, but unless you're too busy snogging with your own cousins, you have to admit their network is superior.
I hope that Sprint (whom I have) doesnt follow this. Already Sprint has one of the best upgrade programs around. Almost EVERYONE is eligible for having $69.99 plan or higher plus the upgrade is every 12 months, not 13-20 or 22-24 like others. This upgrade price is "New Customer" price or $150 off Retail Price (whichever discount is greater) if you sign for a 2-year agreement (doesnt matter if I sign for a 2 year, because I get upgrades every 12 months – only the FINAL year if I dont upgrade will apply). If you want a 1-year (only able to get after your completion of any 2 year agreement or upgrade) then the price you get is $75 off retail price. The deal for 1 year isnt that good because you pay more upfront, but you only have a 1 year contract, and the termination fee STILL drops down to $50 in 7 months anyway. Effectively making your agreement if you breached it only 7 months long.
The way Ive figured out which contract I will get is the price of the subsidy of the phone. Is the phone price at retail $500, and Sprint is selling it for only $200, leaving the subsidy price $300? Then signing a 2 year contract is better because I have a $300 savings, but if I broke contract the MOST Id ever pay is $200 making Sprint pay $100 extra. Thats a good deal in my eyes, provided I broke contract. So basically, if the subsidy discount on your phone vs the retail price actually is MORE then the termination fee, then its a good deal. However, if the 1 year price is only $50 more then a 2 year, Id rather spend the extra $50 upfront because $50 NOW is less then $100 LATER.