If you needed another reason to frown upon the state of the North American wireless industry, allow us to go ahead and turn your attention to Exhibit A here. What you're looking at is some promotional material backing up earlier rumors that the
HD2 /
Leo is
en route to O2 in the UK, but what's especially upsetting (though not terribly surprising) is the knowledge that customers will be able to scoop up HTC's new ultra-high-end WinMo beast for zilch on an O2 1200 tariff -- a plan that runs something like £45 (about $72) a month. Oh, and that's on an 18-month contract, not 24. Meanwhile, we'll be lucky to ever see the Leo land in its natural, original, HTC-approved state on a carrier at
any price in the US, but hey, at least we've still got some more
Touch Pro2 launches to look forward to, right?
[Thanks, anonymous tipster]
posted Sep 25th 2009 3:59PM
Sprint (although God knows I love them for this ridiculously amazing SERO plan) has the audacity to charge $349 AFTER a $100 rebate for yesterdays technology in the form of a Touch Pro 2 (in spite of however nice it is, it's still packing that damned MSM 7201 Qualcomm chip of yore), and yet this, this beast of a phone, that could very well be the best phone on the planet is free on a carrier from across the pond while we're getting shafted state-side.
Ughh.....
LOL@Touch Pro 2 being yesterday's technology. Just a couple of weeks ago, people were pissing in their pants hearing about the release of that phone.
Aahh! The gadget market changes so fast.
@ Maddy
Where the hell do you get your tech. news from? The Touch Pro2 is nothing more than a higher-clocked Touch Pro. Woo.
I don't know where people are "pissing in their pants" for a 528 Mhz. Qualcomm 72xx device, because I've got the same damn phone with a 400 Mhz CPU.
Not bad for it's day--absolutely--but today? Pfft, this is a joke. This is a low-end smartphone.
I want it here in the states.
Damn i want this phone P:
I wonder what it would cost to import one here, activate it there of course, then cancel my contract.
I'll gladly pay an early termination fee if it were like $200 as is the case here in the US. The major drawback of course would be trying to use it on our bands...
Damn you US carriers...why do they always have to be so behind the times when it comes to phone tech!
You have to pay the full contract if you cancel inside the first couple of months.
Kris, so you're telling me
2 months of contract fees = $144
early termination fee = $200 (presumably)
importing (s/h) = $50 (presumably once more)
So, for ~ $400 or so, I could have the HTC Leo?
Hell, Sprint is asking me to pay $525 (that's with a $75 discount for being on SERO over a year) for the TP2.
I'd GLADLY pay $400 for a Leo if I could actually use it on Sprint's network...
If you cancel a mobile phone contract in the UK you have to pay the outstanding amount. So if you want to cancel 2 months into an 18 month contract you have to pay your monthly fee*remaining months. So £45*16 months...
I'm with Vodafone on an 18 month contract that runs out next Christmas. I'm so glad we aren't tied down to stupid contracts. I mean Samsung Jet free on £25 a month contract for 18 Month was good deal for my first contract phone. But I may go for the Sony Ericsson Racheal or this next year.
Personally I think 18 months is too long. 12 was fine.
Wow. We really get screwed over in North America (especially in Canada).
Anyone know if the O2 version of this phone will work on any US carrier?
Depends on what frequency they will work on. But they will probably work.
O2 don't lock their phones via firmware in my experience. You can do whatever you like with it once you've signed on the dotted line and commit your money. So long as the device supports your Western frequencies, you should be just fine to pop in a transatlantic sim.
Wireless industry, internet, education, innovation, yeah the list goes on ..........
But we still have Monday Night Football !!!!!
People may not agree with me but the US is a profit centered country, whether it is Oil, Phones, Healthcare, Computers, Textiles etc. the upper tiers of phone carries seem more obsessed with increasing their net worth rather than accommodating their customers with reasonable prices on their products.
i agree
well, we (Americans) have already proven that we are willing to drop a rent check, camp out, take a day off work and stand in lines that wrap buildings just to be the first one at happy hour to break out the latest gadget...that being said, its not about agreeing or disagreeing with you, that's just how we are. And phone carriers know its never gonna change...all they have to do is sit back, follow the same blogs we do and rack in the duckets....
I know its more complicated than that, you get the point....
peace
It is more to do with americans being consumers with no self respect... BUY BUY BUY CONSUME CONSUME CONSUME, like robots.
Oh, right, and in Europe there are only companies that work as a non-profit organisations. Or was it socialist? I don't remember.
On second thought: Maybe the market in Europe is just in better shape?! Maybe the oh-so-bad EU takes anti-trust measures seriously? You know, like competition forcing the companies to lower their prices and provide better service?!
The UK carriers are trying to push 24 month contracts - when you look at an N97 on Voda or a Hero on Orange their 'best deals' default to 24 month contracts.
Fortunately they've largely been told to sod off by the public and still offer 18 month ones. In fact, if you push you can get 12 month ones - my friend just argues with Voda until they give in to her.
Exactly. The americans need someone to stand up for them but it won't happen any time soon.
We got bent over the barrel with the whole oil fiasco where the companies made RECORD profits... So i'm not surprised that the US government has stepped in about things like this and the reason is that they gain nothing from it they get their tax money no matter what...
*has not*
And by "argue" you mean "expose mammaries."
Nope. Although she has a fine set she's also hard as nails.
The UK networks have been told to 'sod off' with 24 month contracts have they?
As of the first quarter of 2008, 24 month tariffs accounted for 2% of all UK mobile phone contracts.
In the corresponding period of 2009, that had reached 10%.
And as of the second quarter of 2009, they accounted for 26%.
Sounds pretty much like the complete opposite of 'sod off' to me...
Source 1: http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/mobile_exec/news.aspx?id=60467&terms=24+month
Source 2: http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/mobile_exec/news.aspx?id=60599&terms=24+month
Which means three out of four people have told them to sod off.
Not my problem the rest are too dumb to question what they're buying.
Oh an Iain, the 26% refers to sales of new contracts in Q2, not the total number of 24 month contracts which remains at about 10%. This is directly related to Vodafone and Orange hawking this kind of contract onto unsuspecting fools who don't read the small print.
Congratulations, your mathematical skills astound me.
Yes, around three quarters of people are still on contracts other than 24 months on length.
That's not the figure one should be paying attention to though, it's the 16% increase in marketshare in 3 months that is the figure that should be jumping out there.
Given that UK networks have been heavily pushing 24 month deals for about a year at most, to see that level of growth, especially given that a lot of potential customers will have been/will still be tied into pre-existing contracts, represents a drastic swing in customer trends.
Also, even if these figures are for new contracts (and the second article clearly states that it's 26% of ALL contracts sold), to try and pretend that they will be in any way substantially different from the number of upgrading customers choosing to sign into longer tariffs is nothing short of delusional.
A lot of these 'new' contracts will be sold to 'churn' customers or people who have switched networks to get a better deal, so it stands to reason that people upgrading will be looking for similar offers.
As for your supposed 10% figure, care to back that up in any way?
And what's with the Vodafone/Orange-hating?
O2 have pushed 2 years contracts at least as heavily as either of those networks and arguably are even more morally reprehensible for doing so given that they have been heavily marketing one particular handset on 24 month tariffs despite the fact it only has a 12 month warranty.
Like it or not, it's the way the market is headed.
People want increasingly-expensive, top-of-the-range handsets free on ever-cheaper tariffs leaving the networks only one possible route to ensure they make a profit.
And just because you personally would prefer to stay on a shorter tariff, that doesn't mean that people who choose longer ones are automatically 'dumb' or 'unsuspecting fools'.
I don't know what sort of deal you were slammed into that has left you so bitter but give the rest of us a little credit.
"That's not the figure one should be paying attention to though, it's the 16% increase in marketshare in 3 months that is the figure that should be jumping out there."
Except it actually isn't. It's an increase on quarter by quarter sales of 13%, not an increase in market share of 16%. Also, 65% of people - according to Andrew Harrison - never switch network and I suspect it is those people who are getting pinged for 24 month contracts because they're not reading the small print. Of course you are also going to get silly people who buy grossly subsidised handsets without appreciating the ramifications and again that's down to not understanding the details.
The other thing you don't mention for some reason is the increase in SIM only contracts (like Simplicity) which have increased to a quarter of the market which shows that people aren't accepting the carrier's terms. In addition, the 18 month market remains the strongest for the quarter with 50%, down from 60%.
As for being 'bitter' and 'anti Vodafone' I'm actually on an 18 month Voda contract which I'm perfectly happy with for now. But since you apparently didn't read the sources you quoted I'm not surprised you got that one wrong too.
As for the 10% of the market, since there were virtually no 24 month contracts in 2007, very few in 2008 and more in 2009 you can work out the number by averaging sales.
So, to restate again: 24 month contracts are generally only take out by people who are too silly to read the fine print. The majority still tell the carriers to sod off either by taking an 18 month contract out or moving to month-by-month SIM only contracts.
HOLY FUCK! FREE!!! you UK bastards are LUCKY!!!
Why lucky? Being locked to O2 for 18 months isn't lucky.
That could be true but even still....
Why does nobody seem to care about the total costs of ownership?
Glad they are releasing this phone. All I really care about is when is the CDMA version coming to US carriers.
better chance of universal health care first...
probably not gonna have u.s. 3G for importers as usual.
£45 per month is heavy. More expensive than getting Sky High definition satellite tv with all the available channels, Unlimited 16mb/s internet and free phone calls to landlines anytime.
It will not be popular, even if it is very desirable.
Was that an advert?
If it is fuck off
Not sure how things work over there but if I did the conversion right that's on $66 US dollars - a riot would start for a phone of that magnitude for free on a plan that cheap...
No just fact.
I think O2 like high monthly prices cause they sell iPhone and this is the same price as iphone, though I think the phone costs a bit of cash upfront too.
Being a resident in the UK, I dont think this is a terrible package but for many consumers in the UK, phone tariffs that are higher than £40 are deemed quite expensive. The O2 1200 tariff gives 1200minutes plus 500texts(for 18months) or up to 3000texts(for 24months) with an internet data package(which will most likely be unlimited). The price of this tariff to get the handset for FREE begins at £45 approx $72 per month.
18months = £810 approx $1,291
lets say the HTC Leo will cost £600 so we are left with £210 for the cost of the network. Thats £11.67 ($18.6) per month for all the benefits (i.e 1200mins..etc) which isnt too shabby in my opinion as long as you stick within your plan.
correction: The tariff excludes unlimited internet access so that will spike the price. This is were the deal becomes unattractive...lol. What you can get for unlimited is UK data and Wi-fi usage from their partners hotspots.
£45 is quite alot for a contract in the UK
You're allowed to lower your contract to £35 after 9 months (half way) and you'll have 600 minutes, 500 texts and unl Internet. And before Americans moan that it's not enough minutes, they're outgoing minutes, it's free to receive!
I have been on O2 since it was called Genie mobile, and will qualify for this for free (or any other phone they offer) , but my tariff is only £20 a month....
If your monthly spend is over £50, you will get the same deal.
I am due an upgrade in around a month, but am having second thoughts about the Leo, I heard the battery life is not that good. I hope that O2 also get the omnia 2 or I may get a galaxy.
@Adoniteking
The phone would cost O2 about £250 to buy wholesale.
You pay over the odds to chat on O2's network, and its crap with all those iphones on it. Ask for a 12 months contract and pay a bit upfront, its the best way. You will be happy you did when that 2ghz LTE monster comes round in 2010. :D
Me? Im getting a N900 for £392 unlocked.
did engadget pay HTC off to keep this phone out of the US?