Well I got the T-Mobile Touch Pro2 on opening day for a special price of $329 on a ONE YEAR contract. So these prices don't matter to me.
Even if I paid $150 more for the phone (on a two year deal) I'd have to ask myself it it worth $150 to be able to use the TP2 for two months (appx) before anyone else has it. I say yes.
Of course that's a subjective opinion. Others for whom handset selling price is all that matters, then waiting two months to save another $150, well, that's being a wise shopper in their minds.
But like anything, you can go without and hold out for months or years to eventually get something for far less than what it first listed. Look at the iPhone first adopters. They took a bath compared to those who waited a few months to get that phone.
The worst thing that lemming, robotic consumers do, however, is get caught up on handset pricing and failing to take into account what the phone is really costing them over the life of a two year contract.
So they get the phone for $200 and feel great until the first few months of billings come in, where they are paying $50 more a month for service and plans. But maybe people don't think about it. After all, they were suckered in with a low handset price, so why would they all of a sudden wake up three months later and calculate the true cost of the phone.
What I call "pricing scams" must work, why else would T-Mo, for example, sell the TP2 for $400 on a one year contract and for a paltry $50 savings sell the phone for $350 on a two year deal. I challenge anyone to come up with an argument to support the concept that it makes good financial sense to accept a $50 additional discount on a phone in return for obligating one's self to pay at least $1000 to T-Mo for that additional one year plan obligation.
It makes no sense but must work because otherwise carriers would not play these kind of pricing games. $199 indeed.
There should be a truth in pricing law enacted. Each carrier has to disclose the minimum cost a handset and plan will cost someone. That would promote some competition. Imagine Sprint having to say "Buy the Touch Pro2, only $2600." ($200 for the phone, $100 mo for talk and data). T-Mo can compete back "But the Touch Pro2, only $2150." ($350 for the phone, $75 mo for phone and data).
The phone has 256MB of RAM and a 1GHz processor, which do the job reasonably well, though the Anna interface will likely leave something to be desired for many smartphone users.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Well I got the T-Mobile Touch Pro2 on opening day for a special price of $329 on a ONE YEAR contract. So these prices don't matter to me.
Even if I paid $150 more for the phone (on a two year deal) I'd have to ask myself it it worth $150 to be able to use the TP2 for two months (appx) before anyone else has it. I say yes.
Of course that's a subjective opinion. Others for whom handset selling price is all that matters, then waiting two months to save another $150, well, that's being a wise shopper in their minds.
But like anything, you can go without and hold out for months or years to eventually get something for far less than what it first listed. Look at the iPhone first adopters. They took a bath compared to those who waited a few months to get that phone.
The worst thing that lemming, robotic consumers do, however, is get caught up on handset pricing and failing to take into account what the phone is really costing them over the life of a two year contract.
So they get the phone for $200 and feel great until the first few months of billings come in, where they are paying $50 more a month for service and plans. But maybe people don't think about it. After all, they were suckered in with a low handset price, so why would they all of a sudden wake up three months later and calculate the true cost of the phone.
What I call "pricing scams" must work, why else would T-Mo, for example, sell the TP2 for $400 on a one year contract and for a paltry $50 savings sell the phone for $350 on a two year deal. I challenge anyone to come up with an argument to support the concept that it makes good financial sense to accept a $50 additional discount on a phone in return for obligating one's self to pay at least $1000 to T-Mo for that additional one year plan obligation.
It makes no sense but must work because otherwise carriers would not play these kind of pricing games. $199 indeed.
There should be a truth in pricing law enacted. Each carrier has to disclose the minimum cost a handset and plan will cost someone. That would promote some competition. Imagine Sprint having to say "Buy the Touch Pro2, only $2600." ($200 for the phone, $100 mo for talk and data). T-Mo can compete back "But the Touch Pro2, only $2150." ($350 for the phone, $75 mo for phone and data).