• RubberDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    Just make carrier locking illegal and have customers pay the actual price, now it’s just hidden costs to the consumer.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      You’re going off of phone contracts that haven’t been around for a decade. The cost of the phone up front, and has been for a long time.

        • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          They lock it so you’ll pay for the phone. That’s the only reason.
          Should requiring people to pay for things be illegal?

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            You can continue paying at&t for the phone after moving to a different carrier.

            How do you think people will steal phones like this?

            • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              When did that become possible?
              Last I knew is when you cancel your account (which is what moving to another carrier is) they billed you for the remaining balance of the phone.

              • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 days ago

                No I mean thats what’s proposed. I’m saying leaving the companies service has nothing to do with a loan they gave you. They are separate things. Its possible they would stop with no interest but I believe they can still make money without interest in some cases.

                • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Ah gotcha. Yeah that’d be cool. I hope it works out. More options is always better.
                  Your probably right about the interest, or else why would they agree to it.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            Wha? The guy I responded to said the customers now pay full price up front. If a device is bought it should be unlocked.

            Additionally giving away a phone for a determined time contract means that the company is technically giving you a loan and it should be on your credit record, require the company to do a proper credit check and be allowed to give out loans.

            Bottom line, it’s predatory and should not be allowed. Noone is advocating giving 1000 dollar phones for free… it was a strawman you stuck me with… but I don’t want it.

            • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Wha? The guy I responded to said the customers now pay full price up front.

              No. I never said that. I said the cost of the phone is upfront. There are no 2 year contracts anymore, and haven’t been for at least a decade. You see the full price of the phone, and decide how much a month you want to spend to pay it off.

              If a device is bought it should be unlocked.

              I agree with you. And that’s how it works. The question is how long after paying off the phone should it be locked.

              Additionally giving away a phone for a determined time contract …

              Again, they haven’t offered contracts like that in ten years. But yes you do need to pass a credit check to have a phone financed.

              Bottom line, it’s predatory and should not be allowed.

              What exactly should not be allowed?

              • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 days ago

                OK so you buy the phone on a payment plan… and credit check. Then once it’s paid off it should be unlocked.

                  • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    Here in the Netherlands they don’t allow carrier locking and still sell on these installment plans.

                    They are 2 separate services (telecom & financing) and thus cannot be linked at sale. That’s not an issue… why would it be different in the US?

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      It isn’t been a hidden cost for a while. Phone companies sell the phones at full price, but consumers want the 2 year 0% APR financing.