The BIG MOBILE CON - 18 & 24 Month Contracts

terakris

Ive always had contract phones, since i was 18 (my god, 13 years ago!) but have only now switched to PAYG as it just works out cheaper and with my last Vodafone problem, i dont wanna be tied in again and have to pay up front to cancel the contract.

12 months was fair enough, these ultra long contracts are a bit bad if you change provider like i did, only to find out they are horrific in one way or another.

vigilaire

I was totally anti 24month contracts but have just taken one out. I've had no problem with e2save cashback in the past. I went for Orange Racoon 30 24m with £10 monthly discount. My Quidco has tracked, i've got a refer a friend and their Quidco too so all being well it will work out at less than £5.50 per month for 600 xnet, unlim landlines, 500 txts, half GB data and a new Nokia 6303.

So long as I don't go over my allowance (unlikely) and the cash back comes through (always has before) I can't see the Network or the dealer getting very fat off my business. It really pays to shop around these 24m contracts to find something you are comfortable with.

Had I stayed on my o2 simplicity 30 day tarrif at £19.57 pm for a similar allowance I'd still have been on it in 24months anyway.

RICK..._2

jayukps wrote: »

Most high spec handsets cost £300+ now to make anyway N97 for instance is £500, But most £300+ sp on 12 month contract you would need to pay £25 a month just for the mobile company to break even now with everyone trying to pay as low as possible and wanna pay pittence for unlimited mins and texts and internet 12 months are not really going to be realistic

I highly doubt the networks pay anything near what they retail at sim-free, so I'm sure there'll still be profit in there somewhere...

I am currently trying to push for a 12 month deal with Orange but don't seem to be getting very far in terms of how many minutes and texts I want etc.. And now i've found out T-Mobile and Orange are supposed to be merging i'm going to be pushing even harder for a 12 month.

For me it's just a case of being tied to the network rather than having a new phone.

Like with T-Mobile, got a good deal, free phone.. everything was great for the first 9-10 months. Then started having problems with their billing and then their customer service.. at this point I wanted to switch networks, but couldn't because I was tied to a 18 month contract. So I had to continue giving them £30 a month for another 8 months and put up with their bad service, or buy out the remainder of my contract which is an even bigger loss. :rolleyes:

fsrandom

I agree with Jak.

Whilst obviously mobile telecommunications companies do not pay the retail price on handsets, there has to be a minimum amount of profit earned.

Back in the good old "12 month days" phones were alot cheaper than they are these days, you didn't get any where near the amount of minutes/text and the average phone bill was maybe £35 or so.

These days you get alot more value in terms of minutes/texts/data, everyone wants it cheaper £25 or below, phones have become more expensive.. so 12 months is no longer plausable.

People just cut and dry think of the phone price than subtract that from the price they are paying, it's not that simple. Phone staff, paper sent, comission paid, minutes/texts/data you use, network upgrades, other staff around the business that deal with the network, etc.

Simply, unless your prepared to pay the money and have a phone which is not as high spec as the top models about, you can't plausably get a 12 month agreement. If you are happy to pay the money (like people were in the days of the good old 12 months) then you can have whatever you want on a 12 month agreement.

Consumer attitude is changing and networks are offering alternatives (18/24) to suit there wanting high-spec phones and cheap tariff nature.

Edit: The UK is the CHEAPEST IN THE WORLD for mobile telecommunications. If you go anywhere else (Canada 3 year contract standard and PAY TOWARDS THE PHONE or America where you PAY FOR INCOMING CALLS!) or Greece (a 600m/ul txt tariff is like £75 euros a month). We get it good here, I'd be surprised if the networks stop offering better and better deals soon.

robbies_gal

i know phones are alot more expensive now but i agree i much preferred 12 month contracts as i get bored of my phone after about 6-9 months anyway

i wouldnt mind payin some towards the phone if the 12 month was still offered with a good tariff

atlantis187

fsrandom wrote: »

I agree with Jak.



Edit: The UK is the CHEAPEST IN THE WORLD for mobile telecommunications. If you go anywhere else (Canada 3 year contract standard and PAY TOWARDS THE PHONE or America where you PAY FOR INCOMING CALLS!) or Greece (a 600m/ul txt tariff is like £75 euros a month). We get it good here, I'd be surprised if the networks stop offering better and better deals soon.

Are u serious in america u have to pay for incoming calls?

movilogo

In my opinion this duration is far too long, after 12 months our mobiles are battered and bruised. Mobile companies have increased the duration of the contract and what have we got in return? Nothing, lousy service, poor coverage and extorionate internation call rates.

My mobile, after 2 years, still shines like new. With proper care, mobiles should last for several years.

Ok, now coming back to the topic, yes, they are just doing business. No one forced you to take the 18-24 months contract. Take it or leave it.
UK mobile market is almost saturated. That's why mobile cos are trying to increase contract beyond 12 months so that once captured a customer, they are sure of revenue from him for 18-24 months. After Orange + T-mobile merger, now there is even less competition in market. So, expect call price go up - not down!

I never had a mobile contract in my life. I only use mobile for emergencies and always on PAYG plan. There are some cheap 12 months contracts available on SIM only plans. If you can resist temptation of changing handset every year, things can still work out at good price.

PlutoinCapricorn

I bought my first ever mobile phone in January 2003, and it is still my one and only. It is PAYG: I will never take out a contract when there is an alternative. I prefer to use email anyway, I dislike using the phone.

These expensive models and contracts are a luxury, and I can live very happily without them.

elljay20

The minimum contract length now is 30 days on a rolling sim only. Three do a six month contract with a free phone. If you want a shiny expensive handset then 18 to 24 months is standard now. The networks buy their handsets in dollars so they are a lot more expensive now than they used to be. I don't get why the op is moaning?? consumers have a vast array of choice now than they've ever had before!

elfen

I don't mind a 24 month contract. It's cheaper than if I got a 12 or 18 month contract, I've got a phone that I want and that will last, and most importantly for me, it'll get me through to nearly my third year at uni, and I'll decide then if I want to stay or go back PAYG.

I've had 12 and 18 month contracts before, and you do get less flexibility with the amount of minutes/texts/restrictions on usage allowed with, and also with the model of phone provided. I know I'll probably have to have my phone repaired or replaced, which is why I've decided to pay the extra for mobile phone insurance, so if it does break, I'll get an as like model (but I'm hoping it won't happen)