If phones on contract are not part of the contract how come...

donny909

I gather this is an issue that effects ALL mobile companies and looking at the various retention threads it's got me wandering.

So if the phones people get on a contract basis are not thought of as part of the contract but seperate etc. How come the sim only contract deals are far, far cheaper than contracts that also provide the phone?

It seems clear to me from the payments side of this that the phones must be part of the contract as the difference in price for contracts with the same or similar mins, txt etc for phone provided contracts can be far greater than sim only contracts.

If this is not the case and the phones are not part of the contract can someone explain to me the price difference because I dont get the phone is not part of the contract issue when there is a very clear price difference.

Rusty!

It's not part of the airtime agreement, but the contract cost it higher to subsidize the 'gift'

drbesty

The phones arent free, they need to be paid for somehow, hence the higher line rental

donny909

Rusty! wrote: »

It's not part of the airtime agreement, but the contract cost it higher to subsidize the 'gift'

But if you look at the cost of buying the phone outright if say to use on a payg basis, except for the very expensive phones, in most cases the difference between sim only contracts and phone provided contract is pretty much the samy. Certainly dont look like they are substadised by anyone to me.

Anyone else ever looked into this?. As my £15 per month contract over 18 months for a Nokia E63 works out at £270. How much was a Nokia E63 12 months ago? and how much was a 75 mins 3000 txt and 3000 mins to same network phone sim only deal with 3 12 months ago?.

If I'm correct there seems to be no or very little difference between if the phone would have been bought outright and then signing up for a sim only deal?.

Anyone care to work it out for there sub £20 per month phone to see if I'm right as worked it out for my gf's phone and thats the same outcome.

drbesty

A mobile phone operator doesnt pay the retail price for a phone, they buy tens of thousands at a time, so they pay alot less

donny909

drbesty wrote: »

A mobile phone operator doesnt pay the retail price for a phone, they buy tens of thousands at a time, so they pay alot less

So really there is no substadised phone with a contract as the retailer have bought in bulk and possably made a profit when providing them on a contract at a higher rate compared to a sim only contract?.

MissKeith

Retailers make little to no profit on sim only phones. They offer a free phone in order to get a large monthly payment from consumers so there's a constant flow of money coming in.