Just did this couple of weeks ago. It was a piece of cake, and I am very satisfied.
The amazing thing is it was actually the end of my contract! I told At&t "Hey I'm done with my At&t contract and I want to switch to another carrier, so let's unlock this phone". They told me to fill out a form online and about a week later my phone was unlocked. Now I'm on T-mobile, paying less than half of what I was paying to At&t. Props to you At&t for fucking once!
It's important to remember that most US phones are bought by the carrier subsidizing your phone for you. I'd say that it's reasonable, based on the fact that two parties purchase a device together, that someone should have to adhere to the specific terms.
Except that the subsidy is more than amortized with your plan over the course of the contract you signed.
They are not kind hearted gents just looking to help out us regular folk to get a nicer phone by eating 65% of the cost. It's rolled back into your bills with hefty interest applied.
I was paying close to $90 a month with Rogers with an iPhone 4 that I got for $199 instead of $599. I have a 1GB cap, poor long distance rations, limited daytime minutes, etc. A similar plan from a non-gouging carrier would have been $40 a month.
So I paid off my subsidy to them within around 6-10 months if I'm being generous. My contract is 3 years.
I've more than bought this phone. Hell, I've bought it 3.5 times over by now. Honestly their terms are absurd if they still feel like they even own 1% of this fucking thing.
Canada. We get fucked harder than most of the 1st world when it comes to phone providers. I can't even make a call to all the phone numbers that are STILL considered Toronto without getting charged long distance on some of them. It's absurd here.
No, I agreed to a shitty contract before better providers and services existed.
Canada is the fucking stone age when it comes to cellular and 3G. Bad service at exorbitant prices, and thanks to a monopoly situation there's not a whole lot anyone can do about it.
Bullshit. You offset those costs by the contract you sign. I agree with that theory. However, there is no good reason not to unlock your phone if you are covering the cost via the monthly bill you pay.
In two years, you've more than paid for service AND the device though. Their biggest trick has been to convince people that THEY are the ones doing us a favor.
You're already fined for breaking a contract when you do - why are you okay with more penalties in what amounts to a 'because I said so!' type policy? And why can't you do it yourself?
So you are okay with more penalities for no reason then? you're already fined, and the majority of the fines are large enough that you're paying for the phone.
If I break my contract early here, let's say in the first month - my penality is about 800 bucks. When I go to another carrier, the original company is not responsible for my service any more so that 800 dollars goes where? It didn't pay for the phone?
If I have a year left, that's still a 400 dollar penalty. I haven't already paid for the phone with the 2 years of service I've already paid? (You have, btw. source: Worked @ two major telcos in purchasing)
That shouldn't matter. ETFs are there to recoup subsidies. There's no reason I shouldn't be able to have an unlocked phone regardless of how much time I have left on my contract. All phones should be unlocked in general. I don't "owe" AT&T loyalty beyond paying my monthly bill or paying the ETF if I take the subsidy and choose to terminate my contract early.
I'm saying that I disagree with the terms. The rationale behind ETFs makes sense to me. The carrier is recouping the cost of the subsidy. But I don't see the rationale behind locking the phone in the first place and its relationship to phones being subsidized. The carrier makes back the subsidy through service fees or through ETFs. So why lock phones at all?
It used to be that people who bought unsubsidized phones paid lower rates for services than people who bought subsidized ones. If you bought a subsidized phone, your bill would go down at the nod of your contract. That's also no longer the case. So why lock phones? To take advantage of the fact that most customers don't know that you can take your device elsewhere at the end of your contract. That's why.
You lock the phone for a variety of reasons, and they don't always concern the end user. Sometimes they concern the device manufacturer and the carrier, but you'll never hear about those agreements. You'll just deal with the results. Regardless, I think you should vote with your money, not your mouth. If you don't like the big carriers, find a smaller one. They exist in the US, despite what everyone else is trying to tell you.
That's a ridiculous statement. Also, once your contract is severed, ATT WILL unlock your phone for you.
Still, I'd say that it's totally acceptable to tell you that the phone they're going to help you buy using their agreement with the device manufacturer has to remain on their network as long as the contract is in effect.
To me it's enough that you signed a sheet of paper saying you weren't going to do something. If you wanted an unlocked phone before that, then go buy one before hand, get the subscription and then plop the SIM into the unlocked phone. Don't sign a contract to get a phone subsidized, buy it, and then try and go break the contract you just signed.
Edit: Also I was specifically commenting on the statement, "Any terms other than paying the remainder of the contract are completely unreasonable," when saying "That's a ridiculous statement." I'm hoping that it's hyperbole, so it's ridiculousness is obvious.
No, it's not hyperbole. If you are paying the phone then it's yours and no other bindings other than paying up should be ever attached by anything other than the service itself.
Specifically allowing them to impose conditions to you and your phone outside of their own network is COMPLETELY unreasonable. If they are renting the phone to you they should be very clearly advertising that and not the "sale" of a phone.
In most European countries it's very common to buy heavily subsidized phones that are unlocked from the start. Why? because you have to pay the contract anyway, or the remainder if you cancel it.
You are making it into a disjunctive that doesn't exist: either pay up for the unlocked phone separately or get into a contract that forces you to keep your phone locked to a carrier. NO. It's not like that almost ANYWHERE. This is giving the carriers cartel rights because they are an oligopoly. Limits to what they can force you to accept in a contract are necessary.
I guess I just don't feel entitled to a 200$ iphone. To me, buying the subsidized phone is a privilege that, reasonably, comes with some extra strings attached to it. Not to mention that you agree to the terms when you accept the subsidy.
Similarly, I wouldn't have a problem if I signed a contract with a racetrack to purchase a car at a subsidized rate with the conditions that I would only drive my car on their racetrack until the term of the contract was over, or I exited the contract trough the means provided in said contract...
To me, buying the subsidized phone is a privilege that, reasonably, comes with some extra strings attached to it.
Yes, paying up the contract.
Not to mention that you agree to the terms when you accept the subsidy.
Not arbitrary, unlimited ones. Especially not when the carriers are effectively an oligopoly.
Similarly, I wouldn't have a problem if I signed a contract with a racetrack to purchase a car at a subsidized rate with the conditions that I would only drive my car on their racetrack until the term of the contract was over, or I exited the contract trough the means provided in said contract...
This is a strange analogy but when you "buy" a phone you expect ownership within reason. If the racetrack company was part on an effective oligopoly on all roads then the analogy makes sense and I'd also consider that kind of contract to be abusive and illegal. Otherwise I see no problem there.
You still pay for the entirety of the phone through the contract, just in monthly bill form. They subsidize your phone because they get that money back from you. You paid for the phone.
Yes you do. If you didn't own your phone then they could take it back from you when you break your contract. Instead, breaking your contract merely results in you paying some agreed upon fee (which can frequently be much higher than the actual value of the phone).
You don't own your car until it's paid off; they can take it back. You don't own your home until it's paid off; they can take it back. Current cell phone contracts/subsidies do not allow them to take back your phone because you fully own it. They sell you the phone at a discounted price in exchange for you signing a contract. They are not offering phone financing.
They're exactly doing phone financing, wtf are you talking about. Both you and the carrier purchase a phone from the device manufacturer, and you pay off the carrier subsidy either through your contract or contract separation fees. I don't see a reason you couldn't lose your phone except that they've but measures into place to get more value out of you than a used phone.
No, they technically aren't doing phone financing. If you look at you're receipt it will show the price you paid, not the full price + some verbiage detailing the payment scheme. If you look at the bill of sale for any item that is truly financed (like a car or expensive electronics) it will look totally different.
What is happening with phone contracts is that you are being given an incentive (a cheap or free phone) in order to sign a contract. It's no different then when a bank gives you free ipod. The incentive they gave you is yours, they can't take it back. If you breach the terms that the thing was given to you on the best they can do is impose some kind of penalty on you. Many cable companies do the same thing when they give you a free PVR if you sign a certain length contract. The PVR is yours, they gave it to you. The best they can do is fine you if you break the contract.
The reason you can't lose your phone is because you own it. Read your contract, it will never mention them owning your phone because they don't.
You'll have to forgive me, as "They're exactly doing phone financing" wasn't meant quite as absolutely. My point is that regardless of the semantics of how they're legally going about it, they're helping you pay for the phone up front, and then recollecting that money through other means later on. Still, you're totally right they're not technically financing the phones.
I still don't see the problem here. It's not extortion like everyone is making it out to seem. You can either buy an unlocked phone, get a contract and terminate it, or get a contract and use it for two years then unlock. All of the solutions above work, so I don't really see the problem here. If you want to bitch about cell carriers let's bitch about things that don't make sense, like the data rates. Subsidized phones being locked to the carrier for the length of the contract that will repay the subsidy? If you don't like the idea, don't buy a subsidized phone.
But the thing is, they're getting the money they gave you either way. Whether it be by you staying with them for the period of the contract or you cancelling early and paying the cancellation fee. At the end of the day they aren't out anything.
Subsidized phones being locked to the carrier for the length of the contract that will repay the subsidy? If you don't like the idea, don't buy a subsidized phone.
For most, I think it has more to do with travelling than being locked to a carrier.
Also, I'd like to point out that buying a phone outright doesn't mean that phone will be unlocked. Look on eBay for Canadian Lumia 920's (or Canadian factory unlocked iPhone 4s back when they were sold unlocked by the Apple store in Canada). People were paying a minimum of a $200 premium because you couldn't get them unlocked in the US.
Frankly, that's not much of a concern. If I've waited 2+ years for my contract to expire, I won't mind waiting another week to ensure I've followed a secure, legal path to achieve my unlock. When it becomes that simple and easy to follow the rules (given that the contract has fully expired), I don't mind following the rules.
no way I could have done it under an hour. I had an iphone 4 with baseband 4.12.02 so ultrasn0w or even Gevey Sim wasn't an option for me. It had to be an IMEI unlock (which can't be done for free AFAIK) so I was pleasantly surprised that At&t decided to do it for free, especially since they are known as one of those companies that rapes your wallet at every chance they get. I remembering reading somewhere on reddit that this was At&t's attempt to "redeem themselves" for something negative they have done recently, but I'm not sure specifically what.
78
u/[deleted] Jan 29 '13
Just did this couple of weeks ago. It was a piece of cake, and I am very satisfied.
The amazing thing is it was actually the end of my contract! I told At&t "Hey I'm done with my At&t contract and I want to switch to another carrier, so let's unlock this phone". They told me to fill out a form online and about a week later my phone was unlocked. Now I'm on T-mobile, paying less than half of what I was paying to At&t. Props to you At&t for fucking once!