iPhone to become subsidized, non-exclusive?

If they were worried about missing out on revenue when someone unlocks the phone, I wondered why they didn't charge more to begin with. Instead of $399, charge $499 and get $100 back when you activate it on AT&T. If you go with another carrier, you don't get it. Maybe they will do that -- maybe that is what they are calling a subsidy.

Just because it's subsidized doesn't mean it's going to be non-exclusive. It may just be AT&T's price for keeping exclusivity. At this point, I'm sure Apple's recouped their expenses for the iPhone's R&D (Both the 2G and the 3G), and pocketed some nice coin on top. They can afford to subsidize it now to saturate the market even further. If they're looking to displace Blackberry, they need to compete with Blackberry's subsidized price.

I personally would not like this to happen. If the price were to go to 200 dollars and be available unlocked/for every carrier. This would just become another RAZR. A great, popular, revolutionary phone then after a year or so everybody has one and you will pretty much get them for free or under 100 dollars with deals these days.

I just wouldn't be able to stand seeing a kid toying around with an iPhone and dropping it like I've seen kids with RAZRs do.

My two cents.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23654801-5014239,00.html
Looks like this could be true.

Um, doesn't RIM get some sort of revenue sharing from carriers? I believe they do, but can't say for sure.

But if they do, and Blackberries are subsidized by carriers (which they are), why would Apple have to give up their revenue sharing to get the carrier to subsidize the iPhone?

Answer: they wouldn't.

Unless the old rumor about Apple being a carrier itself is coming back. ATT has to be talking about knocking down the price for a reason...

I don't like AT&T... They want $600 deposit for me to sign up with them. It's either that or get raped on the per month. Even if they had a deposit, there should be no way it goes to $600. AT&T know they are the cock of the walk now, and their prices are showing it.

I want a CDMA version of the iPhone, running on my EVDO Rev A Network. And with Sprint getting Visual Voicemail on the Instinct.. (If they can stay afloat long enough for that to release)... iPhone would be a perfect fit.

Um, T-Mobile is a GSM carrier in the US.

Also, the exclusivity agreement may have only applied to the first-generation iPhone, not to the 3G product. If AT&T didn't notice/negotiate for that, then Apple surely can release the new phone unlocked, if they so choose. None of us have read the agreement and know what it contains.

"All of Abramsky's conjecture hinges on Apple and AT&T agreeing to end their 5 year exclusivity agreement early. We here at TUAW see no real reason for either company to agree to that, at least not in the States."

none of this has ANYTHING to do with ATT exclusivity. That only applies in the US, and since the ATT is the only GSM carrier in the US, that won't change. Apple can sell the iPhone however they want outside of the US, because ATT has no power or jurisdiction through the market beyond US borders. Since they are in the exclusivity deal, they can't offer "unlocked" phones (beyond there being no point in the US to do so) to boost adoption here in the States. THAT is why they would possibly subsidize the phone through ATT- they would still get the revenue sharing and still get the full sale price from ATT, while ATT would pick up even more customers and contracts to compensate for having to eat $200 per phone subsidy.

The US plans have no effect on international plans, and vice a versa.

I think this is a great idea, however, I would make sure it stays GSM only. This would avoid any confusion, so GSM 3G only. Then, keep the "Deal" with AT&T by allowing it to be subsidized sans $199, then sell an unlocked version sans $299-$399. The biggest thing would be no "Carrier specific software" meaning, every phone off the shelf is the exact same, aside from the AT&T subsidized ones being carrier locked (easily unlocked after two years) Basically each country has an "Official" carrier, the one that has revenue sharing and the Subsidized phone, but Unlocked versions are also sold in those countries and countries where an "Official" carrier has not yet been negotiated. Thats just how I would do it anyways. :-) I think that would make everybody happy. I don't think that the amount of people going to AT&T would drop much, if anything, it would increase with the phone only being $199