Does a $99 iPhone break the psychological barrier to buying?

After using many "free" phones from the various Canadian carriers over the years, it's painfully evident that you get what you pay for.

Although most of the free phones can do just about everything, it's the higher end phones which do those things more eloquently, and that's what I personally want in a cell phone.

I can say that the AT&T rates for service is the single reason that has kept me from buying the iphone.

And believe me, everybody in my family really wants one. But as long as AT&T is charging those kind of rates, it will just never happen. $99 or not.

I do agree that the price of the phone really isn't the important thing to look at. Total cost of ownership is matters, but if one's going to compare TCO, one also needs to look at what capability is provided by that cost.

The iPhone is the first phone I owned that had a web browser where I didn't think to myself 'hmm, do I really need this information?' before going through the tedium of looking it up. It's the first phone I owned that provided an audio player that was worth using and allowed me to easily buy music directly from the phone. It's the first phone I've owned that had a map application that was good enough to allow me to stop printing Mapquest directions from my computer before leaving the house. I could go on - but the point is this: I get more from my iPhone than I used to from any of the smartphones I've owned previously. Considering the value I get from it on a daily basis, I don't mind the monthly fee in the least. I'm paying less than $3/day for a handheld computer of incredible connectivity and capability.

Not that the iPhone is the perfect device but what phone is cheaper up front and better? Blackberries (except when they give them away for free), Nokias, Palm Pre, and Samsungs are all 99$ and up. I have Verizion and the reason I did not get a free Blackberry is it increases your bill each month 30$.

I don't know about "psychological barriers," but I do know that many many of us would have bought an iPhone long ago, were it not for the ATT exclusive.

I don't see why such a smart company would show Blackberry, LG, and everyone else how to make a smart phone, and then let them clone the iPhone for years before offering any competition on any US network besides ATT.

Stupid. Can you say "Windows 95 all over again?" Does Apple want market share or not?

It will be interesting to see, especially considering the iPhone 3G S is only offering lower price points for people signing a new AT&T contract. Current AT&T customers who aren't happy about paying almost $400 for the new model may just shell out $99 for the older one.
http://www.newsy.com/videos/at_t_crashes_iphone_party

This totally makes sense as to why they can be pushy about the 3G S to existing customers. They are going to be selling a whole lot of the $99 iPhones - enough that they don't care whether or not the existing 3G customers want to upgrade. They've got them for at least another year on contract anyways.

You could get an iPhone for free with a contract in Germany all year here, and I didn't see people falling over themselves in the T-Mobile shops. IDK, maybe Germans think it through, better. (I'm not German)

I didnt think the $99 price point was that big of a deal, personally I cant see NOT spending the extra $100 over a 2 year period for double the memory and a ton more features, but my two office mates are now seriously considering the iphone due to these price cuts. Goes to show what I know.

As ussual corporate America assume (correctly) that joe smo can't do math. The problem with the iphones is not hte upfront subsidized cost (or even really unsubsidized) but the ATT plan costs that are through the friggin roof and comparatively feature pore.