Welcome to the Android Central Forums Create Your Account or Ask a Question Answers in 5 minutes - no registration required!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
Like Tree20Likes
  1. Thread Author  Thread Author    #1  

    Default This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I don't mean to be a buzzkill, but I have to express this.

    The hardware itself, even with the 3D thing, is no great leap in technology.
    The software is, like everything Amazon, designed to bring you deeper into Amazon's ecosystem. To make it easier to buy things on Amazon and bring you deeper into Amazon's services.

    This, in itself, is fine! Prime is great. Amazon's services are actually good and consumer-focused.

    The difference is that Amazon's other hardware is especially cheap in order to keep the barrier of entry low.

    This phone, however, is exclusive to AT&T *and* $200 on-contract. This is absurd. Committing to another two years on AT&T at a premium-phone subsidized price, when the phone has nothing to offer beyond other phones, except the ease of buying things on Amazon.

    I'm sorry, but this is very disappointing.
    Thanked by 4:
  2. #2  
    NYC10065's Avatar

    Posts
    1 Posts
    Global Posts
    913 Global Posts

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Agree. The AT&T exclusive deal is moronic. At a day and age when consumers are starting to warm to the idea of unsubsidized phones, this is a step backward.

    The phone itself is also just "meh". Nothing too exciting and, frankly, not living up to the hype. Looks to me like just another attempt at greatness that will fall far short.
    lindseybp and tryfe like this.
  3. #3  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Yeah I agree, it should have been $99 on contract at most. It'll be interesting to see how it does though.
    I'm gonna get flak but I'd rather have Sense over Stock Android for my daily driver.
  4. #4  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Should have been priced like the Moto X. $650 off contract, amazon is nuts. $199 on contract, why would someone get this over an S5 or 5s? This will go down as an epic fail for amazon. Just my opinion.
  5. Thread Author  Thread Author    #5  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by lindseybp View Post
    Should have been priced like the Moto X. $650 off contract, amazon is nuts. $199 on contract, why would someone get this over an S5 or 5s? This will go down as an epic fail for amazon. Just my opinion.
    it's probably decent hardware, though there's nothing about the specs that promise anything amazing.

    What I find offensive, to be clear, is that there's no secret that Amazon's devices are designed to drive sales to their main business. This should make the device cheaper, not lock me in deeper with AT&T, of all companies.
  6. #6  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Totally agree.
  7. #7  
    Datalux's Avatar

    Posts
    14 Posts
    Global Posts
    83 Global Posts

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Totally agree, this should have followed Amazon's other device strategies and sell for less than the competition. (subsidized by advertising?) I think people are getting fed up with carrier exclusives and this could have really boosted their sales all that much more with the right price point. I can use most of Amazon's services with apps from the app store(s) already and it's not compelling enough to pay that kind of money for such a targeted walled garden. Had high hopes for another Moto G, X, OnePlus option in the market, but alas...
  8. Thread Author  Thread Author    #8  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by Datalux View Post
    Totally agree, this should have followed Amazon's other device strategies and sell for less than the competition. (subsidized by advertising?) I think people are getting fed up with carrier exclusives and this could have really boosted their sales all that much more with the right price point. I can use most of Amazon's services with apps from the app store(s) already and it's not compelling enough to pay that kind of money for such a targeted walled garden. Had high hopes for another Moto G, X, OnePlus option in the market, but alas...
    I really wonder what carrier exclusives are like to regular people. Does anyone think "oh i want that phone, i'll go with X carrier?" maybe back when ATT had a multi-year exclusivity deal with the iPhone, but now?

    If anything, I would guess that this deal really comes down to ATT pushing it in their stores for people who are like "i want to upgrade my phone, which do you recommend?"

    ..."well, this one has fun 3D effects!"
  9. #9  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I completely agree, this reminds me of when the moto x came out with the $199.99 two year contract price, specs just aren't enough to warrant such a price tag. Not that specs are all that matter, the moto x is a great phone, but I feel it didn't sell as well initially because of moto maker being exclusive to At&t. It will be interesting to see how the phone sells, at least it can't sell worse than that flop of a facebook phone... what was it called again? haha
  10. #10  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    It really is a strange move on so many levels for amazon. We are at a time where people are not only flocking to contract free, but they are also looking at lower spec, contract free phones that perform great e.g moto G.

    I am very interested in the phone, but not for the same price as the iPhone 5s/s5/any other flagship.

    The exclusive deal and price may be the death of this phone. Maybe the exclusive deal is very temporary and by the holiday this phone will be priced more like other amazon products.
    geekaren likes this.
  11. #11  
    Kilroy13's Avatar
    Banned

    Posts
    366 Posts

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I don't think it would be successful either way. Limiting it to one carrier is probably the only real option to test the market and not be out to much if it fails!

    Sent from my LG-LS995 using Tapatalk
  12. #12  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I hate exclusive deals like this.. But hey.. It's their issue... They are missing a lot of customers on other carriers who could potentially buy the phone.

    Sent from my T-Mobile Note 3 using AC Forums.
    Golfdriver97 likes this.
  13. #13  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I got a 1st gen Kindle Fire, it's restriction to the Amazon store sucks. Within a year I bought A Nexus 7 as a real tablet and the Fire is now used for books and Prime Video only.

    I can't imagine ever being ok with a Fire OS phone, especially at that price. I think Amazon will fail with this.

    I'm not an Amazon hater, I'm a Prime member and am even hoping that the Fire TV will be one of my birthday gifts on Friday. But this phone at this price and with single carrier exclusivity seems destined to fail.

    Sent from my VS980 4G using AC Forums mobile app
  14. #14  

    Default

    I agree someone will buy it but I think they should have gone with a Nexus line pricing. Seems to me like it would help more people push to their eco system. At this price you can getter better phones for that price.

    Posted via Android Central App
  15. #15  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    i would say this phone would be a failure but the number of iphone exclusives sold when it was on one carrier was extremely high. Plus kindles sell really well.

    But ya not sure why anyone with Verizon or Tmobile and has great speed coverage at a great rate will run their contract out to get a phone. Even if I really want one, it wont be for another 15 months unless I love receiving early termination fees.
  16. Thread Author  Thread Author    #16  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Senn1 View Post
    i would say this phone would be a failure but the number of iphone exclusives sold when it was on one carrier was extremely high. Plus kindles sell really well.

    But ya not sure why anyone with Verizon or Tmobile and has great speed coverage at a great rate will run their contract out to get a phone. Even if I really want one, it wont be for another 15 months unless I love receiving early termination fees.
    sure, exclusivity isn't necessarily something that will kill a phone's sales.

    the iPhone, in 2007-2008, was such a big deal that I don't think you can compare it to any phone coming out today. The Fire isn't doing anything that will be shocking enough to create that kind of buzz.
  17. #17  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    From what I said on the Verge:

    I think when everyone wants things to be cheap and still think it comes with all the bells and whistles, they get all huffy and puffy when phones get priced actually, fiscally in the range smartphones should be at. I looked at what the Dynatac cost when it came out and compare that price to smartphone today, all that the Amazon phones offers is pretty good.

    I think we need to stop expecting phones with obviously expensive features to be $299- $350 off contract, that’s not how it works.
    Thanked by:
    Illustrator Joe likes this.
  18. #18  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I agree with this thread.

    When I can buy a Nexus 5 for $350 and use it on almost any carrier I want, there is absolutely no reason to buy this phone, especially not for $650.

    Sure, the Fire phone has quite a bit of exclusive features and all, but how many people really want those, or more importantly, how many people will use them?

    It was a poor move for Amazon, IMO. I just don't think this phone can ever compete with phones such as the GS5, One M8 or 5s. And this is what it really comes down to -- price. When you have other, better phones for the same price -- or less, depending on where you buy -- the Fire phone just can't compete. The carrier exclusivity only makes it worse.

    I see a lot of people comparing the exclusivity to the iPhone when it was released. The problem with that is, this is 2014 and times have changed, like others here have said already. People want a good phone that is reasonably priced with no contract. Amazon missed the target with the Fire phone.
    Golfdriver97 likes this.
  19. Thread Author  Thread Author    #19  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Yea, except that's not what's happening here.

    Its a phone with meh specs and a hardware button specifically dedicated to help you buy things, and yet it is priced and positioned (exclusivity) as though it were itself independently attractive.
  20. #20  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    From everything I've seen thus far, Amazon has (rather inexplicably) missed the mark on the phone. I am a Prime user, use Amazon quite a bit and have 2 FireTV boxes yet, wouldn't touch the phone. They have pretty much completely missed what Android users want in a phone not the least of which is Google's Play Store access & a choice of carrier. Who wants a smartphone married to Amazon content exclusively much less, at that price? Doomed out of the gate IMHO.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
  21. #21  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by frag06 View Post
    I agree with this thread.

    When I can buy a Nexus 5 for $350 and use it on almost any carrier I want, there is absolutely no reason to buy this phone, especially not for $650.

    Sure, the Fire phone has quite a bit of exclusive features and all, but how many people really want those, or more importantly, how many people will use them?

    It was a poor move for Amazon, IMO. I just don't think this phone can ever compete with phones such as the GS5, One M8 or 5s. And this is what it really comes down to -- price. When you have other, better phones for the same price -- or less, depending on where you buy -- the Fire phone just can't compete. The carrier exclusivity only makes it worse.

    I see a lot of people comparing the exclusivity to the iPhone when it was released. The problem with that is, this is 2014 and times have changed, like others here have said already. People want a good phone that is reasonably priced with no contract. Amazon missed the target with the Fire phone.
    I agree.

    And, for those who have already forgotten and those who are too young to have ever known, when the first iPhone was released there was nothing (nothing!) even remotely similar on the market. It worked then because there was effectively zero competition. It continues to work now because Apple knows how to maintain an unjustified level of fanaticism amongst its customer base.
  22. #22  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by N4Newbie View Post
    I agree.

    And, for those who have already forgotten and those who are too young to have ever known, when the first iPhone was released there was nothing (nothing!) even remotely similar on the market. It worked then because there was effectively zero competition. It continues to work now because Apple knows how to maintain an unjustified level of fanaticism amongst its customer base.
    Sure here was nothing like it, but the phone was garbage, and the bugs of the early days were many. I waited for a reliable Android 2.2 phone which got a late-life bugfixed 2.3.5 ....lasted about four years as my go-to phone while I played around with others. Such high quality that either of the two batteries it came with will still take me thru a whole day, but I have switched over to my Flex as primary.
  23. #23  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    Anybody here have a 1st generation Kindle and remember how much it cost? $399
    Got to give companies a chance to grab back some of that R & D that is spent.

    I know you guys think that this phone should be like the Nexus 5, Moto X, and other products, but these devices sales are eclipsed by the more expensive devices.

    It is those overpriced iPhones, Galaxies, and Notes of the world that get the majority of market demand and profits.
    Thanked by 2:
    A895 likes this.
  24. #24  
    Golfdriver97's Avatar

    Posts
    18,698 Posts
    Global Posts
    19,076 Global Posts
    ROM
    Liquidsmooth ROM

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I think I can only echo the idea of exclusivity being a mistake. Especially, when Amazon could offer better deals off their website. Up the price a little to unsubsidized, but if you buy on Amazon, you get $100 off and can take it to any carrier.

    Phone Timeline
    'If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change.' - Mahatma Gandhi
    Community Guidelines and also here
  25. #25  

    Default Re: This phone should have been cheap & off-contract.

    I totally agree! I'm so disappointed in Amazon for the exclusive contract!!! AT&T just does not have the coverage Verizon does, especially not here. I'm not going to change to an inferior carrier just to try this phone and I am a loyal Amazon consumer! Love my Kindles. They could have open carriers, sell twice as many and lower the cost. Perhaps the next generation of it will open up and the bugs will be worked out. I can not get an AT&T signal here or couldn't when we moved here. I just looked and there are no AT&T towers within 120 miles of here (Montana). Just a few on the I-90 corridor.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What phone are you getting next?
    By BluIndigo in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 3
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 07-06-2014, 11:29 AM
  2. Can I get notifications for this forum?
    By ChrisP1234 in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 3
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-19-2014, 01:28 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-19-2014, 05:08 AM
  4. AT&T Exclusive: 32GB $199, 64GB $299 on-contract
    By Ry in forum Amazon Fire Phone
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 02:47 PM
  5. is this fixable ??
    By 1Vicious9 in forum LG Optimus Series
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 02:08 PM

Posting Permissions