$799 for the Xoom? Ouch!

[pcoble]

I was arguing that Verizon can't charge an ETF on month to month agreements. I've been saying that since post one.

It's cparker5 who's implying they could.

Congratulations, we are in agreement on that point. But I never took issue with what you were saying about whether there would be an ETF and my original reply was to cparker. The point you seem to take issue with is the difference between there being no ETF because there is no contract and my point that an ETF is not applicable to month-to-month contracts. Just because there will be no ETF doesn't stop Verizon from adding, for example, a small "administrative fee" for users who don't maintain service for a certain number of months. I'm not saying that this will be the case (in fact, I don't think it will be), but it is an important distinction IMO. But take it for what you think it's worth.

Of more relevance to this topic, reports are going around that a WiFi only version of the Xoom hit the FCC today. That may signal an earlier introduction of that model than many have guessed.

 

[ckeegan003]

Just because there will be no ETF doesn't stop Verizon from adding, for example, a small "administrative fee" for users who don't maintain service for a certain number of months. I'm not saying that this will be the case (in fact, I don't think it will be), but it is an important distinction IMO. But take it for what you think it's worth.

How exactly could they assess that fee without you signing a contract? They would have to disclose it somehow, and you would have to sign something saying they disclosed it.

Stop making stuff up.

 

[RConcheiro#AC]

http://www.androidcentral.com/did-wifi-only-xoom-just-appear-fcc

 

[cody_21]

crazy price

crazy price but i am still getting it. I mean the ipad 32gb with 3g data is about the same.

 

[Bald Steve]

I'm not buying one at launch - Too expensive, and I won't make a move until there's a slightly cheaper, Wi-fi only version anyway. I will not sign up for another monthly data plan. My Droid X is my hotspot

 

[Menno]

Congratulations, we are in agreement on that point. But I never took issue with what you were saying about whether there would be an ETF and my original reply was to cparker. The point you seem to take issue with is the difference between there being no ETF because there is no contract and my point that an ETF is not applicable to month-to-month contracts. Just because there will be no ETF doesn't stop Verizon from adding, for example, a small "administrative fee" for users who don't maintain service for a certain number of months. I'm not saying that this will be the case (in fact, I don't think it will be), but it is an important distinction IMO. But take it for what you think it's worth.

Of more relevance to this topic, reports are going around that a WiFi only version of the Xoom hit the FCC today. That may signal an earlier introduction of that model than many have guessed.

If they can charge you a fee for not maintaining service for a certain number of months, then you are signing a multi-month contract, not a month to month agreement.

There is no distinction. you're either getting the thing month to month, or you're signing a term contract. you can't sign a month to month and then have them penalize you if you don't maintain service for a number of months. That's a contradiction of terms. If that fee exists, then they will HAVE to disclose it. If they disclose it, they can't advertise the service as a "Month to month" agreement.

 

[Tre Lawrence]

Nice specs, but too pricey for me at the moment...

 

[pcoble]

How exactly could they assess that fee without you signing a contract? They would have to disclose it somehow, and you would have to sign something saying they disclosed it.

Stop making stuff up.

If they can charge you a fee for not maintaining service for a certain number of months, then you are signing a multi-month contract, not a month to month agreement.

There is no distinction. you're either getting the thing month to month, or you're signing a term contract. you can't sign a month to month and then have them penalize you if you don't maintain service for a number of months. That's a contradiction of terms. If that fee exists, then they will HAVE to disclose it. If they disclose it, they can't advertise the service as a "Month to month" agreement.

Believe whatever you want. Anyone who has ever made a credit card payment for $20 at CVS or clicked through a licensing agreement understands that you don't have to sign all contracts to be bound by their terms. They do have to disclose it, but you don't have to sign anything saying that they disclosed it. It only has to be signed if the contract lasts over a year, is for >$500, and in a handful of other situations that don't apply. They can advertise it correctly as month-to-month because you are not obligated to purchase additional months, they can add a blanked admin fee, and provide "incentives" of waiving the fee for repeated months. It's not common practice, but it's perfectly legal.

Sorry to everyone else who doesn't care, I know this isn't an intro to law forum . . .

 

[Menno]

Believe whatever you want. Anyone who has ever made a credit card payment for $20 at CVS or clicked through a licensing agreement understands that you don't have to sign all contracts to be bound by their terms. They do have to disclose it, but you don't have to sign anything saying that they disclosed it. It only has to be signed if the contract lasts over a year, is for >$500, and in a handful of other situations that don't apply. They can advertise it correctly as month-to-month because you are not obligated to purchase additional months, they can add a blanked admin fee, and provide "incentives" of waiving the fee for repeated months. It's not common practice, but it's perfectly legal.

Sorry to everyone else who doesn't care, I know this isn't an intro to law forum . . .

If they waive the fee for repeated months it's for all intensive purposes an ETF. You're splitting hairs here, creating what ifs and irrational probables to try and prove a point that's not worth proving.

Technically speaking the sun MIGHT not rise tomorrow, but arguing that it might not is rather pointless.

 

[Menno]

Nice specs, but too pricey for me at the moment...

which is ironic considering we still have no idea what the price is.

 

[Chris Kerrigan]

Watch Motorola surprise us all and announce it much cheaper.

Wishful thinking? Oh yeah.

 

[RConcheiro#AC]

Watch Motorola surprise us all and announce it much cheaper.

Wishful thinking? Oh yeah.

I have a feeling that you're right, we're all complaining about the price and watch it be like $650-$700ish.

 

[Menno]

Watch Motorola surprise us all and announce it much cheaper.

Wishful thinking? Oh yeah.

I'm more expecting them to announce that a wifi/cheaper model is coming soon after this one is announced. They know they need a cheaper product on the market. It just remains to be seen what their idea of "Cheaper" is.

I'm just tired of people declaring items DOA or "too expensive" before they're even officially announced and priced.

 

[techfreak20]

which is ironic considering we still have no idea what the price is.

great point. you also have to consider that best buy has been known to add $100 to devices so if this will be sold through verizon also it could be cheaper.

 

[eallan]

I think that Motorola is waiting to announce the price after all this news from HP and others. I mean, isn't this thing supposed to launch very very soon? Shouldn't we hear something?

This is a peculiar launch, I must say I prefer Apple's product announcement, preorder, own path. Announce a month in advance, buy that day usually, get in a month.

 

[qnet]

I think that Motorola is waiting to announce the price after all this news from HP and others. I mean, isn't this thing supposed to launch very very soon? Shouldn't we hear something?

This is a peculiar launch, I must say I prefer Apple's product announcement, preorder, own path. Announce a month in advance, buy that day usually, get in a month.

I hope your right. I like the way Apple announces their products also. That's the frustrating thing about all this to me, the no information. I don't like the way they are doing it at all. It makes me feel like they don't have it all together.

 

[heraldo]

This has helped me decide to wait and see what HTC has brewing. I love my Incredible and would love to keep all my stuff one brand anyway.

Lol sound like an apple guy. no worries im the same way

 

[Maikai.Guy]

I hope your right. I like the way Apple announces their products also. That's the frustrating thing about all this to me, the no information. I don't like the way they are doing it at all. It makes me feel like they don't have it all together.

Don't get me started on Motorola's lack of communication. ;-)

IMHO, the suits at Mot are waiting for the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona next week. They want to make a big entrance and command the attention of the press.

It would be a nice plan, if it wasn't for the fact that the XOOM tablet is drowning in bad publicity until then. No matter what they do or announce, even if it's lower prices, the story of the XOOM is soiled. The thing about bad publicity is it never, ever, completely washes off.

 

[ckeegan003]

The thing about bad publicity is it never, ever, completely washes off.

If that were the case, then Apple wouldn't have sold many iPhones after antenna-gate.

 

[c-lord]

your ipad is Wifi only, and 16GB. this one is 3g/4g capable and 32GB (with an expansion slot for 32GB more)

If you already have an ipad there is less of a reason for you to get this, but that also means you're not the primary market. Motorola/Verizon know they won't get many people who will stop using a $500 piece of equipment after less than a year.

And you'll be able to tell the difference. Put a 320x480 screen next to a 480x800. Make them both 3.5 inches. You can easily tell the difference.

Yes but why would anyone pay for 3g/4g when your phone can do it and you save $30+ a month because you dont have 2 4g bills. I understand having all that extra space is great but I dont know anyone who has a Ipad that actually uses it. Are you really going to put all your music and movies on there, you cant fit the thing in your pocket and use as a mp3 player. If you are in the airport more than 2-3 times a month then yes spend the 800 but i can bet you most people are just going to use it for the apps and email and only use 8gb of space at most.