Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Is paying for expensive cellular service a symbol of status? ( 1

VoyagerRadio writes: Prepaid cellular carriers have long been perceived as providing lesser services than expensive contract carriers such as Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, which tend to offer the "best" (and most expensive) smartphones and cellular services, leaving the cheapest prepaid carriers with bargain-bin devices and services. This is no longer the case, however, with services such as SIMPLE Mobile enabling consumers to use their unlocked devices over the same cellular networks as the contract carriers — and at lesser expense.

With services such as SIMPLE Mobile available, why do people continue renewing their expensive contracts? Why don't more people get their phones and other devices unlocked and migrate to a less expensive but equivalent prepaid carrier? Is the real reason because they're more afraid of losing their status than losing their service, since going with prepaid services isn't considered as "sexy" as the contract carriers' big-budgeted marketing departments make their own services out to be?

This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is paying for expensive cellular service a symbol of status?

Comments Filter:
  • None of the sales people of the company I work for would be caught dead with a T-Mobile or ATT branded phone. They claim its because verizon and sprint have better networks, which nationwide is true, but NYC is serviced pretty well by all of them. Perhaps they really believe the marketing or perhaps they just don't want to seem cheap, I don't know. Personally I ported my verizon branded phone to pageplus and I couldn't be happier, the only caveat is that verizon will not allow them to port LTE phones with a

"It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milkbone underware." -- Norm, from _Cheers_