Indeed, which brings me to the other thing I see 'wrong' with the article (or at least the summary) - the statement "it's cheap enough for the pre-paid phones that are much more common than post-paid".
Outside the US (not just in third-world countries, but most other developed countries), this is a false dichotomy (suggesting that only 'cheap' phones can be put on pre-paid plans). Many people with 'high end' phones (Galaxy S4, iPhone 5/5S) are on pre-paid plans. Often quite cheap ones. Actually I'd say that's the norm in many places - many Asian countries, Australia/NZ, much of Europe. People caught on long ago that tying yourself into a 2+ year contract for a subsidized phone isn't worth it in the long run, because you miss out on being able to jump to different plans/carriers, who are in competition with each other and generally introduce new, better value plans a couple of times per year.
Yes, yes I know the market in the US is different. But in much of the rest of the world the phone and the plan are two unrelated purchase decisions. You can have a cheap-ass phone on an expensive post-paid plan, or the most expensive phone in the world on the cheapest $10 pre-paid...