Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New after 2

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 12:19:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Yippie..
I can finally take advantage of Verizon's new-after-2 feature to get a
new phone.
I am quite happy with my Moto v60i but I really would appreciate a
phone with at least speaker phone capability.
I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
has?

Thanks.
Walter

More about : question

Anonymous
October 21, 2004 9:55:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 21 Oct 2004 08:19:27 -0700, w_cohen@hotmail.com (Walter Cohen)
wrote:

>I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
>available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
>Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
>has?

I'm "told" that Kyocera is supposed to release one soon, but you know
how rumors start.:) 
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 10:58:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 21 Oct 2004 08:19:27 -0700, w_cohen@hotmail.com (Walter Cohen)
wrote:

>Yippie..
>I can finally take advantage of Verizon's new-after-2 feature to get a
>new phone.
>I am quite happy with my Moto v60i but I really would appreciate a
>phone with at least speaker phone capability.
>I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
>available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
>Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
>has?
>
>Thanks.
>Walter

I recently upgraded to an LG VX4500 which does have speakerphone and
is available in VZ's plan.

B
Related resources
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 12:25:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:58:07 +0000, Bob_M
<r.mariotti@financialdatacorp.com> wrote:

>I recently upgraded to an LG VX4500 which does have speakerphone and
>is available in VZ's plan.

Didn't I read a while back that the 4500 isn't available in all
markets anymore? If the OP can get one from somewhere, he should be
alright. He just might not be able to buy it new from VZW.
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 4:00:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The more I think about it I will probably not take up VZ with their
new-every-2 stuff. If I do then that locks me in for another 2 year
contract I believe.
I think I'm better off getting a phone off of Ebay and just using/keeping my
current plan which I think, as it supposedly ended on 9/27, has defaulted to
a one year renewal.

Now to look for speaker phones.....

Thanks,
Walter
"The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
news:o vbgn0tkgqite9n741a03la8kbs4kc037r@4ax.com...
> On 21 Oct 2004 08:19:27 -0700, w_cohen@hotmail.com (Walter Cohen)
> wrote:
>
> >I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
> >available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
> >Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
> >has?
>
> I'm "told" that Kyocera is supposed to release one soon, but you know
> how rumors start.:) 
>
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 4:00:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:00:13 GMT, "Walter Cohen" <w_cohen@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>The more I think about it I will probably not take up VZ with their
>new-every-2 stuff. If I do then that locks me in for another 2 year
>contract I believe.

If I re-sign, I'll just pay the higher price for the phone just to get
a one year contract. I think I'm done with 2 year deals, too.

>I think I'm better off getting a phone off of Ebay and just using/keeping my
>current plan which I think, as it supposedly ended on 9/27, has defaulted to
>a one year renewal.

No, you are now on month to month. No annual renewal. Unless you had
special promotions that ended with the initial contract period, you
can stay on your current plan (switching phones on and off of it at
will online) with its features for as long as you like.

>Now to look for speaker phones.....

Good luck. When you look on Ebay, I hear it makes it much easier if
the phone was originally a VZW phone. That way they can't say they
won't/can't support the phone on their network.
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 4:57:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I stopped in a VZW store today in NY. They had the LG VX4500 there.
Another 'browser' there said he never had luck with LG phones and heard
others had problems too....

Thanks,
Walter

"The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
news:tokgn05ue6spkk6masi2t85j6fr5dnj39p@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:58:07 +0000, Bob_M
> <r.mariotti@financialdatacorp.com> wrote:
>
> >I recently upgraded to an LG VX4500 which does have speakerphone and
> >is available in VZ's plan.
>
> Didn't I read a while back that the 4500 isn't available in all
> markets anymore? If the OP can get one from somewhere, he should be
> alright. He just might not be able to buy it new from VZW.
>
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 7:16:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
news:8hkgn05790s92hh67dos5du7r1rj22npb0@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:00:13 GMT, "Walter Cohen"
<w_cohen@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>The more I think about it I will probably not take up VZ with their
>>new-every-2 stuff. If I do then that locks me in for another 2
year
>>contract I believe.
>
> If I re-sign, I'll just pay the higher price for the phone just to
get
> a one year contract. I think I'm done with 2 year deals, too.

Why, you going somewhere other than Verizon?
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 1:24:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote:
> On 21 Oct 2004 08:19:27 -0700, w_cohen@hotmail.com (Walter Cohen)
> wrote:
>
>>I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
>>available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
>>Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
>>has?
>
> I'm "told" that Kyocera is supposed to release one soon, but you know
> how rumors start.:) 
>
Kyocera already has one on the market. The "slider" has a speakerphone
in it.

Jeff
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 1:30:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
if you sign up for another 2 year contract.

So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 3:04:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>
> So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
> your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
> doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
> again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
> except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".
>
But, you would have to change your phone number. Not very convenient to
me. I would prefer to keep my phone number and just settle for their
deal.

Jeff
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 9:06:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>, Sentinel
<none@none.com> wrote:

> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.

It's not the same deal. It's the subsidized "with contract" phone
price that a new customer would get, PLUS a $100 credit towards that
discounted price. So if a phone's $100 "with activation," or say $300
without it, it'd be a free phone for you on the new-every-two deal, but
$100 for the new customer.

--
Garner R. Miller
Clifton Park, NY =USA=
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 9:23:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
>me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
>and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
>if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>
>So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
>your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
>doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
>again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
>except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".

There are two different deals here.

1) When your contract (one or two years) is up, you can buy a phone at
the new-customer price.

2) After you have bought a phone with a two-year contract and have been on
a qualifying plan (at least $34.99/mo, I believe) the entire two years,
at the end of the two years, you will get an additional up to $100 off
the new-customer price on the purchase of a new phone, as long as you
agree to another two-year contract. That is, $100 off if the phone costs
more than $100, or the phone is free otherwise. This is "new every 2".
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 12:33:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:

> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.

No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give you
that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of the phone.

So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of September,
the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was $419, and the
two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219 because I got $100 off
that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70 rebate, so my effective
price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax on $219.)

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 12:48:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>
>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
>> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
>> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
>> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>
> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give you
> that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of the phone.
>
> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of September,
> the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was $419, and the
> two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219 because I got $100 off
> that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70 rebate, so my effective
> price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax on $219.)

Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted price.

-Quick
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 1:57:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:06:26 GMT, Garner Miller wrote:

>In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>, Sentinel
><none@none.com> wrote:
>
>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
>> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
>> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
>> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>
>It's not the same deal. It's the subsidized "with contract" phone
>price that a new customer would get, PLUS a $100 credit towards that
>discounted price. So if a phone's $100 "with activation," or say $300
>without it, it'd be a free phone for you on the new-every-two deal, but
>$100 for the new customer.
Ohhhhh Well that's different then. That is a better deal.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 2:48:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3>,
"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

> > So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
> > September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was
> > $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
> > because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70
> > rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax
> > on $219.)
>
> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
> price.

That is dependent upon state law; what you wrote is true for California
(and perhaps some other states), but not for my state.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 7:52:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
news:1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3:

> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at
all to
>>> me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract
is up
>>> and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new
phone
>>> if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>>
>> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give
you
>> that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of the
phone.
>>
>> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
September,
>> the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was $419,
and the
>> two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219 because I got
$100 off
>> that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70 rebate, so my
effective
>> price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax on $219.)
>
> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
price.

Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
$30,000?
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 7:52:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Mitchell Regenbogen wrote:
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3:
>
>> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all
>>>> to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract
>>>> is up and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a
>>>> new phone if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>>>
>>> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give you
>>> that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of the
>>> phone.
>>>
>>> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
>>> September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was
>>> $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
>>> because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70
>>> rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax
>>> on $219.)
>>
>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>> price.
>
> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
> tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
> mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
> agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
> $30,000?

I guess it's a state thing? I'll garuantee that here in CA you are taxed
on the MSRP of the phone. *Many* years ago they had the completely
"free" phones when you signed a contract. Then they made them charge
for the phone so they could collect tax. That led to the $1 phones. Now
they have to tax on full retail value. Maybe your state is different?

-Quick
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 7:52:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <Xns958CF2D3EB9C7mregpanixcom@166.84.1.69>,
Mitchell Regenbogen <mreg@panix.spam.com> wrote:

> > Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
> > charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
> > price.
>
> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay tax
> on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any mail-in
> rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up agreeing with
> the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on $30,000?

In California, a state law says that when a telephone is discounted as
part of a promotion for getting a customer to sign a term contract, the
sales tax is on the full price of the phone--not the MSRP, but the "no
plan" price the retailer charges.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 7:52:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <Xns958CF2D3EB9C7mregpanixcom@166.84.1.69>,
> Mitchell Regenbogen <mreg@panix.spam.com> wrote:
>
>>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>>> price.
>>
>> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay tax
>> on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any mail-in
>> rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up agreeing with
>> the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on $30,000?
>
> In California, a state law says that when a telephone is discounted as
> part of a promotion for getting a customer to sign a term contract,
> the sales tax is on the full price of the phone--not the MSRP, but
> the "no plan" price the retailer charges.

Ok... let's take your example to California. Would that be tax on
$519 or $219?

-Quick
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 7:52:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1098684810.462539@sj-nntpcache-3>,
"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

> > In California, a state law says that when a telephone is discounted
> > as part of a promotion for getting a customer to sign a term
> > contract, the sales tax is on the full price of the phone--not the
> > MSRP, but the "no plan" price the retailer charges.
>
> Ok... let's take your example to California. Would that be tax on
> $519 or $219?

$519--maybe on $419, depending on how they consider the $100 credit for
New-Every-Two.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 8:54:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 03:52:17 +0000 (UTC), Mitchell Regenbogen
<mreg@panix.spam.com> wrote:

>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>price.
>
>Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
>tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
>mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
>agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
>$30,000?

When you buy a car you aren't also committing to a 2 year service
plan. With a cell phone, they discount the price of the phone *only*
when you commit to the service plan, and in doing so what they are
really doing is building in part of the price of the phone into the
plan term costs. So the state requires that they charge you tax on
the full retail price of the phone.

jc
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 9:08:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:24:42 -0700, Jeff Grossman
<jeff.nospam@stikman.com> wrote:

>The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote:
>> On 21 Oct 2004 08:19:27 -0700, w_cohen@hotmail.com (Walter Cohen)
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I went on the web site for 'upgrade phone' but all of the phones
>>>available to me via this method did not have speaker phone capability.
>>>Anyone have any suggestions as to the good/popular phones that Verizon
>>>has?
>>
>> I'm "told" that Kyocera is supposed to release one soon, but you know
>> how rumors start.:) 
>>
>Kyocera already has one on the market. The "slider" has a speakerphone
>in it.

No, there's supposed to be another one coming out "soon", according to
my local store rep. FWIW.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 9:09:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:23:19 GMT, hoch@exemplary.invalid (CharlesH)
wrote:

>In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all to
>>me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract is up
>>and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a new phone
>>if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>>
>>So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
>>your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
>>doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
>>again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
>>except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".
>
>There are two different deals here.
>
>1) When your contract (one or two years) is up, you can buy a phone at
>the new-customer price.
>
>2) After you have bought a phone with a two-year contract and have been on
>a qualifying plan (at least $34.99/mo, I believe) the entire two years,
>at the end of the two years, you will get an additional up to $100 off
>the new-customer price on the purchase of a new phone, as long as you
>agree to another two-year contract. That is, $100 off if the phone costs
>more than $100, or the phone is free otherwise. This is "new every 2".

Sounds more like new after committing to 4, then new every 2.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 2:02:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:23:19 GMT, hoch@exemplary.invalid (CharlesH)
> wrote:
>
>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all
>>> to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract
>>> is up and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a
>>> new phone if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>>>
>>> So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
>>> your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
>>> doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
>>> again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
>>> except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".
>>
>> There are two different deals here.
>>
>> 1) When your contract (one or two years) is up, you can buy a phone
>> at the new-customer price.
>>
>> 2) After you have bought a phone with a two-year contract and have
>> been on a qualifying plan (at least $34.99/mo, I believe) the entire
>> two years, at the end of the two years, you will get an additional
>> up to $100 off the new-customer price on the purchase of a new
>> phone, as long as you agree to another two-year contract. That is,
>> $100 off if the phone costs more than $100, or the phone is free
>> otherwise. This is "new every 2".
>
> Sounds more like new after committing to 4, then new every 2.

Yea, kind of... You do get the 2 yr. contract price on the equipment
when you initially sign up (as opposed to the 1 yr. subsidized price).
Then you get the 2 yr. contract price (instead of 1 yr. or 0 yr. subsidized
price when you agree to the second contract.

If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over time it
works out to a much better deal. You need to consider probabilities.
If you have been with VZW for at least a year and are planning to
continue with VZW what is the probability that you are really going to
want to switch within the next year? next 2 years? I've been with VZW
for at least 10 years? (it was GTE Mobile back then) with a 2 month
ordeal with Cingular in the middle there somewhere (VZW was still
holding my account for me so I just reactivated it when I came back).
I have no plans to move out of the area. I have no reason to believe
I will have a compelling reason to switch in the next 2 years. I do
believe that I will want and be able to afford cell service for the next
2 years (in case of disaster I can afford the ETF). It would be pretty
silly for me not to take the 2 yr. contract.

-Quick
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 4:01:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
C5DB1E.22483824102004@news.west.cox.net:

> In article <1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3>,
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> > So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
>> > September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract
price was
>> > $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
>> > because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a
$70
>> > rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales
tax
>> > on $219.)
>>
>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>> price.
>
> That is dependent upon state law; what you wrote is true for
California
> (and perhaps some other states), but not for my state.

Or any normal state.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 9:43:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1098681579.545046@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Mitchell Regenbogen wrote:
>> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3:
>>
>>> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>>>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>>>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all
>>>>> to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract
>>>>> is up and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a
>>>>> new phone if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
>>>>
>>>> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give you
>>>> that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of the
>>>> phone.
>>>>
>>>> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
>>>> September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price was
>>>> $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
>>>> because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70
>>>> rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax
>>>> on $219.)
>>>
>>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>>> price.
>>
>> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
>> tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
>> mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
>> agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
>> $30,000?
>
> I guess it's a state thing? I'll garuantee that here in CA you are taxed
> on the MSRP of the phone. *Many* years ago they had the completely
> "free" phones when you signed a contract. Then they made them charge
> for the phone so they could collect tax. That led to the $1 phones. Now
> they have to tax on full retail value. Maybe your state is different?
>
> -Quick
>
Do you pay tax on the MSRP of everything or just cell phones?
Does this include any item which is "ON SALE"?
Then there are some items which are always are sold for less than the MSRP.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 9:43:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

IMHO wrote:
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1098681579.545046@sj-nntpcache-3...
>> Mitchell Regenbogen wrote:
>>> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3:
>>>
>>>> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>>>>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>>>>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at
>>>>>> all to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your
>>>>>> contract is up and they will give you the same deal as a new
>>>>>> customer on a new phone if you sign up for another 2 year
>>>>>> contract.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give
>>>>> you that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of
>>>>> the phone.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
>>>>> September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price
>>>>> was $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
>>>>> because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70
>>>>> rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax
>>>>> on $219.)
>>>>
>>>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>>>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>>>> price.
>>>
>>> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
>>> tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
>>> mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
>>> agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
>>> $30,000?
>>
>> I guess it's a state thing? I'll garuantee that here in CA you are
>> taxed on the MSRP of the phone. *Many* years ago they had the
>> completely "free" phones when you signed a contract. Then they made
>> them charge
>> for the phone so they could collect tax. That led to the $1 phones.
>> Now they have to tax on full retail value. Maybe your state is
>> different?
>>
>> -Quick
>>
> Do you pay tax on the MSRP of everything or just cell phones?
> Does this include any item which is "ON SALE"?
> Then there are some items which are always are sold for less than the
> MSRP.

OK... forget about "MSRP". In the context of subsidized cell phones
lets use the terms "full price" and "subsidized price".

The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
That is what the state considers "full price".
Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
signing a contract. <- this is important.
You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).

NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The establishment
has placed the value of [something] at the difference between
the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
tax due on what was sold you.

When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
their service for a period of time is worth something to them.

Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
pick nits.

-Quick
October 25, 2004 10:55:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

At the end of the 2 year contract does the new contract have to begin
immediately to get the $100 off? Or can I go month-to-month for awhile and
then sign a new 2 year contract with the $100 credit?


"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1098723624.856223@sj-nntpcache-5...
> The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:23:19 GMT, hoch@exemplary.invalid (CharlesH)
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
> >> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
> >>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at all
> >>> to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your contract
> >>> is up and they will give you the same deal as a new customer on a
> >>> new phone if you sign up for another 2 year contract.
> >>>
> >>> So then how is that different from how it was before? Before after
> >>> your 2 year contract was up you could continue doing what you are
> >>> doing or you could close your account and sign up as a new customer
> >>> again getting the same deal as a new customer. So..... what's new
> >>> except now they have a name for it and call it a "deal".
> >>
> >> There are two different deals here.
> >>
> >> 1) When your contract (one or two years) is up, you can buy a phone
> >> at the new-customer price.
> >>
> >> 2) After you have bought a phone with a two-year contract and have
> >> been on a qualifying plan (at least $34.99/mo, I believe) the entire
> >> two years, at the end of the two years, you will get an additional
> >> up to $100 off the new-customer price on the purchase of a new
> >> phone, as long as you agree to another two-year contract. That is,
> >> $100 off if the phone costs more than $100, or the phone is free
> >> otherwise. This is "new every 2".
> >
> > Sounds more like new after committing to 4, then new every 2.
>
> Yea, kind of... You do get the 2 yr. contract price on the equipment
> when you initially sign up (as opposed to the 1 yr. subsidized price).
> Then you get the 2 yr. contract price (instead of 1 yr. or 0 yr.
subsidized
> price when you agree to the second contract.
>
> If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over time it
> works out to a much better deal. You need to consider probabilities.
> If you have been with VZW for at least a year and are planning to
> continue with VZW what is the probability that you are really going to
> want to switch within the next year? next 2 years? I've been with VZW
> for at least 10 years? (it was GTE Mobile back then) with a 2 month
> ordeal with Cingular in the middle there somewhere (VZW was still
> holding my account for me so I just reactivated it when I came back).
> I have no plans to move out of the area. I have no reason to believe
> I will have a compelling reason to switch in the next 2 years. I do
> believe that I will want and be able to afford cell service for the next
> 2 years (in case of disaster I can afford the ETF). It would be pretty
> silly for me not to take the 2 yr. contract.
>
> -Quick
>
>
October 25, 2004 11:00:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote on [Sun, 24 Oct 2004 23:55:57 -0700]:
> In article <1098684810.462539@sj-nntpcache-3>,
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> > In California, a state law says that when a telephone is discounted
>> > as part of a promotion for getting a customer to sign a term
>> > contract, the sales tax is on the full price of the phone--not the
>> > MSRP, but the "no plan" price the retailer charges.
>>
>> Ok... let's take your example to California. Would that be tax on
>> $519 or $219?
>
> $519--maybe on $419, depending on how they consider the $100 credit for
> New-Every-Two.

What a rip!
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 11:39:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Alan" <alnogen@noname.com> wrote in message
news:1%bfd.28562$OD2.27690@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> At the end of the 2 year contract does the new contract have to begin
> immediately to get the $100 off? Or can I go month-to-month for awhile
> and
> then sign a new 2 year contract with the $100 credit?
>

Doing a search at the VerizonWireless site on "new every two", I found this
info at
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/HowToControllerServl....
According to this, if you were signed up for New Every Two after 11/25/02,
you must take advantage of the promotion within 6 months of becoming
eligible.

Harold
October 26, 2004 12:25:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Thanks Harold.

"Harold Sherrill" <hlsherrill@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TDcfd.10862$Al3.4264@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> "Alan" <alnogen@noname.com> wrote in message
> news:1%bfd.28562$OD2.27690@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > At the end of the 2 year contract does the new contract have to begin
> > immediately to get the $100 off? Or can I go month-to-month for awhile
> > and
> > then sign a new 2 year contract with the $100 credit?
> >
>
> Doing a search at the VerizonWireless site on "new every two", I found
this
> info at
>
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/HowToControllerServl...
&featureId=1845.
> According to this, if you were signed up for New Every Two after 11/25/02,
> you must take advantage of the promotion within 6 months of becoming
> eligible.
>
> Harold
>
>
>
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 1:46:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1098749454.317242@sj-nntpcache-5...
> IMHO wrote:
>> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1098681579.545046@sj-nntpcache-3...
>>> Mitchell Regenbogen wrote:
>>>> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1098676383.40327@sj-nntpcache-3:
>>>>
>>>>> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>>>>>> In article <febnn0tqh5qho1dtgv00feuv3unnp3t7lv@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> Sentinel <none@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Personally the "new every 2" doesn't sound like a good deal at
>>>>>>> all to me. The way I read it it says that after 2 years your
>>>>>>> contract is up and they will give you the same deal as a new
>>>>>>> customer on a new phone if you sign up for another 2 year
>>>>>>> contract.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, that's not what it says. What it says is that they will give
>>>>>> you that same deal, and in addition, take $100 off the price of
>>>>>> the phone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, for instance, when I bought a V710 at the beginning of
>>>>>> September, the full price was $519; the one-year-contract price
>>>>>> was $419, and the two-year contract price was $319. I paid $219
>>>>>> because I got $100 off that $319 price. And I'll be getting a $70
>>>>>> rebate, so my effective price will be $149. (But I paid sales tax
>>>>>> on $219.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>>>>> charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>>>>> price.
>>>>
>>>> Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
>>>> tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
>>>> mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
>>>> agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
>>>> $30,000?
>>>
>>> I guess it's a state thing? I'll garuantee that here in CA you are
>>> taxed on the MSRP of the phone. *Many* years ago they had the
>>> completely "free" phones when you signed a contract. Then they made
>>> them charge
>>> for the phone so they could collect tax. That led to the $1 phones.
>>> Now they have to tax on full retail value. Maybe your state is
>>> different?
>>>
>>> -Quick
>>>
>> Do you pay tax on the MSRP of everything or just cell phones?
>> Does this include any item which is "ON SALE"?
>> Then there are some items which are always are sold for less than the
>> MSRP.
>
> OK... forget about "MSRP". In the context of subsidized cell phones
> lets use the terms "full price" and "subsidized price".
>
> The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
> That is what the state considers "full price".
> Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
> signing a contract. <- this is important.
> You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
> sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).
>
> NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
> to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
> price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The establishment
> has placed the value of [something] at the difference between
> the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
> tax due on what was sold you.
>
> When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
> moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
> their service for a period of time is worth something to them.
>
> Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
> pick nits.
>
> -Quick
>
>
Thanks for the clarification.
I was just thinking of it as a reduced price.
Now it makes sense.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 5:30:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1%bfd.28562$OD2.27690@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Alan" <alnogen@noname.com> wrote:

> At the end of the 2 year contract does the new contract have to begin
> immediately to get the $100 off? Or can I go month-to-month for
> awhile and then sign a new 2 year contract with the $100 credit?

You can go month to month for however long you want, and then get the
new every two price; it doesn't have to be immediately. But you can get
it up to two months before your contract ends, i.e., 1 year and 10
months.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 5:34:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <michelle-35F4C8.01302526102004@news.west.cox.net>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> You can go month to month for however long you want, and then get the
> new every two price; it doesn't have to be immediately.

My error; for however long you want, up to six months, unless you
enrolled in the program before November 2002.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Vote for John Kerry.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 12:15:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:02:56 -0700, "Quick"
<quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

>If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over time it
>works out to a much better deal. You need to consider probabilities.

That's where the math gets me. When I find a phone I like, I don't
mind keeping it well past my contract expiration. I'm not one to rush
out and buy the latest, greatest new phones chock full of bugs.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 12:21:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:13:27 -0700, "Quick"
<quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

>The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
>That is what the state considers "full price".
>Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
>signing a contract. <- this is important.
>You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
>sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).
>
>NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
>to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
>price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The establishment
>has placed the value of [something] at the difference between
>the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
>tax due on what was sold you.
>
>When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
>moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
>their service for a period of time is worth something to them.
>
>Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
>pick nits.

I'll do a bit of nit picking.

They tax you on the full, unsubsidized price on the phone. Then VZW
(or any other carrier) signs you up for a contract, through which they
recoup that subsidy cost. But, you pay tax on that bill, too.

Sounds like the state is double taxing the subsidy difference.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 2:15:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:02:56 -0700, "Quick"
> <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over
>> time it works out to a much better deal. You need to consider
>> probabilities.
>
> That's where the math gets me. When I find a phone I like, I don't
> mind keeping it well past my contract expiration. I'm not one to rush
> out and buy the latest, greatest new phones chock full of bugs.

Sure, just go month-to-month. But if you are going to sign a contract
it is usually better to sign the 2yr than 1yr. I'm on one extreme. Been
with them for more than 10 yrs. Can't see any reason that I won't be
with them for the next 2 years. *If* I was to need new equipment I'd
take the 2yr price. The main thing you are balancing it against is the
ETF. Even without the NewAny2 the phones are usually $35 less
for 2yr than 1yr. That effectively brings the ETF down to $140.
I think it's clear that the discount price is worth a 1yr committment.
So we're only talking about the second year. If this is not your
first experience with VZW then you are probably happy with the
current service. This reduces the reasons for leaving to life changes,
unusually good deals elsewhere, and a couple of others. If you're
there for another year the probability that you'll be there for 2 yrs
is pretty good. So the ETF is $140. Minimun "maintenance" plan
is $??/month. The effective ETF tapers off the last 4 or 5 months
of your contract. So just with the above that second year of committment
is a lot less risk than most figure.

-Quick
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 2:20:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:13:27 -0700, "Quick"
> <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
>> That is what the state considers "full price".
>> Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
>> signing a contract. <- this is important.
>> You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
>> sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).
>>
>> NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
>> to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
>> price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The
>> establishment has placed the value of [something] at the difference
>> between
>> the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
>> tax due on what was sold you.
>>
>> When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
>> moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
>> their service for a period of time is worth something to them.
>>
>> Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
>> pick nits.
>
> I'll do a bit of nit picking.
>
> They tax you on the full, unsubsidized price on the phone. Then VZW
> (or any other carrier) signs you up for a contract, through which they
> recoup that subsidy cost. But, you pay tax on that bill, too.
>
> Sounds like the state is double taxing the subsidy difference.

hmmm... I don't think so. You have to compare to those who are
on month-to-month. They are paying the same as you for their
plan without the equipment subsidy. Aren't you effectively paying
less for your plan in return for the contract commitment?

-Quick
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 3:26:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
news:p rfsn09biq1agtrl1djks00dt03jo4l3pq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:02:56 -0700, "Quick"
> <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over time it
>>works out to a much better deal. You need to consider probabilities.
>
> That's where the math gets me. When I find a phone I like, I don't
> mind keeping it well past my contract expiration. I'm not one to rush
> out and buy the latest, greatest new phones chock full of bugs.
>

For me, I don't always want a new phone either, but I started adding up the
accesory costs (Mobile office kit, desktop charger, car charger, case,
wireless headset, Cellsocket, etc. About $659 bucks worth of stuff that I
would have to throw out for $100 credit on a new phone....) Let's see, new
PDA/Phone $559 but $100 credit = $459, plus $659 for accessories..... hmmmmm
by spending $1118, I can save $100.... Not much of a deal....

Seems to me that people never factor in the costs of what accessories they
already have when they look into a new phone.

Did make an interesting deal with a friend of mine, he wasn't eligible but
cracked the display on his phone and was buying another. I used the credit
for a new phone for him and he paid me the money.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 4:13:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Peter Pan wrote:
> "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
> news:p rfsn09biq1agtrl1djks00dt03jo4l3pq@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:02:56 -0700, "Quick"
>> <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If you actually do all the math (correctly) amortizing costs over
>>> time it works out to a much better deal. You need to consider
>>> probabilities.
>>
>> That's where the math gets me. When I find a phone I like, I don't
>> mind keeping it well past my contract expiration. I'm not one to
>> rush out and buy the latest, greatest new phones chock full of bugs.
>>
>
> For me, I don't always want a new phone either, but I started adding
> up the accesory costs (Mobile office kit, desktop charger, car
> charger, case, wireless headset, Cellsocket, etc. About $659 bucks
> worth of stuff that I would have to throw out for $100 credit on a
> new phone....) Let's see, new PDA/Phone $559 but $100 credit = $459,
> plus $659 for accessories..... hmmmmm by spending $1118, I can save
> $100.... Not much of a deal....
>
> Seems to me that people never factor in the costs of what accessories
> they already have when they look into a new phone.
>
> Did make an interesting deal with a friend of mine, he wasn't
> eligible but cracked the display on his phone and was buying another.
> I used the credit for a new phone for him and he paid me the money.

That is another point. VZW doesn't lock their phones. With some effort
you can sell it on eBay or elsewhere. Even if you don't want the new
equipment you should be able to sell it for enough to cover the ETF.

-Quick
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 9:21:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <l3gsn05qbier8tdfcq09hgqc7o74aovuh5@4ax.com>,
The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:13:27 -0700, "Quick"
><quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
>>That is what the state considers "full price".
>>Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
>>signing a contract. <- this is important.
>>You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
>>sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).
>>
>>NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
>>to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
>>price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The establishment
>>has placed the value of [something] at the difference between
>>the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
>>tax due on what was sold you.
>>
>>When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
>>moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
>>their service for a period of time is worth something to them.
>>
>>Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
>>pick nits.
>
>I'll do a bit of nit picking.
>
>They tax you on the full, unsubsidized price on the phone. Then VZW
>(or any other carrier) signs you up for a contract, through which they
>recoup that subsidy cost. But, you pay tax on that bill, too.
>
>Sounds like the state is double taxing the subsidy difference.

Here is the double-talk from the California tax board: You are not just
buying a phone; you are buying a (phone + service) package. The phone
part is subject to sales tax, the service is not. The cellular company
allows you to pay only part of the price of the phone at the time you
purchase it, and for the first couple of payments on your "service"
you are really paying off the balance on the phone. So you really are
paying the unsubsidized price of the phone, just in an installment plan,
and thus should pay sales tax on the unsubsidized price.

Of course, this is really BS; the state tax board was ticked off about
losing the revenue on the cell phone sales, and found a creative rational
to recover the revenue.
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 9:21:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

CharlesH wrote:
> In article <l3gsn05qbier8tdfcq09hgqc7o74aovuh5@4ax.com>,
> The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote:
>> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:13:27 -0700, "Quick"
>> <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The state wants to get tax on what an item is sold for.
>>> That is what the state considers "full price".
>>> Notice that you can't get a "subsidized" phone without
>>> signing a contract. <- this is important.
>>> You can get most anything on sale. You pay tax on the
>>> sale price (that is the "full price" while the item is on sale).
>>>
>>> NOW if some establishment were to say "*if* you agree
>>> to [something] we will sell you this item at that cost ("subsidized
>>> price") otherwise it costs this cost ("full price"). The
>>> establishment has placed the value of [something] at the difference
>>> between
>>> the "full price" and the "subsidized price". The state wants the
>>> tax due on what was sold you.
>>>
>>> When you get a subsidized cell phone the provider has simply
>>> moved that cost somewhere else. Your commitment to buy
>>> their service for a period of time is worth something to them.
>>>
>>> Does that make it any clearer? or were you simply looking to
>>> pick nits.
>>
>> I'll do a bit of nit picking.
>>
>> They tax you on the full, unsubsidized price on the phone. Then VZW
>> (or any other carrier) signs you up for a contract, through which
>> they recoup that subsidy cost. But, you pay tax on that bill, too.
>>
>> Sounds like the state is double taxing the subsidy difference.
>
> Here is the double-talk from the California tax board: You are not
> just buying a phone; you are buying a (phone + service) package. The
> phone part is subject to sales tax, the service is not. The cellular
> company allows you to pay only part of the price of the phone at the
> time you purchase it, and for the first couple of payments on your
> "service"
> you are really paying off the balance on the phone. So you really are
> paying the unsubsidized price of the phone, just in an installment
> plan, and thus should pay sales tax on the unsubsidized price.
>
> Of course, this is really BS; the state tax board was ticked off about
> losing the revenue on the cell phone sales, and found a creative
> rational to recover the revenue.

Yea. That doesn't figure. If it did then the plan price should go down
when you go month-to-month. But this is a different thread.

-Quick
Anonymous
October 26, 2004 10:34:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1098812865.31861@sj-nntpcache-3...
<snip>
> Yea. That doesn't figure. If it did then the plan price should go down
> when you go month-to-month. But this is a different thread.
>
> -Quick
>
>

Bottom line that folks miss is this.

Original Price of Cell Phone: $300
Subsidized Price w/ 2 yr. $ 50
Savings of $250

Min. Plan plus 17.5% tax $ 30 x 24=$720 + $126=$946.00

Your plan could be higher. Now figure this:

Pay full retail for the Cell $300 plus Tax = $325.00
Min Plan plus 17.5% tax $946.00
_____________________________________________________
$1271.00
with 2 year Contract
$
798.00 with 1 year Contract

Vs. $
996.00 With 2 Year Contract

The cost of the phone with $175 ETF $225 which saves you $75 but the tax is
that much so you are locked in for that $75 savings. Yeah right.

Pay the full price and be able to leave when you want, and save a whole year
or more and be on top.

Elector
Anonymous
October 28, 2004 9:08:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:20:08 -0700, "Quick"
<quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

>hmmm... I don't think so. You have to compare to those who are
>on month-to-month. They are paying the same as you for their
>plan without the equipment subsidy. Aren't you effectively paying
>less for your plan in return for the contract commitment?

No, since I'm on month-to-month now (have been since 6/04,
VZW/BAMN/BAM customer since 6/95), I'm still paying for the equipment
subsidy that I've already paid for. Hell, I'll bet I've paid the
subsidies back on my Dish Network receivers 5 or 6 times over by now.
October 30, 2004 6:35:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Actually it depends on what state you are in. In Pennsylvania you pay
tax on the discounted price. In California you pay tax on the
unsubsidized price. Other states may vary.

JC Dill wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 03:52:17 +0000 (UTC), Mitchell Regenbogen
> <mreg@panix.spam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Check again. I think you may have paid tax on $519. They have to
>>>charge tax on the retail price of the phone. Not the discounted
>>
>>price.
>>
>>Incorrect. The "retail price" means nothing. The price you pay
>>tax on is the price you actually pay for the phone (before any
>>mail-in rebate). If a car's MSRP is $30,000, and you end up
>>agreeing with the dealer to pay $27,000, do you pay sales tax on
>>$30,000?
>
>
> When you buy a car you aren't also committing to a 2 year service
> plan. With a cell phone, they discount the price of the phone *only*
> when you commit to the service plan, and in doing so what they are
> really doing is building in part of the price of the phone into the
> plan term costs. So the state requires that they charge you tax on
> the full retail price of the phone.
>
> jc
>
!