[dr0800]

EE are taking advantage of the early adopters who want 4G whilst they have a monopoly. Yep, definitely a rip off, but we all know that plenty of people will go for it, even with the pathetic 500GB allowance that will be gone in a day or so. Prices will fall as soon as the other providers start piling in.

As an aside, have you tried to use their website? It's a complete disaster - looks pretty but is utterly unusable.

I'm on Orange so EE appears as the carrier on the Home screen. The only reaon I can see for adopting Lte is if you can't get broadband at home or to attain a better phone signal if you live in a remote area.
I will be using my Z10 on 3g. I've already cut dowm my Sim to a micro sim in preparation.

[Banco]

I'm on Orange so EE appears as the carrier on the Home screen. The only reaon I can see for adopting Lte is if you can't get broadband at home or to attain a better phone signal if you live in a remote area.
I will be using my Z10 on 3g. I've already cut dowm my Sim to a micro sim in preparation.

There was an interesting article a little while ago talking about the shortcomings of 4G in term of cost and comparing it to the rise of free wifi. Let me see if I can find it (you have to imagine I've disappeared for a few minutes at this point....) ah here we are:

Forget 4G, 2013 could be Wifi's year - Telegraph

For me, there's absolutely no point whatsoever getting a 4G contract. ****, there's not much point me having a 3G one. I live in Sussex, a mere 10 miles from Brighton, yet I can barely get a GPRS 2G signal at home. When I look at the Vodafone coverage map, it's hilarious how my not exactly small place where I live is just a giant hole in their network - there's literally no mast for 10 miles in any direction!

[dr0800]

There was an interesting article a little while ago talking about the shortcomings of 4G in term of cost and comparing it to the rise of free wifi. Let me see if I can find it (you have to imagine I've disappeared for a few minutes at this point....) ah here we are:

Forget 4G, 2013 could be Wifi's year - Telegraph

For me, there's absolutely no point whatsoever getting a 4G contract. ****, there's not much point me having a 3G one. I live in Sussex, a mere 10 miles from Brighton, yet I can barely get a GPRS 2G signal at home. When I look at the Vodafone coverage map, it's hilarious how my not exactly small place where I live is just a giant hole in their network - there's literally no mast for 10 miles in any direction!

That is an absolute shocker. From their ads at the time of the Olympics I thought their network has the best coverage.

[Banco]

That is an absolute shocker. From their ads at the time of the Olympics I thought their network has the best coverage.

Nationwide they probably do. But not here - and according to their website there are no changes planned in the next 12 months. Having said that, no provider offers 3G here, though o2 do have a stronger EDGE signal at least. If only someone else offered anything decent I'd dump them, but the reality is that down the pub I get zero signal and use the pub's wifi instead - which I guess is the point of the article above. Basically, it's dire for them all.

[uyi2g]

I suppose die hard fans will buy at whatever price RIM wants, heck some people are paying $2000 for the dev alphas on ebay.The fact is BB10 will not be able to compete with the competition at the suggested price. The sony xperia s with similar specs as the Z10 is retailing for �250. 2013 flagship phones will have quad cores, 5inch(min) 1080p displays as standard, specs which the rumoured Z10 will not have. The margin on the phone is large because RIM kisses the but of the carriers. They think once the carriers are in the phone will sell. Guess it is a wait and see game. I personally will not buy the z10 for that price.

[dr0800]

I suppose die hard fans will buy at whatever price RIM wants, heck some people are paying $2000 for the dev alphas on ebay.The fact is BB10 will not be able to compete with the competition at the suggested price. The sony xperia s with similar specs as the Z10 is retailing for �250. 2013 flagship phones will have quad cores, 5inch(min) 1080p displays as standard, specs which the rumoured Z10 will not have. The margin on the phone is large because RIM kisses the but of the carriers. They think once the carriers are in the phone will sell. Guess it is a wait and see game. I personally will not buy the z10 for that price.

There are flaws in your argument. Sony have not cracked the smartphone market.
You are also comparing a Linux kernel os with a system running on QNX. For Android to run at comparitive speeds of Ios and BB10 you need a Quad Core processor. Unfortunately that processing power means a trade off on battery endurance and screen resolution. Even the flagship androids run on Super AMOLED rather than LCD on large screens. Don't be fooled by hardware specs, it's os performance that will differentiate smartphones.

[Hawkeberry]

if it is true, it is approx 40K INR+.. hope not. Will prefer the sony water resistant 5" Android

[TomJasper]

Don't be fooled by hardware specs, it's os performance that will differentiate smartphones.

So true, love seeing an unfinished BB10 dev unit smack down quad cores on youtube. Watcha got under the hood, oh just some QNX micro kernel goodness.

[anthonysira]

I think thats a great price money well spent

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Either which way guys, RIM is going to charge whatever, and the carriers are going to charge whatever, so no sense arguing about what the cost should be because we don't control the prices. Either way the Z10 will be between $550-$650. Which is right inline with all the higher end devices, and stop coming back with "Well the nokia lumina bla bla bla" That is the business model that Nokia or whatever company wanted to model their prices at. Just don't be shocked on launch day when the price is announced. And for those that say "But the Android and iOS platforms are really well developed" Remember when the first iphone came out and the price was $600 for something like 4 or 8GB and that was an untested device in the market. So your argument is now invalid, A new system shouldn't be cut under price, it should start high and move down. Apple started high and remained high to this day. The playbook (despite what it was 20 something months ago) started off hot and high on price, and the market pushed it down. RIM will ultimately do it again with BB10. So like I say, don't get your panties all twisted up because you think it should be lower.

Even if the device costs $350-400 to make, you still need to make a profit, which means that the phone would start no less then $500 to consumers. Which is why I'm thinking between $550-600 will be the outright selling price.

Why would it cost $350-400 dollars to make the Z10?? It's reported that the iPhone5 only cost about $170 dollars... I agree that RIM needs to make a profit, and the the carrier needs to make a profit. But for RIM to become a relevant 3 Platform, the need to MOVE devices and BUILD the BB10 user base very QUICKLY. A high or even medium priced Z10 is NOT going to do that.

I really want RIM to be successful, but the only what that I see that happening is for them to release both their base devices and their high-end device together, or at least within a few weeks of each other. The high-end devices will make the "splash" but it will be those cheaper devices that will end up making the sales and expanding the user base.

[fernandez21]

Why would it cost $350-400 dollars to make the Z10?? It's reported that the iPhone5 only cost about $170 dollars... I agree that RIM needs to make a profit, and the the carrier needs to make a profit. But for RIM to become a relevant 3 Platform, the need to MOVE devices and BUILD the BB10 user base very QUICKLY. A high or even medium priced Z10 is NOT going to do that.

I really want RIM to be successful, but the only what that I see that happening is for them to release both their base devices and their high-end device together, or at least within a few weeks of each other. The high-end devices will make the "splash" but it will be those cheaper devices that will end up making the sales and expanding the user base.

That price is only component costs, it does not include R&D, labor, packaging, manufacturing, distribution, or marketing. Alot more goes into these handsets than just the components, and the company has to make that money back and have a profit.

[Flexin]

If RIM's costs double from the Playbook they need to get a new R&D or/and marketing team. No device costs $450. Specially with last gen innards.



You will be surprised to know that the rest of the world buys devices off contract for the most part. I live in Europe and the last time I bought an on the contract device was 7 years ago.

As for your do called b1tching let's clarify one thing : this forum is for BlackBerry FANS not Blackberry SHEEP. The SHEEP part is patented from Apple.
Most of the users that rise valid arguments about the rumored price do so because they want RIM to comeback with a bang and not pull a NOKIA and drown in their own arrogance

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2

The $450 I quoted was what I heard they were looking to sell it for. Not there cost.

James

[kevinnugent]

This article has just come out here. It's about Apple positioning itself for the non premium market. Makes sense for them to try and get everyone.

iPhone Mini | Apple Working On Cheaper Smartphone, Phone: Report

[darkehawke]

The $450 I quoted was what I heard they were looking to sell it for. Not there cost.

James

lol, everyone will find out they've been doing cheap wrong all along. they should be charging them 200 more.
about the cost for the development of the os that was mentioned earlier. there are 5 or 4 more bb10 devices coming out. the z10 shouldnt be expected to recoup the cost alone.
to clarify why 4 instead of 5, i'm not sure if rim have included the playbook as one of the 6 bb10 devices?

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[CDM76]

Why is it that no one has commented on the obvious ?
With a selling price to carriers of $450 and carriers selling price of $700, this leaves room for discounts/sales/and other promotions. With these price points the carrier can offer a promo, or more likely a joint promo with RIM in which they both split the "sale" discount. Say they sell retail for $500 and the carrier and RIM both knock $100 off their respective selling prices. This is what I see happening the first couple of quarters BB10 is on the market.

[TheScionicMan]

It's funny throwing around these large Retail price numbers when most people think of phones being $200 or less, because of contracts.

By some measures, the pricey, wildly popular smartphone -- the iPhone 5 starts at $199 and prices vary depending on storage size --

'Cheap iPhone' Could Launch This Year: WSJ Report

[Kennedy.L]

Dev alphas are going for over $2,000 on eBay. $700 sounds like a bargain.

[kevinnugent]

I don't know why anyone would pay $2k for a paperwight. Anyway, some people must have too much money. I'll be selling a iphone to cover the costs. Should still have some change.

[GunzRx]

you want to price an unproven format to match a proven format and expect the unproven to win?
apple devices has long had the reputation of being overpriced. dont be RIMsheeps.
bb10 needs to sell. it wont if its priced the same as a galaxy s3 or iPhone 5.
you actually think the average consumer will sit there and shell out for a platform they know hardly anything about, when for the same price they can get one all their friends and family have.
bb10 can not compete with iphone 5 or the s3 straight out of the gate. they need to build up a user base before that happens.
more people owned the s2 than they did the s1, likewise more will own the s3 then the number who owned the s2. Samsung built a reputation.
blackberry at best have no reputation with bb10, or at worst blackberry have a bad reputation.
so dont spout nonsense about competiting with the iphone or s3 when we're not even in the same league these days.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

Thing is, remember a few things:

1st. Rim isn't selling this carriers are (more on that later)
2nd. People associate value with quality.

Now, firstly more-so than carriers the salespeople at carrier stores are the ones selling the phone. They get a % commision, a lower priced phone means they will want to sell it less.

2nd. Adding on from the first a $500 phone gets very dif. treatment than a $700 one both by staff, and customers. 700 is the right choice if it's executed properly.

Pure from a hardware POV it's a rip-off as the xiomao 2 or w.e in china has a quad exynos for under $330. Admitddly prices in NA are higher but a dual core 720p screen phone going for this much is over-priced.

The jan 30 launch must be done perfectly with phones in people's hands soon.

Even a month delay means many will see the newer quad 5" 1080p phones and run-off.

Right now due in no small part to the Iphone5 a high-priced dual is acceptable. That won't last.

edit - Also there'll probably be deals on this to bring the price down, I can see many carriers giving free credit to those who buy for accessorices bringing the effective price to 550-600. I don't see mobi/wind doing this but I can easily see Rogers or a big American carrier giving a $100 of free access. if you buy 2 z10 or something and activate them with the carrier. They don't want a samsung/apple duopoly either.

[pick1eberry]

So iPhone was 'proven' when it was first released in 2007?

[darkehawke]

Thing is, remember a few things:

1st. Rim isn't selling this carriers are (more on that later)
2nd. People associate value with quality.

Now, firstly more-so than carriers the salespeople at carrier stores are the ones selling the phone. They get a % commision, a lower priced phone means they will want to sell it less.

2nd. Adding on from the first a $500 phone gets very dif. treatment than a $700 one both by staff, and customers. 700 is the right choice if it's executed properly.

Pure from a hardware POV it's a rip-off as the xiomao 2 or w.e in china has a quad exynos for under $330. Admitddly prices in NA are higher but a dual core 720p screen phone going for this much is over-priced.

The jan 30 launch must be done perfectly with phones in people's hands soon.

Even a month delay means many will see the newer quad 5" 1080p phones and run-off.

Right now due in no small part to the Iphone5 a high-priced dual is acceptable. That won't last.

edit - Also there'll probably be deals on this to bring the price down, I can see many carriers giving free credit to those who buy for accessorices bringing the effective price to 550-600. I don't see mobi/wind doing this but I can easily see Rogers or a big American carrier giving a $100 of free access. if you buy 2 z10 or something and activate them with the carrier. They don't want a samsung/apple duopoly either.

thats great except it doesnt apply to blackberry. they already sell for 700, well the 9900 does. And listening to people in shops they associate that price with blackberry trying to rip them off.
blackberry already have a bad reputation of selling phones that for many people are not up to scratch, for prices like 700.
blackberry 10 will not change that perception for most people. not unless it has more unique features then we already know about.

you're right the carriers desperately want a third player, but even with their help, BlackBerry10 is going to have a tough time

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[darkehawke]

So iPhone was 'proven' when it was first released in 2007?

yeah if blackberry was anywhere near as big as apple then there would be no need for this thread...

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[gng11]

NDTV is not a reliable source of news. Move on. Next.

[avidberry]

IMO, not even RIM's biggest markets like Indonesia, Nigeria or Philippines will warmly welcome a BB 10 priced somewhat similar with iPhone 5 (off contract). BB 10 needs to be sold at starting price lower than the current price of GS III. It is, after all, a new and untested platform and RIM should have learned a thing or two from PB's story

AFAIK, GS II's initial price was far below GS III although it was deemed one of the best phones in its era.

[darkehawke]

AFAIK, GS II's initial price was far below GS III although it was deemed one of the best phones in its era.

it was. the s2 put them in pole position, the s3 raked in the profits. people here dont seem to realise that you font charge that sort of money for an unproven device. but whatever, i am glad they don't work at RIM lol

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk