[andut]

Keep in mind that this $700 figure would have to include All Sales Taxes as this is a contest.

In Ontario (Bell's home territory) the HST is 13%.

That would make the phone cost work out to $609.

So we're probably looking at a No Contract price of $599.



Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

The thing is... $700 is before tax, so with tax it's gonna cost $791

[schmeat]

Unlike Apple, RIM does not set prices for phones. Blame Bell for over pricing the phone. Remember when Roger's priced the first Bold stupidly high and then reduced it after a few weeks?

[Neely2005]

The thing is... $700 is before tax, so with tax it's gonna cost $791

No it's not. It's a contest so Bell will be required to pay the Sales Tax.



Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[mcmolineux]

The thing is... $700 is before tax, so with tax it's gonna cost $791

He's saying that the estimated retail value for contests has to be given after tax, so the $700 would be after tax.

[TheScionicMan]

The thing is... $700 is before tax, so with tax it's gonna cost $791

Based on what? The disclaimer for the giveaway? Then it would need to say $800 as the value of the prize...

[rjshahan]

$599.99 + 13% tax = $677.99 or approx $700

[LazyEvul]

If the device does indeed cost $600 off-contract, I'm very happy - that's precisely the pricing I was hoping for, and undercuts the Galaxy S3 by $50.

[Syrous44]

I wouldn't be worried about off contract pricing. As only a few buy phone outright. If the z10 is going to be a higher price point subsidized compared to the iphone or flagship androids, its a non starter for most. I remember when bell and Rogers had the bold 9900 for 199 on contract for the first month or so, with top end androids and iphone 5 ranging from 159-179 anything higher would be pretty dumb.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[randall2580]

I don't know how things are in Canada, but if one of the 2 majors and 2 mid majors offer a phone $100-150 above where the others are, all other things being equal, I would expect that shop to be selling too many phones. It the efficiency of the free market and word would get around fast, like the example above regarding Rogers and the 9900.

It surprises me that Bell would be priced so much higher than Rogers or Telus ?

[travaz]

Lets remember that they are setting up a point to value the phone to WRITE OFF the cost of the " promotion". They will use that price to say they spent xxx on advertising cost being able to take it off the bottom line.

[jakie55]

And it is killing their bottom line because of the much higher subsidy they have to eat on the sale of the phone!

iPhone drives Sprint growth, but drags loss to $1.3B | Mobile - CNET News

If Bell let me buy the phone on contract for the same price as the iphone 5, on deal, that would be fine.....I know I would be getting the better device at the same price....



So they added 1.8 Million customers with the iPhone, but their losses grew from $900 Million to $1.3 Billion because of the increased cost to sell the phone on contract. iPhones wouldn't sell at anywhere near the levels they do now if the carriers applied the same subsidy to the iPhone as they do for every other phone out there and an iPhone on contract started at $300 to $400. Why the carriers just don't tell Apple either you drop the price or we'll make your phone way less attractive than theses Samsung phones that are selling great is beyond me.

[Skeevecr]

I don't know how things are in Canada, but if one of the 2 majors and 2 mid majors offer a phone $100-150 above where the others are, all other things being equal, I would expect that shop to be selling too many phones. It the efficiency of the free market and word would get around fast, like the example above regarding Rogers and the 9900.

It surprises me that Bell would be priced so much higher than Rogers or Telus ?

Presumably the on-contract pricing are at similar levels and Bell simply use higher off-contract pricing to push customers towards the contracts.

[collinc93]

this about where it is expected to cost...

[Vector-SS]

I think this is exactly what it sounds, an "approximate"

If it was the confirmed retail value, then they would have stated so, no? I guess they chose a high(er) price just in case the phone is priced that high and people won't be disappointed.

[qbnkelt]

At this point I think they're better off selling the Z10 and the X10 lower than other flagships, get a good buzz going, and THEN ask premium prices for the Aristo once the "BB is back" reports are well documented and there are concrete gains in mindshare.

In my opinion....yours may differ....

[TrioGM]

At this point I think they're better off selling the Z10 and the X10 lower than other flagships, get a good buzz going, and THEN ask premium prices for the Aristo once the "BB is back" reports are well documented and there are concrete gains in mindshare.

In my opinion....yours may differ....

I totally agree with you, and remember that Thor said that RIM will launch a entry-level smartphone, a middle-level, and a premium-level one... I hope that the L-Series is the middle-level one.

[Villain]

the prices on devices are so insane when you compare them to tablets and laptops.


hoping this is just the average contest pricing cause the argument "iphone and GSIII are high priced" doesnt cut it seeing they are not a struggling company that needs all the adoption it can get.

[timmy t]

As I suggested elsewhere, they can set that as the MSRP and offer an introductory price of $500-$600. If it becomes a hit, they can go back to the higher MSRP. Otherwise, they can keep the introductory on as long as they like.

[Roo Zilla]

And it is killing their bottom line because of the much higher subsidy they have to eat on the sale of the phone!

iPhone drives Sprint growth, but drags loss to $1.3B | Mobile - CNET News



So they added 1.8 Million customers with the iPhone, but their losses grew from $900 Million to $1.3 Billion because of the increased cost to sell the phone on contract. iPhones wouldn't sell at anywhere near the levels they do now if the carriers applied the same subsidy to the iPhone as they do for every other phone out there and an iPhone on contract started at $300 to $400. Why the carriers just don't tell Apple either you drop the price or we'll make your phone way less attractive than theses Samsung phones that are selling great is beyond me.

Because it's been well proven in multiple markets that having the iPhone leads to increased subscribers, and not having it causes loss in subscribers. Initially, it creates huge hits on the carriers' bottom line, but it eventually catches up and they make a profit. The reason why the carriers don't tell Apple off is because of the prisoners' dilemma, a theory well explored and described in economic theory and the ramifications of which have lead to Nobel Prizes.

[berklon]

It doesn't matter who sets the price on the Z10, if RIM wants to compete - the price has to be at least $50 cheaper than the SGIII and iPhone 5.

RIM can't afford to start with slow sales on release day because it will be tough to gain traction afterwards - even with a price drop.
People will hear how poor sales are and will just avoid them because "no one's buying them. I don't want to be stuck with something no one supports". And dropping the price after reports of poor sales will lead people to think "they're just dumping them off now because no one wants them".

RIM needs to hit the ground running, and to do that requires competitive pricing that undercuts the market leaders. They can't win in a competition of ecosystem, so you try and win with price.

[just_luc]

I agree that these phones are worth as much or more then the iphone 5 (although I think the iphone prices are inflated, I think they are worth more like 599, but if they can get 799 good for them!) but i'm saying that as a blackberry loyalist, who knows all about the BB10 goodness.. IMO if they want the launch to be a hit, they need to take a margin hit, sell them at a price more attractive to consumers and really build up the fan base for the first year or so, get a ton of BB10 devices into customers hands, a ton of new people on BBM, and then when people are hooked they can sunset the current devices and launch some new stuff in those higher price points.

[rog518za]

This price seems competitive based on exact currency conversion rate, but carriers tend to put their own price on devices. Very irritating!

[narci]

$700 is too much.

I got burned being an early adopter getting a 64GB Playbook at full price on day 1.

If it was a $100 price drop on the PB that's fine...I can live with that but 64GB for as low as $150, I paid way more then that. Leaves a bad imperssion on me that I can't shake.

I guess I won't be upgrading to a BB10 phone until I see a price drop. (Btw, I buy my phone outright, my carrier's phone selection is horrible but the plan is good)

[Villain]

Also in canada Bell usually sells devices cheaper than Telus and Rogers (the 9900 is $100 more on telus)

[cjcampbell]

Also in canada Bell usually sells devices cheaper than Telus and Rogers (the 9900 is $100 more on telus)

But the 9900 is $100 less at Rogers than Bell, and Telus is $30 more than Bell, not $100