[Drakim]

All you gotta do is ensure that this 50% discount is tuned to be the actual realistic price, while the full price is secretly just a 200% cost of the real market rate.

That way, the customers pay exactly the same as they normally would, except now they are compelled to buy a new expensive product every 2 years.

[StavrosK]

Exactly. Greece does what Japan does too, except monthly bills here are "20/mo or 40/mo with an iPhone".

Of course, they tell you that the "real" price is 40/mo, but still give you the option to not take the phone and "discount" it down to 20 anyway.

[w00kie]

And ensure that all 3 major carriers agree behind closed do to have the exact same prices, just obscured with a bunch of different discounts and mandatory options that makes them look wildly different until you get the bill in the mail and the totals are the same...

[chrismorgan]

The same happens with other aspects of phone plans. Comparing two providers in Australia:

One provider’s plan (typical of the model adhered to by most providers): $10/month including $200 of value, with phone calls 99¢/minute plus 40¢ flagfall.

Another provider (with a less common model): an “as you go” plan, with phone calls 15¢/minute. (Actually it’s still 12¢/minute, but the increase kicks in next week.)

My phone bill has been well under $1 every month except for last month where it got to $3.84 because of phone calls associated with buying a house and a couple of other things. Meanwhile, most providers would have been trying to charge me at least $10, more likely $30–$50 per month, or more on a long plan with an expensive phone included when I simply don’t need anything more than what a $150 phone provides.

Look me in the face and tell me that the first pricing model isn’t deliberately deceptive. They’re essentially using a different currency which for their own purposes of misdirection they call dollars. (And if you do get over that 200 units of their magic currency… oh, boy. You’re in for a massive bill.)

I’m inclined to believe that mobile telcos’ advertising practices are probably illegal, as deliberately misleading, and that the only reason they get away with it is because everyone does it and so customer expectations have been ruined.

Most providers wind up leading with “unlimited” plans; I suspect that a substantial fraction of their users would actually fare better with simple cost-per-call plans, but giving you that isn’t in the telcos’ best interests, and almost no providers even offer such a scheme—and the main one that I know of that does, doesn’t exactly advertise it obviously.