[mwill]

Sorry, I'm not sure if you're point out the existence of the plans here, or that they seem to be more expensive than what grandparent comment said they run for in the US.

If its the former, I was aware you could get them on a plan with a provider here, I was wondering why Apple hasn't partnered with Telstra or whoever to push the plans as the primary price point like they do on the US site and presumably in stores.

If its the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if that's just down more expensive data/phone usage plans?

[whatusername]

Sorry - the point I was attempting to make (While tired/slightly-drunk) was that all the major carriers have free plans. SO the upfront cost of the phone would be $0 (Which is exactly the same up-front cost as he SGS-3, HTC-1XL, etc). I'm not sure that apple want to position themselves like that. For apples perspective -- having it be a $700ish phone is better than a "free" phone.

As to Apple not pushing the plans -- it could just be the fact that they don't have a "primary" partner. Since every Telco had the phone on launch -- Apple would become an intermediary offering choices (Is Optus or Telstra better in my area?).

[mwill]

If anyone stumbles on this, I actually ended up looking this up, thought I'd add it to the record ; ). Turns out it's considered third line forcing, and is illegal here, prohibited by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, previously covered by the Trade Practices Act, here's the relevant section (hacked apart for clarity) [1]:

(a) supplies, or offers to supply, goods or services; (b) supplies, or offers to supply, goods or services at a particular price; or (c) gives or allows, or offers to give or allow, a discount, allowance, rebate or credit in relation to the supply or proposed supply of goods or services by the corporation; [...] on the condition that the person to whom the corporation supplies or offers or proposes to supply the goods or services [...] will acquire goods or services of a particular kind or description directly or indirectly from another person not being a body corporate related to the corporation.

Note that this only prevents Apple from selling a locked/contract device, carrier locked devices and contracts are fine, as long as they're part of a deal made explicitly between the customer and the third party. Back in 2008 they were making exclusive deals with single carriers in several countries, which would have pretty clearly violated this, so seems like Apple Australia were restricted to outright & unlocked devices, or only selling via carriers.

Now, though, Apple give a choice of carrier and an option to buy outright in the US (And other countries, I assume), which, IANAL, is probably still prohibited by section (b) or (c), ie, 'you can still buy it if you refuse the contract, but you get a cheaper price if you take the contract' sounds like it would still be covered by the 'at a particular price' clause.

[1] 47(6): http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00877/Html/Volume_1#_...