Would you rather bound by the contract or free from the contract?

United States
May 12, 2009 7:14pm CST
Many of mobile service companies such AT&T, T - Mobile, Verizon etc.... wants to sell you a cheaper price phone, but at the same time, you have to sign an agreement, called contract. The term is about 2 years period of time. Within this 2 years, whether you like it or not, about their service, no matter how junky their services you felt about them, you have to stick with them until the mature term. On the opposite side, Metro - PCs provide pre - paid service, which means that you don't need to sign any contract whatsoever. You can terminate it anytime you want. Booster Mobile another Sprint branch company, also trying to sell their free of contract unlimited calls service. Which one you rather pick?
1 person likes this
6 responses
• United States
13 May 09
I've used both, and as much as a plan with a contract... depending on the plan... may sound great at first, agreeing to a contract to me seems risky and has proven to be thus far in the past. While the plan and agreement may seem to be what you need and want for a cell phone at first, being with a phone company for 1 or two years or however long, their policies can change and you can end up being very unhappy with your phone providing company for whatever reason. However, with a no contract phone/provider... there's no worries on that... you can use it and keep it for as long as you like it and agree with it... and then just stop paying and end it with the month or whichever that you're on if you decide you no longer have a use for that phone/provider. I currently am using Boost's monthly unlimited plan and I love it.
@sk66rc (4250)
• United States
13 May 09
I've used contract service ever since I've gotten a cell phone... Back when I first got my cell phone, pre-paid wasn't even avaliable... That being said, it doesn't really matter to me... The way I use the phone, pre-paid would be actually a lot more expensive... My cell phone bill comes out to about $120/month & I use somewhere between 3000 - 4000 minutes a month on average... Boost mobile is actually a pre-paid version of Nextel... I know nextel & sprint are same company now but they don't use the same system... Their hybrid phones are basically 2 circuit boards fused together... That's why if you go to their web site, they have seperate coverage map for sprint & nextel... I've had nextel before & their coverage was good but wasn't too good for me... I had a lot of dropped calls... I'm sure they have improved since... I have t-mobile & I've never had problems with them... I'm on their unlimited plan with blackberry option... I've been using it little over a year, except for last month where I had a basic phone, & I like it...Besides, once my contract expires in the beginning of next year, Febuary I think, I'll be on a month to month anyway unless I decide to get a new phone...
@bloglog (628)
• Singapore
13 May 09
Personally, I don't really like that contract thing which will tie me down for their services for 2 years. However, I still choose to sign the contract in order to get a new phone at a cheaper rate, very much cheaper than those selling without contracts. I use 2-3 phones in 2 years, so at least I can get one of them at a cheaper price with the contract. Of course we can choose not to buy their phone with the contract, then we can terminate the phone line any time. But we will have to pay a higher price for the phone.
@gcorp09 (940)
• Singapore
13 May 09
Well, I will say that in my country, most people will choose to be bounded by a 2-year contract with the telecommunication company, as the phone are a lot cheaper as compared to the outside market price. You can even get a cell phone free (depends on the cell phone model). For me, it's the same. I do prefer to be bounded by a contract so as to get the cell phone at a cheaper rate. I do understand that you will have to stick with them for the next 2 years, until the end of the contract or else you will have to pay a penalty. I will think that it's fine with me as the telecommunications service provider in my country all have similar price plans, so it's not much of a difference to me.
@Boffle (123)
13 May 09
I have used both systems, but much prefer the "pay as you go" system where you don't have to have a contract. There are some benefits to having a contract (like free texts or unlimited call time) but I think the freedom of being able to switch suppliers, only pay for what you use and not have to commit to a legal contract outweigh them. You don't know whether you'll like the company, or want to keep the service, so until you're sure, I think you're better of paying in advance and giving yourself the flexibility to do what you like in the future.
@eponiine (141)
• United States
13 May 09
I've experienced both, and I much prefer not to have a contract. For one thing, I don't use too many minutes so I save by not having to pay for the say 300 minutes a month that rolled over. I spend a lot less this way than I did with the cheapest plan AT&T had to offer. Plus I don't really care much about the phone and its features as long as I can call and text, so I can buy a cheap phone with a prepaid service as well.