What’s so new about the Nexus One business model?

Update – Google ETF is actually $550 on top of the $180 you already paid!  So if you pull out early, you’ll have to pay $730 total!

I know Justin was impressed with the business model Google’s new Nexus One phone, but I really don’t see how it’s any different.  You can buy the phone from Google for $529 without a carrier subsidy, or you can pay $179 with a T-Mobile subsidy.  You buy the phone directly from Google, but how’s that any different than buying an iPhone directly from Apple?

Furthermore, it seems that Google isn’t very honest about the Early Termination Fee.  It’s actually $350 if you break the contract early but Google advertises a $200 ETF.  Verizon honestly advertises a $350 ETF and they’re being persecuted by some members of the FCC and by the so-called consumer advocacy groups who haven’t made a peep about Google’s misleading advertising or the $350 ETF.  Why such an obvious double standard?

The Nexus One is made by HTC and it seems to be fairly impressive with an 800×480 OLED display and a 1 GHz ARM processor.  But according to Michael Arrington, it only gets 1.5 hours of battery life when he games with the display at full brightness.  That’s pretty pathetic considering the fact that a full size laptop gets more than that.

7 thoughts on “What’s so new about the Nexus One business model?”

  1. @Dietrich Schmitz

    Why is it sour grapes to point out the hypocrisy of advocacy groups who have been railing on Verizon but not on Google.

    Furthermore, why is it OK for Google to be less than upfront about their ETF by calling it a $200 ETF when it’s really a $350 ETF?

  2. @George Ou
    I believe if users ‘do the math’, they will realize that having an unlocked phone is the best way to go.

    Google is putting the consumer first, and by that I mean, they are giving Consumers the ‘choice’ to have an unlocked phone before any telco involvement.

    That is the way it should be. Consumer Choice.

    Well the ETF is a contentious issue I understand the necessity of such practices; given the chance, maybe Google will rectify the apparent discrepancy, yes?

    I see the Nexus One as a ‘symbolic’ move with major implications.
    Namely, give Consumers the maximum right to making their own determination–choice–whether it be for a smartphone, pc, buying a pc with no o/s (big issue).

    Google has the where-with-all to make it happen and we are seeing that unfold.

    Relax George. Serenity now…serenity now… ;)

  3. @Dietrich Schmitz

    There are lots of ways to save money Dietrich. In fact, not buying a smart phone is probably an even cheaper way to go. But many people don’t want that, they want the convenience of a smartphone but they don’t want to pay up front for it. They would rather pay more for it later than pay for it up front, and this is the choice that the vast majority of phone buyers are making. I don’t subscribe to that line of thought myself, but I don’t consider other people are dumb for the choices they’re making. They have a right to spend their money they want to spend it. On the other hand, there are a number of self righteous people who believe that most Americans are dumb or naive for buying into this bundled business model, but I don’t care for that kind of arrogant thinking.

    I understand the necessity of an ETF as well, and I don’t begrudge Google for using that. What I’m calling out is the deceptive manner that Google advertises its ETF. What I’m calling out is the double standard that slaps Verizon for having a transparent $350 ETF but the same people aren’t saying anything about Google’s less transparent $350 ETF.

  4. George, IME, you rarely get a lower price on your service when your phone isn’t subsidized. Why pay up front and then pay for it again with each bill?

Comments are closed.