T-Mobile Germany’s iPhone court date set for November 29

“A Hamburg court will hear the case on T-Mobile Deutschland’s German marketing rights for Apple Inc.’s iPhone November 29,” Dow Jones reports.

Earlier this week, Vodafone “filed an injunction with the court, requesting a legal assessment of T-Mobile’s marketing rights to the iPhone,” Dow Jones reports. “Vodafone objected to the fact that the iPhone can be used only on T-Mobile networks, and questioned the company’s pricing packages, which were tied to binding contracts with T-Mobile.”

Dow Jones reports, “Following a court order, T-Mobile has made changes to its iPhone offer, but has said it expects its marketing model to hold up in court.”

Full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Mike in Helsinki” for the heads up.]


  1. Apple said over 250,000 iPhones were sold and unlocked. So this goes to show a incredible demand for consumer choice.

    Legal unlocked iPhones are selling for $1480. No contract.

    So is it right to say $1480-$399= $1081 or $45 a month for two years is what we are paying Apple actually?

    Can this device actually cost this much, or are the margins incredibly high?

  2. Anyway my point was if we are being unfairly charged because of the exclusive contracts?

    I’m all for innovation and fairness, I think all phones should be unlocked and able to be used with most any carrier.

    What happens if a carrier screws you? Like Cingular was doing to people for awhile before it was bought by AT&T;? Then what? Where can you take your iPhone?

    Here is a breakdown chart

  3. “expects its marketing model to hold up in court.”

    In brief, T-Mobile is getting the run-around. Using that loophole, the penal codes to sue should have a mandate with stiff penalties for interrupting market penetration. Saturation is the goal, but rubber stamping the idea of “everyone should get a piece” only deflates the will of the initial investor….excuse me, I need to smoke.

  4. @Pete

    Apple has sold over 1.25 million iPhones, surely closer to 2.5 by now, on contract. Those consumers had a choice, they made it.

    250,000 have been bought without contracts. Those consumers know their choices there, too (i.e. no warranty, etc.).

    Who are you to say margins are too high, people being unfairly charged, etc. Do you read? There have been dozens of articles comparing iPhone total cost of ownership to RIM and MS devices, with iPhone coming out to be cheaper.

    What you call ‘fair’, is Apple playing the usual game, following the same old tired way of letting the operators tell them what price it will be sold at, what features will be disabled, what branding shall be used, what user interface changes must be made, and then maybe, just maybe, they will distribute Apple iPhone, if Jobs bends down enough.

    No. not this time buddy. New game, new rules.

    Jobs intends to get paid for their innovation, and he means to make the operators do the paying. They don’t innovate, yet they want the rewards. To hell with that.

    You don’t like the price, the contract, the locked phone. Fine. There are lots of other networks, lots of other phones, lots of other plans and you can even unlock a real iPhone.

    But stop your bitching. Your false, pathetic vicitimzation that Apple won’t give you exactly what you perceive to be right is bullshit.

  5. I don’t hear anyone else saying this, but isn’t it relevant that Apple takes care of all hardware problems, leaving AT&T;out of the insurance picture? When an iPhone goes bad, AT&T;doesn’t pay a dime in processing a broken phone, replacing one, or fixing one. It’s all on Apple. That’s not how it goes with the other phones sold by the network. This has to be figured into their agreement– and with a low failure rate, the Phone is bringing Apple lots and lots of extra money. It could just as easily happened the other way if iPhone sucked.

    Apple asked AT&T;to trust them. In other words, they said we are willing to back up our product ourselves, no extra cost to you. They gambled on themselves (again) and won.

  6. Mobile phone functionality has gotten ahead of commensurate thoughtful human interface design and software to capture that functionality correctly. Also, mobile phone designers and engineers has mistakenly assumed that cramming all possible features and functionality into a phone creates value, differentiation.

    Parallel with that have been operators successful efforts in seizing the value chain to the extent were they can dictate terms and capture an inordinate amount of the value given their role in that chain.

    These two trends have conspired to open a window of opportunity to someone who can step in and correct the bad human interface design, correct the experience-killing overserving of mobile phone features, and correct the misallocation of profits in the value chain for those who do the work.

    Apple has seen this and, due to their experience in human interface understanding, software design, business model acumen and competencies in the skill needed to mass produce consumer electronics (logistics, outsourcing, subcontractor relations, etc) via their iPod experience now ALL COMES TOGETHER IN THE MOIBLE PHONE ARENA!

    Apple must DESTROY ALL VESTIGES OF THE CURRENT OPERATOR-CENTRIC MODEL and rebuild it to reallocate profits to those who do the hard work of innovation.

    It is always a tough row to hoe. Destroying business models that are unfair to innovators, that piss of consumers (they hate operators more than the US Congress) are NOW GOING THE WAY OF THE DINOSAUR, but its hard on lots of comfortable, vested interests.

    Jobs has proven to be a guy who destroys unworkable business models. Witness the music industry, currently the computer/software industry, now the mobile phone industry, tomorrow the video industry.

    Europe will get it, but it will take more time. That clueless, dumbass judge in Germany is in WAY OVER HIS HEAD.

  7. …but isn’t it relevant that Apple takes care of all hardware problems, leaving AT&T;out of the insurance picture? When an iPhone goes bad…

    Exactly, Apple just replaces it right off, even if people drop the thing. So they figured that $300 into the $1480 as well obviously.

    Of course the Apple warranty only lasts a year, one can get another year for $69. (instead of another two years for a Mac)

    $300 to make first iPhone
    $300 for it’s replacement
    200% markup brings that up to $1200

    $1480-1200 leaves $280

    $280/2 (two iPhones) = $140. $399 -$140 = $250 The new iPhone price come January?

    I don’t know about anybody else, but I certainly don’t turn over my cell phone every year or even every two years. As long as it keeps working I keep using it.

    So it seems Apple is betting that everyone will break their iPhone and take it in for a replacement. Anyone who doesn’t is extra gravy.

  8. Ok lets take a look at the AT&T;plan.

    $60, $80 and $100 a month calling plans

    minus $45 Apple charge per month each

    $15, $35 and $55 respectively.

    Since it’s so difficult to tell if a customer dropped a iPhone instead of it being a defect/damage from the factory. I’m going to have to figure in a replacement in the price. However the replacement shouldn’t have the same profit, that’s totally unfair because most people don’t break their phones so they shouldn’t have to pay for two in the first place, much less double profit for Apple. So I’ll give that replacement a 50% profit over the original one.

    So $300 plus $300 profit = $600
    So $300 plus $150 profit on the replacement = $450

    So a 8GB iPhone should cost $1050 total

    or $1050-(24*$45)= -$40 FREE!!! with AT&T;2 year plans of $60, $80 and $100 a month

    Is this a eventuality? FREE iPhones with 2 year contracts?

    Apple STILL makes a killer profit to boot!!!!

  9. Still going here.

    But my latest brainstorm is that Apple’s $45 a month kickback only lasts for two years. After that it’s all At&T;’s profit.

    Since like I said, most people don’t turn over their phones every year or two. Instead keep using them until they break or get get hopelessly outdated. Which could last many more years beyond the two year contract.

    Apple makes a iPhone that is so killer that people keep it for a long time. Increasing the installed base, which is a proven Apple tactic.

    So AT&T;gets to keep a profitable contract a longer time without people switching carriers, thus they are willing to cut a deal with Apple.

    It all makes sense now. After all who would buy a iPhone (or any phone) for $1480? Not many, so Apple gets the price down, gets more people buying at the lower $399 price plus contract. Still makes a killing on the profit but sacrifices a higher turnover rate to develop a large install base.

    Of course Apple might be screwing their carriers later, by developing such a much cooler iPhone in two years from now…

  10. GD, Mike in Helsinki! You’ve got that unfair advantage of being 7 hours (8?) ahead of us on the East Coast. Well, I am going to start checking the European newspapers at midnight eastern time, just to beat you and get my name mentioned.

    Ha, your best laid planes are foiled!!!


  11. @ Pete,

    Is your head rotating round & round anti-clockwise?

    Is this the first time you have made a post on this site??

    Can you remember what you have said in a conversation 2 minutes later???

    Take your bullshit elsewhere, you have just given me a headache trying to figure out what type of rock you have crawled out from!

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.