17 of 46

No

Write now Article Tools

In general I agree that any company should have the right to protect it's investments. And US cell phone contracts DO work to protect themselves from people changing providers every month to get the latest "best deal" based on commercials and specials run.

HOWEVER, Cell phone companies SHOULD NOT be able to hold people to contracts which are so exclusionary as to offer no protection to the consumers. Most cell companies charge you to upgrade or replace your phone, EVEN if it has ceased to work. They change phone models almost monthly to ensure this continuing revenue stream and they lock the phones so they have a monopoly of sorts. We also have the problem in the US of having completely incompatible technologies for cell companies. AT&T/Cingular and T-Mobile use GSM technology which is also used in the rest of the world. Verizon, Nextel, and Sprint use CDMA technology which is used almost exclusively in the US.

In Europe you may buy ANY phone you want at the store, and then you shop for the provider and plan that is best suited for you. You then sign a one to two year contract with that service provider. If your phone breaks or you want a newer one, you can do this with minimal cost and effort, usually you simply change the SIM chip from your old phone to the new one and turn it on. This is a much better way of doing things as it allows true competition to flourish.

Learn more about this author, Jeg Brown.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should cell phone providers be allowed to hold customers to long service contracts??
We want to hear your view. Write now!