Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Apple Puts Limits on iPhone Sales

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

October 29, 2007, 11:46 AM

In a move aimed squarely at reining in the growing "unlocking" market, Apple last week placed new restrictions on the sales of its popular iPhone.

The company estimates about 250,000 of the 1.4 million Phones it has sold since its launch in June have been sold to people who intend to unlock the device. Apparently, the company has some concerns that these sales could hurt availability for legitimate buyers.

Only two phones will now be allowed to be purchased per person, and the company now no longer takes payments of cash for the device. A debit or credit card is required to purchase the phone.

Apple is also reportedly tracking the histories of purchasers of the phone to ensure that customers do not break the new two-per-customer rule. The new policy went into effect on Thursday, according to spokesperson Natalie Kerris.

While the move may make sense considering Apple loses a continual revenue stream once the devices are unlocked, the new regulations open up a host of potential problems this holiday season.

Some families may have been planning to buy multiple phones for members of their family this Christmas: now these people need to find another person to buy the device if they required more than two iPhones.

Unlockers have very much seemed to become a headache for Apple, and a majority of its recent moves and updates surrounding the iPhone have been aimed at controlling this growing segment of the device's market.

Add a Comment (54 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 2:15 PM

"The more you push hackers, the more they will push back."

...and the more the corporations will take away the rights of consumers, ad infinitum. The very definition of a vicious circle where the only people getting hurt are those not playing the game.

Yeah, we're all so thankful for the hackers...

Score: 0

By Program86

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 1:09 PM

Let the HACKERS HACK! Dont piss us off! You'll regret it.

Remember the "Law of Hax"! The more you push hackers, the more they will push back.

Score: 0

By Ramhound

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 11:48 AM

People asking for the government to do something like force phone companies to sell the phone and plan seperate really do scare me.

LET THE MARKET SPEAK FOR ITSELF. THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO THOSE PLANS.

I was able to get my original cell phone without a plan, and was able to keep it like that over 3 years.

Score: 0

By timatl

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 10:08 AM

we the google phone/OS coming i am sure it will change game and bussiness strategy for apple. the open platform will be awesome because google learns from others mistakes. i am really excited to see what google has to offer in the mobile phone industry. it looks like it may be sooner than later. see link

http://www.engadgetmobil...ans-to-be-unveiled-soon/

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 10:07 AM

Another great marketing ploy by Apple.

(Prediction: One day Apple will spin-off its own advertising agency. Its first customer will be Microsoft.)

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 5:47 AM

Even though I don't have one, everything I've read about the iPhone grabbed my interest and while I would've waited for iPhone v2, I could well understand why people are buying it - or so I thought until last night. I watched 'The Gadget Show' here in the UK last night and they did a review of the iPhone against the Nokia N95, and while I still wouldn't buy a Nokia N95 myself, I would whole-heartedly recommend it over the iPhone at present. I was quite shocked at just how disapointed I was in the iPhone. DO NOT buy the iPhone yet until at least iPhone v2.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 12:41 AM

It's simple, if you don't like the iPhone, don't buy one.

I think it's a waste too but they can sell them however they want.

Score: 0

By urgur

edited Oct 29, 2007 - 8:46 PM

Haha, Apple has gone mad... They can keep their damn phone for themselves, should I bring over my house contract so they will be kind enough to sell me the crappy thing. Shees, you guys in the US really need to act on this "only phone companies sell phones" thing, it's become insane

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 7:11 PM

It's time for the US Government to force the industry to sell phones and plans separately.

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 5:10 PM

While I'm very disappointed with this move, I keep reminding myself that Jobs is probably between a rock and a hard place. I suspect this restriction was pushed on him by the contract in place with AT&T.

Just as Jobs is aware that DRM is not working, I'm certain that he and other top managers at Apple are well aware that these restrictions won't stop anyone determined to get lots of iPhones (as one writer pointed out, it's trival to get lots of prepaid debit cards) and so they're paying lipservice to placate AT&T.

In other words, beat up AT&T, not Apple, for this move.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 5:57 PM

great way to scapegoat, Apple can do no wrong.

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 5:48 AM

Are you PC Tools going under another name? lol

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

edited Oct 30, 2007 - 8:57 AM

Would you blame him if he was? But both user names have been around a while. I doubt that's him.

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 6:12 PM

I didn't say that. Nor was I trying to JUSTIFY what they did. I was simply speculating on WHY they did it.

--->Apple can do no wrong

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 4:52 PM

silly apple!

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 4:10 PM

I'm thinking iPhones sales will drop sharply after this not to smart and probably illegal decision by Apple. And I'm quite confident there are lawsuits just around the corner.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 4:33 PM

"lawsuits around the corner" doesn't make it illegal. :)

Nor does stating one will not accept any form of payment other than Credit or Debit.

Internet retailers don't (and won't) accept cash payment. Many of them will not even accept checks, western union, or EFT. All Apple needs to do is set up payment kiosks in the store for the iPhone.

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 5:12 PM

I didn't say it was illegal I said it's probably illegal. But legally they have to defend not accepting cash payment for iPhones while accepting cash payments for all their other products. But I'm sure Apple's legal department have crossed all their T's and erased all their i's. LOL

Oh, and of course internet retailers don't accept cash. (since it's physically impossible):-)

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 10:45 AM

"I didn't say it was illegal I said it's probably illegal. But legally they have to defend not accepting cash payment for iPhones while accepting cash payments for all their other products."

It's legal and they don't have to defend it.

"Oh, and of course internet retailers don't accept cash. (since it's physically impossible):-)"

It is possible to send cash through the mail. There are some retailers who will accept this. (I don't know why any customer would ever do something that stupid, but...)

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 3:57 PM

The easiest way to take care of this is have them sign the contract when they buy the phone.

Any way, I am still wondering why people why this POS and a whole bunch of restriction on it. On both Apple and AT&T.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 3:31 PM

ah...true monopoly in action, but it's not Microsoft so it's OK in the eyes of many MS haters.
Closed platform, software and hardware...and controlled sales. Apple just thrives on that control.
Gotta love the oddity of how the world works.

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 3:40 PM

you need to be a bit more subtle for your troll post to work...

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 1:12 AM

Says the biggest troll. I think he forgot to put M$ somewhere in his post.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 6:37 PM

hehe....stating my opinion is trolling? interesting. I hide nothing and people are free to believe in what they choose. I am no god....dislike me, my posts and the companies and ideas I like...I won't attempt "troll" claims.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 3:51 PM

So you are saying he makes up these facts?

Score: 0

By dingomutt

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 5:19 PM

of course he's making up these facts. It's not like Apple won't let you install 3rd party applications that god forbid may be useful to a lot of people or that you're locked into 1 carrier when the phone is not subsidized. Apple certainly would never dictate as to how "YOU" can buy a phone. Never in a million year would the company whose motto was "think different" would do those kind of things. Shame on you Mr. xyzcb1.

Score: 0

By khetos

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 3:22 PM

hmm, money from sales, or from contracts..hmm... id take sales, who cares what somone does with the device..

its like a car company saying you have to go here only for servicing on your car, well, you buy it, its yours, you may loose out on the warrentee.. but the end result, you buy it, its yours.. if it was a lease different story..

Score: 0

By smarterthanyou

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:30 PM

It's unfortunate that consumers have forced Apple to take these steps. When you sign up for mobile phone service, it's the wireless carrier that determines what equipment can be used on their network not the consumer (at least in the USA). This is the one advantage that 2G CDMA networks have over GSM. Since 2G CDMA phones don't use removable sim cards, consumers can more easily be blocked from using unauthorized equipment with the phone service.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

edited Oct 29, 2007 - 2:32 PM

We have the right to compain, and in this case I think we should complain, but ultimately, it is Apple's iPhone. They can't force us not to unlock them but they can do what they are doing here. And we can complain and hope they hear us...

"Unlockers have very much seemed to become a headache for Apple, and a majority of its recent moves and updates surrounding the iPhone have been aimed at controlling this growing segment of the device's market."

What about that old saying, "If you can't beat them, join them"? How much money can they be paid for exclusivity? It must be quite a bit, because they just shot off their other foot this time.

Score: 0

By Austin814

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 1:51 PM

How can anyone, Apple, Wal-Mart or AT&T require the use of a CC or Debit Card? Cash is considered "legal tender" which means under law it must be accepted when you sell something in the US with a monetary value. CC, Debit cards and chickens are not legal tender and do not have to be accepted as a form of payment.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 12:45 AM

DirecTV did this years ago, they also charge your credit card $300 if you don't activate your access card within a certain amount of time.

Nobody sued, all it did was stop the pirates from buying cheap sat boxes and selling the modified cards. Then they developed the new cards in house and nobody to date has been able to crack them and make them full access.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:11 PM

My usenet service:

9.98 (if paid by CC or debit)

12.99 if paid by western union, check, etc...

Now, imagine somone trying to suggest what you just did to Apple.

$499 (credit or Debit)

$1,000,000,000 (cash, check, etc)

Same results, and perfectly legal by your terms.

FYI: There is, afaik, no federal law against sales solely through bartering, for instance. But since I don't have a "clicky" handy, I won't call you out on it just yet. ;)

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:57 PM

Yea, but they still wouldnt be aloud to not accept cash.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 4:30 PM

Yes, they would.

They would simply refuse the sale. It is perfectly legal to not sell a product to any individual so long as it is not discriminatory (based on whatever we decide to call a minority at the time).

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 7:42 PM

Its discriminating against people who dont use creditcards, etc.

You cant refuse to sell something to me when I give you legal tender and then sell it to the guy behind me who uses a check.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 8:54 AM

No, I'm sure you've seen the signs. They don't even need to tell you why (in fact, it's probably better if they don't).

"We reserve the right to refuse sale to anyone."

...or something similar. It's a private business. Unless it breaks discrimination laws, you're out of luck.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 9:44 AM

"This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy."

Assuming the following is true (from Wikipedia), you indeed are correct. However, I still believe it is wrong that it is like this.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 10:02 AM

:) It's nice being right. I should try it more often.

You are also right. It's kind of off-putting to say the least that Apple has stooped to this.

But it's within their rights to put us off. We'll just shop elsewhere.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 10:13 AM

Yea, you've got that right.

Score: 0

By tstr

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:34 PM

The reason why at times there are different prices when it comes to different forms of payments is because there are sometimes certain fees or percentages involved that the seller has to pay when those methods of payment are involved. With cash there really is no such thing, and nothing to justify higher rates, let alone simply not accepting it. Cash is essentially one of the more fundamental and basic forms of payment, and to simply deny its use is rather ridiculous.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:59 PM

I thought that legally, they can not deny a payment of cash.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 4:29 PM

They can deny sale to anyone, regardless of form of payment so long as it is not based on race, religion, sex, age, etc.

Score: 0

By greensabath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 11:21 PM

You are WRONG. On the dollar bill, it says "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." This means, that if someone sells something in the US, they HAVE to accept the US Dollar as a form of payment, because the US Government decreed the Dollar Bill as such. If you don't believe, look it up in any economics book, and you will see that Cash MUST be accepted as payment. Apple is breaking the law here. I just want to go and buy an Iphone with cash just to take them to court over this. Lol. I'm sure someone will do this at some point, lol.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

edited Oct 30, 2007 - 10:03 AM

"On the dollar bill, it says "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.""

Read the ferret's post above. It is perfectly legal to not accept cash as payment.

Score: 0

By arossetti

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 1:07 PM

Why in the world should Apple care? The main party being hurt by unlocking is AT&T, not Apple. I guess I'll just never understand Apple.

Score: 0

By dlab21

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 1:14 PM

apple shares in a portion of the revenue of each at&t subscriber that has an apple iphone on their mobile... so they are hurt for each phone used on another carrier.

apple should have no revenue sharing based on monthly subscriptions and this wouldn't be an issue but at&t gave them everything they wanted.

Score: 0

By auiotour

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:32 PM

Companies like at&t aren't stupid they understood how huge the ipod is. And they knew the iphone would be huge as well. They probably bowed down to apple to get the phone with their carrier. Apple being excited as At&t is the largest network that utilizes sim cards. Compared to Tmobile and other carriers (forgot the exact server time's name.. chime in if needed)

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Oct 30, 2007 - 9:47 AM

Yes, and it is still stupid how Apple is getting this extra money.

Score: 0

By sacaripasa

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 1:01 PM

You know how EASY it is to get a single use debit card or a rechargable debit card! This will do little to stop the people who want to unlock their phone.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:35 PM

Maybe they are thinking little is a little more than nothing, the same seemingly logical (but flawed) thinking that DRM companies take.

Score: 0

By timatl

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 12:48 PM

the iphone has a few more months before they have some copy cats released. the nokia phone looks like a goog alternative. i am sticking with my blackberry for now. i prefer to have a keypad. iphone is eyecandy and nothing more, in my opinion. it will continue to be succesful i am sure.

Score: 0

By PhoenixPath

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 12:22 PM

What surprises me most about this isn't the people whining about having their phones bricked, the cries for legal action, or any of that.

What surprises me is that Apple didn't see this coming prior to the launch of the device and implement such policies immediately.

Sure, people are going to complain about this as well, and perhaps they should. But from Apple's point of view it wouldn't be any worse than the criticism they've been blasted with so far for their handling of this device.

I shouldn't say surprised, I should say amazed. I just cannot figure how they could not have expected a backlash from their community which is about as fervent about openness and choices as the FOSS cultists, or at the very least, utterly failed to prepare for it.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Oct 29, 2007 - 2:33 PM

Agreed.

Score: 0

By stdly

edited Oct 29, 2007 - 6:43 PM

I never wanted one before and for sure not now.
What are these people thinking especially with the biggest retail holiday of the year coming up.
Saying AT&T is responsible is ridiculous Apple could use any provider and must have huge influence on these decisions?

Score: 0

Dec 2 - 5:09 PM ET Microsoft: Vista SP2, Windows Server SP2 betas Thursday

Dec 2 - 4:55 PM ET With premium content, monetization will follow, says YouTube exec

Dec 2 - 3:59 PM ET Europol plan against cyber-crime would enable remote searches

Dec 2 - 2:22 PM ET Roaming SMS charges to decrease in Europe

Dec 2 - 1:41 PM ET Oracle contributes Linux code for detecting 'silent data corruption'

Dec 2 - 1:31 PM ET Sling.com launches its joust with Joost

Dec 2 - 1:27 PM ET Nokia closes its Symbian acquisition, seeding an open source foundation

Dec 2 - 11:44 AM ET Another confusing split decision in Broadcom / Qualcomm spat

Dec 2 - 11:02 AM ET Africa is springing into fertile ground for WiMAX

Dec 2 - 10:08 AM ET Nokia goes full-tilt in unveiling its N97