Haven't read entire thread, but T-Mobile started doing something like this I think. Where you basically pay a little each month for the cost of the phone. It ends up being like a lease. I'd rather just pay $200-$300 up front and sign a 2-year agreement, own the phone, and go from there. I did the math and it appeared to be quite alot cheaper to go that route. I don't know if this is a good thing.

It's not but people will be fine with it because they want the ability to switch phones every year and get the newest technology.

Or keep their phone forever and not pay the subsidy.

Or be able to shitcan those mother****ers mid-contract if I deem it necessary.

Or if my phone can't un**** itself after I've had it for a year and 8 months.

Or.... Or.... Or....

Two years is pretty much perfect for me. Hope Sprint doesn't go this route. Im fine with paying more upfront as long as its cheaper in the long run for me

Sprint is phasing out contracts at the end of the year.

I've been with T-mobile for a number of years now and I'm looking at changing. The coverage is fine in KC, but if you leave town it sucks. I have family in Columbia and we visit once a month or so and as soon as we leave the metro area our signal goes dead. NOTHING all the way to Columbia. And then we barely get a signal.

So I checked out coverage maps and it seems like AT&T has the best coverage for where we travel. I chatted with them yesterday and they are expensive! It would cost us $190/month to get what we're getting right now with Tmobile for $110/month...and that is with 33% less data. Verizon is a little more affordable, but they said our phones (Nexus 5) won't work on their network so we'd need to buy all new phones. No thanks.

It looks like we're stuck with Tmobile for now.

Try Ting.com

Looking now, thanks.

The strange thing is, judging by tmobile's coverage map, we should have an excellent signal all the way down I-70.