Prediction: Good iPhone Apps Will Be Free and Apple Will Develop Ad Network

As I wait for my iPhone order to be filled (my local AT&T store says it will be anywhere from 10 to 21 days), I am researching the large number of iPhone apps I will have access to very soon. I’ve noticed that there seems to be many quality apps that cost money but also many quality apps that are free. What is the future of iPhone apps?

I’ll tell you. All the good iPhone apps will eventually be free. Furthermore (you heard it here first people), Apple is going to develop an iPhone ad network. I know what you’re thinking. I’m crazy. Why would Apple, a company that specializes in hardware and software, dive into the crowded advertising network market? Let’s discuss it further.

Good iPhone Apps Will Be Free

The real useful iPhone apps are ones that connect us with the rest of the world. While Super Monkey Ball might be fun, it’s just a game. Games get old fast. The best apps are the ones that connect us with our already existing web applications (like Pandora, Facebook, and AIM). Almost all, if not all, of these applications are free. That’s because these apps aren’t there to make money. They’re there to build the user base for those companies. The only monetizing that might come from these apps is advertising based.

So while in the present time you have every amateur entrepreneur trying to scrape some extra dollars from the iPhone folk, the public will get smart and stop paying for most of those apps after a while. And unless it’s a revolutionary app, some developer will code up a duplicate on a sleepless weekend and give it away for free. So let’s go to the next point.

Apple will develop an iPhone ad network

Thousands of apps have been downloaded from the app store. Many of them were paid for. The app store is a very large potential revenue stream for Apple. The problem is that most of the apps will be free (see above). That means there won’t be another money tree in the Apple garden…or will there? As more apps become free and lean towards advertising for revenue, Apple will get jealous. And you will eventually see the Apple iPhone Advertising Network.

This network will allow application developers to focus on building great applications and receive revenue from ads on the top or bottom of the screen as their app is displayed. Apple will take a cut from this revenue. Whether Apple teams up with an advertising leader for this (Google most likely) or build it on their own from scratch, you will see an Apple advertising network in the next 12-18 months. Just watch.

How to Port Your Number Without Paying the Early Termination Fee

For all those who are looking to get out of your Verizon contract without paying an early termination fee (ETF), please see my video tutorial. I have been getting a lot of questions about how to go about this process and still keep your phone number. Here is a simple step-by-step process to help you port your number while still canceling without paying an ETF. After you convince Verizon (per your rights in the contract) to allow you to leave without paying the ETF, here is what you do:

1. Set up cancellation for a future date

Give yourself at least two weeks if you’re planning on getting an iPhone. The customer rep will put a note in your account that when you cancel, you won’t have to pay the ETF. Get the rep’s contact information so you can call him/her back later.

2. Call back to confirm the note in your account

Speak to a totally new rep and don’t explain anything. Just ask whether the note about not paying the ETF is there. You can never be too careful.

3. Sign up with your new carrier and port over the number

Verizon has to allow the porting of your number to a new carrier. Once this happens, your account will instantly be deactivated and you WILL be charged the ETF.

4. Call Verizon and get your ETF back

Call up the original Verizon rep and get refunded for the ETF based on the note in your account. If you didn’t get the number of the original rep, call up a new one. The note is in your account so you should be OK.

That’s it. It’s simple in theory but some people run into some bumps in the road. It’s usually due to uneducated service reps. That is why it’s good to get the number of the person you speak to who put the note in your account. Good luck and let me know how it goes in the comments.

Video Tutorial: How to Get Out of Your Verizon Contract Without an Early Termination Fee

I’ve gotten a lot of great feedback on my previous posts about successfully canceling my Verizon contract without paying an early termination fee. Based on the requests of many of my readers, I have made a video tutorial on exactly how to go about this process.

Send this post around to all your friends who have Verizon. Maybe some will want to consider getting out while they still can.

Verizon Finally Agrees to Follow Their Own Contract

After many attempts, I have finally been able to cancel my Verizon contract without an early termination fee. I got a call back from Rob, a Verizon manager, and he explained how, after further review, they will be able to follow through with my request. Now I’ve got to spread the word.

Verizon Update

I have previously discussed my trial and travails with trying to get out of my Verizon contract without an early termination fee. Here is an update.

I received a call from Rob who is apparently some sort of manager at Verizon. He seemed like a nice guy who honestly wanted to help (unlike those call center people who just sounded like they wanted to get me off the phone). Rob was clear to point out the paragraph in the contract that states Verizon is not responsible for a rise in taxes and government charges. I was quick to point that the charge that recently went up (FUSC charge) is listed in the paragraph “Charges and Fees We Set”. So much for that argument. He asked for time to review that paragraph and call me back. Apparently I know the customer agreement better than the managers at Verizon.

Rob called me back and told me that he consulted with the legal department, and according to them, since they are offering me a $10 credit to compensate for my “material adverse effect”, this negates the effect and therefore, cannot allow me to cancel without an early termination fee (ETF). This is how the conversation went.

Rob: Since we offered you the credit, we are negating any material adverse effect, and you cannot cancel without an ETF.
Me: Aren’t you proving my point? By offering me a credit to negate an effect, than you are admitting that the effect took place.

Rob: Yes. The effect definitely happened.
Ely: Okay, so I choose not to accept the credit. So now, I have a material adverse effect, and would like to exercise my right to cancel without an ETF.
Rob: I’m sorry, but my legal department told me that the credit is good enough to negate the effect.
Ely: Rob, let’s say I have a contract with the bank to pay off my mortgage. And in that contract, if I don’t pay on time every month, they could take away my house. Then, one month, I’m late. If I go back and offer them the money I owed plus some more to cover the interest they would have made on my money, does the bank still have a right to take my house?
Rob: Mr. Rosenstock, this is what legal told me.
Ely: Yes! Because once I’m late, the contract gives the bank the option of taking my house. I can’t change the rules of the contract after we already signed. That’s what Verizon is trying to do here Rob. You know I’m right. I understand your position. Verizon is trying to keep customers. But I’m not an idiot. I read what I sign. I’m following your customer agreement. What can I do here? Who can I talk to?
Rob: <long silence>

After trying to convince me to write a letter to Executive Appeals (probably the paper shredding department at Verizon), Rob told me he has someone else he wants me to talk to but he’s not in today. So I’ve got Rob’s number and am expecting a call from the head of North American Call Centers on Tuesday. I’ll keep you posted. Do you believe this!!??

Verizon Ignores Customer Agreement, GameFly Does it Right

I have spoken a lot about companies that don’t understand their customers. I’ve recently had experiences with two companies where I need to cancel my subscription. I think the difference in my experiences highlights the different approaches companies can take.

Verizon

Like so many other techies, I really want an iPhone. Unfortunately, I still have a year and a half left on my Verizon contract. I thought I would just have to wait but was pointed to a clause in my Customer Agreement with Verizon. It states that when Verizon changes their fees, and these fees have an adverse effect on me, I can cancel within 60 days of notification without an early termination fee (ETF). These fees could be any type of fee that Verizon raises. A couple months ago, Verizon raised their text messaging rate and I know people who (after hours of arguing) were able to cancel their account without an ETF. In my latest bill, Verizon notified me that it raised its Federal Usage Service Charge (a fee that, Verizon clearly states in their Customer Agreement, is a Verizon fee and not a federal fee).

So, I call up customer service, explain the situation, quote my contract and let them know that I’m notifying them within 60 days and would like to exercise my right to cancel without an ETF. Here is a list of the arguments Verizon made to not allow me to do this:

Verizon: The FUSC is a federal charge and not a Verizon fee.
Me: Actually, it clearly states in the contract that the FUSC is a Verizon fee set by Verizon.

Verizon: It says in the contract that we can change the fee, so it doesn’t apply here.
Me: You’re right. It does. You’ve done nothing wrong. You can change the fee. It also says in the contract that I can cancel my account when you change the fee without an ETF. So we’re both following what the contract says.

Verizon: Well, the FUSC changes every quarter.
Me: Interesting. So according to the contract, I can get out of my plan every quarter. Thanks for that information.

Verizon: A raise in this charge isn’t a “material adverse effect”.
Me: What would you call a material adverse effect?
Verizon: If we stop providing service to your neighborhood.
Me: In the contract it states in the paragraph titled “Our Rights to Make Changes” that you have the right to change any fees. Right after that it states that if these changes have any material adverse affect on me, than I can cancel without an ETF. The change isn’t talking about coverage, it’s talking about a change in fees.
Verizon: Well, you have a different definition of material adverse effect.
Me: My definition is from your contract.

Verizon: We’ll give you a $10 credit to your account. That will make up for the material adverse effect on your account.
Me: I don’t want the credit. Nothing in the contract talks about a credit to my account. I’d like to exercise my right per the contract that you and I agreed upon.

After speaking to 4 people, I’ve been told that I’m going to get calls back today from managers. I’m not holding my breath. I’ll try again next week.

Gamefly

A friend of mine was trying to get a free Xbox 360 through one of those referral sites. How it works is that you get a bunch of friends to sign up to a service and in return, you get a free gift. My friend did lots of research and found a place that it legit. One of the services to sign up for was Gamefly. He thought he’d pay each friend $10 for a one month Gamefly subscription. After the eight referrals he’d get the Xbox 360 for $80. Not bad. I figured I’d help him out.

My month is nearly up and am ready to cancel in the next few days. A friend of mine had already canceled. Here is the process. You got to My Account page. Click on the “cancel membership link”. Follow on-screen instructions. And you’re done. That’s it! Simple and easy.

Bottom line: Verizon pissed me off and if ANY carrier out there had decent service and wasn’t horrible to their customers, I would use them in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, all cell phone providers are like this from what I hear. While I don’t have a desire to continue Gamefly right now, I was impressed with the service and would recommend it to friends. I would also consider using it when I have a video-game-playing child and don’t want to shell out $60 every time he/she wants a new game.

In the next 5 years we’re going to see technology that changes the telecommunications sector. Just like VOIP for landline service, something will come along and shake up the wireless world. And when it does, Verizon is going to pay for their mistreatment of customers. I can’t wait.

User Privacy Isn’t About Information Protecting, it’s About Information Collecting

I used to work for a company that generated most of its revenue from lead generation. It was a web publication where users registered to see premium content. We would work with big companies like IBM and Microsoft to sponsor webcasts and we would give the contact information of the users who viewed these webcasts to the respective sponsors. The users agreed to this in the Terms and Conditions and all was done fair and legally. This is how many free sites make their money. They sell your contact information to the highest bidder. I always had a problem with this concept. I’m not giving companies my contact information so they could sell it to the highest bidder. But what choice do I have?

With the new slew of web 2.0 companies, we’ve seen a backlash of sorts regarding this issue. One of the many definitions of web 2.0 is user-centricity. It’s all about pleasing the user. That means you don’t give away your users’ contact information. Wonderful. Out contact information is safe. Right? Well, in a recent court case, Google is forced to provide Viacom the usernames, IP addresses and online activity of all of their YouTube users. Apparently our information isn’t safe.

Michael Arrington at Techcrunch makes a good point about who is to blame here. Everyone wants to blame Viacom and it’s understandable. It’s an organization that has decided to fight their customers rather than work with them. Viacom is in the group of other media companies who have pushed the legal limits to track down people who love their content and sue them.

As Arrington points out, the real company to blame here is Google. Google is the one collecting this information on us. Until now, they thought (as did we), that our information was safe. Apparently, we were both wrong. Google needs to change their policy on how they track their users. For one thing, Google needs to make sure that any information on their servers cannot track someone down. That means no IP address saving, no mailing address saving, no credit card saving, etc….Secondly, (this might just be a marketing ploy) but we want a user contract. We want to know what information you save, how you use it, and who has access to it.

Viacom is evil, but Google is now their tool. Google needs to eliminate the possibility that our information will be used to track us down. That doesn’t mean hiring better lawyers. It means stop saving our personal information.

Don’t Believe the Twitter Hype

I was discussing the value of Twitter with a friend of mine this past week. He was making the case that Twitter will be the next big communication tool in the near future for life updates (what you’re up to right now). Currently, looking at my friends’ Facebook statuses and photos is how I stay abreast of what people are up to. This friend of mine was making the case that Twitter is only in its infancy and that it will replace Facebook statuses as the preferred method of this type of communication. Well, Twitter fans, I think Twitter is great but has one major flaw that won’t allow it to go mainstream. It’s just a communication tool and communication tools evolve to become open standards. These open standards allow anyone to compete on the communication side. Let me explain with a bit of internet history.

Prodigy was my first introduction to an online community. I used to post questions about Space Quest on Prodigy game forums and get answers from other Prodigy users on what code the time machine needed to get back to the future. It was amazing. I was also able to message other users directly. For example, I could send a message to my brother’s account (FNHK96B) from my account (FNHK96C). This was, in a sense, email. The user base was limited to Prodigy users, but I could still email any of them as many times as I wanted.

Then AOL came around and blew Prodigy out of the water. AOL gave the option to email anyone, anywhere, as long as they had an email address. Email was suddenly open. So if email was open, what was AOL’s competitive advantage? Some may say that it was their ease-of-use but the real killer app was AOL Instant Messenger. You had to be on AOL to chat with other AOLers. EVERYONE used AIM back then. There was no alternative. Eventually Microsoft and Yahoo came out with their own chat programs. AOL had to open up their chat to outsiders via a downloadable AIM program. Now, any program can chat to AIM users. Chat is open. No matter how many people use AIM, AOL lost its competitive advantage.

Jump ahead to the present. Twitter is the hot program to use for short mass communication. The interesting thing is, it’s already open. Any program can post to twitter and and receive tweets. So what is Twitter’s competitive advantage? People might use it, but why would people visit the site (which Twitter would need to make money)?

So here are the final thoughts of this  long post (sorry about that). Twittering, micro-blogging snippets about your life, is awesome. Twitter, however, is a delivery service. Nothing more. There is no other advantage to using Twitter and therefore, Twitter will become one of the many message delivery services in the future. Facebook, however, has lots to offer. It’s a social network. People will always have a reason to visit the site and because of that, the Facebook status will survive while Twitter will eventually fall. We’re already seeing people migrate to Plurk and FriendFeed (which are both more robust, and in my opinion, better than Twitter). You could love Twitter, but be realistic. Twitter is not all it’s hyped up to be.