Akis
I need to address something that’s been bothering me about the “non-flagship” justification.
When I bought the Phone 3a, the product lineup was clear: CMF was the budget line, Nothing Phone was the main line. That’s how it was positioned, that’s how it was marketed, and that’s what I paid for.
I spent half of my monthly income on this phone - something I’ve never done for any purchase before. I stretched my budget specifically because Nothing Phone was supposed to be the “main line” with the clean OS experience you promised. Not budget, but compromise being better specs while maintaining actual Nothing experience.
Now you’re telling me that because you released a $799 Phone 3, my phone is retroactively classified as “non-flagship” and gets the degraded experience with ads and bloatware? You’re moving the goalposts AFTER I already made the purchase based on your original positioning.
That’s not just changing strategy - that’s a bait-and-switch. You can’t reclassify product tiers after people have already paid based on how you positioned them. When I bought this phone, it WAS your near best offering in its category.
If the plan was always to have “flagship gets clean OS, everything else gets ads,” that should have been disclosed at purchase time. Instead, you sold us on “Nothing Phone has clean OS” - full stop. No asterisks. No “unless we release something more expensive later.”
I made a significant financial sacrifice based on your promises. A lot of us did. And now you’re telling us that sacrifice wasn’t enough to qualify for the experience you promised? That we should have somehow predicted you’d release a more expensive model and retroactively demote what we bought?
This isn’t about not understanding business costs. This is about being sold one thing and receiving another after it’s too late to make a different choice.
