Nokia Lumia 1020
166

Retail price of Nokia Lumia 1020 revealed: $699; on contract $299?

Now that we supposedly have the full specifications for the Nokia Lumia 1020, the flagship photography device destined to be revealed tomorrow morning, we just need to fill in some details, like price and availability.

We’re going to reveal two prices here tonight, both of which are not 100% confirmed but look to be accurate. You might want to grab a chair before you read on…

We reported earlier that the price listed at the Microsoft Store was for $602. Of course many of you noted how “odd” of a price that was with a few of you astute readers suggesting that is what Microsoft pays for the phone to Nokia, not what is charged to the customer. The actual price would be higher, since retailers obviously get a batch device discount.

Nokia Lumia 1020 price

That price is evidently $699 off contract as revealed by the above screenshot, which we can confirm as legitimate.

The other price is the on-contract, two-year price that AT&T users will have to pay. Here we have heard that price will be $299 with a two-year contract.

You read that right, do not adjust your screen.

Now, the source of that info comes from our same treasure trove of leaks lately, which so far have proven to be accurate, lending us to believe that this will indeed be the price. Having said that, even we’re having a bit of a difficult time believing it, so we’re feeling odd about reporting it.

Why so expensive?

Nokia Lumia 1020

There’s little doubt that tomorrow that Nokia will unveil what is the most advanced smartphone camera in the world. Between the 41MP sensor, oversampling and built in optical-image stabilization, the tech that is that device is akin to buying a quality point and shoot camera. Now throw in a high smartphone into that mix.

It doesn’t take much imagination to see how expensive such a device can be: quality point and shoot camera ($350) plus quality smartphone ($350) can get you to $700 quite easily.

Also, while the Lumia 1020 will get a lot of press and bring a lot of needed attention to Nokia and Windows Phone, let’s be clear: only a certain segment of buyers will want to buy the Lumia 1020. It’s not the everyday phone for every man, it’s geared for the hobbyist to pro-photographer who wants a quality all-in-one device.

Regardless, we still hope that $299 is not correct and we’ll be more than glad to eat crow tomorrow if we’re wrong. But just in case…

2
loading...
0
loading...
0
loading...
0
loading...

Reader comments

Retail price of Nokia Lumia 1020 revealed: $699; on contract $299?

166 Comments

Doubt it. This isn't a phone everyone will want and AT&T knows it. The people who want it will pay whatever up front cost they have to. Again, this is a very niche device. Nokia knows not many people will buy it (not many compared to a normal phone).

Also, the HTC Pro on Sprint had a $250 up front cost when it launched, also because it was a niche device.

I just feel like Nokia can't be messing around with not selling a lot of phones at the moment. If they were at the top of the world, sure, but I don't think right now is the best time. But whatever the case I guess it doesn't really matter for me since I'm not on AT&T. I just want Nokia and WP to do well.

 
This phone is obviously an enthiousiasts phone where Nokia utilizes this niche to get the tech out and in the hand of people who will provide valuable feedback on it. No doubt the net gen hardware will see this integrated and improved on, maybe as early as the end of this year, with a much more 'main stream' friendly pricetag.
 

I mean I agree but at the same time I think we're all dreaming a little. Expecting the best phone/camera ever and not thinking we'll have to pay a premium for it. They've just released the 925/928, they couldn't make them redundant the next month, the 1020 is a phone for enthusiasts and priced thusly.
For the mass market Nokia have the 520, 620, 720, etc. This phone will get press, will build the Nokia and WP brands, most people will however buy in below with the cheaper models.

I agree a little. The Galaxy Note II was something of a Galaxy S III with a better display, and it got a price premium. In that same vein, this is essentially a Lumia 920 with a better camera (in both cases, the bigger of the two devices also got a 1GB upgrade in the RAM department). However, the Galaxy S III was $200, which pushed the Note II to the $300 price it was at on-contract. The Lumia 920 is only $100, with it also going on-sale on a few occasions (including a Black Friday sale right after release, which put it at $50 less than a month after WP8 launched).
 
I can't say (for certain) that the camera is worth a $200 price premium, though. I'd really rather see them readying to announce a TRUE 920 successor, because it's starting to look again like (at best) we'll end up getting WP8 devices with the newest SoCs right before their successors release (like how the MSM8960-packing launch devices were outpaced by the One and S4's Snapdragon 600 within 6 months).
 
Don't get me wrong, I think that this is a fantastic camera, and the tech is impressive, at worst. I'm just thinking that the pricing is terrible (adding $250 to the off-contract $450 would be a steep request as well), and that the OS needs some more spec-stuffers to impress the casual crowd.

Note 2 had a 720p display, as did the Galaxy S 3. Because the Galaxy S 3 had a smaller screen, the ppi would be higher, therefore, the Galaxy S 3, technically, had the better screen.

No It didn't because it was pentile 720p and the note was full resolution 720p. That said the s4 is pentile 1080p which is about the same resolution as full 720p so the screen is fine on this.

Lol it needs more spec stuffers to impress the casual crowd? I think you have that mixed up.

Why do you think it's not the phone everyone wants it. It's supposedly thinner than 920. There is nothing else that can hold it back unles that bulge is too protruding. 

Exactly it should be $200 on contract at most, if I have to pay $300 on contract I will probably think twice about getting this; or will at the very least wait a month or two and perhaps the price will go down.
 

No way this will be priced at $299, this is an AT&T exclusive. It doesn't have the features, even with the camera,to be priced that high. 925 is $49. But this is going to be marketed as a level above 920, which had a price point of $99. I can't think of a justification for it being priced at $299. $199 it is, which I think is fair. This is for the US, because it is such it is the flagship market for smartphone sales, ehance being lunched first in the US. UK and everwhere will probably see a much different and higher pricing scheme even compared to the off-contract US phone. That's what happened with the 920.

Otis23, Nokia has a history of putting some awesome tech in their devices.  With that said, their MSRP on many of their phones (including Symbian devices) are quite expensive - The Nokia 808 was, I believe, $699 at launch (contract free).
 
Honestly, with the R&D that Nokia puts into their devices, I personally don't take issue with a $299 price tag (on contract) or $699 off contract for this device.  With that said, I will most likely sit this one out as my Lumia 900 is only 8 months old, and I promised myself I wouldn't upgrade until after my 1 yr. warranty expired :)

Point is if Nokia wants to succeed, they can't afford to sell at that high price. They are not market leaders currently. They should aim to make this phone as their flagship for this year and not target only small amount of users. I do think that price will not be more than $199.

I think $300 would be justified if it was carrying the Snapdragon 600 in the newest Android devices. With the 18-month-old MSM8960, I agree completely that $300 is too much to ask. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised to at least get a the 8960T, with the slightly-stronger Adreno 305 GPU, though.

No, I know what it means. I'm just saying that the niche is shrunk by poor pricing, because it's hard to justify $300 for the camera when it means loss of wireless charging and no SoC upgrade.

Still buying this off contract. Can't wait to see comparison photos between this and other point & shoots. 

If buying off contract its better to wait for the 64GB version; unless, of course, your employer covers the cost ;)

299 though? IPhones and the S4 are usually close 700 off contract and get less than this on contract...

Yes, indeed....
 
Maybe these prices are for the surprise 64GB model....
 
A guy can dream :o)

I know. This baffles me, to. The devices cost around the same unlocked yet they charge $100 more? Doesn't make any sense to me. 

I understand the $699 price... But $299 on contract? Doesn't sound right and just opens doors for launch failure. I really hope it's more like $199. Definitely won't be $99.
If it's $299 on contract, Windows Phone (no matter the hardware) is not worth it. It's just not there yet. Not hating, but it's the spicy truth.

seeing as the 925 is just $50 on t-mobile, it would be nice to see the 1020 for $100 if ATT wants to keep its customers

Nothing stopping people just buying the 920 if they dont want the 1020. Switching to Tmo doesnt strike me as the solution.

Sorry but the 925 could have quad-core and 1080p screen and still wouldn't go to t-mobile too many bad experiences.

I do not see a problem with that price tag. You stated it above Daniel, "only a certain segment of buyers will want to buy the Lumia 1020" its odd because we are so used to the 199$ price tag on flagships.

Every now and then Verizon releases some flagships with the 299$ price tag so its nothing to hit your head about. I would also throw into that price tag the 2 gigs of ram they've added, I know memory is cheap but still :P

That's not the problem though if understand if it was Samsung or apple doing this but not Nokia, Nokia no because Nokia can't afford to just target a small group of consumers, this is the high end phone that needs to reach out to everyone!

Dont think this is their aim with this phone, more like a buzz creating, ultimate camera phone for the elite mobile photographer. The mainstream models will be revealed at Nokia world in a few months.

yeah, but Nokia doesn't have one device...they have like around seven or eight...it's about the portfolio, the spectrum of devices.

From a $130 phone (Lumia 520) to a $699 phone (Lumia 1020)...why not? 

Idk if $299 is a marginally or highly subsidized price for on contract, but I feel like $249 might have looked a little better to the consumers eye to maybe get some on the fence type ppl to literally buy in...just my humble 2¢

You guys should never complain: here in Brazil the Lumia 920 costs 1000 dolars!! The others:
- Lumia 820: ~ 700 dolars;
- Lumia 720: ~ 475 dolars;
- Lumia 620: ~ 407 dolars;
- Lumia 520: ~ 260 dolars.

Now imagine how much the Lumia 1020 will cost in here... I bet 1250 dolars, being optimistic.

Brazil doesnt allow phones to be imported. Nokia runs a factory in Brazil to cater to the local market. Hence prices are higher than elsewhere

Man, just spend 550 (maybe a bit more) on tickets for flight to Belarus and buy 920 BNIB for just $450 (if you ok with black color) shipped especially for you from good neighbour Poland:)

i got my 820 from Poland, lol, when i first booted it, the setup welcome screen was all in Polish. The rom version on the phone was also in polish. I was able to change it to english after.

do you think in Canada, the prices are cheaper? The 520 here with Rogers is 150-200$ plus taxes (an extra 50$) so you are at 200-250$ CAN. There is no 620/720/820 and the 920 without contract is 500-600$ + taxes at least. Not close to 1000$ i know but almost. With contract, it's only 100-199$
 
I had to buy my 820 outside of Canada, unlocked and paying the full price when it was not that cheap as now. You can get a 820 now unlocked for under 400$ if you are lucky.

The carriers contract in here are sooooooooooooooooooo expensive!! If you wanna buy a Lumia 920 per 250 dolars in here will have to pay for a plan about 250 dolars per month

it's actually Brazilian Real, why are you keep saying dollar?
250 BR = 115$ CAN here which is normal in a sense, I pay almost 80$ for my plan and I have everything unlimited except data plan. With unlimited data plan, I will be close to 100$, trust me.

Seems about right for the tech involved. Btw are you hearing anything about a Rogers version? Need that for T-Mobile. Thanks.

Which means nothing in the context of the 1020. Just like the 808, its target market will buy it no matter the OS. The 808 had Symbian, which while Anna wasn't bad it still had terrible stigma. But the people who wanted a 41MP camera phone still bought it. And the same is true here. People who are deciding between SGS, iPhone, HTC One and a WP won't have the 1020 in the equation anyway.

I don't know that that many people will be cross-shopping this against those phones.  They have the 920/925/928 for that crowd.  This probably appeals to a certain type of buyer who already knows he wants it when he goes into the store.

this phone is not being launched to compete with the S4 or ONE, but it is a way better phone then both of them.

The camera yes I agree but other them that it's a 920...so the cAmera is pulling all the weight 

699€ without VAT seems to match what I expected.
I bet over here it will easily reach 800€ (if not more since the L920€ costed 700€) and carriers will only make 2 year contracts that will make you end up paying more for the phone than if you bought it off contract.

I would expect it more than 700 off contract. Remember with all the technology (software and hardware) that goes into handling 41meg photos doesnt come cheap. The BOM cost of this phone might be way higher than the iphones/bb/S4s and the 92x series

$300 on Contract for Windows Phone won't sell. Even if its superior to the iPhone and Galaxy S4 that price is just too high to convince the public to jump over. I think Marketing will see some personnel changes after this. ;)

They're just a few months away from a software and hardware refresh, so this isn't the device they're trying to win people over with.

Pureview Pro on Windows Phone has always been highly anticipated ever since Nokia dished out the 808. 

But anyway, just by going off context clues here.  There is no way in hell they would implement another 41MP sensor in an upgraded spec phone.  It would make the phone way more expensive! 

The last 41MP pureview phone they released was on an operating system they were no longer going to support. They're doing the exact same thing here.

T mobile service sucks, but a go ahead and switch for its "Jump" program, you'll be "Jumping" right back to where you "Jumped" from

Yeah, $50 plus $20 bucks a months for 24 months for the privilege of owning it (or should I say leasing it).

Right, after factoring in the "lease" price it's no cheaper than my Verizon plan... after factoring in the service, its more expensive per se.

Can July 11th just get here already. I'm actually hoping for Nokia to drop a bomb shell on everyone and announce it'll be available everywhere! We can dream right?

Looks like BestBuy price, just an FYI some retailers put in "filler" pricing until the real price is revealed. GameStop and BestBuy would do that when new consoles could be preordered before a price was set.

I like this theory. I've seen this before. People kinda freak out, but they basically hold it with a price that would never be lower than the actual price, presumably a CYA move so people can't say they saw it for less at one time.
 
Curious: This same comment was on Facebook. Same guy or did one of you copy/paste?

+1
 
My faith in the internet has been restored!  (I've been scarred by so many people that copy/paste trending tweets on Twitter.)

That's what I'm doing.  Amazon sells most Windows Phones for a penny eventually.  I have gotten all of my WP/WM devices for 1 penny on contract with them.  It's rad.  By the time this one gets that low maybe the bugs will be out and WP 8.1 will be ready.  How killer would that be?...

I don't think that this shows US pricing.  Nowhere that I'm aware of in the US uses VAT.  The US has a sales tax, which is quite different. 

It's completely different - and strongly suggests that it isn't US pricing.  An AT&T register wouldn't show VAT, it would show sales tax.

VAT is a sales tax. If the system was produced using the international English, it will have VAT instead of "sales tax". It's not enough to prove it's not an AT&T register.

It would depend on whatever the vendor who wrote your point-of-sale system decided to write next to the box.  I could imagine that if it was a European company then they probably call any kind of add-on tax 'VAT'.

Oracle's PeopleSoft ERP system has VAT built into it as well as many other records/features not configured/used in my experience in the US. It's very likely AT&T's POS system has a similar approach. I wouldn't read too much into it.
 
Edit: Looking at the pic again, I see your point. It does looks like VAT is being used...so it does seem foreign. It'd be odd if a POS system simply used VAT across the board as generic terminology.

Nitch, perhaps, but for me the nitch is "best Windows Phone ever".

Being a WP fan I'd buy this over the 920 just to get the best WP ever.

Obviously a camera freak would jump at the chance to own this.

Now given those two nitches, the third group of people are simply interested in the most advanced phone hardware ever and don't care what OS comes with it.

That's a lot of nitches to fill with one phone.

Without competition, the $299 price is justified.

Nah I prefer the surface rt, Smartphones are getting too expensive lately and in 6-months you have another one so f*** that

It may be a niche device, but does who can afford will buy it. Everyone else will wait for Amazon, Microsoft or the carrier to drop the price.

and who the eff wanted higher specs on this thing?  A quad core and 1080p would've easily increased the price of this phone.  

Don't get me wrong, I knew it was going to be expensive as I bought the 808 and that wasn't even spec-tastic as the 920.  Wow...but really even subsidized costs are expensive. 

This would be downright horrible if ATT launched it for 299 on contract.

Well I'm one of those so called "certain people that would want one" photo enthusiasts, and I'm not paying $300. To bad, hope its not true

$700/$300 seems excessive. $600/$200 sounds about right, especially in light of the fact that the 920 has been $450/$99 since launch. Does anyone know if AT&T will continue to carry the 920?  

Nokia 1020 should be priced to sell:
 
32GB - $199
64GB - $299  (If available)
 
Otherwise, we just have to wait for while.  Price will start to drop like L920 or L928 after a few months.

I must say that I am really tired of people saying this is niche device. It's only a niche device if they price it as a niche device. And as far as only certain people being interested in this phone, I disagree there as well. I am a very proud owner of a 920. However, I would still be interested in this phone simply because it takes the best of Windows Phone and makes it better. Price this at 99.00 on contract and all of a sudden everyone looking for the best WP is interested. No more niche product. Who would not want the best phone with the best camera if it was priced right?

I do agree it will create buzz, and I think that buzz will be negative. Now people will use the usual arguments of lack of apps, 720p screens, no expandable storage and no quad core and then add in a price of 300.00 as more ammo against Wp. This phone needed to really sell. This phone needed to be in the hands of as many people as possible so it could give WP a "killer app" in the fight for public opinion. This is a big big mistake in my opinion. I expected 200.00, I think the smart thing would be 100 for this, 50 for 920 and 820 free. Niche devices at niche prices are fine when you are selling 100 mil phones and have already won people over, this is not that time.

It's a niche device because it looks goofy. That is going to be peoples' reaction to it, fair or not.

Just another reason I won't be getting it and sticking with my 920. If this price is right and the lack of built in wireless charging is a turn off for me. I've spent too much on the wireless charging accessories to give it up. And I don't want to buy a $299 phone and another accessory to wirelessly charge it. Ugh.. Damn you Nokia.

I'm still in, though might lean toward off contract at this on contract price. Almost found myself spending $500+ on a Nex 5 last month when I reminded myself to wait for this. As long as the photos blow me away I think the on and off contract prices are reasonable. If the images are mediocre or somehow closer to the 920 than the 808 I'd pass (I sure hope that doesn't happen).

This is scary. Historically, Nokia's stock bumps a little before announcements but then, on announcement day (after every last spec and EOS/tablet rumor stone has been turned beforehand), it dives because there seems to be a consensus of disappointment in the particular product contributing to a turnaround. The 925 announcement wasn't too bad though.
 
This time, the stock has been really climbing (probably because of the NSN buyout) going in and they really have that "wow" phone everyone's been wishing for, but the announcement is in the US where consumers don't seem to care much for Windows Phone and are used to subsidized prices rarely more than $199. I'm not sure $299 will be well received. Can't remember if it was the S4 announcement or what, but I remember an awkward silence when the guy announced the off-contract price. I thought the crowd was gonna boo.
 
Not claiming to be a stock expert (far from it), but paying attention since before the 920 announcement, announcement days usually result in the market (coincidentally or not) responding negatively. $299 or not, I do hope Thursday doesn't follow the same pattern so we can see some sign that Nokia is back with a vengeance.

Interesting theory on which I agree.  Up till now, we have seen Nokia targeting on the cheaper end of things.  I cannot see this going too well (for Nokia or AT&T) if off contract/on contract pricing is too high.  In my case and all those who plan on waiting for the price to drop for this phone...I hope this isn't an HTC First type thing where AT&T decides to cancel/EOL it after the first 3+ months because no one was buying.  

Can't remember if it was the S4 announcement or what, but I remember an awkward silence when the guy announced the off-contract price. I thought the crowd was gonna boo.

 
I believe you're refering to the google edition of the s4 :) And considering that was the "dream phone" of many, a high price like this will be very hard to swallow.

699 seems a little steep, but considering there are deals for the 925 here in Australia for about 600, an extra 99 for the awesome camera seems alright.
Though after the pre-order sale, the price will be higher ... which probably means it won't just be 699 here :(

My wife was really looking forward to dumping her 900 (I have a 920 so it will be a while before I am due an upgrade) but a $300 price tag is going to make her say NO, and she will end up with a 920. Sure hope the rumored price is wrong.

If this phone is more than $149 It will be an EPIC FAIL OF BLACKBERRY PROPORTIONS. Actually, $99 is the correct price because not everyone wants it or wp8.....YET. But to overprice this phone, and lack of top quality devices will be one of the nails in the coffin.....
 
 
BTW, im a wp owner. Im just being real.

My question is if an unlocked version will run on ATT LTE or if they are still messing around with hacking the radio to lock it...

299 is a good price. This is a niche phone. At that price point it will definitely draw attention from those not familiar with WP and those who take photography a bit more seriously.

Here's what I'm thinking(and hoping)- this $700 price point was intentionally leaked a day before a much hyped device that is bringing to the market technology that NO other OEM, not Apple, Not Samsung -NO ONE- has brought to the smartphone market. This 41 megapixel camera is news worthy and will probably hit the tech segments of mainstream news programs.
Windows Phi e may not have the market share Apple and Samsung have bit camera tech of this magnitude so well integrates into a smartphone by the former global smartphone leader who has pledged a comeback cannot go ignored.

That said, by allowing the $700 price to leak, with both Microsoft and Nokia betting on the prevailing assumption of the masses being a $300 retail price, I'm thinking that their strategy will be for ATT to offer the device at a much lower price riding the hype around the device with the added bonuses of an awesome lower than anticipated price tag to really drive the marketing of this device home.

I say this noting the fact that Microsoft and Nokia of course are working closely together and reports have been made of an even tighter relationship. Two there is a precedent for Microsoft and/or Nokia to subsidize the costs of their devices to ensure a great price point for the consumer.

Again I believe this is all part of the marketing plan to add to the hype of incredible smartphone camera tech that will be coupled with an unexpectedly low and hard to pass up price tag subsidized with the carrier by Microsoft and or Nokia making it VERY affordable for consumers.

This will allow Nokia and Microsoft compete against the better known Apple and Android flagships. Possibly grab some customers not entrenched into Apple who may otherwise be waiting for the Iphone 5s.

They may not be targeting a niche group, with the new frontier for smartphones being photography, and Nokia's strength being photography they will likely try to use this device to solidify their position as the smartphone photography leader, knowing the best way to do so is to grow their mindshare in that area, thus Nokia needs this device get into as many hands as possible as EASILY as possible. Thus a relatively low price for an awesome product. Just my thoughts. Hope I'm right.:-)

They probably would have leaked it a week ago in that case, to give the news a chance to spread around a bit.  Now, only WP fans who already had their minds made up anyway will have heard about $299 before they announce the "real" price.

Maybe. :-) Granted on 7/8/13 (two days before the $699 leak) the $602 leak carriers pay for it leaked giving us a brief window with that approximate cost.I don't know what price they will set(we will all know in a few hours). But I'm hoping that Microsoft/Nokia are keenly aware of their position with their 3-5% market share, low mindshare among consumers(few consumers actually walk into a store seeking Windows Phones-though awareness is slowly rising many regular Joe Consumers have only Android/Samsung and Apple on their minds when going to buy a phone, which is sadly reinforced by sales reps.
In such an environment telling consumers "hey pay $300 for this awesome phone with state of the art camera tech on an OS you're barely aware of made by a company(Microsoft) often considered "the bad guy" on hardware made by a former smartphone leader striving for a comeback" won't go over well for regular Joe Consumer whose hard earned dollars would be better invested from his perspective on a device that is "proven" to be great . Proven meaning his friends have one, family has one, people on bus have one, everyone at restaurant has one, sales rep pushes them and the highly visible displays surrounding him in the store are littered with the "proven" Android and Apple devices while the Windows Phones likely occupy an obscure corner of the store.
If Microsoft and Nokia are keenly aware of this reality I sincerely hope that their marketing plan with a phone with such a standout feature 41 mega pixel camera(and easy selling point for sales reps to latch on to and push as a unique a differentiating feature) would be to get this phone into as many hands as possible so that Word of mouth (the most powerful advertising) would ensue.
To do so they need to hit an accessible price point. If they price it low enough so that it's "accessible" to the masses, sales reps as mentioned have a great selling point with the 41 megapixel camera to grab a buyers attention. People may not know what that means completely nor do they have to. Most people,sadly are lulled in by BIGGER numbers, bigger specs. Most people don't know what two gigs of ram translates to on their device but they know it's bigger than one gig of ram. Most people don't know what single or duo or quad core translate to on their device but they know bigger must be better and sales reps need only communicate how the "bigger" number makes phone faster etc without having to delve into the tech. They can mention how the 41megapixel is 5times the usual 8 megapixels on competing devices. I can hear the ooh ahhs of regular Joe Consumer now. "5 times?" That's all he needs to hear to then ask well can that phone do everything the other phones do?(Translated can it do the usual smart phone tasks of surfing the web, sending emails, texting,playing games and using apps). Sales Rep- "IT SURE CAN, with a 41 megapixel camera, with great night time(dark) shots, built in FREE OFFICE, and see these live tiles, they give you updated information right on your start screen. So yes it does what the other phones do plus what they don't!" Regular Joe Consumer- How much? Sales Rep - $149 on contract. Joe Consumer-Give me two. If Microsoft uses its billions to subsidize the costs they can have a real winner here..

If they price it too high not only will it not sell and Microsoft/Nokia miss out on an opportunity to pump up their mindshare and word of mouth with a device that really differentiates itself from the competition with a feature that is desired and understood(taking pictures) by consumers and easy to communicate by sales reps but tech journalists and reviewers will also take the opportunity to blast how the the two companies, and their struggling mobile efforts failed if this device doesn't sale.
With the potential restriction of the iPhone 4 on ATT due to the Samsung lawsuit, a competitive price for this device(1020) can possibly grab some of the Joe Consumers who would have purchased the older Apple Device(which though older the brand for a price conscious consumer still is perceived as premium status) due to low price on ATT but can be lured to the premium, high-end Lumia 1020 if priced right.
Microsoft and Nokia can't afford the bad press of an expensive to make device, with pioneering camera technology to fail to sale especially now with Build just ending, Windows and WP 8.1 pending, the Microsoft re-org occurring- the recent chatter(though denied) of Huwaii looking to buy Nokia, a LOT of attention is on these two companies who are struggling for a foothold in the mobile arena.
If this phone fails to sale the tech media will have a field day that the much anticipated device, running Microsoft's struggling mobile OS, with a pioneering 41 megapixel stand out feature made by a leader/innovator in mobile phone camera tech(Nokia has invested itself in photography being its major hardware differentiating feature) STILL couldn't sale a a significant number of phones. This would not bode well for Nokia or WP OS. Apple recent commercial touts how more pictures are taking with the iPhone more than any other camera. Their upcoming Iphone, if not the 5s then then the 6 later this year ealy next year will likely tut better camera tech. They are invested in the new photogray frontier. Recent review f iOS7 have noted new camera features. Granted features that are playing cathip. And Samsungs Zoom also shows that that tech giant is in the battle of mobile photography on a smarphone. The timing for the 1020 to sale NOW is right, before competitors can get something out there to pull the rug from under Nokias feet in their own forte. If this doesn't sale, if it's prced too high, the backlash for Nokia and Microft will pretty claim that regardless of the innovation it the hardware tech no one wants Wndows Phone. I hope that Microft invests it billions to keep that kind of ammunition out of the hands of the media.

They must be nuts with this price, this is WP not Samsung flagship or iPhone flagship, it will be forgotten within a week or so, whose gonna buy this?? goodness me nokia, learn ok

Lets put this into perspective.  iPhone 5 32GB with 8mp camera, $749 off contract.  Lumia 1020 32GB with 41MP camera, $699 off contract. 
Winner Lumia 1020.

Yeah, with VAT and the usual UK price hikes this is going to be like at least £550 here if that info is correct.
More likely £600 sim-free, which is how I'd have to go. I was pretty much signed up to this, but now not so sure. Spending over half a grand on a phone/camera seems a bit pointless at that price. Phone's are good for at max a couple of years before they're outdated, I could get a decent DSLR for that wouldn't have an out of date phone attached to it after a couple of years :-/ Will wait and see. They're obviously targetting it as a niche market - but not sure that is wise. Huge market of tech geeks who want the latest & greatest (usually android phone) just to boast what it can do. If it was priced a little more competitvely it could pull in the same revenue with impulse buys, with the possibly generating more then by word of mouth, and seeing these things out in the wild.

It is not a flagship photography device - that is insulting to any photographer.  It is a phone with a high MP point and shoot sensor.  Unless something has changed it is also not nearly impressive if you pay attention to the fact that it is producing an oversampled 8 MP image.  People talk about Apple sheep and then swallow everything Nokia shovels them....

Sorry mate, this phone is basically the Kwisatz Haderach of phones AND cameras, going to have to accept it. :)

Nokia has the NSN business now, they don't need to sell phones anymore. So they can charge any price.

Oh. And I wanted this phone. If it includes the wireless charging cover and the phone cover and the wireless charger, then OK. But I don't want to pay $300 and then have to get all the accessories, and then be upgradeless for 2 years after shelling out enough to get a new 920 on ebay. This better not be the price.

The price will get the attention of people shopping high end smartphones. May make theme realize there is more out there than Samsung and Apple.

This strategy reminds me of RIM and Apple- take a captive audience and gouge the hell ouf ot them. I would LOVE to cut the cord with Google, due to their spyware, but at least Android gives me choices over hardware price points. It's a shame, because I like the clean WP interface and I don't need any touchy-feely "apps"- I want it to work for email, SMS, telephony, including Skype, and Maps/NAV. I'd love to switch to WP but not if each handset costs me an extra $150 or more up front (look at T-Mobile's Galaxy S4 offers to see the huge difference)

Well...that's not good. When you could get the 928 for $39 at launch and the 920 for $50 with a wireless charger, $299 is simply crazy. Expecially for a newer OS that a lot of people are not familiar with.

Wow %700 is a load of crap. Maybe if the phone had a 5" 1080p display and a quad-core snapdragon 800 it could justify the price. Those high end phones only run for $550-600 e.g. HTc One, Galaxy S4, and future LG Optimus G2 and whatever Motorola and Sony will come out with. But this is basically a Lumia 920 with a big camera stuck on the back. The Lumia 920 was released LAST YEAR at $450 retail with dated specs. It's been almost a year now. That MSRP even though it hasn't changed, the cost for Nokia and the its mid-range specs should be even lower now and it should retail for $350. You are basically paying double the amount, an additional $350, just for the 41MP Pureview camera. You know how ridiculous that sounds? That's like buying a whole extra Lumia 920. You can have TWO of them now! I just bought (and returned) the 808 Pureview with a similar sensor for $400. I guarantee you the $50 extra is not enough to make up for the "phone" part. That sensor does not cost $350. The price is grossly inflated.

People have been screaming about how great it would be to have the 41mp pureview paired with a modern phone. But the definition of a modern phone is subjective. Many said the 808 Pureview was modern enough. The 41mp camera is yet again being released in an outdated phone, one that's based on a phone released almost a year ago that was also outdated at the time and is super outdated now.

There's so many things that piss me off about Nokia. They wouldn't piss me off so much if I didn't want the pureview camera so badly. However, I also want a decent phone with it. Nokia time and time again has shown their inability to compete in this area, to listen to user criticism or change from old archaic ways. When sites like TheVerge tell you to ignore the phone because you only came for the camera, they mean that literally. The phone part is disappointing, so just ignore it and focus on just the camera. The 4.5" screen is considered a "mini" in today's market, and the resolution is budget as well. The thick ass bezels are even BIGGER than the Lumia 920, if that were even possible, since the width of the phone went from 70.8mm to 71.4mm while keeping the screen the same. Everyone else is trending towards bigger screens in smaller phones, with the thin bezels on the Galaxy S4, and the super thin ones on the 5.2" Optimus G2 that fit in the same size phone. But Nokia just says FU we like our thick bezels because who needs a big screen on a phone, especially one that takes 41MP photos? We like thick bezels and thick brick-like phones because people want something substantial in their hand, and its tertiary uses means it makes for a great paperweight and assault weapon.

Another blow is that it is being saddled with Windows Phone 7/8. Just looking at the dialer makes me barf. Yes, I've owned a WP phone before. Quickly returned it too. I can live inside the camera app and gallery, but stepping out into that awful metro UI and stark black abyss and solid color blocks makes me feel suicidal and depressed. Unlike Android with a million launchers, you can't change whatever screwed up aesthetic Microsoft likes to something less dead and forlorn. You are permanently stuck.