how-to block ads
|
next review in page
Review by Maui2013 
member for 139 days, 0 visits, last login: 139 days ago
lodged 139 days ago
 Kihei,Maui,HI
 $5 per month- (month by month)
 "Nothing good" "No phone support, website user data not linked to # CSR (can't port out)" "I would avoid Future-Nine like the plague."
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings well below consensus)
|
I lost my # since future nine is completely incompetent. They changed my phone CSR info to another person so I could never port away my #. I tried 10 times and for 5 weeks. The support guy "guessed" what it was then finally he says he pulled the CSR info but AGAIN it was wrong. I guess he thinks he can keep his business by holding your # hostage. Bottom line Future Nine is not a real business. They have no phone # to call. I am now trying out Straight Talk for 15 dollars per month. It's a real business.
Comments:
 nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Straight Talk's fault. Straight Talk never even attempted to port the number. They gave a serious of b/s excuses that made zero sense to me (being experienced with porting). They are either completely incompetent or they deliberately did not want to port the number - either way we cannot do their job for them. Our carrier never received a single request to port the number out - it was never filed by Straight Talk.
I seriously urge you to reconsider doing business with them. They don't sound like a "real business" to me if they can't even handle a number port.
Please note you have NOT lost your number. It is still active, and ANY other carrier/provider will be able to port your number - I urge you to attempt to do so and see for yourself. | |
| | | | | Reviews:
 ·Future Nine Corp..
| Re: Straight Talk's fault. Well, Future-Nine (Nitzan) is the FROM in this case.
My #, purchased through F9, has the WRONG INFORMATION on the CSR. It's some address in LAS VEGAS for a company I have never heard of. Usually your contact info at the time of purchase would be used for the CSR information, or a system would auto-update the info in a timely manor. But instead it has a LAS VEGAS address (not my information).
Also since F9 isn't a telephone carrier, I guess this doesn't apply to them:
Per FCC mandate, any and all carriers must provide a CSR upon demand. The CSR will show the carrier, the customer name and billing address, and the phone numbers belonging to the customer. Without either a phone bill or a CSR, no carrier will be able to port a number.
Here is an interesting fact from F9's TOS:
3. Type of Service - FNC offers Customer PRE-PAID service. FNC IS NOT A PHONE COMPANY AND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS SUCH. SERVICES RENDERED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE INFORMATION SERVICES AND NOT PHONE SERVICES.
Nitzan works hard to defend himself but he doesn't work hard to help his customers. He doesn't even have a telephone # to call nor will he call you. It took him 3 weeks to look up the CSR information on file with the carrier (whoever the carrier is I never knew)... To this day he blames the other side. If I could port a # without matching information it would be no problem. But F9's data isn't linked to my phone's CSR... I have no idea what the info is.. (He says he called the carrier and gave me the Las Vegas info, but it too failed)... So it cannot be ported.. it failed nearly 10 times... Nitzan even guessed at what it might be... wasting my time at 1 hour per call...
Nitzan do you ever plan to fix your customer's CSR's? You are such an expert at porting, is it possible to port numbers without the correct info? Will you admit to everyone the data on the CSR does not match my data? No carrier could port a number with the wrong data.... so why do you blame the other side when you are at fault? Even if Straight talk lied (which is absurd), without the correct info the port will ALWAYS BE DENIED.
To his credit he refunded my money very promptly. Thank You. | |
| | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: Straight Talk's fault. You are misunderstanding the whole concept of CSR. CSR is the COMPLETE HISTORY of a phone number's ownership. Just because a carrier changed it to reflect their own name and address doesn't mean YOUR name and address get purged - they are still in there.
The problem is Straight Talk never bothered looking at the CSR or even attempting the port - they simply rejected it. They could have easily ported but they chose to not even try. You are blaming us for their incompetence.
I have personally ported hundreds of numbers with similar issues - where a carrier changed the CSR to reflect their own name. Vonage for example comes to mind. I know for a fact this is not a problem and can be easily done. As I mentioned before: I urge you to port this number to someone other than ST and see for yourself. | |
| | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | said by Maui2013:is it possible to port numbers without the correct info? Absolutely YES. If your info is in the CSR history and the current CSR info reflects your carrier - then yes you can port it and we've done so hundreds of times. | |
| | | | | | said by Maui2013:Here is an interesting fact from F9's TOS:
3. Type of Service - FNC offers Customer PRE-PAID service. FNC IS NOT A PHONE COMPANY AND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS SUCH. SERVICES RENDERED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE INFORMATION SERVICES AND NOT PHONE SERVICES.
Don't blame Nitzan for that particular issue.
The FCC has said for several years---and this still is their current position---that VoIP services are NOT common-carriers.
Even Vonage, the biggest independent VoIP company, is in that same position.
Here, someone is trying to change that with regard to Vonage:
»www.telecomlawmonitor.com/2012/0···ication/
By the way, for readers who don't know, Straight Talk is not a VoIP company, nor a Republican radio show.
Rather, it is a cellphone service (an MVNO that is sponsored by WalMart and TracFone).
Thus, being a cellular outfit, it is not a peer of a VoIP company. | |
|
| | | The fact is, Nitzan doesn't even have a telephone # to call. Even in a special case. He also doesn't put your information on your CSR (It's some company in Las Vegas, or is it?). Do you really think a national company using Verizon as their carrier is not trying to port my #? These people who call me every time the port fails? They are just lying? Nitzan, tell the truth. My # was not even in my name. Probably NONE of your client's numbers are in their name.
They cannot port them out. To this day I have no idea who the carrier was. Nitzan, why was my information not on the CSR? How about all your other customers? What about their CSR?
Here is what was on my # I purchased through Future-Nine's website. What's your CSR info? This is not me:
COMMPARTNERS CONNECT, LLC
3291 N BUFFALO DR STE 150
LAS VEGAS, NV 89129-7437
Nitzan, how many employees do you have? You really have NO IDEA what went on. You make a lot of noise but everything I said was 100% truth.
He couldn't be bothered to help me in a timely way.. But man when I posted this review he was on it so fast. I wish he couldn't have helped me with the same enthusiasm...
You be the judge. I don't like to pan people but in this case he did such a crappy job I went out of my way to tell others to beware they might end up losing their numbers too.
Also check this out right from his terms of service:
3. Type of Service - FNC offers Customer PRE-PAID service. FNC IS NOT A PHONE COMPANY AND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS SUCH. SERVICES RENDERED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE INFORMATION SERVICES AND NOT PHONE SERVICES. | |
| | | Reviews:
·Future Nine Corp..
| Re: Straight Talk's fault. It was a flagged reply.. thus the delay..
I said my piece on this matter.. I'm not happy I couldn't keep my # after 5 weeks of effort, but I guess that's the state of the industry. It would have helped had my name been on the record...
Anyway I have moved on. Good luck to all whatever your choices!
Sean | |
| | | | | said by Sean :The fact is, Nitzan doesn't even have a telephone # to call.
That's not unusual.
Others that don't include Localphone, CallWithUs, etc.
Even Voip.MS which does have contact numbers, says that they prefer to do tech support by e-mail, ticket, or chat.
said by Sean :Nitzan, why was my information not on the CSR?
This sort of arrangement is a rather common situation among Voip providers, perhaps more so among ultra-low priced ones. It's similar to a stockbroker holding your securities in "street name".
said by Sean :Here is what was on my # I purchased through Future-Nine's website. What's your CSR info? This is not me:
COMMPARTNERS CONNECT, LLC
3291 N BUFFALO DR STE 150
LAS VEGAS, NV 89129-7437
They are a well-known national CLEC. VoIP providers have to get their numbers from CLEC's.
said by Sean :You be the judge. I don't like to pan people but in this case he did such a crappy job I went out of my way to tell others to beware they might end up losing their numbers too.
You did NOT lose your number. He has stated several times that you can ask that it be ported to someone other than Straight Talk. Why not take him up on the challenge? If it gets ported, you can have your way with the number. If it doesn't get ported, then you will have bragging rights that you were right all along.
said by Sean :Also check this out right from his terms of service:
3. Type of Service - FNC offers Customer PRE-PAID service. FNC IS NOT A PHONE COMPANY AND IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS SUCH. SERVICES RENDERED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT ARE INFORMATION SERVICES AND NOT PHONE SERVICES.
As I explained above, that language applies to EVERY VoIP provider today---it's from the FCC and reflects the current state of regulation. VoIP companies are NOT legally common-carriers. Nitzan did perhaps make a mistake by actually putting it in the terms of service where certain people will misunderstand it and twist it. But it's the state of all of the providers today in the US milieu, and Canada too pretty much.
Were that NOT the case, VoIP would be far more expensive, you'd have to pay all the taxes and fees charged to regular phone companies. | |
| | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | said by Sean :He couldn't be bothered to help me in a timely way.. But man when I posted this review he was on it so fast. I wish he couldn't have helped me with the same enthusiasm... We went out of our way to try to help you and spent HOURS trying to do so, in a very timely manner. We can't help you if your new carrier isn't even submitting the port - we can't do their job for them.
You have not lost your number. It is perfectly fine, active, and available to be ported out. As stated before- you are welcome to port it out to another carrier, and we'll even provide service for the number FOR FREE until you do so.
Having your number in the carrier's name is not a problem and does not prevent port outs. It happens all the time in the VOIP world- most numbers you purchase from a VOIP provider will have their name on the CSR, not yours. This never prevented us from porting numbers in so it shouldn't have prevented Straight Talk from doing so - the problem is THEY NEVER EVEN TRIED. | |
|
nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Update - it really is Sprint MVNO's at fault. We recently had another customer attempt to port their number to another Sprint MVNO (Ting) - they ran into the same issues and over and over again the port failed. Eventually giving up on Ting he attempted to port to T-mobile and the port completed within a few days with no issues. Please see: »How to port to Google Voice from Future-Nine | |
|
| |
 | next review in page (previous review)
Review by yahoo2003
member for 5.6 years, 1567 visits, last login: 169 days ago
updated 1.4 years ago
- Mclean,Fairfax,VA
- $18 per month
 about 3 days- "The CEO semms nice sometimes"
- "The CEO make and change rules at any time without notice"
- "Can't be trusted as VOIP provider"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
Misleading overall rating. Little has improved, Quality and support are much worse than some other providers.
I had been F9 customer for about 3 years, I signed up F9 on 2008 because F9 offered simulring while CC did not. I have promised some members to write a review.
F9 had failed to notify customers when the term or rates are changed, there were several threads and commentaries about those practices.
It seems F9 has been run by one person and he can change terms and rates at any time without writing or email notifications to customers.
Some companies such as Phone Power and VOIPO have received some very negative reviews recently, F9 has joined the discussions, I want potential customers read more posts and reviews before they make their decisions.
As for service, there were many quality problems over the years, there is no comparison between F9 and providers such as Callcentric and Callwithus.
Their web site is misleading about services and TOS.
There are many providers provide much better support and service with lower rates.
Most importantly, there are many providers which can be trusted.
Comments:
nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 |  Classic REVENGE REVIEW.
| |
| | Reviews:
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Future Nine Corp..
·Google Voice
·ViaTalk
·Callcentric
| Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. Read this forum and review board, people can find many's comments to the CEO of F9, e.g.,
»Future Nine CEO, Customer Fight Over Accurate VoIP Rates
The list can be added and added by doing a little search.
There were many posts by formal customers left F9 for better providers. You were fired by many.
You can say what you want to say, I'm only one of your many "formal" customers.
I have never seen any business in my life charging customers without notifications of term changes.
You have been going back and forth to admit or deny F9 is for small business or not, when you make money you welcome "business", when you felt you lost money you deny F9 is for "business". In your word "you decide", you called a long time customer with a single month 3500min/mo as "abuser".
Customers have the rights to know the providers and to be informed.
You have not admit customers should be notified when term changes until the very end of that thread, instead you called other providers "spam" by notifying customers.
Many other providers have A-Z rates, F9 changes rates at anytime without notifications, that caused one of the long tread, but F9 has not changed.
| |
| | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. said by yahoo2003:you called a long time customer with a single month 3500min/mo as "abuser". I have never used the word "abuser". I don't think what you did was abuse. But we did end up losing over $100 on your account because of your wife's business increase. I am glad that her business is going well but to us it meant we had to look the other way for many many months when you kept crossing the 2000 minutes allowed on your DID.
You claim that we changed the terms on you but that is not true. The only thing that changed is the number of minutes allowed was decreased from 3000 to 2000. As a very active member of this forum I'm surprised you didn't see the thread discussing this. But let's assume for a second that you didn't know it was decreased: you've used 3500 minutes on a DID that was CLEARLY marked as 3000 minutes at the time you purchased it. It was clearly stated on the website and the only way you could miss it is if you IGNORED it. So even if we were to stick to the initial 3000-min limit you'd still be charged an overage fee - just a few bucks lower.
I'm amazed you'd go to such lengths to hurt our business for $15 (or actually just $10 when you consider you'd be charged $5 according to the original 3000-minute limit). Karma is a bitch though. Good luck with your wife's business....
P.S. It's funny how you were satisfied with our quality, customer service, etc. while we were providing you service below our cost. But now all of a sudden you claim you had poor service, bad quality, etc. - you are lying to make a point and hurt our business. I guess for you the end does justify the means. | |
| | | | | | | | | Reviews:
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Future Nine Corp..
·Google Voice
·ViaTalk
·Callcentric
2 edits | Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. said by Arne Bolen:said by nitzan:but to us it meant we had to look the other way for many many months when you kept crossing the 2000 minutes allowed on your DID. IMHO a provider should never look the other way when the limit is passed. Always automatically charge for overage minutes even if it is only a couple of minutes. As F9 don't use wordings like "unlimited", all plans are clearly marked with the number of minutes included, I can't see any problem with automatic charging of overage minutes. I suggest you change the text at » www.future-nine.com/plans.html to: Free INCOMING Minutes:2000
Usage over the limit included are charged at $0.0xx per minute.That way it will be even more clear. Agreed. Except many customers had signed up at much higher limits (at least 3000 min/mo) than published at web site from time to time.
By industrial standard, if customers are not notified term charges by writing or emails , they should stay with rate/limit at time of signing up, e.g, those customers with $1/mo DID offers should not pay $5/mo or $6/mo posted on web site from time to time.
Providers such as Anveo clearly stated incoming calls over limit will be charged at e.g. 1.4c/min.
An Anveo customer was charged for over limit for that day, he posted, that did not become a big issue.
CallCentric notified a residential customer for using 5000+min/mo without charging that customer first.
F9 instead charged a long time custom with only one month usage of 3500min/mo at end of month for $15, without notifying customer limit change or posting rates of over limit.
By industrial standard, provider can't charge customer with un-published rate.
As he stated "he decide" how much to charge. If I had more than $15 in my account, he could have charged me for much more than $15 such as $100 "administration fee" as he said. That's why I said F9 can't be trusted.
I don't have time to respond F9 CEO today, but I'll. | |
| | | | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. said by yahoo2003:Agreed. Except many customers had signed up at much higher limits (at least 3000 min/mo) than published at web site from time to time. 1. That's great and all but you exceeded the 3000 min limit too. How many times do we have to go over this? you didn't just exceed the 2000 min limit - you exceeded BOTH limits!
2. We do not publish limits "from time to time". We had a 3000 min limit for a certain period, then we changed it to 2000 min a couple of years ago. You make it sound like we flip-flop with this - this is b/s and bordering on slander - we've only ever had these two specific limits!
By industrial standard, if customers are not notified term charges by writing or emails
Providers such as Anveo clearly stated incoming calls over limit will be charged at e.g. 1.4c/min.
F9 instead charged a long time custom with only one month usage of 3500min/mo at end of month for $15, without notifying customer limit change or posting rates of over limit.
By industrial standard, provider can't charge customer with un-published rate.
I don't have time to respond F9 CEO today, but I'll.
Hogs will be hogs! | |
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Future Nine Corp..
·Google Voice
·ViaTalk
·Callcentric
4 edits | Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. said by nitzan:said by yahoo2003:Agreed. Except many customers had signed up at much higher limits (at least 3000 min/mo) than published at web site from time to time. 1. That's great and all but you exceeded the 3000 min limit too. How many times do we have to go over this? you didn't just exceed the 2000 min limit - you exceeded BOTH limits! 2. We do not publish limits "from time to time". We had a 3000 min limit for a certain period, then we changed it to 2000 min a couple of years ago. You make it sound like we flip-flop with this - this is b/s and bordering on slander - we've only ever had these two specific limits! By industrial standard, if customers are not notified term charges by writing or emails No dude - YOU decided that. Nobody owes you anything unless it's written in your terms of service - which it wasn't. You just for whatever bizarre reason feel entitled to take advantage of a business for well over a year to make your own business flourish, then slander them when they finally penalize you for your disproportionally high usage. Shame on you. Providers such as Anveo clearly stated incoming calls over limit will be charged at e.g. 1.4c/min. That's awesome. We charged you 1 cent a minute. Clearly this is unfair and we should have charged you 1.4 cent a minute. F9 instead charged a long time custom with only one month usage of 3500min/mo at end of month for $15, without notifying customer limit change or posting rates of over limit. One month of usage? what happened to the other 10 months or so in which you exceeded the 2000 min limit? you want all sorts of warnings but when it comes down to it YOU put a business on a residential line and therefore it's YOUR responsibility to monitor your usage. By industrial standard, provider can't charge customer with un-published rate. There is no such standard - get over it. I don't have time to respond F9 CEO today, but I'll. At this point you sound like a broken record. Good luck with your next provider - until they, too, kick you off due to overuse. Hogs will be hogs! I liked you responses, it's the Nizan the others had described  .
BTW, you're lying, after I told you I started porting out to CC, you PMed me and offered me to stay (Do you want me to post the PM?)
I notified you 2 months later to close my account after I used up my balance.
Does it make you fell better when you're lying about firing customers when many customers fired you? | |
|
| | | | | | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: Classic REVENGE REVIEW. said by yahoo2003:(1). You said many times "I am glad that her business is going well" how did you know my "wife's business going well"? Considering her line of business, I am assuming a lot of calls means a lot of business. That's a good thing.
(2). You said many times "we did end up losing over $100 on your account". We paid either $15 or $20/mo for a $5 DID and a PAYG plan (I have PAYPAL receipts), how did you loss over $100 over my account with only one month 3500min and 2 months over 2000 min/mo? If a customer cost you, why didn't you notify the customer as all other reputable providers do?
Don't blame customers for loosing money
I thought we were doing you a favor by staying with you for many years. | |
|
| | | | | PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP
·Gizmo5
1 edit | Re: As Mr. Reuter said, news is best when it's fresh. said by yahoo2003:Unfortunately, I don't think either F9 or CEO of F9 has changed for the better, as a member posted:
"I have been in the market for a new VOIP provider for a while now....
That thread is from 2009 !!
By posting that, you prove Nitzan's point about your obsession, and it reinforces the perception that you are hung up in the past.
Moreover, lots of the posts in that thread were in support of Nitzan and F9.
said by yahoo2003:I can have a list of what have become worse and worse, e.g., rate increases and service cuts.
FutureNine is still a value-priced provider, offering good basic service at good prices.
said by yahoo2003:Customers need to aware they are dealing with an individual with un-predictable personalities.
To which individual are you referring?
It seems to me that every time you post, you make Nitzan look better, and you make your own case look worse. | |
| | | | Reviews:
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Future Nine Corp..
·Google Voice
·ViaTalk
·Callcentric
| Re: As Mr. Reuter said, news is best when it's fresh. said by PX Eliezer:By posting that, you prove Nitzan's point about your obsession, and it reinforces the perception that you are hung up in the past.
F9's "defenders" only make F9 and CEO be more reluctant to make changes to make it better.
A company won't be run down by it's customers and competitors, only by it's management.
If you believe that thread is old, did you see any changes he has made? His current customers are complaining now about his rates/routes changes without notification.
F9 Advertised as "the cheapest" VOIP providers, you know it, there are many lower rates and much better providers there.
There are defenders, that doesn't mean the provider is right. There are much more silent costumers are reading the reviews and posts.
You can attack me and defend your buddies, that will not change the facts that more and more F9 customers left for better providers, you know it. | |
| | | | | PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP
·Gizmo5
| Re: As Mr. Reuter said, news is best when it's fresh. said by yahoo2003:If you believe that thread is old....
You have now truly jumped the shark.
It is not a matter of BELIEF if an internet thread from 2009 is old. It is a statement of FACT.
said by yahoo2003:F9 Advertised as "the cheapest" VOIP providers, you know it, there are many lower rates and much better providers there.
Are there truly monthly flat-rate plans with lower rates, once fees are considered? F9 continues to have very attractive plans:
»www.future-nine.com/plans.html
Does anyone else offer these packages for less? Please tell us.
(In any event, courts allow great latitude in advertising terms such as "best" and "cheapest". It's called parity. Every pizza place in town advertises that they have the "best" pizza.)
said by yahoo2003:His current customers are complaining now about his rates/routes changes without notification.
Who?
Perhaps you can find a handful, as there are discontented customers in ANY company.
But there is NO big epidemic of dissatisfaction with F9 except in your mind.
said by yahoo2003:You can attack me and defend your buddies, that will not change the facts that more and more F9 customers left for better providers, you know it.
I don't know any such thing.
And Nitzan is not my "buddy". In fact, I have consistently said that F9 needs to make website upgrades. And Nitzan recently criticized something that I had posted. We are not "buddies".
As I said, everything that you post, ends up to his benefit. | |
| | | | | | |
| | |  Arne BolenHappy Anveo customerPremium
join:2009-06-21
Planet Earth
kudos:4
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Callcentric
·voip.ms
| said by PX Eliezer:said by yahoo2003:Unfortunately, I don't think either F9 or CEO of F9 has changed for the better, as a member posted:
"I have been in the market for a new VOIP provider for a while now....
That thread is from 2009 !!By posting that, you prove Nitzan's point about your obsession, and it reinforces the perception that you are hung up in the past. Two years is an extremely long time in the world of Voip. A provider who were good two years ago could be bad today and vice versa.
--
iNum +883 5100 XXXX XXXX - Anveo - Localphone - VoIP.ms - Rebtel - Callcentric - PBXes - MAXroam - Linksys IP Phone SPA962 - Gigaset S685IP - Ubuntu Linux 11.04 | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Future Nine Corp..
·Google Voice
·ViaTalk
·Callcentric
| Re: As Mr. Reuter said, news is best when it's fresh. said by Arne Bolen:said by PX Eliezer:said by yahoo2003:Unfortunately, I don't think either F9 or CEO of F9 has changed for the better, as a member posted:
"I have been in the market for a new VOIP provider for a while now....
That thread is from 2009 !!By posting that, you prove Nitzan's point about your obsession, and it reinforces the perception that you are hung up in the past. Two years is an extremely long time in the world of Voip. A provider who were good two years ago could be bad today and vice versa. Indeed.
In 2 years, Callcentric implemented SimulRing, call hunting and got Fax to email working reliably and added many other features. CC's rates have not increased (at least for my DID since 2007)
New comers such as VOIP.ms provide very competitive prices and services.
There is Anveo which I love it.
What improvements has F9 done in 2 years? There were many threads about F9's service cuts and rate increases. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Revenge rating. Yahoo2003,
Nitzan was nice enough to let it slide and loose $100 on you. Why you continue to blast Future Nine over $15 is incomprehensible. As a business user, you should have downgraded to per minute and start paying for your high usage, or canceled. $15 is about 1500 minutes, which roughly equates your overage - fair enough. Unless you're really hurting, $15 in a business is pocket change. This is really nothing to be raising a big stink about, it's time to move on. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 | Are you still a customer? yahoo2003, are you still a customer of F9?
If not, you should not be updating your previous review.
(Re: Your "updated" review of 01/23/2012). | |
| | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: Are you still a customer? He is not a current customer and his updated review is nothing more than a revenge rating.
The only reason he is updating his review is because he wants to see us out of business because his abusive behavior led us to ban him from our service. It is sad that this website lets people like this drag down providers who are in good faith trying to provide good service. | |
| | | baj475
join:2004-11-02
Chico, CA | Re: Are you still a customer? From the responses from your customers, it does not appear that anyone will take him seriously. As one of your satisfied customers for several years, I don't. | |
|
| | Simple logic doesn't apply to this user. Re: updated review If he costs the provider $100 in overuse and only billed $15, do you still blast the company for the $15 ? Logic tells me that I saved $85 and I should quietly go away.  | |
|
| |
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by rwbuck
member for 5.5 years, 87 visits, last login: 2.4 years ago
updated 2.5 years ago
- Danville,Montour,PA
- $7 per month
- (month by month)
- about 5 days
- "Nothing"
- "Couldn't provide service"
- "Forget them, not reliable"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
Update: 12/18/2010
Was with F9 since April 2009. For the most part the service was fine. Every once in a while I would need to reset the ATA.
Skip to November 2010. Had a cell phone call from in-laws saying they were getting an error message when trying to dial our home phone. The message was - "the code you have dialed is not deliverable to the code owner". Submitted a ticket to F9 and received this response - "the carrier took out their switches from the rate center without notification which basically means that although they still operate your number they can't deliver calls".
The only solution F9 offered was porting our number, preferably to CallCentric. The kicker... in their reply the link to CallCentric was an affiliate link. They could do nothing for me and now they tried to make money off me when I leave for another service.
So there I was, able to make calls out, but not receive calls. It had been going on for days and we had no clue. No notification from F9 that our service was only half available. Luckily no one had been trying to contact us with anything important.
In the end, they refunded my balance ($30.00). I requested credit back to the time I could no longer receive calls, but they did not do that for me. I got a song and dance about how lucky I was they were not charging me the $15 cancellation fee. Might nice of them!
Goodbye F9....
Original review: April 2009
Had enough of Verizon and decided it was time to switch to a VOIP provider. My family does not use a landline enough to justify $48 a month that Verizon charges. Our cost with F9 - $7 a month (including 911 service). This is for the Bare Essentials plan. Nitzan (F9 owner) was even able to get me a local number. We didn't bother porting our Verizon number, this saved us $25.
Spent a couple of weeks here reading reviews and the forums. Had narrowed down to F9, CallCentric, and Voipo. Signed up with F9 and ordered an ATA. Took a few days for the ATA to arrive, but once it was delivered it only took about 5 minutes to setup and hear dialtone.
Been running a couple of weeks now with zero problems. My dsl contract with Verizon expired yesterday, so we canceled the landline and dsl. I was able to get 3 meg cable service from our local CATV company for a better price than Verizon dsl. We'll save $41 a month on phone service and $4 a month on broadband.
If F9 ever offers an affiliate program, I'd be the first in line to sign up. This is a great product at a great price!
Comments:
nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | . Nice. So we provided you with good service for a year and a half, and now due to a problem that is completely out of our control we get a 33% review? Gee, thanks. Much appreciated. | |
| | Reviews:
·VOIPo
·Callcentric
| Re: . said by nitzan:Nice. So we provided you with good service for a year and a half, and now due to a problem that is completely out of our control we get a 33% review? Gee, thanks. Much appreciated.
Ouch. I wonder if the OP is in a rural area. Not familiar with the area myself. | |
| | rwbuck
join:2007-11-28
Danville, PA | Nitzan,
I'm a fair person. Tell me what is unfair on my ratings and I'll consider your responses.
Reliability is a 0. The service was not reliable.
Tech Support is a 0. How did you not know the switch was removed? Weren't you paying them for service?
Value for money is 0. I was paying, and not receiving any value.
I do appreciate the service I originally had. But what happened is totally unacceptable. Like my old boss used to say, "one oh sh*t wipes out a year of good work". | |
| | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: . I understand you're pissed off about the whole thing but you're taking it out on the wrong company. It's THE CARRIER who's actions are unacceptable - not us! We'll take measures on our own to transfer our business elsewhere, so it's not like they're going to go unpunished - but meanwhile why punish us for something that's not our fault? we've done our best to give you good service for a year and a half and even during the problem we communicated with you and tried to help to the best of our ability. Zero is for companies that don't even have tech support - can you honestly say that about us?
Same for the other ratings. | |
| | | | | | Re: . said by nitzan:I understand you're pissed off about the whole thing but you're taking it out on the wrong company. It's THE CARRIER who's actions are unacceptable - not us! We'll take measures on our own to transfer our business elsewhere, so it's not like they're going to go unpunished - but meanwhile why punish us for something that's not our fault?
If I hire a contractor to do some work, and his work is shoddy because he was unable to find good help, who do I blame? The contractor or the incompetent helpers? | |
| | | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: . This isn't valid considering we gave him good service for a year and a half. None of what WE did was incompetent or shoddy. The only problem with his service was our inability to continue it. That we couldn't give him advance notice sucks but is neither our fault nor does it justify a revenge rating.
Do you burn the building when a restaurant you like closes? this is the same thing logically. | |
| | | | | | |
| | | Nitzan,
While I know bad reviews hurt personally, as you're doing you're best to provide excellent service to the customer. The fact is, this customer wasn't satisfied, adequately explained thier beef, and actually left the text of their previous, positive review. I don't really see how that is being unfair. A simple, sorry that we weren't able to forsee the carrier pulling out of the market, and we do our best to provide excellent service would have sufficed as a response. Attacking the reviewer seems a bit petty and unprofessional, givin that it appears that the text of the posters complaint is a correct factual account of the situation. | |
| | | PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 | Re: . letitgo, I think that you have made excellent points. | |
| | | |  unknvoipRIP goosePremium
join:2006-07-25
Rochester, NY
kudos:1
·ViaTalk
| Re: . I agree, PX. I also notice that nitzan did not take the time to complain about he previous reviewer who left because of better prices elsewhere along with some recently developed call connection issues. That reviewer left all his ratings except for website at 100%. | |
|
| |
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by Toollio
member for 9.5 years, 1286 visits, last login: 62 days ago
updated 3.1 years ago
- Brazil/Cda
- Contract price not specified.
- "Cheap rates, when they work"
- "Quotes one rate, charges another higher rate"
- "Terrible"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings well below consensus)
|
I was a Future Nine customer until I started a dslreports thread about Future Nine overcharging customers. The owner, Nitzan Kon, then unilaterally closed my account. He also divulged personal information about my account in a public discussion.
Rather than repeat the story here, the thread can be seen at:
»[Future9] Rate surprises (and not good ones)
My complaints were legitimate. Future nine was charging 2.5 times its stated rate for cellular calls to destinations in Brazil. This was acknowledged in the thread.
I do not recommend anyone use this service unless they are prepared to tolerate an abrasive business owner who cannot stand to see his business legitimately criticized.
Instead of addressing complaints in a timely manner, Future Nine apparently prefers to ban customers who complain.
These are the words of Nitzan Kon, owner of Future Nine, in the thread referenced above. They were written to me:
"Consider yourself permanently banned. You've wasted enough of my time to earn it."
Not at all the kind of business anyone should be dealing with, in my opinion. But by all means use this service if you are prepared to deal with these kinds of business practices.
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by npuser
member for 3.3 years, 25 visits, last login: 142 days ago
updated 3.2 years ago
- undisclosed location
- Contract price not specified.
- "easy to configure"
- "Lack of custom threshholds"
- "what you get what you paid for - i guess"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
Worst service - it works one day but not other. International routes are horrible. You never know when you be subject to higher premium rate.I trash the service and went with voip.ms. stay away.
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by sbi
member for 3.3 years, 0 visits, last login: 3.3 years ago
lodged 3.3 years ago
- Bellevue,King,WA
 Business customer- $7 per month
- "low cost, voice quality is fine when works, set up adapter when shipped"
- "very poor support and service"
- "low cost but when you can't make calls you're dead in the water"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
basic package, used only for a few calls/month
worked fine until this week, now can't have a two sided call
summary - stay away
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by maxschnell
member for 3.6 years, 0 visits, last login: 3.6 years ago
updated 3.6 years ago
- Boulder City,Clark,NV
- Contract price not specified.
- "Good when and if it works"
- "not listed"
- "They waived their $15 cancellation fee and refunded my money."
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings well below consensus)
|
Resolved.
Comments:
|
|
·
·
·
