 markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4 | A shame... that someone, anyone (and I'm not it) hasn't come along with a more innovative way to motivate people to longer commitments outside of "early termination fees".
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
 |  Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23
 ·Cox HSI
4 edits | Re: A shame... Shame on anyone who thinks Verizon should eat the install and ONT cost of someone who signs up and then bails after just a few months or wants the 2 year plan discount and immunity to future price hikes but doesn't want to live up to their side of the contract.
Don't like the ETF, pay the $20 activation (or whatever it is now) and go with a month-month plan or flee to a competitor. | |
|
| |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: A shame... said by Z80A:Shame on anyone who thinks Verizon should eat the install and ONT cost of someone who signs up and then bails after just a few months or wants the 2 year plan discount and immunity to future price hikes but doesn't want to live up to their side of the contract. Don't like the ETF, pay the $20 activation (or whatever it is now) and go with a month-month plan or flee to a competitor. The ETF pro-rate should be reduced by 1/24 each month on a 2 year deal. I'm not sure what is hard to get about that. Aperson who has to move 2 months early on a 2 year contract shouldn't have to pay $100-$150 or more ETF. So a $360 ETF should be reduced by $15 a month but it isn't. | |
|
| | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
1 edit | Re: A shame... The ETF is not compulsory. I'm not sure what is hard to get about that. If you don't like the ETF, you are free to sign up on a month-month plan. This isn't a situation where VZ is saying take it or leave it and people are stuck.
Meanwhile someone canceling 2 months early doesn't pay a $100-$150 according to the news item. It would be about $135 at month 16 which makes it paid down at a bit more than $14 a month on average, less at first, faster at the end according to the item. By the end the customer is about $15 short of eliminating the ETF all together. Not the end of the world penalty you make it out to be.
quote:
A FiOS subscriber who signs a two-year contract and cancels within three months would pay $330, according to Verizon documents accidentally posted on the Internet and then taken down. If the customer cancels in 16 months, the fee would be $135; at 24 months, $15.
| |
|
| | | |  birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5 | Re: A shame... said by Z80A:By the end the customer is about $15 short of eliminating the ETF all together. Not the end of the world penalty you make it out to be. The beauty of VZ's ETF plan: if you ride your 2-year contract out past the end, yes the ETF finally goes to zero, but you're back to month-to-month rates for $20 premium, where you can cancel anytime, or
Start a new contract and incur the ETF again. 
I'm sure someone got a nice bonus for that idea.  | |
|
| | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... People seem to forget the ETF only applies if you cancel and then it's pro-rated. | |
|
| | | | | | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5
4 edits | Re: A shame...
ETF Comparison |
said by Z80A:People seem to forget the ETF only applies if you cancel and then it's pro-rated. It's a 2-year service grab. See attached chart.
If you know you're going to cancel in less than 10 months, ask for month-to-month which will be cheaper than canceling with the ETF.
Also, it was stated in the training documents the Month-to-Month rate ($20 more) was an Honor-But-Don't-Offer. You have to ask for it, they won't tell you it's available.
[edit to add] I imagine they will have to soften how the ETF applies. There will be way too much resistance to it. Unless all the fanbois cave. It *is* marketed as top of the line.  | |
|
| | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... No one is going to give two squirts of piss about the ETF other than whining bloggers (who would give their left nut for 20/20 FiOS) and do-nothings in Congress. | |
|
| | | | | | | | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5 | Re: A shame... said by Z80A:No one is going to give two squirts of piss about the ETF other than whining bloggers Oh, now I get it. You're one of those who FiOS left behind. Voting with your wallet is easy. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... I have 20+Mb service from Cox. I couldn't care less about FiOS. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Cogdis
join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY | said by Z80A:No one is going to give two squirts of piss about the ETF other than whining bloggers (who would give their left nut for 20/20 FiOS) and do-nothings in Congress. I disagree. I think the cable companies will give two squirts, and so will potential customers when cable starts advertising Verizon's $360 termination fee (especially compared to a cable company like Cablevision that charges no early termination fee.)
I believe this will hurt Verizon's new subscriber numbers for the quarter and they'll realize their mistake and come back down to earth- but the damage will be done. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
1 edit | Re: A shame... Won't matter because cable has a bad rep about endless price hikes, particularly now during cable rate hike season. They also know that VZ will counter with the very effective web-hog/cap ads to which cable has no answer.
No one cares about the ETF. All they care about is $99 triple play. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | said by Cogdis:said by Z80A:No one is going to give two squirts of piss about the ETF other than whining bloggers (who would give their left nut for 20/20 FiOS) and do-nothings in Congress. I disagree. I think the cable companies will give two squirts, and so will potential customers when cable starts advertising Verizon's $360 termination fee (especially compared to a cable company like Cablevision that charges no early termination fee.) I believe this will hurt Verizon's new subscriber numbers for the quarter and they'll realize their mistake and come back down to earth- but the damage will be done. My 2 cents. Cablevision sucks. My mother in law's cable box wasn't working. That was Monday. She was told the first available service call was late Thursday. If Cablevision attempts to charge an ETF, they will go out of business, because their service is not worth it.
As for Verizon's ETFs and pricing, FIOS is expensive to deploy. Our phone wires are above ground (poles). You can't run FIOS on a pole, its too heavy. So they have to cut the street, lay the Fiber and fix the street back up. I am not making excuses for Verizon. The price is high and the ETF is high to recoup cost of deployment. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Cogdis
join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY
1 edit | Re: A shame... My Fios comes from a pole so I don't think that's their reason for digging in your area. Also I'm not debating the reason for the high fee, I agree Verizon spends alot more than a cable company to install and so they have to recover their investment.
However I don't think it's a smart decision since it opens them up to the obvious negative advertisements. I think they'll lose more money in lost customers than they will gain from termination fees. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... They have nothing to worry about advertising because cable sees the obvious threat of counter-advertising. Cable won't throw stones in their glass house. No one will care. The only ads you will see are the endless $99 triple play promos. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  rtcyFACTS only pleasePremium
join:1999-10-16
Norwalk, CA | said by johnnylakis:said by Cogdis:said by Z80A:No one is going to give two squirts of piss about the ETF other than whining bloggers (who would give their left nut for 20/20 FiOS) and do-nothings in Congress. I disagree. I think the cable companies will give two squirts, and so will potential customers when cable starts advertising Verizon's $360 termination fee (especially compared to a cable company like Cablevision that charges no early termination fee.) I believe this will hurt Verizon's new subscriber numbers for the quarter and they'll realize their mistake and come back down to earth- but the damage will be done. My 2 cents. Cablevision sucks. My mother in law's cable box wasn't working. That was Monday. She was told the first available service call was late Thursday. If Cablevision attempts to charge an ETF, they will go out of business, because their service is not worth it. As for Verizon's ETFs and pricing, FIOS is expensive to deploy. Our phone wires are above ground (poles). You can't run FIOS on a pole, its too heavy. So they have to cut the street, lay the Fiber and fix the street back up. I am not making excuses for Verizon. The price is high and the ETF is high to recoup cost of deployment. It's amazing the NONSENSE one reads in here, "fiber is too heavy to run on poles" man where did you dig that up from ? you should be writing copy for Fox news
the whole country is saddled with fiber hanging on poles from "sea to shining sea". there was fiber on the poles before you ever heard of fiber , well except in cereal commercials | |
|
| | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Then simply pay the extra two months service.. it's cheaper than the ETF... plain and simple. I know many people that do that to get out of a contract early or simply move on to a new provider.. just pay off what you owe..
The ETF is well stated in advance prior to signing up.. people continually say how comcast and other cable companies are ripping people off.. well, maybe they need to listed to the other side, like people like me and others, who have been saying that the phone company is no one's friend! To the younger generation, the phone company has been their savior.. to many of us, and I"m only in my 30's, we've been around long enough to see the phone company stick it to people for years! It's only been recent that the phone companies have been trying to "appear" kind to the consumer.. and now, they show their true colors, once again.
Personally, I liked the day where you signed up for service, paid the install fee, and cancelled at anytime. When they brought up ETF charges back in the late 90's I saw this happening...
"If you can't keep a customer's loyalty, then rope them in!" - Ma Bell
What people think today is that install fee's are BS.. not true. You don't pay them any more because people sign contracts. Contracts ARE your installation fee with a different name.
The choice is simple... pay the install and go month to month, or don't pay the install and accept the ETF.. people know what they are going into them - there is no reason to bitch.
If Verizon is going to pull this kinda crap, then don't buy from them - THAT is how capitalism works... exercise it! | |
|
| | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| Re: A shame... According to the leaked ETF information, bailing 2 months early would be a $30, not $100-150+ (as BF69  sensationalized) ETF. | |
|
| | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4 | said by Z80A:Shame on anyone who thinks Verizon should eat the install and ONT cost of someone who signs up and then bails after just a few months or wants the 2 year plan discount and immunity to future price hikes but doesn't want to live up to their side of the contract. Don't like the ETF, pay the $20 activation (or whatever it is now) and go with a month-month plan or flee to a competitor. It's a shame that something more innovative to cause incentive for long-term customer commitment isn't implemented.
ONT/Install.. blah blah... = cost of business
There are more positive consumer approaches to not only recoup business cost, but also make a profit. Unfortunately, ETF's are on a decline. With the FCC investigating cellular ETF's, a few recent large blows with class action lawsuits deeming ETF's illegal, and smaller cases recovering "damages" for hurt credit under the Fair Credit Act for companies reporting ETF's as bad debt; it's interesting to me that a company such as Verizon would be negligent to it's share holders to not only continue in the practice that is becoming more difficult to enforce, but rely on it even further as a revenue stream.
It's a shame that a more innovated approach isn't found and used.
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... Blah blah, someone has to pay for it...better that particular subscriber than all the other subscribers.
Don't like the ETF, go month-month. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: A shame... Month-month does not provide a decent revenue stream which will allow the company to continue to operate on a means to satisfy the intent of direction the share holders demand. Your continual "solution" is poor, naive, and lacks innovation. You will find nothing in my posts that claims Verizon shouldn't recoup cost + profit from the consumer. Why, Z80A, are you unable to see past the fact that recovering the cost isn't the issue I have, the lack of innovation to find a better recover process is?
ETF's are becoming harder to enforce, it is a shame Verizon has not only continued to engage in the practice, but further enhanced it. A more innovative way should be sought and implemented, one that does not include growing court, regulatory, and consumer despise.
If the ETF is solely to recover cost, as you claim, wouldn't a more reliable recovery process be favorable then one that has been loosing more than winning in courts (class actions) recently?
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
2 edits | Re: A shame... How do you get any better process? People who don't cancel get the discount and immunity from any future price increase (during the term). Those who do cancel pay a pro-rated ETF. Those averse to even a threat of an ETF are free to go month-month.
The ETF isn't solely to recover cost and I never claimed it was. It is consideration for the immunity from price increases and a lower monthly price and in return Verizon reduces impulsive churn. Those impulsive people can go month to month. ETF is not a take it or leave it deal.
Would you prefer that there not be any 2-year guaranteed price deal? No price discount for committing to a 1-2 year plan? No choice of immunity from potential price increases and a large Cablevision style install fee?
The deal is simple. "In exchange for staying with us for 1 or 2 years, you get a guaranteed discounted rate for the term".
The customer is free to say "No. I would rather not risk an ETF and just pay the $20 activation, pay the regular month-month rate and be free to cancel whenever I feel like it". | |
|
| | | | | | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: A shame... It is a shame we have not yet found a decent Chief Officer staff that can find more innovative ways than to use an out-dated, deemed illegal in California, currently investigated by the FCC method to lock customers into a competitive product because the product itself can not compete at favorable market price points.
quote:
The deal is simple. "In exchange for staying with us for 1 or 2 years, you get a guaranteed discounted rate for the term".
Maybe I should start exercising my vote options more often, this company is going down the toilet as fast as the rest of them and you've done nothing but help prove my point. Without some sort of threat, the product offered itself doesn't warrant enough enticement to stand on it's own merit in a competitive market. If the ETF was to ensure the customer stayed as a revenue stream to offer profit over the initial cost of equipment, the "cell phone" model, then that would be understandable but regrettable that a more positive, consumer favorable recovery system isn't found . But, as you say, if the ETF is more than that and is needed just to keep customers from switching, then the company is in big trouble, as their threat is loosing teeth and they will be stuck with nothing except their self-proclaimed non-competitive product, if what you say is true: the ETF is more than to set a length of monthly payments at a price that recovers hardware and installation costs.
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... It's easier for those who don't like the ETF to exercise their option to go on the month-month plan. | |
|
| | | | | | | | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5 | Re: A shame... said by Z80A:It's easier for those who don't like the ETF to exercise their option to go on the month-month plan. If the ETF is imposed to recover the cost of installation in case someone cancels early, why does it also apply to a 3-year subscriber who merely renews a bundle "at the current rate"? Nowhere in the documents that were posted (but have since been removed) does it indicate for new installations only.
The only way to avoid the 360 ETF is to go to the month-to-month rate for $20 more although you can cancel anytime. Or, don't change your grandfathered plan, and only lose the bundle discount at the end of the term.
Clearly, no matter how you look at it, it's a price increase without making the so-called monthly cost higher.
Perhaps the clarification for existing subscribers is the reason VZ is holding back the details. They haven't worked it all out. It will all be made clear after the 17th when the complaints start coming in.  | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: A shame... Because it's not just for the install. It's consideration for immunity against price increases and the monthly discount.
It's not a price increase. ETF only applies to those who CANCEL. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: A shame... Right! And, that ETF also covers...
1) Marketing cost to the customer (It keeps that expense low)
2) Subsidized hardware costs (Consumers pay far less, sometimes nothing)
3) Discount on the monthly service that those month to month don't get..
.. shall I go on?
I keep hearing "what's in it for me" but you never hear "what's in it for them"...
It would be a different conversation if they charging full rates on everything, charging for install, AND requiring a ETF/contract... pretty much what DSL did back in the late 90's from the phone company.
I paid $300 installation fee for my DSL, a $100 fee for my Alcatel 1000 bridge termination unit, and $89.00 a month for 384/384 and STILL had to sign a 1 year agreement with a $200 penalty...
... those days are gone.
People need to stop whining. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4 | Re: A shame... said by fiberguy:Right! And, that ETF also covers... 1) Marketing cost to the customer (It keeps that expense low) 2) Subsidized hardware costs (Consumers pay far less, sometimes nothing) 3) Discount on the monthly service that those month to month don't get.. .. shall I go on? 1) should be covered by the sell price
2) should be covered by the sell price or charge installation fees
3) doesn't have a need to exist if you offer a competitive product
All costs of doing business, there is nothing listed there that is not required in order to sell the product itself to the entire market as a whole. If there was some sort of "bright light interference fee" or "highly dense population of fiber-hungry beavers fee", yeah, I could see that, but these are costs that, if managed properly, are part of doing business. These costs + profit margin should be the sell price. Either the product is no different than everyone else's or the thing is mismanaged.
The ETF is being used in place of an innovative and superior product that competes so well in the marketplace that "future revenue" isn't such a huge worry that installation won't be covered. Instead, Fios is so mismanaged that it needs two price points with time gaurantess through threats built in to compete in the marketplace. This? From FIBER DIRECT TO HOME? What a squander. It is a shame that Fios isn't a superior product and is nothing more than what everyone else can offer over technology that is decades and decades older thus succumbing to the status-quo pricing model.
As a customer, the ETF doesn't bother me, it's a common market strategy to lock me in. As an invester, Verizon is squandering FTTH and mismanaging it to the point it isn't anything greater than other offerings.
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5
1 edit | said by fiberguy:3) Discount on the monthly service that those month to month don't get.. I'm not whining, but I did read the documents that were available before they got pulled. Month-to-month costs $20 per mo. more than the bundle, but it's Honor-Do-Not-Offer. They aren't telling anyone about month-to-month except the whiners.
I'm getting the feeling there's a ton of people making comments here without reading all the details. 
See more details here: »Re: Even If You Move? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | said by fiberguy:.. shall I go on? I keep hearing "what's in it for me" but you never hear "what's in it for them"... Please don`t. We humans prefer to hear about what can help us humans. Apparently you are a corporation, so you wouldn`t understand. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: A shame... We humans prefer to hear about what can help us humans. Life isn't a charity case... PEOPLE help PEOPLE... business is out to make money.. it's what keeps this world going around and has since the dawn of time... trade has been around for years, and this is what it is.
Apparently you are a corporation, so you wouldn`t understand. Riiiiight... dude, seriously... people like you keep focusing on the word CORPORATION.. which I am not.. so you can pound sand with that flame of yours. However, back to the point... somehow people like you and others think that you attach the word CORPORATION to something and it's bad... get over it. There are plenty of SOLE-P's out there that are just as bad.. there are many corporations out there that are good as well.
It's opinions like yours that shows that people believe they're entitled to something. Let me remind you.. You DON'T NEED A CELL PHONE... if you don't like the offerings of Verizon, chose one of the others.. or, go get a prepaid phone and don't deal with the contracts.. it's quite simple.
Corporations/business, etc, are not there to "help".. .who ever taught you that needs to check themselves... they're out there to make money - plain and simple. So far, I don't think, feel, or see anyone being harmed with the $350 ETF fee... simply don't buy a smart phone.. stick with a texting phone or just a plain old flip... if you want the big stuff, you gotta pay for it.. don't like the terms, don't touch it.. Or, do like many suggest.. hack, search for used phones, find options out there and piece something together that will act like a phone that you can save money on... but seriously, stop the bitching.
Something you want to hear what you want to hear.. sometimes you have to hear what you need to hear, and you wont' always like it.. again.. that's life. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | said by Z80A:Because it's not just for the install. It's consideration for immunity against price increases and the monthly discount. It's not a price increase. ETF only applies to those who CANCEL. Why is the ETF the same regardless of what phone you purchase? | |
|
| | | | | | | | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4 | said by Z80A:It's easier for those who don't like the ETF to exercise their option to go on the month-month plan. I'm sorry, your still stuck in a conversation as if I was a customer, not one with ownership stake in a company making terrible decisions. The pricing model is stuck between an unpopular, deemed illegal in CA through lost class action lawsuits, FCC investigated threat and a non-competitive offering. Has it been so long since innovation caused higher stock prices that most forget it's power and not only are complacent with threat, collusion, and favorable-regulatory-lobbying but embrace and defend it? I guess it's easier to budget and "invent" strong arm tactics than to actually be innovative enough to develop a competitive product.
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
See 8 replies to this post |
| | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Pay full price for the phone.. .pay a higher monthly service fee, and stop complaining that you can't have the discount and NOT want the ETF...
As far as the ONT argument goes.. it's NOT just part of doing business... when was the last time people didn't bitch about the install fee?
You can't have it all. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: A shame... said by fiberguy:Pay full price for the phone.. .pay a higher monthly service fee, and stop complaining that you can't have the discount and NOT want the ETF... As far as the ONT argument goes.. it's NOT just part of doing business... when was the last time people didn't bitch about the install fee? You can't have it all. Your idea of `having it all` is just screwed up.
Why is the ETF the same regardless of what phone you purchase? | |
|
| | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: A shame... my "idea" of having it all is NOT screwed up at all... its very relevant to the discussion.
So far, people are saying "I don't want to have a contract, I don't want an ETF, I want the discount, I want I want I want.." and also "I don't want contract to be so long".. but, what are people saying they're willing to give in trade? JUST because they are "corporations" doesn't mean that they have to give the most.
The consumer has to be willing to give up things.
And, um... isn't Verizon saying that for smart phones, the ETF is going up to $350 while other phones remain the $200 fee? What you're saying, in my opinion, is just insane... to start nit-picking the ETF fee based on the phone. How much more confusion do you want to place on the already un-sophisticated consumer? (And before anyone goes off on that term, it's very much a legal term and argument played in court every day when these issues come to light)
The truth is that the consumer IS largely stupid. If they weren't, we wouldn't hear about people "shocked" that there was an ETF to begin with.
Additionally, there is actually more to pricing, fees, and contracts than just the phone. There is the consideration of churn rate, which is expensive to a company which DOES factor in to everyone's monthly rate. (The more churn you have, the more money you have to spend to keep your business running) There is the savings they get in bulk. All new customers have the choice to get a new phone if they want and when you have high churn, you go through a lot of phones. There are MANY other things that go into running a large scale operation like this and the consumer doesn't think about it.
I do NOT agree with contracts.. however, I don't agree that they should be REQUIRED. I DO believe the consumer should have the option to go with out a contract, HOWEVER, for no contract, I believe the customer should pay full price for the phone, all installation fees, no monthly "loyalty discount/breaks" on the service itself.. etc.
The consumer IS getting something for the loyalty contract they agree to.. they often forget that with out them, the price of some services would be, and have been, MUCH higher.
And, one more thing DIRECTLY to what you just said about "Why is the ETF the same regardless of what phone you purchase?" .... Well.. for the cheap little flip phone you get for free, you pay a $200 ETF. For the very expensive smart phones, that a large group of people get JUST for the full keyboard alone, the fee is still just $200 a month, at least for now. So, the ETF does work both ways. Its called a subsidy. In many cases, you still pay for some of the phone, while others are free.. so really, you're paying the same regardless of the phone.. I guess they believe that those free flip phones are worth at least $200 in a retain environment while smart phones DO cost more which is why you pay a portion of the hardware.. so really, are you paying the same? .. yes.. because you can't disregard the portion of the hardware you pay for as well. | |
|
| | | | | said by markofmayhem:It's a shame that something more innovative to cause incentive for long-term customer commitment isn't implemented. What? I thought that FiOS was the service from God or something. Why do they need incentives to keep customers? Who is canceling FiOS and why?
ONT/Install.. blah blah... = cost of business Don't like it, stick with cable who are more than happy to keep you month to month.
It's a shame that a more innovated approach isn't found and used.
Like what? | |
|
| | | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| Re: A shame... Like free Internet for everyone. After all surfing pr0n and running BT is an entitlement /sarcasm | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by markofmayhem:that someone, anyone (and I'm not it) hasn't come along with a more innovative way to motivate people to longer commitments outside of "early termination fees". See but that would require provding better service at reasonable prices. It's easier just to rape customers. | |
|
| | | said by markofmayhem:that someone, anyone (and I'm not it) hasn't come along with a more innovative way to motivate people to longer commitments outside of "early termination fees". I don't think it's motivation. The motivation is the new products and features that Verizon keeps adding.
Rather, the ETF is liquidated damages for breach of contract.
The 1 year (or whatever) commit is a contract, and the ETF is the penalty you pay if you break it.
The motivation to keep the service is the new features, higher speed, more HD channels etc. It is not the ETF. | |
|
| | markofmayhemI can haz competition?Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:4 | Re: A shame... And we have gotten to a position where mass-market retail products not only require a contract to be profitable, but people are so complacent that the mediocre product they are ordering for slightly less per month is a practice that is defended. If the motivation to buy the product existed, ETF's wouldn't be necessary because contracts wouldn't be necessary. Fios is an advanced technology that, if managed properly, SHOULD be competitive at it's price point. Instead, it is NO different than all other offerings, so it is utilizing the same pricing structure as the competition. That is the shame, that in order for Verizon to maximize profit it is just following the Comcast/DirecTV model and offering juuuuust enough to stay in step. Over Fiber. To the Home. It's the same price and product that is on the 25 year old copper and even older tech: RF (satellite).
--
I can haz competition? | |
|
| | |  aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | Re: A shame... said by markofmayhem:And we have gotten to a position where mass-market retail products not only require a contract to be profitable, but people are so complacent that the mediocre product they are ordering for slightly less per month is a practice that is defended. If the motivation to buy the product existed, ETF's wouldn't be necessary because contracts wouldn't be necessary. Fios is an advanced technology that, if managed properly, SHOULD be competitive at it's price point. Instead, it is NO different than all other offerings, so it is utilizing the same pricing structure as the competition. That is the shame, that in order for Verizon to maximize profit it is just following the Comcast/DirecTV model and offering juuuuust enough to stay in step. Over Fiber. To the Home. It's the same price and product that is on the 25 year old copper and even older tech: RF (satellite). Because for the majority of people, they don't care if it is better or not. They are more concerned with the price than anything else.
I know plenty of people who will go to FIOS kicking and screaming. They are perfectly satisfied with their $20 DSL and they have no desire to pay any more even for 35x their current speed.
Unfortunately my girlfriend is one of them. And she gets all her TV from OTA too. Hopefully verizon will force her to Fiber soon since they sent her a letter last year claiming they would be dumping copper in her area at some point in the near future. And when they did that, she would be put on fiber and would no longer be able to get DSL.
That day can't come soon enough. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: A shame... Aaron if that were true then DSL wouldn`t be losing customers at an increasing pace to cable. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | | said by markofmayhem:And we have gotten to a position where mass-market retail products not only require a contract to be profitable, but people are so complacent that the mediocre product they are ordering for slightly less per month is a practice that is defended. If the motivation to buy the product existed, ETF's wouldn't be necessary because contracts wouldn't be necessary. Fios is an advanced technology that, if managed properly, SHOULD be competitive at it's price point. Instead, it is NO different than all other offerings, so it is utilizing the same pricing structure as the competition. That is the shame, that in order for Verizon to maximize profit it is just following the Comcast/DirecTV model and offering juuuuust enough to stay in step. Over Fiber. To the Home. It's the same price and product that is on the 25 year old copper and even older tech: RF (satellite). Point 1 - The days of copper will end in the next 10 years or so. Switch to FIOS or Switch to Cable, your choice.
Point 2 - Over time, the price of FIOS will be much lower since it will already be deployed nationwide. Maybe 10 years, maybe longer. I remember when DSL was expensive. | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by markofmayhem:that someone, anyone (and I'm not it) hasn't come along with a more innovative way to motivate people to longer commitments outside of "early termination fees". how about "a quality service at a fair price"
oh wait! this is RAPE & GOUGE at its finest!
you make little off happy subs but money hand over fist on unhappy subs!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
cacoPremium
join:2005-03-10
Whittier, AK | Told you so. IMO they have about 2 more price increases before their satisfaction scores take a hit and they come back to earth like everybody else. Won't matter how clear the picture is or how many hd channels.
No one likes paying more for tv service year after year for 150 crap channels when they only watch about 15, at least that is the way it is perceived by general public.
--
Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason. | |
|
| | | Re: Told you so. JSRoman...
I agree with the sentiment about people not wanting to pay for channels they do not watch or want but that is not the fault of Verizon or other telecos in this business.
The real culprits here are the media companies like Viacom, TimeWarner, NBC Universal etc and the cable companies like Comcast etc with which they have mutual ownership stakes in each other. Their practice of forced bundling, which they falsely claim lowers costs, is the root of this problem.
Verizon and other telecos have long opposed the practice of forced bundling (which ultimately subsidizes their competition) and asked Congress to put a stop to the unethical and anti-competitive practice so they could offer an ala carte tier to their customers. Just before Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 there was a bill moving ahead to address this issue and Nancy Pelosi (top recipient of donations from media and cable companies in Congress) made stopping it her top priority.
Lay the blame for hundreds of crap channels squarely where it belongs - Hollywood, traditional cable operators and their lackeys in Congress we know as the Democrats.
Verizon has nothing what so ever to do with it and will keep getting a pass by me so long as this situation exists. | |
|
 matcarlPremium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY
1 edit | Even If You Move? Nobody can help if they have to move to another location. There is no way that anyone should have to pay an ETF for moving.
They are also going to scare away any customers that are considering them. Cablevision already has a commercial saying they have no contracts to sign and no ETF's, so the cable companies are using that as a weapon. | |
|
|
See 16 replies to this post |
|
| |  This should be illegal :
Adi | |
|
|
See 32 replies to this post |
|
 VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | According to some people here we should just take it and accept that every year, price rates will be increasing because the poor old companies need to pay more to get the channels.
So, everyone just shut up and accept it!
 | |
|
|
See 10 replies to this post |
|
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
| No problem Verizon is spending real money to roll out Fios. On our block, we had a brigade of bucket trucks for months. Just to wire the small building, they had a crew of four come out, and spent about six hours each. When activating just one unit, the installer was here the entire day - only to have the sub cancel a day later, because VZ didn't enable the VCR (yes, I know) functionality in the Moto STB.
Verizon needs to fix its overbilling and offshore customer service issues, but I don't see anything wrong with them expecting customers to honor their contract. | |
|
SunnyD
join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL | So change the contract. You do realize that you are well within your power to modify the contract as you see fit before signing off on it. At that point the onus is on the other party to accept or deny the contract with the updated provisions. There's no guarantee that Verizon will agree to the changes, but once it's signed off on you have just as much right in court over the contract as they do. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
| | Contract renewals also subject to the same fee The telecom giant has said early-termination fees cover the cost of installing FiOS - $500 to $600 per customer. When you renew your contract you are also subject to the ETF.
I have had FIOS for 2.5 years and just renewed a new 2yr contract last month. Presumably the installation costs have been recovered in the 2 years we have been with FIOS. For the new 2yr contract why should there then be an ETF and why should it be the same as those who get a new install?
Also, lets say you move in to a residence that is currently wired for FIOS. If I sign up again I will be subject to the ETF but presumably the previous owner would have already covered the installation costs through an eary termination or their monthly fees. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Don't like the ETF, go with a month-month plan It's not rocket science. | |
|
 n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| You Gotta Pay... Since it appears Verizon and other cable companies, except Cablevision so far, have knuckled under to the demands of the content providers, the bills are going to soar. The Scripps demand for Food and HGTV alone are going to rake in millions for Scripps.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | Does it matter? Does it really matter?
What are you doing canceling it?
I so wish I had fios comin to my house. | |
|
 Mike_
join:2003-06-24
Fort Lauderdale, FL
 ·Verizon Wireless..
·Comcast
| Company is losing more subscribers.. Increases in ETFs are clear indications that the company is losing more customers than their usual and thus feels if they ramp up the cost of leaving, people will be "forced" to stay and keep profits/subscribers more stable. They did that with their cellular service too for pda sign ups.
Not really a nice service to be proud of having knowing they force you and take it this far to stay. The Cherry picking markets tops it all off too. Hell, it's not your fault if your job requires a move that which VZ does not provide service to.
--
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Unless you know what you're doing. | |
|
|  ddg4005Premium
join:2001-08-22
Bronx, NY
·Optimum Online
| Re: Company is losing more subscribers.. said by Mike_:Increases in ETFs are clear indications that the company is losing more customers than their usual and thus feels if they ramp up the cost of leaving, people will be "forced" to stay and keep profits/subscribers more stable. They did that with their cellular service too for pda sign ups. Not really a nice service to be proud of having knowing they force you and take it this far to stay. The Cherry picking markets tops it all off too. Hell, it's not your fault if your job requires a move that which VZ does not provide service to. Verizon does not cherry pick markets. There are poor neighborhoods in the Bronx that have the service and affluent ones that don't. What's killing them is that they waited this long to roll out a competitive service and now they're fighting against cable companies with entrenched customer bases. It won't be easy for them to woo new customers but they don't have any choice.
--
A man must have a code -Bunk | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| Re: Company is losing more subscribers.. said by ddg4005:Verizon does not cherry pick markets. Verizon has not installed FiOS anywhere in the states of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, or Wisconsin. Ft. Wayne(and 2 suburbs) are the only Indiana FiOS towns.
Would it be fair to say that Verizon has ignored/neglected FiOS installation in the Midwest? Would this be considered cherry picking? | |
|
| | | ddg4005Premium
join:2001-08-22
Bronx, NY Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Company is losing more subscribers.. said by Bob61571:said by ddg4005:Verizon does not cherry pick markets. Verizon has not installed FiOS anywhere in the states of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, or Wisconsin. Ft. Wayne(and 2 suburbs) are the only Indiana FiOS towns. Would it be fair to say that Verizon has ignored/neglected FiOS installation in the Midwest? Would this be considered cherry picking? I'd call it gross neglect of those areas. And it's a damn shame on top of everything else since those states represent potential customers.
--
A man must have a code -Bunk | |
|
| | hmm IF verizon keeps this up they will price themselves out of the market.
The etf is insane consigering in a lot of places whole towns arent even wired for fios. Here where i live i dont have fios but if I move one block over i do For some reason verizon doesnt want to wire this block every surrounding block has it.
What good is better tv and internet if I have to pay an extra $20 for it. More if you include all the fees. | |
|
neftv
join:2000-10-01
Broomall, PA Reviews:
 ·SIP Global Phone
·QuantumVoice
·Verizon FiOS
| You had to see this coming folks! Roll out of Fios was/is not cheap and I read the claim that Fios was going to need less maintenance than copper in the long run. So that's why Verizon hired temporary help with Fios implementation. Now these increases are unremarkable for something that was suppose to be less maintenance hence this is a ploy to just make stockholders happy. As everyone know rate always go up and when they do they very rarely go back down.
For me I will stick with my Fios internet only deal 20/5 and if they start raising prices on that I will gladly go back to Covad dry DSL or some non-Verizon equivalent (coughs even CavTel) or may begin to see if Wimax is reliable like Clear (its seems everyone hate them). Like I said I am happy with internet only Via Fios. Please don't change anything Verizon.
I keep getting those promos in the mail get 150 cash back get tv/phone/internet for $99/month But I not ready for the $79 price hike in two years. | |
|
 KCrimsonPremium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1
·Verizon FiOS
| I Cancelled and Was Reimbursed ETF By Cable Co... Part of the Cablevision's "Winback" is the reimbursement of ETF from FiOS. What I don't understand is why each and every customer pays the ETF regardless of whether it was a "new" install. Forinstance...
When/if I return to FiOS, the ONT and fiber is already in place. Why is Verizon entitled to an ETF when they've already collected on their buildout cost the first time (and the same goes for ANY tenant situation, where the ONT has already been installed by the previous tenant)? | |
|
 hambone42Peace, through superior firepowerPremium
join:2002-02-02
Manassas, VA | Verizon -- you're racing against yourself now Hmmm. As much as I've lusted after FiOS and dreamed of kicking Comcast to the curb, I'm also a big fan of taking responsibility for one's own actions and honoring contracts. I find, however, these new contract terms -- if enacted as described -- to be rather unpalatable.
Every day as I pull up to my house, I gaze longingly at the as-yet unconnected fiber hanging on the poles across the street. Verizon, you've got until your own 01/16/10 deadline to get things sufficiently lashed up in order to allow me to place an order. Miss that deadline, and I'll be staying with Comcast or finding another solution (Xohm, perhaps?).
Your call, Verizon. It's nothing personal, it's just business. 
--
Sarcasm is the Body's Natural Defense Against Stupidity | |
|
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| what it could mean... 1. Verizon makes some short term gains before the deadline..
2. After the deadline bundling pricing incentives die-- which is to say customers can't afford two or three services with the higher rates.. so expect a customer for example to just get stand-along broadband & voip from another carrier. The FIOS voice & cable-tv service will have to to wanting for customers.
3. Knowing that there is little compeition for it's current rates... cable companies RAISE RATES... goodbye $29.95 triple play from the likes of cablevision.. try $39.95-$69.95--- With little to show for the extra money.. no vast improvement in services-- Just higher bottom line price.
Welcome to 2010. Competition is now officially dead 1/17/2010. | |
|
| | | Re: what it could mean... I would never ever sign a 2 year contract with anybody. Just plain dumb. Plus who pays for tv anymore? | |
|
| | aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
2 edits | Re: what it could mean... said by dr3yec:I would never ever sign a 2 year contract with anybody. Just plain dumb. Plus who pays for tv anymore? the vast majority of people with television sets.
For me if I had not signed a two year contract for Verizon wireless, that would not have made sense. I got the cheapest price by signing a two year contract. Why would I sign a contract for a shorter term to pay more?
Just like my alarm monitoring company. 3 year contract and it's works out to around $11 a month instead of over $20 without the long term contract. | |
|
| | | | With the crap on television nowadays, I wouldn't miss it much. | |
|
| | Another reason to stick with cable No ETF on my Comcast and it works fine. Maybe FiOS is not worth the extra expense. | |
|
| | | Re: Another reason to stick with cable They all are going to start screwing the customer. Just a matter of time, my friend. | |
|
| | Counter-productive I think this will hurt them.
•People move. It's ridiculous to be penalized for this.
•Customers renewing have already fulfilled their commitment; their equipment is paid for; they shouldn't be subject to this bullshit.
•Many potential new customers may be turned off by not having a 15 (or 30 day) grace period to at least try out the service.
IMHO, most ppl aren't to savvy when it comes to picture quality, stable inet speeds (which FiOS certainly has the advantage on, no doubt about it). And, they go primarily for price. Those potential new customers may not be willing to "take a chance" on FiOS without an "out" in the 1st month.
They may see it as a $300 gamble. | |
|
| | | Re: Counter-productive We do have a 30 day trial with no etf...Also if a new promo comes out you can sign up for that one and get a better deal(did it myself).So you have options and one of if not the best product out there except it's run by MaBell..That MaBell mind-set should start to change (at least)here in NJ this year.The the door2door sales people are might going away and the Fios Techs will start to do sales.Been here 13 yrs. and it's in our(fios techs)interest to make sure you guys are happy.
Don't worry about the etf,once you have Fios installed you will not want to cancel(yes I know the billing is a nightmare,but is being fixed!).And yes we were in NEWARK today doing Fios installs.No cherry picking and in a mdu apt. bldg. Left the customer happy with HD channels and 15/5 internet connection and caller id on the tv nice clean install. | |
|
| | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5 | Re: Counter-productive said by nj fios tech :
We do have a 30 day trial with no etf... New rules hit the street starting 1/17. »Re: Even If You Move? | |
|
|  KramerPremium,Mod
join:2000-08-03
Richmond, VA
kudos:1
·Verizon FiOS
Host:
Microsoft Help
Satellite Radio
Wireless Security
| said by jimboe:I think this will hurt them. •People move. It's ridiculous to be penalized for this. •Customers renewing have already fulfilled their commitment; their equipment is paid for; they shouldn't be subject to this bullshit. •Many potential new customers may be turned off by not having a 15 (or 30 day) grace period to at least try out the service. IMHO, most ppl aren't to savvy when it comes to picture quality, stable inet speeds (which FiOS certainly has the advantage on, no doubt about it). And, they go primarily for price. Those potential new customers may not be willing to "take a chance" on FiOS without an "out" in the 1st month. They may see it as a $300 gamble. That's exactly they way I see it. When my contract runs out in a little over 1 year, if I have a choice between two reasonably close in quality services, I will go with the one without an ETF. The high ETF, makes me more forgiving of something not quite as good too. I might be willing to settle for fewer HD channels or whatever. I have always had at least one Verizon land-line, but that I am not sure is going to continue.
It isn't always a move that may force one to change or drop services. Health problems, divorce and old age come to mind. The worst possibility that comes to mind, which could be the result of any of the above mentioned, is a financial catastrophe. You lose your job and go on unemployment, let's say. All that and you are faced with hundreds of dollars in fines for canceling your expensive CATV service. That will leave a nice taste in your mouth, when you find a new job and look for a CATV company.
As I said in a precious thread on this issue.. I can't wait until Verizon's competitors use this in advertisements. It will sting Verizon in the long run. It is a stupid corporate policy, because they are going to lose money with the high ETF. They have a great product and need a lot more people to buy it. This isn't the way to get that accomplished. | |
|
|
|
