  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |  Should Be Illegal
I really hope that most Frontier users have another option for broadband. This fee is total crap.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  FronkmanAn Apple a day keeps the doctor awayPremium
join:2003-06-23
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Should Be Illegal i agree, very poor legal decision to call this a "warranty" too. there is tons and tons of case law about warranties. they should have called it something cryptic and ambiguous like "modem technical response fund" or something...
--
Everyone should own a Mac! Go Bucks! | |
|
| |  spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1
 ·SureWest Internet
| Re: Should Be Illegal said by Fronkman:i agree, very poor legal decision to call this a "warranty" too. there is tons and tons of case law about warranties. they should have called it something cryptic and ambiguous like "Government modem technical response fund" or something...
There, fixed it for you. 
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
| |
|
| | |  GbcueP.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 | Re: Should Be Illegal said by spewak:said by Fronkman:i agree, very poor legal decision to call this a "warranty" too. there is tons and tons of case law about warranties. they should have called it something cryptic and ambiguous like "Government modem technical response fund" or something...
There, fixed it for you. What does the government have to do with Frontier's blatant free-market monopoly money grab?
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| | | | spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
| Re: Should Be Illegal said by Gbcue:said by spewak:said by Fronkman:i agree, very poor legal decision to call this a "warranty" too. there is tons and tons of case law about warranties. they should have called it something cryptic and ambiguous like "Government modem technical response fund" or something...
There, fixed it for you. What does the government have to do with Frontier's blatant free-market monopoly money grab? USF! Any other questions?
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
| |
|
| | | | | GbcueP.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 | Re: Should Be Illegal said by spewak:USF! Any other questions?
They already collect USF regardless if they charge an extra $7 or not. So again, what does their charging $7 for people who own modems have to do with the government?
--
My Blog 2.2 | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | So instead, theyll raise all DSL prices. Who CARES. Isnt the bottom line monthly price whats important?. If your monthly overall charges are too much, shop around for another provider and compare THEIR overall charges.
This is no different than the DirecTV "mirroring fee" that I remember paying when I hooked up my own STB's.
So what we're REALLY arguing here is BILL SIMPLICITY.
Frontier, do yourselves a favor, scrap this idea and raise all your DSL prices $7 a month. As you can see, people dont like bill increases in this manner. lol | |
|
| | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Should Be Illegal said by ITALIAN926:So what we're REALLY arguing here is BILL SIMPLICITY. Absolutely. I believe that all service providers should be required to include the costs of non-government imposed fees in their advertised prices. This makes it easier to directly compare prices between service providers.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
·Frontier Communi..
| said by ITALIAN926:So instead, theyll raise all DSL prices. Who CARES. Isnt the bottom line monthly price whats important?. If your monthly overall charges are too much, shop around for another provider and compare THEIR overall charges.
This is no different than the DirecTV "mirroring fee" that I remember paying when I hooked up my own STB's.
So what we're REALLY arguing here is BILL SIMPLICITY.
Frontier, do yourselves a favor, scrap this idea and raise all your DSL prices $7 a month. As you can see, people dont like bill increases in this manner. lol
Verizon once offered promotion where they would offer you a fixed-rate contract "for life". For these ex-verizon customers, Frontier must still honor the contract. The modem fee is a way to get around this. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Should Be Illegal Ahhh I see now. Yea, Id be upset too. I didnt realize that had prices locked in for life. | |
|
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Keeping it separate allows them to benefit the same way on-line merchants benefit from not disclosing shipping/handling fees and taxes when they send prices to search sites. Often the site with the lowest price isn't after you add S&H and potential sales tax.
Deceptive? Absolutely. From an advertised price perspective, the airlines baggage fees, cancelling fees and change fees are genius. They call them hidden fees for a reason. Caveat Emptor.
What amazes me is the constant barrage of offers from banks that offer 0% interest for 12 months on balance transfers. It looks like free money but the fine print contains a balance transfer fee -- often something like 3%. Fees are immediate. 3% expressed as a 12-month APR is ~5.5%. Suddenly what was free money costs ~5.5% and if you don't pay it off in 12 months, it gets even worse -- especially if the creditor compounds interest at a crazy rate that is magically forgiven only if you pay it off in 12 months. How many people fall for this stuff?
Other than being lawful, banks have the ethics of a drug pusher. Both of them act like they are giving away free stuff and it's too late after you realize it was never free.
Can we really expect any business to have ethics? Their excuse is always going to be that if one of them does it, they have to follow or go out of business.
I have no idea how Southwest airlines does it but so far they don't charge a lot of the same fees and business is booming. Bravo! | |
|
| | | | | Re: Should Be Illegal Southwest just gives an upfront price, which most customers appreciate.
They still charge comparable rates every time I've used them. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Should Be Illegal said by chgo_man99:said by rradina:What amazes me is the constant barrage of offers from banks that offer 0% interest for 12 months on balance transfers. It looks like free money but the fine print contains a balance transfer fee -- often something like 3%. Fees are immediate. 3% expressed as a 12-month APR is ~5.5%. Suddenly what was free money costs ~5.5% and if you don't pay it off in 12 months, it gets even worse -- especially if the creditor compounds interest at a crazy rate that is magically forgiven only if you pay it off in 12 months. How many people fall for this stuff?
I paid it off in 7 months and guess what? Did I get interest incurred for that 1 last month? No they charged me interest for all 7 months! Thieves!  RIF.org, this is pretty standard and if you would have bothered to read the terms on the credit card would have seen this clause. | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
 ·T-Mobile US
| Re: Should Be Illegal Don't be ridiculous. the sales associate at the counter won't tell you this when you apply for credit. You won't get print with those terms at the store or when your new card arrives in the mail. You will only get them after you receive statement in the mail which has them written in tiny blueprint on the back or pages of the thick booklet without indexes.
And if you opted to get paperless statement good luck with that. I also don't believe all credit companies do it. It might be standard but not uniform. | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Should Be Illegal said by chgo_man99:Don't be ridiculous. the sales associate at the counter won't tell you this when you apply for credit. You won't get print with those terms at the store or when your new card arrives in the mail. You will only get them after you receive statement in the mail which has them written in tiny blueprint on the back or pages of the thick booklet without indexes.
Yes, reading is ridiculous. The information is out there, YOU didn't read it and are all pissy at the credit card company. Get over it. You should know reading the terms and conditions but as you put it, reading is ridiculous. | |
|
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
| Re: Should Be Illegal I hope you like reading EULA before installing programs or games.
The point of technical writing is to be informative, concise and grab audience (customer) attention. If a cell phone company can do this when signing two year contract about any hidden charges, bank could do as well. One style of writing and jargon do not fit all. The point of these "contracts" is to delude customer, not inform them in clear, informative and explicit manner.
Regular customers should not be expected to be readers on business-to-business level when it's business-to-person.
Youre either delusional about banks business ethics or a simply a troll having fun playing dad's "role". | |
|
| | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Should Be Illegal said by chgo_man99:I hope you like reading EULA before installing programs or games.
The point of technical writing is to be informative, concise and grab audience (customer) attention. If a cell phone company can do this when signing two year contract about any hidden charges,......
bla...
I happen to be one that DOES read everything PRIOR to installing.. I'm the one that annoys the bankers and AT&T reps when I sit there and read what I'm signing. When I rent a U-Haul truck, I read what I'm singing myself to. Novel concept these days huh? I know that doesn't fit the "pay and use now, bitch about it later" crowd - but they get what they deserve. Also, that credit card example above about the hinted bait and switch on interest rates.. pure B.S. The rates disclosure for credit card companies is one of the most widely published / made-available documents in circulation to customers. And with that said, smart people will take advantage of the interest free period on the balance transfer (ultimately stopping interest from occurring) in order to pay off the balance they owe. Again, a simple concept the seems to escape those that just won't accept being informed. | |
|
| | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | "INTEREST FREE FOR 6 MONTHS" - in big print. "Balance must be paid in full in promotional period or interest will incur from date of purchase" is hardly in small print and in addition it's * out on the front as well. The sales associate isn't the banker. They're simply asking you if you wanted to open a charge card to buy those tires that you were too weak to resist their sales pitch.
Just wow - seriously so many things wrong with your approach on things. I do feel sorry for you and those like you who don't take the time to educate yourself and rely solely on everyone else to pat your bottom. The most ironic thing is that it seems this kind of thing follows you through out life, yet you continue not to learn from YOUR mistakes. I'm sure you could occupy Firestone if you're dissatisfied. | |
|
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
1 edit | Re: Should Be Illegal INTEREST FREE FOR 6 MONTHS
Tere morele...
Except you don't get part that already paid off portion of balance charged on purchase during this promo period should not incur interest after promotional period expires. That capital letter wording you spelled out does not mention anything.
Second emergency planning is not the same as long term planned purchase u gave a lot of examples on such as cell phone purchase on 2 year contract. Long term planning leaves a lot more room for preparedness.
Third not all banks are the same and cut through transparent especially some unknown 3rd party shady small banks for retailers. It's no surprise retail cc get the worst rap, their interest is typically higher than regular bank cc and their terms less favorable to consumers.
Tell me how fair it is to get charged all 24% apr cumulative daily interest on $400 when u paid on time within promotional window period $399.99?
Even if it's disclosed in tiny print on back statement on your first bill, how do u justify this practice fair for consumers? How about blind disabled customers?
Maybe a smart old Russian soviet computer will explain this perfectly reasonable "logic"?
Nothing what u said in defense for Firestone makes sense, may in theory but does not make sense in practice. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |  Re: Should Be Illegal
While you may be knowledgeable at the Kmart checkout about the legal meaning of these terms, most retail personnel do not understand them, anymore than their customers.
»www.creditcards.com/credit-card-···1282.php | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  ThespisI'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX | Re: Should Be Illegal said by Doh321 :While you may be knowledgeable at the Kmart checkout about the legal meaning of these terms, most retail personnel do not understand them, anymore than their customers.
»www.creditcards.com/credit-card-···1282.php
You don't have to be smart enough to understand the contract. You simply have to be smart enough to NOT sign a contract you don't understand.
--
Fast. Cheap. Safe.
Pick two... | |
|
| | | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by chgo_man99:Thats how I fell in trap with merchant Firestone. When my tire went broke and needed urgent replacement. I couldn't even drive, had to tow it.
What did they do? they pushed me to replace all 4 instead just one, because all of them looked "old." Only later to find out at home, my father replaced them few months ago. Rip-off 
Then not having immidiate $600 to spend for replacing tires, not wanting to put on my credit cards, I applied for their firestone CC. It had 0% apr for 6 months.
This makes no sense. Anyone with half a brain can change a tire - mount the spare, and drive home to comparison shop, consult your father, etc. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Should Be Illegal said by elray:This makes no sense. Anyone with half a brain can change a tire - mount the spare, and drive home to comparison shop, consult your father, etc.
Ethics are just a forgotten memory in our corporate America.
People should rip people off because they can?
Do you know how many times I could rip people off with IT work because they are ignorant of it? But the difference is I don't. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Should Be Illegal Thats not unique to America, thats worldwide phenomena.
Canada is just as corrupt as the US, although in different ways. | |
|
| | | | | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by DataRiker:said by elray:This makes no sense. Anyone with half a brain can change a tire - mount the spare, and drive home to comparison shop, consult your father, etc.
Ethics are just a forgotten memory in our corporate America. People should rip people off because they can? Do you know how many times I could rip people off with IT work because they are ignorant of it? But the difference is I don't. Most mechanics, tire dealers, etc, never had ethics. You have to vet them, in advance of need, through word of mouth, Yelp, etc. It has NOTHING to do with "corporate America". | |
|
| | | | | |
| | |  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by rradina:Keeping it separate allows them to benefit the same way on-line merchants benefit from not disclosing shipping/handling fees and taxes when they send prices to search sites. Often the site with the lowest price isn't after you add S&H and potential sales tax. In merchant defense, are they suppose to advertise the absolute highest tax rate and shipping fees and then discount final price down if sales/use tax doesn't apply, or next day air isn't required?
Listing the price without sales tax and shipping is just the greatest common denominator. ALL customers pay that. If shipping or taxes are applicable then that ultimately should be taken into account but it's impossible for the store to advertise those variable extra expenses in many cases.
Now it's a different thing when a store charges $1 for an item that normally costs $20, but then a $19 "handling fee" to make it up but hide the amount below the line. | |
|
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Should Be Illegal Amazon ships items over a certain dollar amount free (Super Saver Shipping). They probably do this by using their volume to normalize fees with shippers. By that I mean they probably get flat-rate pricing and that enables them to build their handling and shipping into their margin (no hidden fees).
The post office offers anyone this with their flat-rate "if it fits, it ships", program. If merchants cannot take advantage of this it's likely because they are lazy and don't want to categorize their merchandise by package size and attempt to build it into their margin.
And this is just postage. Regarding handling, if you don't know your own costs and cannot build them into your margin, well that's just sad.
I'm not buying the "poor merchant" argument with respect to S&H.
Taxes ... I agree on that topic and there's not much you can do about that. | |
|
| | | | | cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | Re: Should Be Illegal said by rradina:Amazon ships items over a certain dollar amount free (Super Saver Shipping). They probably do this by using their volume to normalize fees with shippers. By that I mean they probably get flat-rate pricing and that enables them to build their handling and shipping into their margin (no hidden fees).
The post office offers anyone this with their flat-rate "if it fits, it ships", program. If merchants cannot take advantage of this it's likely because they are lazy and don't want to categorize their merchandise by package size and attempt to build it into their margin.
And this is just postage. Regarding handling, if you don't know your own costs and cannot build them into your margin, well that's just sad.
I'm not buying the "poor merchant" argument with respect to S&H.
What works for Amazon doesn't necessarily work for all ecommerce sites. Many small mom and pop sites can't normalize their shipping across all orders as they just don't have that many. And "if it fits, it ships" doesn't work for everyone. I've shipped items and price things both ways and "if it fits, it ships" has never been cheaper.
I've setup many ecommerce sites that pull real time rates from Fedex or UPS based on weight and destination. People pay exactly what the actual shipping costs are (or with some specific add-on or mark up). People shipping across town then don't subsidize those people that ship cross country. Plus if you offer multiple shipping options (Ground, 3-day select, 2nd day, next day, etc) how do you compare final prices between sites? | |
|
| | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Should Be IllegalAs I said, I'll give you the tax argument but I have trouble buying the S&H argument. Distance just isn't that much of a factor and it should be easy to factor it into the margin. Many sites include free shipping and still offer competitive prices. To provide context, I did a quick check on UPS for a 5 pound package:
FROM/TO UPS Ground Fuel Surcharge Total
--------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------
KC to LA 13.84 USD 1.18 USD 15.02 USD
KC to STL 11.45 USD 0.97 USD 12.42 USD
Regarding shipping options, I'm OK if the price includes the cheapest option and then I pay more for a faster method.
I also think fuel surcharges are another hidden fee that should just be included in the cost. I work for a retail/wholesale company and we ship full trucks to retail outlets. Amazingly we also break out the fuel surcharge on our statements. I can only guess our customers like to see consistent shipping costs and a separate line for the variable fuel costs. We're so anal about the fuel surcharge, we parse the RSS XML feed from the eia to keep them accurate. The eia updates them weekly and our customer's shipping charges are constantly changing. If it wasn't for computerized automation, we probably wouldn't bother but since it doesn't cost anything, we do it. | |
|
| | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Should Be Illegal I personally am fine with the fuel surcharges imposed as unlike other fees out there, the fuel surcharges have in fact disappeared over time. Just adding it to the cost of doing business seems to make them permanent. Fuel can rise suddenly and a surcharge is easier to apply over re-costing your entire product line. | |
|
| | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Should Be Illegal In our case, we do charge separately for shipping (we send them a whole truck an often it's a contracted trucking company which passes variable costs through to us).
What I don't understand is why we just don't adjust our shipping costs when fuel goes up. Most of our costs are already based on labor hours and miles. Those factors are easy to adjust to derive a bottom-line shipping cost that includes increased fuel prices.
Something similar happens with airline tickets.
»travel.usatoday.com/deals/inside···071096/1
Like the article says, why do they go through these charades? In my opinion, it's in the hope that someone sees the $1,560 Lufthansa base ticket price and mistakenly thinks it's cheaper than the United $2,013 base ticket price even though both are equal after the extra fees are added. | |
|
| | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by rradina:Keeping it separate allows them to benefit the same way on-line merchants benefit from not disclosing shipping/handling fees and taxes when they send prices to search sites. Often the site with the lowest price isn't after you add S&H and potential sales tax. True, but even these websites have to show you all these fees before you commit to buying. ISPs and cell service providers currently don't. You don't know what the hidden fees are until the first bill arrives.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Should Be Illegal If you work at it you might find out about the modem rental fee but it will be buried in fine print that's so small and displayed so quickly that unless you have a 256hz 50" 1080p flat-panel with a DVR that let's you freeze the commercial, you'll be hard pressed to notice the fine print displayed for 500ms at the end of the 30 second spot:
Taxes and regulatory, franchise, equipment rental, setup and installation fees may apply. Price quoted is for comparison purposes and does not represent a final price.
But that $29.95/month will be in a type-face approved by the society for the blind and visually impaired. | |
|
| | | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Should Be Illegal said by rradina:If you work at it you might find out about the modem rental fee but it will be buried in fine print that's so small and displayed so quickly that unless you have a 256hz 50" 1080p flat-panel with a DVR that let's you freeze the commercial, you'll be hard pressed to notice the fine print displayed for 500ms at the end of the 30 second spot:
Taxes and regulatory, franchise, equipment rental, setup and installation fees may apply. Price quoted is for comparison purposes and does not represent a final price.
But that $29.95/month will be in a type-face approved by the society for the blind and visually impaired. But even that fine print doesn't tell me what the fees are. If a provider can calculate the fees down to the exact penny when I see the first bill then the provider should be made to do that before I sign anything.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
| |
| cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by pnh102:If the advertised cost of service doesn't include the cost of this fee, then Frontier users should contact their respective state attorney general's office and report blatant false advertising.
I really hope that most Frontier users have another option for broadband. This fee is total crap.
They could move their phone/internet service to Comcast...where they'll end up paying a $7 EMTA rental fee (in many areas). | |
|
| | ski93
join:2005-02-14
Northwood, NH | Re: Should Be Illegal If you have comcast phone you dont pay a rental fee for the EMTA...if buy the stand alone modem for the internet and not use the EMTA for internet you save the modem rental fee | |
|
| | How Long Until the class action lawsuit? You can't force a warranty onto people when there is a cost involved.
They can sure have an extended warranty plan on customer-owned equipment (for a monthly fee), but like hell they can force that on you. | |
|
| |
| | | This is like when old bell wanted you to use their phones only | |
|
| | | it won't due to other companies do the same thing. CentLink does the same thing. Except depending on their mood- you pay up front for the modem and then $4 for the modem.
Frontier could claim the modem was no longer supported and forced those customers to new ones with this. which I'm sure they'll end up doing anyway. But this is only "wrong" due to VZ not coming up with it on their own. | |
|
 n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY | Slow Death This looks like the desperate move of a company dying a slow death. Hopefully their lawyers will be educated in "class action" soon enough.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | | Re: Slow Death said by n2jtx:This looks like the desperate move of a company dying a slow death. Hopefully their lawyers will be educated in "class action" soon enough.
Lawyers don't care. Any litigation means a pay raise and a chance to fleece as many billable hours out of this toilet as possible. | |
|
| | | | Re: Slow Death Exactly right. Lawyers will win no matter what. | |
|
 thegeekPremium
join:2008-02-21
right here
kudos:2 | I laughed at how ridiculous this is. I love how companies do everything they can to bend you over anymore. | |
|
| | | Re: I laughed said by thegeek:I love how companies do everything they can to bend you over anymore.
As long as people keep putting up with it, companies will keep doing it and pushing the envelope to see how much further they can bend customers over.
You have to understand: In the U.S. it isn't about customer service and satisfaction anymore. Or pride in product or service. It hasn't been for... gee... several decades, at least. American companies are all run by bean counters whose primary objective is to make more money for themselves by making the company's investors happy.
The above is exacerbated by the fact that customers are largely no longer interested in buying quality, even in the rare times it is available. People want cheap and they want it now.
We're getting that for which we're asking.
Just like we are in government.
Jim | |
|
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: I laughed Which is why capitalism demands a competition. Either we all have to swear on a stack of [insert your religious text here] and be held accountable for ethics violations or the consumer must be given a choice to vote with their wallet.
If you only have one option for HSI, you can be assured that you will pay more, get less and if you don't like it, tough. | |
|
 Camelot OnePremium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1 | How do they stay in business? I can't recall ever seeing a "Frontier makes customers happy" news article on these jokers. Bogus fees left and right, flat out raping Fios customers, lousy customer service. How exactly does Frontier stay in business?
--
Intel i7-2600k /ASRock P67 Extreme4 /4x 4Gb G.Skill /2x Intel 510 series 250Gb SSD /3x WD20EADS 2TB /2x PNY GTX 260 /Silverstone 850W /Custom water cooler /Antec Twelve-Hundred | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: How do they stay in business? said by Camelot One:I can't recall ever seeing a "Frontier makes customers happy" news article on these jokers. Bogus fees left and right, flat out raping Fios customers, lousy customer service. How exactly does Frontier stay in business?
Competition. There isn't any. Customers have the choice of doing without or taking it.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
toro
join:2006-01-27
Scarborough, ON Reviews:
·Bell Sympatico
| Bell has been doing this for years Bell Canada has been doing this for years to their customers. They simply give you no option to own your modem. What's even funnier, you can purchase a Bell branded modem at FutureShop or Bestbuy and when you sign up for service, they will rebate you the cost of the modem and start charging the rental fee.
--
Providers: voip.ms, freephoneline, smartcall.ro through asterisk. Hardware: Vonage VDV21, Moto VT2x42, Linksys SPA series, Grandstream HT series, Panasonic KX-TGP5x0
»www.voipfan.net | |
|
| | | Re: Bell has been doing this for years said by toro: What's even funnier, you can purchase a Bell branded modem at FutureShop or Bestbuy and when you sign up for service, they will rebate you the cost of the modem and start charging the rental fee. The box is sold as an "activation kit", not as a retail modem. This is the same price as their one-time rental fee on online orders.
This is a little misleading but you are paying for the activation rather than the device... the store price is little more than a safety deposit on the modem until you actually proceed with the service order. | |
|
| | toro
join:2006-01-27
Scarborough, ON Reviews:
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: Bell has been doing this for years said by InvalidError:said by toro: What's even funnier, you can purchase a Bell branded modem at FutureShop or Bestbuy and when you sign up for service, they will rebate you the cost of the modem and start charging the rental fee. The box is sold as an "activation kit", not as a retail modem. This is the same price as their one-time rental fee on online orders. This is a little misleading but you are paying for the activation rather than the device... the store price is little more than a safety deposit on the modem until you actually proceed with the service order. Well, yes and no. There is a retail kit which includes a 2wire 2701HG modem and everything (cost is about $100) and an activation kit (about $20 if I'm not mistaken, sometimes on sale for $8 at Dell).
The one I was referring to is the modem kit.
--
Providers: voip.ms, freephoneline, smartcall.ro through asterisk. Hardware: Vonage VDV21, Moto VT2x42, Linksys SPA series, Grandstream HT series, Panasonic KX-TGP5x0
»www.voipfan.net | |
|
| | What could the FCC do? I am curious as to whether this is even legal or if the FCC could step in and do something. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Charter
| Re: What could the FCC do? said by fifty nine:I am curious as to whether this is even legal or if the FCC could step in and do something.
I dont believe its legal. Look at all those companies who charge for an extended auto warranty. They cant just start charging you and say "your in" regardless of what you want. I am gonna guess that Frontier is in the same situation, and will either back off the "fee" or will face legal action for something that is clearly illegal. | |
|
| | cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | Re: What could the FCC do? said by Chubbysumo:I dont believe its legal. Look at all those companies who charge for an extended auto warranty. Dealers don't sell extended auto warranties. They are service plans. There are legal differences between the two.
They cant just start charging you and say "your in" regardless of what you want. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| Consumer Protection It just amazes me that people (aka RWers) still do not see the necessity and value of a consumer protection agency like every other advanced nation has in place.
'Let the market decide right', dead wrong considering that a large portion of Americans often have no other choice. | |
|
| | wonder how quick mdeiacom follows ever since rocco took over mediacom they do every thing they can to make there service less apealing, now they have contracts, modem rental fee's, the DCT fee's are more than satilite,
ill bet you anything if frontier doesnt get sued in to oblivion mediacom willow follow suit. | |
|
|  IowaManPremium
join:2008-08-21
Grinnell, IA | Re: wonder how quick mdeiacom follows I'd like to see a map of Mediacom's service area,
Windstream and CenturyLink have one
Frontier, should be acquired | |
|
| | Pure Greed On average, a 3rd party modem might run you about $25. A 3rd party gateway might run around $45 or a little higher.
Based on Frontiers calculations, They will pull in roughly $168 for a 2 year contract. At roughly 1 million user base on a 2 year contract, that would be $168 million.
What people fail to realize is, like a lot of other ISP's, Frontier needs this money. Since they answer to Wall ST and not it's customers or its employees, they have to keep funneling money to their share holders. With the money they are loosing on the Verizon acquisition, loss of lines with people going to cells only, they need to find way's (loopholes) to rape the consumer.
Kind of like BoFA did with the "trial" of the $5 a month fee for using your debit card. I think the trial was what, 6 months long? Even if only 500,000 people in this country swiped their cards for just 1 month, thats $250,000 for the month in income. $1.5 million over 6 months.
So depending on what loophole they've found or created, it will go for a few months. Until the lawsuit comes into play. So let's say they only run with it for 3 months, with a user base of a million, they're looking at a $21 mil cash infusion to their share holders.
*my numbers are not actual. But close that i come with out digging their their quarterly reports. | |
|
| | | Re: Pure Greed Except that BofA's fee never went through. It was supposed to start in jan. but got cancelled a few weeks ago after wells fargo, chase, etc dropped their debit card fees as well. There is a 100% chance of Frontier proceeding with their fee. | |
|
| | As of this moment... ....I am charging all Broadband Reports viewers a $7 fee if you decide to not buy my product. You can choose to either pay my usage or non-usage fee, that way you have a choice....and everyone knows that giving consumers a choice is the right thing to do. | |
|
| | | Re: As of this moment... That's just messed up, hard. | |
|
| | | | Re: As of this moment... Congrats you''d be a billionaire soon May the free market force be with you | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by expert007:....I am charging all Broadband Reports viewers a $7 fee if you decide to not buy my product. You can choose to either pay my usage or non-usage fee, that way you have a choice....and everyone knows that giving consumers a choice is the right thing to do.
I am going to charge you a fee of 15 dollars per fee you charge for the right to charge the fee. | |
|
| | | | Re: As of this moment... Ah.....grasshoppa, I will then charge you $15 for not paying me the $15 you collected on my $7 fee.
I am pure genius. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: As of this moment... said by expert007:Ah.....grasshoppa, I will then charge you $15 for not paying me the $15 you collected on my $7 fee.
I am pure genius.
Which means I have to charge you 30 bucks to cover your 15 dollar fee which covers my 15 dollar fee which covers your 7 dollar fee. | |
|
 firephotoFacts hurtPremium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA | Security Are these carrier provided modems/routers even truly secure from all spying eyes? Doesn't seem like it would be easy to figure out what they are doing since you're plugging your equipment into a black box.
I had one westel modem from Verizon till Frontier took over and only in the last year replaced it just to avoid any downtime. It's bad enough they're hijacking and or just snooping on http search traffic and who knows what else, I definitely do not need to move their spying operation inside my walls which I suspect will or is happening with some excuse about diagnostics to go with it.
--
Say no to JAMS! | |
|
| | filling in for the resident NEOCON This should be perfectly legal. The government should not regulate this as it is a part of the free market. The free market will take care of it in an amicable way rather than having government entity for it . Any gubernment regulation on this would be tantamount to tax and spend SOCIALIST NAZI communist kenyan plot. If the customers donot agree to this fee they are traitorous criminals and should be dealt with pepper sprays and other brutalization.
That government is the best that governs the least, the things I like . | |
|
| | Seems like... Frontier customers need to contact their AG and PUC.
Frontier execs: "How can make the customer absorb the cost of our mistakes?"
Frontier middlemanager:" We could nickel and dime them!"
Frontier execs: "Ah, good idea. Wait! Even better, lets charge them a 'Nickel fee', and a 'Dime fee'!"
--
Splat | |
|
Reviews:
·Eastlink Cable
| Frontier Failboat One of many little baby steps Frontier is taking on it's way to bankruptcy.
Only one way to keep this sinking ship afloat and that's by getting more buckets! Shame this failboat was allowed to set sail in the first place by the FCC.
I mean really now, what could possibly go wrong with taking on over 3 Billion dollars in Verizon debt and buying up markets Verizon doesn't consider profitable enough to keep themselves...*cough* | |
|
| | paying for warranty service... then be sure to get the most out of it by having TS send as many modems out as replacements as you can stand to call in for. once the rental game costs more than they anticipated, you might see it go away. | |
|
 ArrayListnetbus developerPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | out of warranty??? lol who cares if it is out of warranty. as long as it works. | |
|
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms
| Nothing new People need to be aware that absorbing the Verizon 13 --and $3b in debt-- systems versus the legacy systems create a support nightmare, so while this may be a way to temporarily impose a fee hike on verizon people, it will ultimately allow them to swap out for similar supported devices lowering their costs, and hopefully a reinvestment back into infrastructure (capx vs opex). It is not unusual for service providers to provide the service premise equipment and charge for it. So if you are getting this fee, tell them you want a new DSL box, and sell the old one on ebay. And when the new one has issues, there is nobody else to blame. When Adelphia imploded and TWC came into town, they lowered service and added cost, and charged me $4 for my modem (which I owned). It happens. Luckily we have FIOS and DSL (both Verizon) but that has kept them in check. Frontier areas, maybe not. So 2 is better than one, but by all means it is not free market competition.
I cannot fathom how Frontier, fairpoint, etc fall into this trap of reverse morris trusts to acquire land (as it were), and now verizon is going to come back into town with their new shiny LTE cantennas and sell them as a loss leader to take back that market share. So blame Frontier for being crazy, but Verizon or whoever will be back in town w/ LTE soon enough, and then competition will force a recalibration. There are new DSL technologies out there to make this competitive, and they could always go a a hybrid model just the same like AT&T (i.e. the dsl line dies, replace w/ a wifi white space adapter as needed). Technology is a wonderful thing, and the market will kill the inefficient (that is unless the govt tinkers w/ it, and they will always do more harm than good). | |
|
| | The law of unintended consequences Just wait until the law of unintended consequences kicks in… now that they cannot blame the customer's modem every time there is an issue, I'll bet people will be much more willing to call in trouble reports. Even in cases where the lines are no worse than they were before, customers that have issues they might have previously overlooked may be more willing to call in, especially if they think that "with the amount of money I'm paying Frontier, I should NEVER have a service problem." So they will wind up having to do more truck rolls to fix issues that probably should have been fixed a long time ago, but because they were relatively minor and because the CSR's would try to blame the customer's equipment, were overlooked. Now, if a squirrel farts on the phone cable and the service goes out for ten seconds*, people will call to complain!
* And given the condition of some of the old GTE/Verizon lines that Frontier bought, a squirrel fart is about all that would be necessary to put another pair or two out of commission! | |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: The law of unintended consequences True, but they don't have to do anything about it.
If they can get away with this fee, they must figure they have little competition for people to switch to, so they can get away with not fixing issues, as well. :/
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Wow. Another posterchild for "Because we can." Got to love it. Lack of competition, expansion, innovation, and regulation.
Bring on the Muni-Fi. Our Last, Best hope for Peace.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
|
|
