Chiyo
Save Me Konata-Chan
Premium
join:2003-02-20
Minneapolis, MN
clubs: | thats the goverment for you
since when have they started caring for the people who elect them? not in a long time sadly I'm not surprised anymore...
--
My Blog:
»abanzai.animeblogger.net/ |
|
nmarrion
join:2001-05-22
Los Altos, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | Sprint do not pro-rate ETF
This article is not correct. Some, not all, wireless providers pro-rate their ETF. Sprint does not yet, they announced in Nov 2007 that they would do so sometime in 2008.
My guess is that if/when Sprint relax their $200 ETF then many customers will dump them, purely because Sprint Customer Service is so bad.
(article was later updated) |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  Multi-state businesses hate state regs & will opt for ....
... national regulation as an alternative every single time. Especially when state rules vary greatly from state to state. It is the same reason that the auto industry tries over and over to kill the California EPA regs that conflict with national EPA regs. It costs a lot to tailor your business from state to state and adds a lot of lawyers and lobbyists to your payroll to deal with many government agencies. Much preferable to deal with only 1.
"Faced with the prospect of multiple state policies on this issue, Verizon believes that appropriate federal action to establish a national policy is preferable."
-Verizon
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
kfsutops
Premium
join:2002-08-19
Brandon, FL
clubs:
| Yeah. That's what we need federal regulation. That way the lobbies can do what they do. Buy the FCC. Especially with that moron Martin running things with the FCC. He has absolutely to care for the customer. None.
ETF are not going anywhere. It has been talked about in other articles that the average subsidy on a cell phone is around $10-$15. Why should I pay a $200 ETF fee?
--
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots" |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA | So? That's what a contract is.
If you break a contract you should expect a penalty of some sort. Provided they are actually disclosing the fee, what's wrong with them? |
|
jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA
| Exactly. Go to any provider's website and it is clear that a fee is assessed if you break the contract early.
Don't like it? No problem. Every single major carrier offers prepaid, month-to-month plans without any long-term commitment necessary.
»www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-···-phones/
AT&T Go phone. No contract.
»www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/defa···tegory=4
T-Mobile. No contract.
»www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/stor···anDetail
Verizon. No contract.
»www.boostmobile.com/
Sprint Boost Mobile. No contract.
I personally recommend Virgin Mobile USA's prepaid plan, which gives 400 minutes a month with Unlimited nights and weekends for $49.99 a month:
»www.virginmobileusa.com/rates/mo···ainrates |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | reply to russotto
I think the problem is that invoking such contract provisions is in violation of the law in some states. More generally, it's bad because it's a barrier to competition. |
|
Richard B
Fur It Up
join:2007-06-22
Portland, OR
1 edit | bust a deal and face the wheel!
This is not the job of the FCC to interfere with private contracts. IF people are too stupid to read the contract then doom on them. It i also why I gone the pre-paid route. |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to nmarrion
Re: Sprint do not pro-rate ETF
said by nmarrion  :Some, not all, wireless providers pro-rate their ETF. Calling what the providers offer "pro-rating" is a lie since it is actually only discounting the remaining amount due if the contact is ended early. For it to be true pro-rating, the reduction per month must be set at a value where the sum of the reductions by the end of the term must equal the original amount.
IOW: If the EFT is $240 and the term is 24 months, you reduce the remaining EFT by $10 each month.
I question the EFT amount also since I feel it is set too high. The providers claim it is to reimburse them for giving me a discount on the handset but the difference between the price of a "free" (or discounted) handset and buying it outright from the provider is less than the EFT that they claim they are owed due to me not buying the handset but them selling/giving it at a discounted/subsidized price. |
|
floridaguy
@cox.net
| business law...
There's this little thing called Business Law and it tends to impact these things called "contracts." Basically, the carrier have a lot of the bargaining power, while the individual has very little. This is how/why the courts choose to frown upon ETF(s). The courts have tended to try and protect the little guy. |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Multi-state businesses hate state regs & will opt for ....
said by TKJunkMail :... national regulation as an alternative every single time. Especially when state rules vary greatly from state to state. It is the same reason that the auto industry tries over and over to kill the California EPA regs that conflict with national EPA regs. It costs a lot to tailor your business from state to state and adds a lot of lawyers and lobbyists to your payroll to deal with many government agencies. Much preferable to deal with only 1. So just meet the most stringent (the CA Regs in this case) and you will (should?) meet the others. Their problem is trying the cut corners by having different versions instead of just one that will meet the most stringent version. I'd guess that the cost of going this way would be LESS than the cost of all those "lawyers and lobbyists to your payroll". |
|
BigMac777
join:2001-07-21
Green Valley, AZ | Yes To Government
Thank goodness the FEDS are going to do something. Right or wrong, at least the crooked Cell carriers will have to take notice and reduce some of there high fees. I say yes to the Government coming to the rescue. ABOUT TIME. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
| reply to RARPSL
Re: Multi-state businesses hate state regs & will opt for ....
You can't compete doing what you're doing because you will be competing in other states with companies not following the stricter regs.
There is no such thing as "just meeting" regulations. It costs money to do that an in terms the actual Cal EPA regs example, it costs us a fortune. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
2 edits | Pay full price for the phone
Can't you avoid any ETF by paying full price for the phone and doing an month to month plan? |
|
esc0
@newskies.net
| reply to nmarrion
Re: Sprint do not pro-rate ETF
I got out of my contract with Sprint even before they said they were considering prorated ETF. They had a change in services that voided many customer's contracts. I am no longer going with any company that requires a contract for cell service.
Other countries around the world has some type of contract also, but the US is getting worse. And now with the internet useage fee. We are going back in time instead of ahead with technology, yet the majority of us think we have the best consumer services. Sad day in America....... |
|
AbBaZaBbA
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Wildomar, CA | .
why not get a plan you want to be locked into. Such as the sprint sero 500 minutes $30 a month, unlimited text unlimited data.
If sprint goes under before my 2 year contract is up i'm going to be very sad. |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| reply to axus
Re: So? That's what a contract is.
said by axus :I think the problem is that invoking such contract provisions is in violation of the law in some states. More generally, it's bad because it's a barrier to competition. Really, which states? Can you provide details?
Really, its simple, you promise to stay with them for x time and they give you money off a phone. Its purely voluntary, it benefits some people but not others. I don't tell other people what they can't go month to month - why can't they have the same courtesy about me getting a long-term deal? |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| reply to Dogfather
Re: Pay full price for the phone
Some carriers make that difficult- though it's often not so much the carriers policy as much as salesmen hoping to make the highest commissions.
In general I support subsidized phone plans, but there should be unsubsidized ETF-free options as well. |
|
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs:
·Optimum Online
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Multi-state businesses hate state regs & will opt for ....
said by TKJunkMail :... national regulation as an alternative every single time. Especially when state rules vary greatly from state to state. It is the same reason that the auto industry tries over and over to kill the California EPA regs that conflict with national EPA regs. It costs a lot to tailor your business from state to state and adds a lot of lawyers and lobbyists to your payroll to deal with many government agencies. Much preferable to deal with only 1. "Faced with the prospect of multiple state policies on this issue, Verizon believes that appropriate federal action to establish a national policy is preferable."
-Verizon Don't feed the shill.. Move along nothing to see here.
--
Reach out and Tap someone! |
|
