how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
229 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3
 ·Vonage
 ·Optimum Online
| Consumer Caught in the Middle May be it's me -- while I can say that I'd consider this fair business practices on the part of Verizon, it does have a little bit of slime associated with it. The customer made a choice to change providers, and they shouldn't have to fight to make that choice once they provide the correct paperwork.
If I wanted to leave Verizon for a cable company, I would have done my research before hand, or at least inquired about a Verizon discount to "save me". May be not every customer would do this, but if it happened to me, I would be a little pissed with Verizon.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | | |
|
| said by Jeffrey:May be it's me -- while I can say that I'd consider this fair business practices on the part of Verizon, it does have a little bit of slime associated with it. The customer made a choice to change providers, and they shouldn't have to fight to make that choice once they provide the correct paperwork. The slime part isn't because they are trying to retain customers. It is because they often DELAY a port of a number for more time than is necessary so that they can extend their marketing effort. The FCC gets involved because delaying porting of a number is against the rules.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| said by fAcEtIOUs:said by Jeffrey:May be it's me -- while I can say that I'd consider this fair business practices on the part of Verizon, it does have a little bit of slime associated with it. The customer made a choice to change providers, and they shouldn't have to fight to make that choice once they provide the correct paperwork. The slime part isn't because they are trying to retain customers. It is because they often DELAY a port of a number for more time than is necessary so that they can extend their marketing effort. The FCC gets involved because delaying porting of a number is against the rules. Yeah I agree, that's what I'm implying if I wasn't clear. Wanting to retain the business is fine, but any delays that further prohibit the customer's choice is slimey, IMHO.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | |
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Here's another issue that many people have forgotten about. These incumbents have not played very nice PERIOD to anyone else they deal with.
Back when DSL was in full swing, and they were supposed to play by similar rules with the CLEC providers, or 3rd party DSL providers, they'd play the same tricks.
Say for example, PacBell.. You placed an order with PacBell for DSL and they could get you up in one week. However, order it from MCI (CLEC) and it would take upwards to 30 days. Meanwhile, while the customer who chose to use another company to provide the DSL is waiting for their extended order to be installed (if they were lucky it only took 30 days) PacBell would break the rules, look at the customer data, market that customer, and take the customer away from the CLEC/3rd Party.
I always found THAT, too, to be slimy. If I were the 3rd parties, I would have sued the ILECs off their as*es. MCI marketed the customer, while PacBell would take the free lead.. and often would sell the service even cheaper to the customer than PacBell would have if the customer called PacBell direct.
I see some of the same concept going on here. Let's now use Comcast and Verzion as an example. Comcast marketed the customer with offers - and spends a lot of money doing so. Verizon gets the port order from Comcast to lose the number, so Verizon uses the efforts and money resources of Comcast to solicit a customer who, technically, is no longer theirs at that point.
The rule is a good one. I don't see cable as limiting the choices of customers. Verizon is perfectly in their rights to solicit the customer after the banned period has ended. They can STILL use the loss as a lead.. Verizon is afraid the customer will taste the new service and stay. To be fair, some customers come back, quickly at times, on their own anyway.
With the recent past events of Verizon in the way they are going after the competitor, I do not feel sorry for them one bit. If ANYONE is limiting customer choice, it's CLEARLY Verizon... | |
|
