republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Wireless Carriers Trying To Kill ETF Lawsuits » Getting new rules locked in by FCC better than lawsuits ....
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
269
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
« You DID sign up, right?  
page: 1 · 2
AuthorAll Replies


TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

 Getting new rules locked in by FCC better than lawsuits ....

... where the only winners would be the lawyers who file the class action lawsuits.

By having the FCC ratify and make the new policies law instead of just phone company policy, the consumers get the break and the phone companies can't back out of them later.

All the lawsuits will do is line the pockets of a bunch of scummy law firms that would probably net the actual customer nothing more than a discount voucher on their next phone upgrade.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

jc100

join:2002-04-10

TK JUNK,

We all recognize this but you miss the big picture. While the lawyers WILL GET RICH, consumers will have laws protecting them on the books. Companies will no longer be able to get away with this crap. It has to come at someone's expense. Sure the lawyers will be the real winners monetarily, but the consumers will finally get protections in place.


TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by jc100 See Profile :

TK JUNK,

We all recognize this but you miss the big picture. While the lawyers WILL GET RICH, consumers will have laws protecting them on the books. Companies will no longer be able to get away with this crap. It has to come at someone's expense. Sure the lawyers will be the real winners monetarily, but the consumers will finally get protections in place.
But they get the legal protections anyway when the FCC implements the new rules. So where is the need for the lawsuits? All the lawsuits do is raise the costs to the cell companies - which WILL be passed on to the customer in higher fees.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


mod_wastrel

join:2008-03-28
reply to TKJunkMail
"scummy law firms"

That's redundant.

jc100

join:2002-04-10

reply to TKJunkMail
Tk you are very very wrong. It usually takes lawsuits to spur the action of agencies. Do you think worker protections, safety measures, and many of the luxuries we enjoy were done on their own? If you say yes, you are by far mistaken. Most changes only came after legal battles occurred. While I hate that the lawyers get rich off this, it's a fact of life.


jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:

reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Getting new rules locked in by FCC better than lawsuits ....

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

But they get the legal protections anyway when the FCC implements the new rules. So where is the need for the lawsuits? All the lawsuits do is raise the costs to the cell companies - which WILL be passed on to the customer in higher fees.
Because of course, if we know something from all your posts, is that your real concern is always how this will affect the customers.


TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by jhboricua See Profile :

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

But they get the legal protections anyway when the FCC implements the new rules. So where is the need for the lawsuits? All the lawsuits do is raise the costs to the cell companies - which WILL be passed on to the customer in higher fees.
Because of course, if we know something from all your posts, is that your real concern is always how this will affect the customers.
I'm a customer. I care too.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..

reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

... where the only winners would be the lawyers who file the class action lawsuits.

By having the FCC ratify and make the new policies law instead of just phone company policy, the consumers get the break and the phone companies can't back out of them later.

All the lawsuits will do is line the pockets of a bunch of scummy law firms that would probably net the actual customer nothing more than a discount voucher on their next phone upgrade.
The FCC can't create laws, only regulations with fines attached. You know this.

I agree with you though that we need laws in place, rather than class-action lawsuits, to protect consumers.


TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast


1 edit
said by Matt See Profile :

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

... where the only winners would be the lawyers who file the class action lawsuits.

By having the FCC ratify and make the new policies law instead of just phone company policy, the consumers get the break and the phone companies can't back out of them later.

All the lawsuits will do is line the pockets of a bunch of scummy law firms that would probably net the actual customer nothing more than a discount voucher on their next phone upgrade.
The FCC can't create laws, only regulations with fines attached. You know this.

I agree with you though that we need laws in place, rather than class-action lawsuits, to protect consumers.
But the regulations have the force of law when they are issued. This wouldn't be a policy statement like the FCC has for network neutrality, but real regulations that can be enforced by the courts.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

reply to mod_wastrel
said by mod_wastrel See Profile :

"scummy law firms"

That's redundant.
It is also insulting to scum.
--
This isn't fair! I was only supposed to hate just ONE presidential candidate!

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to jc100
Re: Getting new rules locked in by FCC better than lawsuits ....

There should be NO ETF fees. The companies are all big enough to handle setups and the risks. If I suddenly don't like a service, or move, or whatever, I shouldn't be penalized. NO ETFs.


TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by jjeffeory See Profile :

There should be NO ETF fees. The companies are all big enough to handle setups and the risks. If I suddenly don't like a service, or move, or whatever, I shouldn't be penalized. NO ETFs.
Without any ETF at all, there would be hundreds, if not thousands of people, who would get service, quit, and then resell cellphones they got at deep discounts on eBay and elsewhere. Therefore, getting rid of ETFs would result in "no discounts" on cellphones. Sure you could then buy one on your own at full price, but you won't get the deal a Verizon or AT&T get when they buy cellphones in the millions and then resell them.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


ReVeLaTeD
Premium
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA

reply to jjeffeory
You're kidding, right?

It costs time, and money, to set up a new account. Provisioning the line, activating the equipment, maintaining signal, etc etc etc...all rolled into it. It's not acceptable for the companies to eat thousands of dollars because a consumer got buyer's remorse two months in.

That said...on the flip side, state law needs to provide for a "cooling off" period. California, for example, does allow for 30 days to try a phone and service and cancel with no penalty or cost. I think that's more than reasonable. Notice I said STATE law. It shouldn't be Federally mandated, because no two states are different in their saturation of customers. California, I'm sure, has more Cingular and T-mo customers than the state of Montana.

What I would like to see here though, is a Federal ban on mandatory contract extensions due to account activity. I mean, if I'm in an apartment, my lease doesn't get extended unless I sign a new agreement to that effect. I don't think it's fair at all that they can essentially keep a customer for the long haul just because Joe Customer decided he wanted 600 minutes instead of 300. Ban the mandatory, force the cellcos to use incentives and competition to convince customers to extend on their own free will.

Of course, that would make too much sense.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

reply to TKJunkMail
This is why they should offer the plans unlinked to any phone.

IE "Bring your own phone" or "Buy what you like" and use our service. What they have been doing is using the gee whiz factor of the latest fancy phone to sell people their service contracts (iPhone, anyone?).

There should be no ETF options on every contract level. You buy the phone you want, or pick one they offer, and have the choice to pay normal price (or buy one off the Net). IE every phone should be unlocked and not bound to a particular carrier. That's been anti-competitive for years.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

reply to ReVeLaTeD
said by ReVeLaTeD See Profile :

You're kidding, right?

It costs time, and money, to set up a new account. Provisioning the line, activating the equipment, maintaining signal, etc etc etc...all rolled into it.
On a wireless new account? Please. I think the main cost is the labor cost of the employee who has to spend 30 seconds typing your info into the computer to set up your account.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)


Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..

said by KrK See Profile :

said by ReVeLaTeD See Profile :

You're kidding, right?

It costs time, and money, to set up a new account. Provisioning the line, activating the equipment, maintaining signal, etc etc etc...all rolled into it.
On a wireless new account? Please. I think the main cost is the labor cost of the employee who has to spend 30 seconds typing your info into the computer to set up your account.
You're exactly right. Sometimes, a human isn't even required. I've added 3 lines via the web with Verizon, with no human interaction whatsoever. The phones were active in 5 minutes or so.

It's the discounts on the phones that will lock the consumer into the contract. Most carriers will allow you to have a plan with no contract if you don't buy a discounted handset.

EPS

join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA

reply to KrK
I disagree- I know a cell-phone company will work in my area, if I can get a free phone by agreeing to sign up with them for a long-term contract why shouldn't I?

Now, non-contract options should be available, but I think for most consumers the current set-up is more cost-efficient than the one you are suggesting.


dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

said by jjeffeory See Profile :

There should be NO ETF fees. The companies are all big enough to handle setups and the risks. If I suddenly don't like a service, or move, or whatever, I shouldn't be penalized. NO ETFs.
Without any ETF at all, there would be hundreds, if not thousands of people, who would get service, quit, and then resell cellphones they got at deep discounts on eBay and elsewhere. Therefore, getting rid of ETFs would result in "no discounts" on cellphones. Sure you could then buy one on your own at full price, but you won't get the deal a Verizon or AT&T get when they buy cellphones in the millions and then resell them.
What about those that bring their own handset and get nothing in subsidies when they join and are unhappy and get hit with ETF. sorry TK i dont buy that arguement. is just an easy no cost way to make money off of unhappy subs.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
Forums » Wireless Carriers Trying To Kill ETF Lawsuits« You DID sign up, right?  
page: 1 · 2


Saturday, 28-Nov 16:14:53 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [122] Time Warner Cable Fires Broadside At Broadcasters
· [112] New AT&T Ad Campaign Hits Back At Verizon
· [96] Apple Joins AT&T Verizon Snark Fest
· [87] New Bill Takes Aim At Higher Verizon ETFs
· [76] TiVo Sees Record Customer Losses
· [70] Verizon CEO: Hulu Will Be Dead Soon
· [69] In-Flight Internet Headed For Bumpy Landing?
· [62] Thanksgiving Open Thread
· [62] Weekend Open Thread
· [40] EFF Wages War On Fine Print
Most people now reading
· ToC 4th boss - Preliminary Strategy for Twin Valkyr [World of Warcraft]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Why would I want an e reader? [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· What is the spell hit cap for a lvl 80 full arcane spec mage [World of Warcraft]
· [WIN7] What Win 7 version has Complete Backup and Restore [Microsoft Help]
· Blue Ray: Samsung BD-P3600 or LG BD390 [Audio/Video Chat]
· [Vista] Why is HD So Full? [Microsoft Help]
· Why does it take so long? Mail question [General Questions]
· Gizmo5 has added a Google Voice section in its members area. [VOIP Tech Chat]