1 edit | reply to fiberguy
Re: Verizon! said by fiberguy:Why don't you first learn how to read and maybe I wouldn't have to answer your very strange questions. It's nice when people play tough guy on the Internet. It says a lot about them. I guess it makes you feel good.
said by fiberguy:For one, DISTINCTLY made a difference between save offers and initial promotional offers. I do NOT believe in save offers, I believe that legally they are anti-competitive and hurts other businesses. When you're with a current company who has disclosed their rates to you as, say $50 a month, and company B comes along with an every day price of $40 a month and you found you like that price better.. you call to cancel your service and your current provider says "Wait.. don't leave.. what if we offer you service for a year at $30 a month".. you'd stay. What you believe, and what is actual are two different things. It's a common mistake that people around these parts like to make. What you believe is "common sense" doesn't always matter in reality. Sound familiar? It should.
said by fiberguy:How about if you just called up your provider and said "Hey.. This rate is too high, can you lower my bill".. they are going to say "NO".. its ONLY when you are leaving to take another companies service that they are willing to give you a better deal. What you accuse others of, you appear to do yourself. Try dealing with some facts. Your statement above is not a fact, and is even incorrect.
Look at the following post, a user on this website that uses my provider. They clearly stated they did not have to threaten to cancel, only asked for a better deal. And they got it:
»Re: [IL] Specials
I do not believe he is the only one who received such an offer for simply calling and asking about ways to lower a bill without any mention of dropping services or the entire business.
said by fiberguy:Second, I also stated that I have NO problems with promotional introductory offers. These are generally given as a way to get people to try their service. THESE offers are given FAIRLY across the board to ALL customers who are signing up. It does not matter what you have a problem with. This is not about you.
I fail to see the difference between someone being offered a "save" plan, and someone being offered a "intro" plan. Please tell me, besides the obvious, exactly how they are so different to the point that one is fair, while the other is not fair?
You claim that the intro promos are offered to all. That might be true in the sense that they are for all those who qualify, but it's simply not true that everyone receives them. It's another assumption you make. If you do not ask for the promo price, or mention it, you do NOT ALWAYS get it. Once again, the customer has to be willing to "wheel and deal" and be on top of the situation. Therefore, I still do not see the difference between someone:
1) Asking for a better rate, such as openbox9  did in my referenced thread above
2) Threatening to cancel unless they can get a better deal
3) Signing up under a intro plan
All are the same. It's the business' attempt to keep, or secure, a customer to add to their figures. Nothing more. How can number 2 be "anti-competitive", as you claim it, while number 3 isn't?
If you believe a "save" deal is anti-competitive, then isn't those "price match" guarantees that so many retail outlets use? The ones where if product X is advertised at business A for a lower price, the business will honor (and sometimes with an extra percentage off) the price of product X advertised at business A.
said by fiberguy:You, however, didn't read what I said or you wouldn't have gone on like you did. And to answer your question, if someone calls in with a threat to disconnect and an offer is made available to THAT customer that would not normally be offered to others simply for asking, then yes, that should be illegal, and, technically, I believe it already is. The fact that it happens, and the fact that both companies do it, in my opinion, tells me that while bother do it, neither will try to stop the other and both deem it ok, void of what the laws state. And, I've already cited a case where it was decided anti-competitive rules were violated for similar/same actions. And, I only singled out cable companies, since we're basing conversations on topic (are you?) is why I put cable on the side that I did.. again, PLEASE read before you post. Once again, though guy on the Internet. How about I make you a deal. I'll read before I post (as I usually do), if I can ask that you not only please think before you post, and don't make assumptions or incorrect statements such as you did above, but try to drop your tough guy attitude as it makes it seems you are a 16 year old. Thanks! |
