| reply to openbox9
Re: Whats next? That argument has been said sooo many times in sooo many ways, it's become a mantra for every business in America (almost like the sky is falling). How many times has that been said whenever the minimum wage gets raised. What are the credit card companies now before the Credit Bill of Rights becomes enacted (I believe it was changed from Feb 1 2010 to Dec 1 2009). 
--
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian. Robert Orben
|
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | What do the minimum wage rates and the new credit card legislation have to do with ETFs for mobile phones? What do you think would happen if companies aren't allowed to charge appropriate ETFs for their products? My guess is that you'll pay more upfront for the devices. BTW, I do believe that the ETFs should be prorated by the number of months on the contract, i.e. prorate a $350 ETF by $14.58 for each month completed of a 24 month contract. |
|
| Because it is the same BS they try to claim to "protect" us consumers. EVERYTHING they don't want to do they claim will cost us more or won't work because "WE" won't except it and yet every single time the industry still strives because us consumers weren't hurt.
If phone prices go up then let them. Then the phone companies will have to find a way to make a good product for less. If they can't innovate in that respect then they don't need to sell phones. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | You're missing the point. The phone companies won't be impacted by this type of legislation. The consumers, ironically the ones this legislation is supposed to protect, will end up paying the cost. ETFs affect a relatively small population of mobile device customers. Why potentially impact everyone with higher costs for the "benefit" of a minority that actually wants to terminate their contracts? |
|
|
|
