dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
747

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

pnh102

Premium Member

Government Should Act

The government should require that the costs of these fees be included in the advertised price of the service. It is not right for people to be surprised with mystery fees on their monthly bills.

As for the $350 ETF, I don't have a problem with it, because this fee is fully disclosed and is entirely avoidable.

MSauk
MSauk
Premium Member
join:2002-01-17
Sandy, UT

1 recommendation

MSauk

Premium Member

What else is new, nobody can touch these ultra huge corporations. It is proven time and time again.

The fines they place on these companies are chump change in most instances, in fact in just about every single instance.

They run the government, the policies they vote on and most likely the outcome.

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

dvd536 to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

The government should require that the costs of these fees be included in the advertised price of the service. It is not right for people to be surprised with mystery fees on their monthly bills.

As for the $350 ETF, I don't have a problem with it, because this fee is fully disclosed and is entirely avoidable.
"Out the door pricing", now i'm all for this. never happen but i'm all for it.
dvd536

1 recommendation

dvd536 to MSauk

Premium Member

to MSauk
said by MSauk:

The fines they place on these companies are chump change in most instances, in fact in just about every single instance they filter back down onto the customers bill in one way or another.
there. i fixed it for you.

MSauk
MSauk
Premium Member
join:2002-01-17
Sandy, UT

MSauk

Premium Member

said by dvd536:

said by MSauk:

The fines they place on these companies are chump change in most instances, in fact in just about every single instance they filter back down onto the customers bill in one way or another.
there. i fixed it for you.
perfect

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
It looks like Verizon is going to extend ETF to FIOS.

If so, I have a huge problem with it.... because companies often sell you an internet service they can't always deliver. It's probably less of a problem with FIOS, but still.... if you get an expensive superfast Internet plan (and a 2 year contract) and 3 months in the connection is choked and sub-par, high latency/packet loss etc and they won't fix it, there's no way you should face a $350 ETF for dumping them

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

pnh102

Premium Member

said by KrK:

It looks like Verizon is going to extend ETF to FIOS.
I've heard. Comcast does something similar but they also offer a non-contract-based alternative. I take that only because I am so not interested in their bundles which include phone service.

If FIOS does offer a non-contract option, then I would really not have a problem with them offering a contract option. But either way, if the terms of the fee are fully disclosed up front, then that is fine with me. I just wish this was true of all the fees.

dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI

dnoyeB to dvd536

Member

to dvd536
The shareholders won't like it if they get fined or have a lawsuit against them. Especially one by the government.

NOVA_Guy
ObamaCare Kills Americans
Premium Member
join:2002-03-05

NOVA_Guy to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
So you wouldn't have a problem if they raised the ETF to $1,000 or more as long as it's disclosed prior to signing the contract?

How about creating a 5 year contract with a $10,000 ETF that goes down by $1,500 every year (leaving you owing $2,500 if you cancel on the last day of your contract), as long as it's disclosed?

My issue is less with having early termination fees, and more with how ridiculous they're becoming due to lack of adequate competition. In a competitive landscape, we wouldn't see $350 early termination fees that still require someone to pay $120 if they terminate on the last day of their contract. We wouldn't see a company espousing a BS line about how such ETFs help poor people buy handsets and surf the web (IMO, poor people shouldn't get these handsets and service in the first place-- if they have money for a Droid and can afford service they aren't poor in the first place and don't get any pity from me).

We also wouldn't see bogus $1.99 fees charged on people's bills, and a company completely denying that it's happening.

We also wouldn't see companies charging fees like "regulatory surcharges" on bills, and then increasing them quietly in the night as wireless companies do. And we wouldn't see companies like AT&T publicly crying about how mythical iPhone "bandwidth hogs" are crippling their network, while not providing even a shred of proof to back up their claims. And we wouldn't see stupid things like wireless data plans being advertised as "unlimited" while having 5GB caps placed on them in the contract's fine print. And we wouldn't see wireless companies charging the same price to customers who bring their own device as they do to customers who receive a handset subsidy.

A $350 ETF is ludicrous, and sickening. Verizon should be embarrassed to charge that, since they're not losing anywhere close to that much money-- even if you cancel your contract after day 1. I applaud the government at least looking in to such anti-consumer practices, even though their efforts will likely amount to very little (if any) change. At least it gives the appearance that they're looking out for the very citizens who pay their salaries.