| They can shove their fees We dont have to pay these fees. Just join together and say HELL NO!
It works.
It's because most people don't care about $4 here $2 there that they get away with it. Its time to remind them WE pay the bills and we're not gonna just start paying fees because THEY want more money. |
|
| said by ImBatman:We dont have to pay these fees. Just join together and say HELL NO! It works. It's because most people don't care about $4 here $2 there that they get away with it. Its time to remind them WE pay the bills and we're not gonna just start paying fees because THEY want more money. Send in a check by mail or pay thru your bank's Bill Pay system. Most banks I've seen charge no fees at all to pay bills thru their online systems. You pay no fees that way to those billing you. |
|
|
|
 tomkbPremium
join:2000-11-15
Tampa, FL
kudos:5 | reply to ImBatman
In my opinion, Quest is an evil corporation, just dirty. The audacity of a few executives who are so out of touch with society to think something like that would float. Really, to charge a fee so someone can give you money.
Pure scumbags, the poop of society.
In fact, IMO, quest is swine, a vulgar little maggot. A worthless bag of filth. A canker. A sore that won't go away. A putrescent mass, a walking vomit.
Those executives in my opinion are spineless little worms deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. jerks, cads, weasels.
Their life a monument to stupidity. A stench, a reuvlsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.
They are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying their alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired them and then killed themselfs in recognition of what they had done.
So what else is happening? |
|
 OCZThe Former Pocket
join:2009-05-15
Saint Paul, MN | said by tomkb:In my opinion, Quest is an evil corporation, just dirty. The audacity of a few executives who are so out of touch with society to think something like that would float. Really, to charge a fee so someone can give you money. Pure scumbags, the poop of society. In fact, IMO, quest is swine, a vulgar little maggot. A worthless bag of filth. A canker. A sore that won't go away. A putrescent mass, a walking vomit. Those executives in my opinion are spineless little worms deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. jerks, cads, weasels. Their life a monument to stupidity. A stench, a reuvlsion, a big suck on a sour lemon. They are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying their alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired them and then killed themselfs in recognition of what they had done. Remind me to NEVER piss off Tomkb. |
|
| Seriously. |
|
 TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | reply to tomkb
Well this rant is almost up to Duckman standards but it doesn't have the nice cadence a Duckman rant has.  |
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | reply to tomkb
Re: They can shove their fees What is that, the WoW insult engine? |
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to ImBatman
said by ImBatman:We dont have to pay these fees. You're paying for the added costs of operators taking payments over the phone, and Qwest paying 3.5% to credit card companies.
It's just a question of whether those costs should be apportioned to those who pay by check (and ACH bill pay)? Or, paid entirely by those who incur the costs?
Mark |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Most banks I've seen charge no fees at all to pay bills thru their online systems. I think, that's why Qwest wanted to charge people who pay using methods that cost Qwest more money to process the payment. ACH bill pay doesn't cost Qwest nor the customer anything. It's like writing an electronic check.
It won't surprise me if someday banks try to monetize ACH bill pay. But, for now it seems like they have an incentive to get everyone to use it instead of paper checks (lower cost to the bank). And, to get everyone to use it instead of credit cards so they have a user base to compete against credit-card companies (and presumably monetize it eventually).
It doesn't seem like a big consumer "win" to force Qwest to distribute higher-cost payment processing to everyone who doesn't contribute to those higher costs.
Mark |
|
1 edit | Feh. They're paying higher costs no matter what. Executives will simply find another way. Pretending they'd save money by inferring they should support higher costs for others is silly. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by Karl Bode:Feh. They're paying higher costs no matter what. Executives will simply find another way. Pretending they'd save money by inferring they should support higher costs for others is silly. C'mon, Karl. The "they wouldn't pass the savings on anyway" line is becoming circular. You use it for *everything*.
The same could be said that, by not allowing Qwest to recover costs more specifically from those who incur them, Qwest will just use it as an excuse to raise rates sooner (being the evil corporation just looking for an excuse to line its own pockets).
Or, we should just get rid of tiers? We know ISPs like Qwest won't really pass on the savings of lower-tier users to those users. So, they might as well be charged the same price as higher-tier users?
Using telephone operators to take payment information costs more. So does processing Visa payments.
Mark |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to tomkb
... tell us how you really feel would ya? lol |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by Karl Bode:Feh. They're paying higher costs no matter what. Executives will simply find another way. Pretending they'd save money by inferring they should support higher costs for others is silly. C'mon, Karl. The "they wouldn't pass the savings on anyway" line is becoming circular. You use it for *everything*. The same could be said that, by not allowing Qwest to recover costs more specifically from those who incur them, Qwest will just use it as an excuse to raise rates sooner (being the evil corporation just looking for an excuse to line its own pockets). Or, we should just get rid of tiers? We know ISPs like Qwest won't really pass on the savings of lower-tier users to those users. So, they might as well be charged the same price as higher-tier users? Using telephone operators to take payment information costs more. So does processing Visa payments. Mark Actually Mark free.fr in France has one tier, one price, and provides everyone with the best service they can afford while guaranteeing its owner a certain margin. They charge $40/month for a triple play of voice, internet, and TV and the owner takes $10/month margins on the service, using the rest of the money to upgrade speeds, build FTTH to major metropolises, and now to move into the wireless service business. So yes, one tier does make sense, especially considering the cost of provisioning 1.5 mbit/s versus 3mbit/s to a customer is virtually the same. |
|
| reply to tomkb
gee dude are you sure you don't leave anything out, i hope i never have it so bad i have to use all then words in one sentence...lol.. |
|
