AT&T Tries, Fails To Justify 3G Cap-Eating Microcell > ???

???

We should all be happy to pay more for the privilege of using their service. /sarcasm

Its completely predatory, the customer already pays top $$ for service and then when they cannot provide adequate service they attempt to further fleece the customer in order for the honor of sending them X dollars a month.

This is what I told Verizon when they wanted to charge me $249 for one and then I told them I will be porting my number to another service. After a 20 minute conversation with a nice guy at VZW (from what I assume was the retention dept) , I talked him down to $50 and there's no monthly charge for using it with VZW.

How does the fact that I bought one change anything? I did what I needed to do to maintain a phone without having to get a land line.

I paid 1/5 of what they wanted to victimize me for, $50 vs $249. I did the math and buying new phones (actually 1 since the wife uses a cheap free model) for our family plan would have been more costly. If I had to pay any monthly fee for the use I would've went to another company instantly.

It still left a bad taste in my mouth and if ATT didn't suck in the New York metro area I probably would've jumped ship anyway. I went with whatever cost me less in the long term. They should provide it free of charge to customers if they allow you to sign up for service in an area that has crap reception. They know where they have trouble areas and if they're willing to sign you up when your in one of them they should offer it as part of the service.

reply to swintec

reply to swintec

reply to margaf77

reply to margaf77
I am missing the pic of the verizon person with the gun to your head telling you, you have to buy this... Till I see it I say balderdash!!

reply to oh_really
I already give them a nice chunk of money every month and if they wanted to keep my business and continue receiving a check from me every month then they better provide it or they can pound salt. And charging someone for one when it uses the customers internet and takes the burden off their equipment is ludicrous. I wasnt willing to pay more to use their service and then burden MY equipment (internet, router spot, etc) to extend their network.

I dont live in the sticks, I live 10 mins from Manhattan, and when I moved here I found there was dead spot and called up and when they wanted to hit me for $249 told them they could kiss my ass for that...after asking and getting the OK to kill the contract. I gave it a couple of days to think about what I wanted to do and who I was going to port my lines to.

They called me back and began a negotiation which I told the guy I wasnt willing to pay a thing for it. We went back and forth and he finally asked me what I was realistically willing to pay I told him $50 not a penny more and BAM I got it.

Having a customer pay a monthly fee and pay for equipment for the privilege of being a customer and paying already high fees is complete bullshit, plain and simple. The only reason I went for the $50 is the cost of a decent phone on another provider would've been much more.

reply to notwrth10

reply to margaf77

Your argument is plain silly, I pay to be able to use the service anywhere I go, I didnt have the "Can you hear me now?" guy here, I had a bum with a tin can and a string. I wasnt in a dead zone when I signed my contract, it became an issue when I moved to the godforsaken shithole that is Bayonne, NJ.

Im fully aware of the small amount of traffic it generates but it is using a connection I pay for but when I am downloading large files I have to leave a small amount of bandwidth reserved for the extender using QOS, or my cell call is broken up which of course I dont change back so its just "lost" bandwidth.

I see you just want to argue a silly point endlessly. Ill leave it at this I, as well as a majority people here, see this as a scummy practice. I wouldve quicker jumped ship and bought new phones before I gave them a completely unreasonable $249 for the network extender.

reply to swintec