dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
383

AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ

1 recommendation

AVD

Premium Member

bad PR

how stupid, so much bad publicity for revenue of a few Thousand dollars.

cdru
Go Colts
MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

cdru

MVM

said by AVD:

how stupid, so much bad publicity for revenue of a few Thousand dollars.

There's no such thing as bad publicity. There's good publicity, and publicity. If they pulled it off, they are a few thousand dollars ahead. If they have the PR issue, they are out no less then what they would be had they done the "right" thing to begin with. Anyone who leaves because [AT&T|CableOne|Charter|Comcast] is nothing more than a blip on the churn rate radar.

It sucks, but it's reality.
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin to AVD

Member

to AVD
said by AVD:

how stupid, so much bad publicity for revenue of a few Thousand dollars.

They don't care because no one can leave. No one competes with them.
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI

Mele20

Premium Member

said by sonicmerlin:

said by AVD:

how stupid, so much bad publicity for revenue of a few Thousand dollars.

They don't care because no one can leave. No one competes with them.

What I don't get is where is the franchiser in this? It is the responsibility of the franchiser to stop such shenanigans. If they shirk their responsibility then the citizens can vote them/their superiors out of office and can sue the monopoly and put pressure on the franchiser to not renew the franchise when up for renewal, to revoke the franchise, etc. With the right to be a monopoly comes certain responsibilities and it is the job of the franchiser to make sure those responsibilities are taken seriously.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

While it's a nice rant you made, the issue remains that the franchise authority has nothing to do with anything as you have stated it. I would guarantee you that there are no provisions in the franchise agreement that states "after a natural disaster, the franchisee must forgive all damages due for lost boxes... " etc. The cable company does have a right to collect on the damages or lost equipment from the customer which WILL be payable through their home owner's insurance once a claim is filed. Many people do have insurance on their homes AND the home owner / subscriber is able to file the lost equipment at the time of claim. When this is the case, the provider has EVERY right to claim their losses as well.. it's the responsibility of the home owner.

The fee to keep the account on hold is a joke. However, there is clearly going to be more to the story.. there always is. The media, and Karl, love to sensationalize things a bit... okay, a lot. (Giving credit where due) I'd imagine that a few representatives in call centers several states away had no idea what they were facing when people call in. However, providers SHOULD be a bit more proactive about these kinds of situations and have a policy in place so they don't insult the victims of these natural disasters. The providers SHOULD have a flag placed on these accounts and assign an adjuster or representative to handle these accounts.

Asking for "immediate payment" as stated here is a bit of the same crap comcast is being accused of on the part of the "reporters".. I don't think I've EVER heard a CSR say "you have to pay NOW tornado victim!!" Seriously! And even then, do you really think that these residents are worried about Comcast demanding payment for their service at the time of impact or right after? .. yea.. right.

I'm glad you all have been emotionally charged by these stories, but they get blown up quite a bit for ratings of course.

If my house was blown down in a tornado, I'd absolutely take care of business in a reasonable amount of time - calling providers. I'd make them aware, and move on. As things come in I'd deal with it. First thing I'm going to do is contact the insurance company anyway. Any bill that I get from Comcast, Charter, TWC, Verizon, ATT, etc, I'm going to turn over to the insurance company anyway.. that's what we have insurance for! and like I said, those providers are absolutely entitled to ME paying them out of my insurance which covers that stuff.

Now.. as for those less fortunate, either as renters who haven't insured their contents, or the lower income, and even for idiots who don't insure their homes for what ever reason, then I'd say that the companies should write that stuff off if there are no other security blankets available.

As for their service status.. where I do agree with other users here is that there should be no charge to place accounts on hold, or suspend billing for things like telephone service, etc. for at least up to 90 days at no charge so the customer can get their life in order.
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI

Mele20

Premium Member

Of course, the franchise authority has everything to do with it. You want to continue your fanciful ignorance go ahead...it just makes you look dumb.

As for renters, yeah, I have renter's insurance but it would not cover my modem. It has a $500 deductible and there are no lower deductibles. Plus, it does not cover acts of God which is what a tornado, hurricane, tsunami are. I was extremely lucky to even be able to get any renter's insurance because almost all insurers will not insure the contents of homes on the coastline for anything and 95% of them insure only for cash value only if you are a renter and live away from the coastline. Renter's insurance is for liability mostly and to cover fire, theft and not much else.

quetwo
That VoIP Guy
Premium Member
join:2004-09-04
East Lansing, MI

quetwo to Mele20

Premium Member

to Mele20
This is in Michigan -- one of the states where our elected officials decided to team up with AT&T, and pass a franchise reform bill. Franchises are granted at the State level, with no input or responsibility to the local level.

In turn, us citizens can appear before the state PUC's monthly meetings (located in Lansing) and petition for a hearing if we want anything done. Currently, their schedule has slots about 12 - 16 months away, if they choose to pick up your request.

It's an awesome setup -- and allows for consequence-free actions of our local telecoms :S

jtudor
MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC

jtudor to Mele20

MVM

to Mele20
said by Mele20:

said by sonicmerlin:

said by AVD:

how stupid, so much bad publicity for revenue of a few Thousand dollars.

They don't care because no one can leave. No one competes with them.

What I don't get is where is the franchiser in this? It is the responsibility of the franchiser to stop such shenanigans.

With the right to be a monopoly comes certain responsibilities and it is the job of the franchiser to make sure those responsibilities are taken seriously.

Actually Most cable systems are a monopoly only because nobody wants to overbuild. They are not like electric and POTS phone companies who have true monopolies and are monitored by state PUC's. The franchiser (city or county) CAN grant overbuild rights to another cable company, but in most places nobody is interested, as they say there is not a sufficient market to support overbuilding.
In my area, two of the three largest towns in the county had overbuilding by a new company that built out the entire county except for the largest town. All three towns were served by TCI (remember them?). After TCI lost the franchise in the largest town to a municipal built system, they eventually pulled out of the other two towns, and the county wide system was eventually bought by Charter. Since then there has been no overbuilding here, actually not even any interest in it by anyone.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2 to Mele20

Premium Member

to Mele20
Please show me on a franchise agreement where "compassion" is part of the terms? In a contract there isn't a lot left to grey areas.. it's usually black and white. You can continue to view things in an emotional way but when it comes to franchises it's all about the black and white - that is the extent of their reach. Do you understand what contracts are? I find it ironic you call me ignorant when you yourself have no understanding of what you speak of.

You're in Hawaii and things certainly are different there. Other than being a state in the U.S. there doesn't seem to be much other in common with the rest of the country. (For example, name another state that charges non-residents different taxes or rates than residents.) You also live on an island.. a real island, and not an island like Manhattan. With that said, in the state I live in, which is one of the tornado alley states, renters insurance here covers content in case of "acts of god".. that's more than half of why you have covrerage.

AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ

AVD

Premium Member

this thread is only about discussions from a PR not legal standpoint.
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI

Mele20 to fiberguy2

Premium Member

to fiberguy2
said by fiberguy2:

Please show me on a franchise agreement where "compassion" is part of the terms?

Who said anything about the actual terms in legalese of the franchise agreement? I'm referring to good or bad PR and how the consumer does have weight to bring to the table. In Hawaii, if Oceanic TWC were to pull something like this...well, I would be shocked if they tried because they know damn well that you don't do this crap in this state. Oceanic was a locally grown and owned cable company for many, many years (and much loved) until TWC purchased them and, yeah, I guess things are different here. Note the official name is OCEANIC TWC. TWC corporate, idiots that they are, tried to force the removal of "Oceanic" from the official name of the company. That went over with Oceanic, and the general public, like a lead balloon. Oceanic got to keep "Oceanic" in the offical name and we are the sole exception of all TWC franchises/divisions in this regard.

If Oceanic tried this after a major natural disaster, not only would the media be all over it quickly but consumers would file formal complaints with the Dept of Commerce and Consumer Affairs under which cable TV division resides and the consumers would also file formal complaints against Oceanic with the state of Hawaii Office of Consumer Affairs. There would be investigations by both departments, hearings, etc. This is a pro consumer state unlike many on the Mainland. Businesses that forget about the concept of Aloha don't last long here.