Sonic.Net Offering 1 Gbps, Unlimited Phone for $40 in California → Don't worry

I'm sure they'll still charge hidden below-the-line fees and act like it's for our own good, like every other major provider.

(»newsignup.sonic.net/shop, $39.95asterisk a month, look at the Equipment & Install tab and discover... oh, cool, a free included router. Just kidding, you have to click on the FAQ and look at the very last question to discover the actual price is $46.45 a month (or 16.3% higher than advertised) because you are forced to pay them an equipment rental fee even if you don't use their equipment. At least the cable companies aren't bending you over that hard yet.)

This isn't even getting into the minimum $10 of other bullshit fees that are actually disclosed with the asterisk: »newsignup.sonic.net/taxesfees. (Hint: very few of those are actual taxes. Most are just fees that Sonic pockets.)

The absolute cheapest you can get the $39.95asterisk plan for is $56.11 (or 40.4% higher than the advertised price). But I guess $56.11 doesn't sound as cool as $40.

Not excusing below the line pricing, but it's still cheap at that price.

Sonic routinely gets an exemption from press critique because of the uber-left / faux-anti-corporate / davey v. goliath profile and hero-halo status.

Dane's excuse for mandatory modem rental was "everyone else does it"; his tacit approval of massive regressive telephone taxes applicable to his service is reprehensible, yet his sycophants are silent.

Granted, it is hard to squeeze all the disclosures and extra charges into a simple bumper sticker or postcard for advertising, but if prepaid phone firms can charge ONE "out the door" price, Sonic ought to be able to at least estimate a range, up front, not hiding behind fine print. "Sonic: Gigabit Internet + Unlimited Phone for $40 (+tax) $56 a month or less."

Exactly, "everyone else does it". Remember that parties like Comcast even double dip and also get something like 2$ from Netflix for your service. (Actually, it'd be interesting to know how much they're getting, but I bet it's at least 1$ for each subscriber that's a customer of both Netflix and Comcast, probably even more.)

Everyone has to select their fights. Sonic.net chose to leave the taxes-and-fees fight for a later time, and I cannot blame Dane. I'd rather them bring affordable GigE to the rest of the Bay Area and beyond, than get more disadvantaged in the marketing department due to how others are playing.

That said, the "free" phone service effectively costs 10$+ in taxes; it'd be nice if they have an internet-only option at the same price but with none of the phone taxes, for an effective 10$+/mo worth of savings, I guess.

Dane chose to force his customers to pay the tax.
When Fusion was first conceived, dialtone was not required.
Those of us who had to wait for deployment didn't get that option.

If Dane actually brings cheap (I won't say "affordable", that's too subjective) "capless" FTTH - at 50Mbps+ without server restrictions or cherry-picking (bypassing business), to any significant footprint, I'd grant him some time to address taxes and fees - provided they're fully disclosed.

But to date, its been Fiber-to-the-press-release, while no one here seems to question it.

That's wrong regarding the rental policy though.IIRC the modem is only rental for the first month or something, once the first month is up, you can RMA/ship it back and use your own equipment.
»forums.sonic.net/viewtop ··· 5&t=1666
Which is good for a lot of people who are not good with tech, and still good option for techies to make sure the line is working well before switching to their own stuff.

Sure, there is now a double-secret hidden policy permitting you to return the modem, but it isn't published, it isn't disclosed, and it isn't well-known.

Why are you citing a forum entry instead of the sales page where the disclosure should be?

When we asked, we were told, in no uncertain terms, that we had to rent a modem, and that came from the top. Dane echoed that policy online - no nuances. Eventually, we found one C/S agent who didn't get the message, and "hooked us up".

I actually didn't know it was required; I just knew that they strongly preferred such option, as it cuts down on troubleshooting costs, for both the customer and the provider.