Dr WizardThe Wizard of Speed and Time Premium Member join:2002-12-23 Plain Dealing, LA |
BS"...with regulatory proceedings, and other network and servicing requirements," BellSouth informs.
I understand now, this is why my brother has been waiting for over THREE YEARS in his middle-class, well-established neighborhood for DSL service. | |
|
| Alpine6 Premium Member join:2000-01-11 Atlanta, GA |
Alpine6
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 11:24 am
Re: BSYep...
While I know how amazingly expensive it is to comply with all the regulatory junk that burdens the telco industry, this really is just a price hike in regulation's clothing.
I'm a fan of -most- deregulation, because I think it helps everyone (including consumers) in the long run. But the telcos are going to shoot themselves in their collective foot if they do this. It's deceptive and they won't be able to use the "cheaper for consumers" argument against regulation if they continue to charge even after regulations are relaxed.
Doh...
Adam | |
|
| | en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA |
en102
Member
2006-Aug-24 11:59 am
Re: BSThese 'unfees' are nothing more than a slush fund for to pay for the CEO's golden parachute when he/she bails. | |
|
| Sammer join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA |
to Dr Wizard
IMHO these fees are costs of doing business and not including them in the advertised price is false and misleading. It seems the one regulation we really need on telcos is truth in advertising. | |
|
| batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie. Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ |
to Dr Wizard
It is very expensive to supply access the the NSA for every circuit. | |
|
bmn? ? ?
join:2001-03-15 hiatus |
Wait...This is on top of the existing $2 and something "Regulatory Cost Recovery fee" (or whatever its called) or is this the same fee being rehashed again ? | |
|
| |
Re: Wait...Yes. Pretty soon the ads will read:
6.0 Extreme DSL for only $9.95 per month!!!*
*plus regulatory cost recovery fees of $50.97 per month
Just tell me what the price is with all the fees, taxes, and any other charge by any other name. I hate it when I get one price quoted to me and pay an entirely different price when the bill arrives. Cell phones, electric service, and POTS are also terrible at this. | |
|
| | Shack join:2002-01-17 Bloomington, IN |
Shack
Member
2006-Aug-24 11:25 am
Re: Wait... That should be the law, it is a bit of deceptive advertising | |
|
| | fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 1 edit |
to phathead296
You do get to know the price. It's called "Total Amount Due" and is on the bottom of your bill.
If they are all doing this, electric, phone, cell, etc., don't you think there is a reason for that?
The government requires, so that people on the other side of the isle bitching that they feel decieved that the taxes aren't broken out, that everything must be broken out.
Now, let's look at the other side of things. Some fees or taxes may be higher or lower or non-existent in your neigboring area from yours. It's impossible to advertise a price as "the price" when your neigbor may have to pay a dollor or two more higher or lower than you.
Besides, the price is exactly what they advetised. If they say your DSL is $14.95, then the DSL is $14.95. They aren't selling you taxes and all the fees.. those are often collected and passed on.
So, in your desire to have thi put up front, how do you propose that they accomplish this task for you?
Seems no one likes the way it's advertised now with out the fees, which is the law, by the way, nor do people like having to deal with disclaimers as they want it "straight forward".. so exactly what would make EVERYONE happy... the reality answer is that not everyone is going to be happy all of the time. You can't please all the people all the time and everyone wants it to be their way. Welcome to dealing with the public. | |
|
| | | GlennLouEarl3 brothers, 1 gone Premium Member join:2002-11-17 Richmond, VA |
Re: Wait...Speaking only for myself, I'd like to see only the actual govt. (fed/state/local) taxes and fees separated out from the "total cost" and not the telco's "taxes, fees, and surcharges", which are, in fact, part of their cost of doing business. I'd be somewhat happier with that; at least, I'd tend to not think so much that my telco is just ripping me off for a few extra dollars every month. | |
|
| | | |
to fiberguy2
Fiberguy, the issue here isn't that "fees should be included in the initial estimate." The issue is that the telcos have recently been excepted from a particular fee (which should logically drop the price by said fee), but are continuing to charge for that fee under a different name. | |
|
| | | |
to fiberguy2
The original article is incorrect.... DSL providers do not pay into the universal service fund any more than you or I do when we purchase telephone service. (maybe oversimplicated, but true) Most of the fees in the telco industry are junk fees (cable companies aren't exempt with their "franchise fees"). "Regulatory compliance" "Universal service" "account maintenance" Why not add on: "IRS tax filing fees" "local gross receipts tax" - varies "state income taxes" - varies by state "sales tax differential" "lobbying fees" bah...it's all bogus. "pass through" type fees are not taxes, however, most of us are too addicted to our internet and are establishing "what the market will bear". Since we have contracts, the providers have to pass through as much as possible via "fees" because that is what we agreed to when we signed on. We pay the same "12.99" or, whatever rate, and are locked in with the contingency for them to add fees. Until a class action suit is filed, what recourse do we have other than suck it up until the contract expires or refuse payment and have credit report issues. Next we might expect to see our food prices at the grocer have an "advertising fee" and "fuel surcharge" added... Welcome to the deregulatory model of communications It is up to the market to hash this out (meaning our walking with our dollars) Since you mention the law though, fees are not taxes (check your bill, taxes are applied to those alleged taxes). A good lawsuit or ousting of some of our sold out politicians might more effective than a class action law suit, but frankly, we won't bother (at least in the US). | |
|
| | |
jipper join:2001-01-04 Stanton, MI |
jipper
Member
2006-Aug-24 10:01 am
Has anyone noticed....Companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest have all started referring to DSL as HSI. I find it intresting and wonder if they are doing this to position it as not a data service but a different kind of service to charge another fee? Any thoughts? | |
|
| |
Re: Has anyone noticed....said by jipper:Companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest have all started referring to DSL as HSI. Just another one of the Telco's lies. | |
|
| KoshWe are all Kosh Premium Member join:2005-11-16 Z'ha'dum |
Kosh to jipper
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:12 am
to jipper
I'm not sure that it makes any difference. DSL is unregulated whether they call it DSL or HSI, so they can tack on fees whenever they want regardless. Maybe they think "HSI" is a better marketing term. | |
|
| | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ
2 recommendations |
FFH5
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:24 am
Re: Has anyone noticed....said by Kosh:I'm not sure that it makes any difference. DSL is unregulated whether they call it DSL or HSI, so they can tack on fees whenever they want regardless. Maybe they think "HSI" is a better marketing term. They certainly are legally safe in doing what they are doing. But it is misleading, and I prefer doing business with straightforward companies whenever possible and take that into account when choosing a service. | |
|
| | | KoshWe are all Kosh Premium Member join:2005-11-16 Z'ha'dum
1 recommendation |
Kosh
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 1:12 pm
Re: Has anyone noticed....Very true. I don't like it either, but this is one of those "it's legal, but definitely not honest" situations. Not a lot that the individual can do - if you're fortunate there may be a competitor in the area with comparable service, so you could switch I suppose...though many dsl users are on contracts and would have to pay a termination fee. | |
|
| | | |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by Kosh:I'm not sure that it makes any difference. DSL is unregulated whether they call it DSL or HSI, so they can tack on fees whenever they want regardless. Maybe they think "HSI" is a better marketing term. They certainly are legally safe in doing what they are doing. But it is misleading, and I prefer doing business with straightforward companies whenever possible and take that into account when choosing a service. Yes, it is indeed legal, but it is also the perfect evidence to show Americans that telecommunications is not dictated by the free market/competition like most industries. When a fee is waived and "competitors'" prices do not go down accordingly, what is evident? | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to jipper
trouble is the competition just follows suit and invents their own new fees as well. Telecom is not an honest industry and is full of "WeaselSharks"(aka sneaky bastards who enter a feeding frenzy at the smell of cash). | |
|
| fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
to jipper
said by jipper:Companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest have all started referring to DSL as HSI. I find it intresting and wonder if they are doing this to position it as not a data service but a different kind of service to charge another fee? Any thoughts? Qwest? Really? I can only speak of Qwest since I am in their territory. But every comercial, advertisement, and bill I get from them still says DSL. Even if they call it HSI, (High speed internet) isn't it? It IS high speed internet. I think more people look for high speed internet and not necessarily "DSL".. maybe it's just a smart marketing move. Believe it or not, not everyone out there understands broadband like the visitors of sites like this do. As people what DSL is and they will stare back with a blank look. Many people that have DSL or cable modem service are pretty much saturdated by now. The next group of people are the slow adopters and you need to speak their language... Many of these people are on dial up still. To them, it's SLOW INTERNET... So, to call the service HIGH SPEED INTERNET will grab these people's attention better than DSL will. Positiion it as a data service? That was already done by the supreme court about a year ago. | |
|
| |
to jipper
I think it is interesting that nearly every Qwest commercial I see is pitching phone service labeled as "Digital Voice" I've not been able to figure out if this is some sort of VoIP service or just their new name for POTS. | |
|
| |
werwerasdfsadf to jipper
Anon
2006-Aug-24 3:42 pm
to jipper
Because High Speed Internet will often not be delivered over DSL. FIOS certainly isn't DSL and Lightspeed isn't DSL in some places. | |
|
technick Premium Member join:2000-12-16 Wheat Ridge, CO 2 edits |
technick
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:02 am
This Is Bull!!!It would be a wonderful thing if a group of customers stood up and refused to pay these junk fees and filed a class action lawsuit against the telco. I know I am dreaming, but still it would be a wonderful thing. Best thing anybody with alternatives can do, dump the telco all together. TO HELL WITH BELLSOUTH!!! "Our greatest glory consists not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall." - Confucius
Bellsouth Free Since 10/05 - To Hell With Bellsouth Advocatus Diaboli
Streamfire.net | |
|
Robert Premium Member join:2001-08-25 Miami, FL |
Robert
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:06 am
Wrong Title.BellSouth didn't join Verizon in nothing, Verizon joined BellSouth in the Bogus 'Fees'. BellSouth has had the 2.97 "regulatory fee" for at least 1.5 years now. But, man my connection has been solid, so if it's because of that 2.97, then OK with me! | |
|
| pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium Member join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD |
pnh102
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:21 am
Fees are False Advertisingsaid by Robert:But, man my connection has been solid, so if it's because of that 2.97, then OK with me! Then why not include the cost of this fee in the advertised price? These extra fees are inexcusable. If an ISP isn't making profit by advertising their service at $29.99 a month, then they should simply raise the advertised price and not include a fee. | |
|
MxxCon join:1999-11-19 Brooklyn, NY |
MxxCon
Member
2006-Aug-24 10:11 am
unfee?Karl, what the heck is 'unfee'? i understand what you imply by that term, but why use that word? why not call it 'fake-fee' or 'hidden charge' or something else more obvious for consumer to notice and complain | |
|
| tsu9 join:2001-08-17 Wheeling, IL |
tsu9
Member
2006-Aug-24 10:36 am
Re: unfee?fake-fee = un-fee. Hidden charges are often somewhat legitimate. | |
|
| | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium Member join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD |
pnh102
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:57 am
Re: unfee?said by tsu9:fake-fee = un-fee. Hidden charges are often somewhat legitimate. I disagree. There is never any justification for a hidden charge. If a company wants to add fees, they should either increase the price or state up front in the advertised price that said price includes all fees. When we go shopping for anything else, we see the listed price and we pay sales tax on it at checkout. Internet service should be no different. | |
|
| | | tsu9 join:2001-08-17 Wheeling, IL |
tsu9
Member
2006-Aug-24 11:28 am
Re: unfee?Oh, I agree. Full disclosure should be absolutely manditory. | |
|
| | | ff1324Everybody Goes Home Premium Member join:2002-08-24 On Four Day |
to pnh102
Would "money grab" be a better term? | |
|
| N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano Premium Member join:2003-11-11 Philly burbs |
to MxxCon
Just like 7-Up is the UN-Cola!
Never had it, never will! | |
|
| Sammer join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA |
to MxxCon
BBR is right, "Bogus Fee" rings true. Unfee = Bogus Fee | |
|
rudnicke Premium Member join:2004-10-23 Rantoul, IL
1 recommendation |
rudnicke
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:11 am
TrustAll these articles I see about the telco's. You just cant trust them anymore. | |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2006-Aug-24 10:26 am
They better remove itPretty damn simple if they don't remove the $2.97 then I'll just dump them and they can lose the $37.95 a month they get for what they charge for internet too. Now if they are that stupid to lose me as a custmer for $2.97 so be it. For evey year I am not a customer it would take 12 years of "recovery fees" to add up to that ammount. Doesn't seem logical to risk losing customers. Of course we are talking about telcos. | |
|
| IhatemyISPMM1 Corbski Premium Member join:2003-01-27 Hampton, VA |
Re: They better remove itsaid by 88615298:Pretty damn simple if they don't remove the $2.97 then I'll just dump them and they can lose the $37.95 a month they get for what they charge for internet too. Now if they are that stupid to lose me as a custmer for $2.97 so be it. For evey year I am not a customer it would take 12 years of "recovery fees" to add up to that ammount. Doesn't seem logical to risk losing customers. Of course we are talking about telcos. Honestly, $37.95 a month is pocket change. They don't care about you, or the majority of the people that actually do care about this. We're in the minority. Most of their customer base doesn't know about this, and will just continue paying it. | |
|
| | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2006-Aug-24 11:01 pm
Re: They better remove itHonestly, $37.95 a month is pocket change. They don't care about you, or the majority of the people that actually do care about this. We're in the minority. Most of their customer base doesn't know about this, and will just continue paying it. Less me put it this was. If BS loses just 8% of their customers over this then it will take ALL of the rest of their customers $2.97 fees to make up that lost revenue. So in the end what is the point? Not to mention some of those 8% are being charge for using features like the security suite.
Oh and if I go to Charter then I'll dump my BellSouth phone service and just use my cell/and or use VoIP. So there is more revenues lost.
Fact is it would only take less than a 5% loss for Bellsouth to lose money on this deal so why bother? | |
|
timcuthBraves Fan Premium Member join:2000-09-18 Pelham, AL Technicolor ET2251
|
timcuth
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:28 am
I can see three cjoices....1) We can continue paying these absurd fees.
2) We can change providers, if we have a choice. Many people do not have a choice.
3) We can stop service and drop off the internet. It is becoming a PITA, anyway. Viruses, trojans, rootkits, DOS attacks, advertising bots, etc - its all getting to be more trouble than its worth.
Tim | |
|
Dan48Trailer Park Supervisor Premium Member join:2002-12-17 Eh? |
Dan48
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 10:29 am
KARL! I figured it out!The government is not paying the bells to illegally spy on the citizens, so the bells are charging the customers to spy on them!
Quote:
"...as well as costs associated with monitoring..." Hmmm? | |
|
| ••••••• |
|
smell_test
Anon
2006-Aug-24 11:25 am
doesn't pass,well, they will slowly erode the dsl subscriber gains back to competitors, since there is no real difference between brand A and brand B dsl service, why not screw BellSouth and Verizon and use this against them again as a REASON to CHURN back to the competiton?
I would, but then again, I don't have, need or want dsl.. I do fine with my "high" megabit rate... People flip kittens over a few pennies at the gas pump, well, this will erode some subscribers, but as much as people have few alternatives, RBOCS turned the screws to clecs so much, that they can't even compete with RBOC dsl prices!
It's like having and entreprenuer trying to sell people on hydrogen fuel right beside the gas stations, when the only affordable vehicle, is that little toy model for $40. REAL hydrogen vehicles are a couple more decades (and wars) away! | |
|
Servimaster Premium Member join:2005-04-16 Grass Valley, CA |
FUSFi thought it was going away looking @ my most recent AT&T DSL bill this is what it says
UNIVERSAL SVC FEE Effective 8/1/06, the Federal Universal Service Fee increased. This fee supports telecommunication needs of low-income households, consumers living in high cost areas, schools, libraries and rural hospitals. Your current bill reflects the change. For more information, please contact an AT&T Service Representative at 1-800-310-2355. Thank you for choosing AT&T California.
2-05 FUSF Pass-Through Fee 1 1.52 Service Date: 07/01/06 - 08/02/06 2-06 FUSF Pass-Through Fee 1 1.52 Service Date: 08/03/06 - 09/02/06 | |
|
| |
Re: FUSFDoesn't also AT&T charge you a "Data Transport Charge" for their "supplier" who is actually a AT&T Advanced Services? | |
|
| Servimaster Premium Member join:2005-04-16 Grass Valley, CA |
Not that I could find. | |
|
|
Speakeasy claims no foulIf you read my exchange with Speakeasy here: » End of Reg Fee = Higher Reg Compliance Fee???You will see that they are claiming that they are just passing through increased government fees and are not profiting from this increase. I don't see how that could be the case if Verizon already admitted that its basically a backdoor service price increase. | |
|
| 1 edit |
Re: Speakeasy claims no foul You see? I TOLD you so. Business 101 strikes again.
Once one pulls a ripoff and gets away with it, the others WILL follow like lemmings.
A glaring example of why prices will NEVER go down, ever.
| |
|
| Windogg join:2002-07-24 Redwood City, CA |
to TheOtherPete
That is one reason why I dropped Speakeasy apart from the awful service. These bogus fees added 9% to my bill. I have never regretted my switch to LBDSL.net for DSL. The price I am quoted is the bottom line price. Not one penny is added as a fee, surcharge, or tax. | |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
|
KrK
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 2:49 pm
AT&T Still charges USF feeAccording to my brand new at&t bill in my hand....
"The FUSF pass through fees charged to some customers has been reduced".
In looking over my bill, it appears I have been charged $1.93 for this month, which is indeed reduced from the past.
They are still calling it the "FUSF Pass-Through Fee" on the DSL portion of my bill.
When was the fee eliminated? Sounds like it shouldn't be there at all. | |
|
| batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie. Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ |
batterup
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 4:37 pm
Re: AT&T Still charges USF feesaid by KrK:When was the fee eliminated? Sounds like it shouldn't be there at all. It was most likely eliminated during your billing cycle. | |
|
|
Fuel adjustmentI am waiting for a Fuel and Energy fee on each bill "a quarterly recalculated non-governement fee to relief energy costs". | |
|
| |
Re: Fuel adjustment
SHHH!!!
Dont give them ideas!
| |
|
TOPDAWG Premium Member join:2005-04-27 Calgary, AB |
TOPDAWG
Premium Member
2006-Aug-24 7:44 pm
It's BS but no worriesI always ask when I get something what will my total bill be. Most of the time they say it will be around this and I say around? You them to give you a number and they will then give you a number.
However you have to work it out of them most of the time. | |
|
| |
Re: It's BS but no worries | |
|
|
|