Robert Premium Member join:2001-08-25 Miami, FL |
Robert
Premium Member
2010-Oct-13 10:18 am
C'mon...Why do we continue to take the FCC serious? | |
|
| |
Re: C'mon...I agree. The ONLY thing the FCC is good at anymore is press releases. | |
|
| axus join:2001-06-18 Washington, DC |
to Robert
If they did something (good or bad) we would take them more seriously | |
|
pende_tim Premium Member join:2004-01-04 Selbyville, DE |
pende_tim
Premium Member
2010-Oct-13 10:32 am
Not Just Wireless FeesThe FCC needs to look at all the operators: Cable and Fixed line while they are investigating. | |
|
| |
Re: Not Just Wireless Feescable does not really have any "add-on fees" that are below the line. They need to take on the Telcos. but if they did that they'd cry, whine and stomp their feet about not being able to "recover" any of their fees and taxes that they're allowed to. That's the whole reason people are dropping landline and moving to cable VoIP or to a 3rd party VoIP provider. | |
|
| | amarryatVerizon FiOS join:2005-05-02 Marshfield, MA |
Re: Not Just Wireless Feescomcast has the regulatory recovery fee too. as do other voip providers. | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to pende_tim
However they do need to make it so the salesman can tell people their final out the door cost. | |
|
hayabusa3303Over 200 mph Premium Member join:2005-06-29 Florence, SC |
?How do these people get these jobs at the fcc?...lol | |
|
| TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY
2 recommendations |
Job Application Form for FCC Job Gov FCC Form 666 |
here is the offical Job Appilcation form for an FCC Job. | |
|
| | Robert Premium Member join:2001-08-25 Miami, FL |
Robert
Premium Member
2010-Oct-13 12:37 pm
Re: Job Application Form for FCC JobI'm pretty sure you aren't required to get all dressed up.. | |
|
|
jhacker
Member
2010-Oct-13 11:39 am
What about landline and VOIP carriers?Yes, Verizon is bad about their tacked on fees, but so are the other mobile carriers. In addition, the landline and VOIP providers engage heavily in this practice, too. I cancelled Vonage last year because of this. There were $11 worth of added fees on my $25 bill every month. That's almost 50% tacked on, just in fees! So, I'd like to say to the FCC not to stop at Verizon. Also investigate companies like Vonage and AT&T with their 'un-fees' as well! | |
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ 1 edit |
FFH5
Premium Member
2010-Oct-13 11:58 am
Advertising practices belong to FTC and not FCC» FCC Broadens Investigation Into Wireless Fees [24] commentsWe've noted for years that carriers use bogus fees like "regulatory recovery," because it allows them to engage in covert price hikes without changing the advertised price. It's false advertising and harms consumers If the purpose of this inquiry is REALLY about false advertising and not about anti-competitive billing practices, then the gov't agency that should be spearheading this is the FTC. It is they who have the regulatory muscle to make the telcos change their advertising. The FCC should stick to illegal billing and charging fees that are not authorized by current regulations. | |
|
| |
Re: Advertising practices belong to FTC and not FCCsaid by FFH5:» FCC Broadens Investigation Into Wireless Fees [24] commentsWe've noted for years that carriers use bogus fees like "regulatory recovery," because it allows them to engage in covert price hikes without changing the advertised price. It's false advertising and harms consumers If the purpose of this inquiry is REALLY about false advertising and not about anti-competitive billing practices, then the gov't agency that should be spearheading this is the FTC. It is they who have the regulatory muscle to make the telcos change their advertising. The FCC should stick to illegal billing and charging fees that are not authorized by current regulations. Who made you the all-knowing regulatory agency mission reviewer? Does it ever bother you how much you stand up against people and for corporations? | |
|
| | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2010-Oct-13 9:15 pm
Re: Advertising practices belong to FTC and not FCCsaid by sonicmerlin:Does it ever bother you how much you stand up against people and for corporations? LOL. Sure saying the FTC instead of the FCC should regulate advertising is an assault on "the people". How lame is that charge? | |
|
| | | Sammer join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA |
Sammer
Member
2010-Oct-14 3:53 pm
Re: Advertising practices belong to FTC and not FCCThe problem with saying the FTC should regulate telecommunications advertising is you're really saying the FTC should regulate the FCC. It's the FCC that allowed all these bogus below the line charges in the first place. Until the the FCC, FTC, and everyone else in government label these bogus charges what they really are, false and misleading advertising, consumers are screwed! | |
|
1 recommendation |
Why the FCC?I don't quite get why "truth in billing" is an FCC issue. Sounds more like a problem for the FTC, which is responsible for investigating fraudulent advertising.
Regardless of how poorly I rate the companies involved, this creeping expansion of the FCC into any aspect of the businesses that it regulates troubles me. I'd rather see the states taking on this sort of deception than the feds. | |
|
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2010-Oct-13 12:34 pm
Below the line?The consumer will only benefit when ALL below-the-line charges are suppressed, which means local, state, and federal taxes - the real growth in cost.
With carriers battling the taxman on behalf of the consumer, instead of everything being a pass-through, we'd all enjoy lower bills. Imagine those "special interest" lobbying efforts working to reduce telecom taxes (~12-20% in my locale). | |
|
| |
Re: Below the line?At least with the fed/state/local taxes, they are uniform between carriers, and therefore for the purposes of price comparing one to the other, they can be ignored. It is the below the line charges, deviously listed as "fees" and "access charges" that the carriers throw on there that muddy the waters. Just recently went through a change in carriers at my place of employment, and trying to perform a legitimate cost analysis was overly complicated by having to get definitions from each of them on those fees. AND - like someone posted earlier, the fees are not part of the negotiated, fixed contracted service rate. They can (and will) be raised. | |
|
| | elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2010-Oct-14 11:54 am
Re: Below the line?said by ddbonkers:At least with the fed/state/local taxes, they are uniform between carriers, and therefore ... they can be ignored. It is the below the line charges, deviously listed as "fees" and "access charges" that the carriers throw on there that muddy the waters. Below-the-line taxes have been running 20%+ in our jurisdiction for as long as I can recall. They're a far greater bite than niggling "fees". | |
|
| |
|
What is Verizon's Early Termination Fee?It isn't $175 (or $350 on a smart phone). It is closer to $185 after their fees. | |
|
|
INsano
Anon
2010-Oct-14 4:23 am
FCCI'd love to see the FCC crack down on someone OTHER than Eminem.
They were patting themselves on the back this week on their twitter account for their "preemptive" action in this area. It's only been a problem for what, 10 or 15 years? Toothless, gutless, brainless retards moving at the speed of bureaucracy. | |
|
|
I am sure they will do what most doand that is give them a slight fine that hurts them not even slightly....and then move on as if nothing happened
Just gives these companies more incentive to do the same things in the future with little to no fear of ever being punished | |
|
|
|