Why can carriers get away with charging consumers ever-increasing early termination fees? Because they're willing to pay them. A new survey by Consumer Intelligence Research Partners (CIRP) shows that 45% of customers who bought an iPhone between October 31 and November 10 broke a contract with their current or previous carrier to get the device. Of that total, 70% paid more than $100 to get out of their previous contract. The survey also offers some interesting additional iPhone purchase data, like the fact that 17% of respondents purchased a Sprint iPhone, 34% a Verizon iPhone, and 49% an AT&T iPhone. 37% of CIRP survey respondents were willing to switch carriers to purchase an iPhone.
I seriously doubt that Verizon or at&t have $350 ETF's in the hope that their customers will go to the competition so they can collect $350. That one time $350 is much less than what the company would get form that customer if they stay. I think the motivation is to KEEP customers. According to the OP logic if people stopped paying ETFs then carriers would stop charging so much for them. Except that if people aren't paying ETFs then that means they are staying with their carrier which as I said is exactly what the carriers want. And if carriers started charging less for ETFs people would right back to switching companies over and over.
I seriously doubt that Verizon or at&t have $350 ETF's in the hope that their customers will go to the competition so they can collect $350. That one time $350 is much less than what the company would get form that customer if they stay. I think the motivation is to KEEP customers. According to the OP logic if people stopped paying ETFs then carriers would stop charging so much for them. Except that if people aren't paying ETFs then that means they are staying with their carrier which as I said is exactly what the carriers want. And if carriers started charging less for ETFs people would right back to switching companies over and over.
I think both the OP's scenario and your scenario fit. The Carriers win either way. Churn(etf's)+new subs(latest and not so greatest iphone)=paying customers. Either scenario benefits the Carriers.
i am not happy with etf. mind you if anyone reads tos on some of this company's. like verizon if you dis agree with your service you don't have to pay for etf. but you have to disagree with it and not cancel it
The ETF is the most up-front, fully disclosed fee that any cell phone subscriber needs to know about. There's also ample opportunity for people to escape these fees if they are unhappy with their service.
Why aren't all the other hidden fees, the ones that you don't know about until after the you get the first bill, made known to people? These fees should be fully disclosed to the user as being part of the advertised price of service before any service agreements are signed. If a retail store advertised prices in the same manner, it would be hit with charges of false advertising, why aren't subscription-based service providers held to the same standard?
The ETF is the most up-front, fully disclosed fee that any cell phone subscriber needs to know about. There's also ample opportunity for people to escape these fees if they are unhappy with their service.
Why aren't all the other hidden fees, the ones that you don't know about until after the you get the first bill, made known to people? These fees should be fully disclosed to the user as being part of the advertised price of service before any service agreements are signed. If a retail store advertised prices in the same manner, it would be hit with charges of false advertising, why aren't subscription-based service providers held to the same standard?
IMO laws need to be passed at the federal level that require all service providers to be able to tell you total monthly cost at the point of sale before any ink hits the contract.
I mean when I pull into the Wawa I know what its going to cost per gallon to fill my car, its not like there is a below the line "Nozzle Maintenance Fee" tacked on after I am done.
Naturally the cell carriers would fight such a law because it would prevent them from selling service at 39.95/mo and then the actual bill being closer to $60/mo.
Gas stations can change their prices hourly, even with gov't fees fixed. Your contract fee is because you're there for 2 years, and prices can/will change.
The ETF is the most up-front, fully disclosed fee that any cell phone subscriber needs to know about. There's also ample opportunity for people to escape these fees if they are unhappy with their service.
Why aren't all the other hidden fees, the ones that you don't know about until after the you get the first bill, made known to people? These fees should be fully disclosed to the user as being part of the advertised price of service before any service agreements are signed. If a retail store advertised prices in the same manner, it would be hit with charges of false advertising, why aren't subscription-based service providers held to the same standard?
IMO laws need to be passed at the federal level that require all service providers to be able to tell you total monthly cost at the point of sale before any ink hits the contract.
I mean when I pull into the Wawa I know what its going to cost per gallon to fill my car, its not like there is a below the line "Nozzle Maintenance Fee" tacked on after I am done.
Naturally the cell carriers would fight such a law because it would prevent them from selling service at 39.95/mo and then the actual bill being closer to $60/mo.
Some of these fees are sales taxes and 911 fees which vary area to area. So there's no way someone form some call center would know what those taxes would be. You're more likey to know that answer.
IMO laws need to be passed at the federal level that require all service providers to be able to tell you total monthly cost at the point of sale before any ink hits the contract.
I'm one of the last people who thinks any new laws should be passed but I totally agree here.
I mean when I pull into the Wawa I know what its going to cost per gallon to fill my car, its not like there is a below the line "Nozzle Maintenance Fee" tacked on after I am done.
I so miss Wawa. LOL. I know there's 2 with a 20 mile radius of me, but that just doesn't work too well for me.
IMO laws need to be passed at the federal level that require all service providers to be able to tell you total monthly cost at the point of sale before any ink hits the contract.
I mean when I pull into the Wawa I know what its going to cost per gallon to fill my car, its not like there is a below the line "Nozzle Maintenance Fee" tacked on after I am done.
Naturally the cell carriers would fight such a law because it would prevent them from selling service at 39.95/mo and then the actual bill being closer to $60/mo.
Vote with your feet and walk away from those carriers.
I did and now pay $40 per month for unlimited everything. No ETF. No hidden fees. No overage charges on data or minutes or messaging. I don't even need to buy a phone from my carrier as I can bring any unlocked GSM phone to them or they can even unlock most phones if need be.
Check for SimpleMobile in your area. Also, I'm told, Boost and Metro have straight-up monthly plans with no ETF and no hidden charges.
I am a strong proponent of people purchasing their mobile device upfront and having a choice of carriers. The fact that so many are willing to pay more than $100 just to terminate their contract indicates that having your own device is the right way to use mobile services.
This is why we have multi-mode and multi-band devices. It does work in the USA as I have used the same phone with SIMs on AT&T (wireless and Cingular), Suncom (while they were a separate entity) and T-Mobile networks. I have also used the same device quite successfully in three countries in Europe both while roaming with my AT&T SIM and with pre-paid local SIMs.
I do agree, it will not work for everyone as many people will not be willing to do the "integration" and troubleshooting -- should the need arise -- themselves.
This is why we have multi-mode and multi-band devices. It does work in the USA as I have used the same phone with SIMs on AT&T (wireless and Cingular), Suncom (while they were a separate entity) and T-Mobile networks. I have also used the same device quite successfully in three countries in Europe both while roaming with my AT&T SIM and with pre-paid local SIMs.
I do agree, it will not work for everyone as many people will not be willing to do the "integration" and troubleshooting -- should the need arise -- themselves.
How does a sim card work on Verizon's or Sprint's network when they don't use GSM they use CDMA?
Problem is the carriers all have locked or conveniently inoperable handsets.
Once again the rest of the world leads us in this and their government regulation (take note Libertarians and TEAcrackers) ensures switching carriers is indeed possible and easy to do.
That is very interesting. So despite all the complaints about AT&T's customer service, network availability/reliability, comparisons to the dark side of the force people still chose AT&T.
Would it have something to do with GSM/UMTS/HSPA+ and why we need a stronger competitor like T-Mobile using these protocols?
Re: 49% of survey respondents (half) went with AT&T!
Last I checked little 't' has no plans to transition to LTE so they're taking themselves out of the game. I expect big Verizon will trend toward the 50% mark at sprint's expense, closing in on big 'T' market grab.
I'm not sure that somebody who chooses to honor the terms of a contract can be automatically counted as being "happy" about it.
I am sure they are not happy paying the ETF. But they are so brainwashed by TV commercials that they feel they have to get a new, fancy, latest, greatest toy no matter what it costs. Most of them have a very functional device, but just can't wait an extra year or 6 months to get the latest toy for the status it gives them among their friends. It is people that have no self control and have their ego tied up in the THINGS they own.
Customers pay ETF fees because they didn't make smart decisions from the beginning of their contract.
I have been with every carrier besides Verizon. I don't think a data card count's because I was never using voice service. But just like Verizon and any other carrier I had 30 days to "try" the service and if I was not satisfied with it I can return it.
Not only did I get a full refund from Verizon, as promised I only paid for the amount of service I used which a week was enough to make my decision.
I think 30 days to try out a service is long enough. Also the option to always purchase the phone up front and get service without a contract is always there. Every time I wen't to get service I was always asked if I was looking for contract or no contract.
I would like to also add that many places they will pay you for your old phone. Apparently for the iPhone 100 bucks flat. So if customers kill their contract for the same amount and do another contract right after to get a newer phone at the discounted price then it's more of a upgrade if you look thing's that way.
If they don't provide service then they don't get paid, that's the end of it. I normally explain my situations to carriers and if they are unwilling to budge then the argument starts. If they want to add it to my credit report then we are going to court.
I don't waste my time with these thing's and I remember when I was with Sprint and the screen on my blackberry broke. I had insurance on it and got it replaced. Second time the screen broke within 9 months after they where unwilling to provide me with a refurbished phone even after I paid $100 the last time. After several calls and a bit of frustration they terminated the remaining 6 month contract I had left.
I refuse to pay for a service I am not even using, and I refuse to pay for a insurance that does not cover the cost of another replacement phone even after I took time to read the TOS on the actual insurance.
Not always sometimes the service goes down the drain. I was an AT&T user who was very happy with their service when I got an iphone 3GS, fast forward 9 months and I had constant dropped called and very slow and unreliable 3G connection.
I paid an ETF 3 months later to switch back to Verizon. If carriers quality was set in stone you'd be correct, but networks are constantly being upgraded, users constantly being added and issues arise that don't get resolved right away.
Not always sometimes the service goes down the drain. I was an AT&T user who was very happy with their service when I got an iphone 3GS, fast forward 9 months and I had constant dropped called and very slow and unreliable 3G connection.
I paid an ETF 3 months later to switch back to Verizon. If carriers quality was set in stone you'd be correct, but networks are constantly being upgraded, users constantly being added and issues arise that don't get resolved right away.
Same here, I've had AT&T for 6 years (2004-2011) and they were Cingular when I signed up. I had Verizon from 2001 to 2004 but switched to then Cingular because I moved from Iowa to Massachusetts and my new area had terrible reception on Verizon and Cingular had good coverage. Fast forward six years and AT&T is a sinking ship in terms of quality and reliability while Verizon made improvements to their network to warrant me switching back to Verizon. My mother hates Verizon and she took over my remaining AT&T family share lines and now I have coverage where she doesn't.
As for AT&T, when my 3GS dropped three times in the same call (even with 2-3 bars) that is when its time to Abandon Ship and pay the ETF. I went on Verizon's website a few minutes later and ordered an iPhone 4 and ported my number. My shiny new Verizon iPhone arrived the next day
In that situation you are right, but normally when there is a issue like that I will call at the end of the weekday for every week of that month if the issue has not been resolved. After a month I will demand cancellation and because there is a call log of me calling every week about the issue they are more willing to budge and I leave after returning the equipment without paying ETF.
Not saying that it will work for everyone, but I document every call or chat I had with a representative and I will keep a log of the issue. So if they want to act stupid I have them on file.
Are we sure people weren't just happy to dump the "dumbphone" they were using to get a iPhone Smartphone versus happy to pay that ETF?
Just sayin'....
I mean if you are happy about loosing $350 you can pay that money to me and I will even sing you a song over your new iPhone. Even better, I'll let you pick the song, and if I don't know your song I'll offer you 1/2 off!
Like DirecTV's $480 ETF ($20 off per month) if you cancel before your 2 year commitment. And these days you don't even own the hardware anymore... it's gotta go back.
At least with the cell phone industry you can shop for the hardware YOU want that has flashy software and guess what... if you cancel early and pay the ETF, you still have the phone in your possession!
Like DirecTV's $480 ETF ($20 off per month) if you cancel before your 2 year commitment. And these days you don't even own the hardware anymore... it's gotta go back.
it's been that way for awhile. And if you have service for less than 2 years why should you get to keep a STB that cost hundreds of $$$ when you're only pauying $5 a month for it for a year? And since you're canceling service what are you going to do with it anyways?
the big & small carriers can KMA.. they ain't getting a cent more than I want to pay them. no handset or service are worth getting roped into a contract.
the noise I hear from iphone lemmings and sheeple are boing, boing, boing off the money pit cliff, and Baaaah!, Baaaah!