page: 1 · 2  |
 phills_suck
join:2004-10-11
Burlington, NJ | Suprise Suprise? Now that doesn't suprise me one bit.... | |
| teleblender
join:2007-07-26 | so? so what? if you had even a fraction of the lines the gvt does, say 15,000 with sprint, i bet they would let you add and drop lines as your needs changed without etf too. | |
|  | | | | 
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA | Re: so? Furthermore, if you're a taxpayer you would end up paying the ETFs anyway. If anything, this is a good thing.
Slow news day? | |
| | | | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| Re: so? said by rf_engineer  :Furthermore, if you're a taxpayer you would end up paying the ETFs anyway. If anything, this is a good thing. Slow news day? You have to keep the peanut gallery revved up by giving them their daily anti-corporate feeding.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
| | | | | | 
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL | Exactly and any large org could have the same arrangement with Sprint when you deal in that type of volume. | |
| | | | | 
Mosbieq
@ssa.gov | Only 15,000? Try closer to 150,000 and that would be just in the Washington DC metro area. | |
| 
HEDP
join:2008-04-27
Miami, FL | . The more business you have with a certain company the more personal it becomes. | |
| xenophon
join:2007-09-17 | Businesses do custom contracts, big deal. This isn't a big deal. Every company has custom contracts with vendors. The company I work with has very customized contracts with cell carriers. Why is this worth reporting? | |
| | 
hopeflicker
They all belong in the trash
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA | Re: Businesses do custom contracts, big deal. Another example of companies buying the government. | |
| | | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Businesses do custom contracts, big deal. With something that saves taxpayers money? Oh, please DO explain! | |
| | | | | | | |
putch
@myvzw.com
| they're not technically pro-rating ETFs it seems like prorating because they fee does decrease over time. but prorating implies a proportional decrease over time. so if it was TRULY prorated than when you quit at 23 out of 24 months you should only pay 1/24th of the ETF. However, users at the 23rd month are paying closer to a 1/4 of the ETF.
yeah it's a step in a the right direction, but it's not prorated. | |
| 
texans20
TaxHikeMike dot org
Premium
join:2002-09-28
Texas!
clubs:
| DSLR's Biased Reporting It's obvious the staff at dslreports.com are a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. One thing they don't remember is the fact the US Government is essentially the people. Sprint deciding not to charge ETFs to government lines is saving taxpayer dollar, though a very small drop in the bucket. I understand how Sprint would treat somebody paying $40 per month different than somebody essentially paying millions per month. Most business owners, big and small, treat their most valuable customers better than the average customer. I don't understand how this is front page news, unless there is a quota of X number of stories per day and it's just a really slow day.
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson | |
| | | |
HEDP
join:2008-04-27
Miami, FL
| Don't be so fast to accuse people, not everyone who actually posts articles thinks the same way. One perfect example of that was the article in regards to caps from the site administrator. Even though different authors share different opinions, that does not mean the entire staff is on the same page. You are to easy to jump the gun.
Most of the time, in a news paper you usually read articles from different authors all sharing different view points, with their emails and phone numbers published right under the title. The news paper might sometimes two completely opposite views, right next to each other as a means to cause discussion.
Also Sprint promised much, but has failed to deliver as a investor and customer I felt like the entire migration from Nextel over to Sprint and billing systems was more than enough of a hassle. During that time the company was ran by an aggressive and fast paced CEO who was doing the right thing, but he was unable to finish what he started and in the end simply delayed all the projects in the table.
Just now a Sprint PR release has been given on the four QChat next generation Nextel Direct Connect over CDMA EVDO networks. Those where suppose to be out since last year, and also it looks like Hesse is more and more jumping back into the original merger agreement plans.
Hesse who is a conservative CEO and is cleaning the trail of unfinished projects left over by the previous one, is starting to slowly stabilize the company, and as he tries to stop the bleeding and costly non profitable customers he is now removing customers from SERO packages, he is now also introducing new calling plans in June.
During the previous CEO's term it seems that the board pressured him to do something about customers leaving, which is when the whole change your voice plan means signing up for another 2 year contract scenario came into play. That of course has been eliminated, and also I know plenty of military personnel who use Sprint, me myself including.
Sprint also has plenty of landline and dsl customers on military bases that I can confirm in 29 Palms, CA, Parris Island, SC, and Camp Lejeune, NC. Also Nextel has a strong base in other branches not just military, so Sprint has plenty of business from the government in general, and with the ability of off-network communications on iDEN technology, reliability is quite high especially without the need for a network and a large footprint from a small handheld device that carries a small rechargeable battery, they serve as an excellent radio for safety personnel that is easy to use, yet is scalable in a massive scale that even with network outages and rugged phones they still operate.
Nextel's are not designed to look pretty, they where designed to get the job done. This is why Nextel had that advertisement campaign of Nextel | Done. playing before the merger took into effect.
Nextel is a very very valuable asset, and has somethings CDMA does not have, so even if Sprint did get rid of iDEN. The technology will still be available from someone else, iDEN is not a very valuable consumer asset, but for business, it's like gold.
Back on topic though, the more valuable you are to a company the more they are willing to bend their own rules to satisfy your needs. A business is there to serve you, but they will always cater to those who bring in the bacon more than they will to daddy and his daughters cellphone.
The government receives VIP treatment from Sprint because of the amount of business they bring them, I am sure ETFs are just the scratch of the surface of all the goodies they get. I am also sure Sprint receives goodies from the government itself as well though, so it's a two sided coin. | |
| | | | | | |
HEDP
join:2008-04-27
Miami, FL
| Re: DSLR's Biased Reporting Unfinished projects could be related to several variables, I am not pointing the blame at Sprint, but this is what the customer will blame for delays. Even though it's really not Sprint's fault this is how the media works in general.
At least they are finally available and are being deployed though, so that's good to know. | |
| | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southwest
| said by texans20 :It's obvious the staff at dslreports.com are a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Uh, the story is from the Associated Press, on FOX News website... So if you want, you can call Fox news a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Or at least you can keep your try to keep your foot out of your mouth. Which would be better for all of us.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: DSLR's Biased Reporting said by KrK :said by texans20 :It's obvious the staff at dslreports.com are a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Uh, the story is from the Associated Press, on FOX News website... So if you want, you can call Fox news a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Or at least you can keep your try to keep your foot out of your mouth. Which would be better for all of us. There's a percentage of Internet forum posters who call anyone they disagree with or dislike a liberal or label an opposing viewpoint as liberal. It's a product of the conservative talk show hosts who have trained their listeners that all liberals are morons and the root of all evil and it's become the modern substitute for knowing the facts and understanding the issues before forming an opinion. | |
| | | |
texans20
TaxHikeMike dot org
Premium
join:2002-09-28
Texas!
clubs:
| Re: DSLR's Biased Reporting said by rf_engineer :said by KrK :said by texans20 :It's obvious the staff at dslreports.com are a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Uh, the story is from the Associated Press, on FOX News website... So if you want, you can call Fox news a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies. Or at least you can keep your try to keep your foot out of your mouth. Which would be better for all of us. There's a percentage of Internet forum posters who call anyone they disagree with or dislike a liberal or label an opposing viewpoint as liberal. It's a product of the conservative talk show hosts who have trained their listeners that all liberals are morons and the root of all evil and it's become the modern substitute for knowing the facts and understanding the issues before forming an opinion. You should learn how to stop assuming, it's dangerous. I do not listen to any talk shows. I find most political commentators are jackasses. I can't stand Michael Moore, nor can I stand folks like Bill O'Reily and Rush. I don't watch any TV news, because all TV news is slanted since they want to make the most money possible. You know nothing about me.
The reason I say what I say is because there are a lot of news articles posted on this site's front page that are anti-business. For whatever reason, I've seen a lot of articles that have to do with cell phone ETFs, as if an ETF is the devil. Shit, the contract was signed, live up to your end. ETFs are not that bad. Besides, it's my understand most cell phone companies are not pulling in any actual profits. The ones that are, the profit margins are razor thin. It's not like the consumers are being raped (though if the US government keeps allowing them to merge we might be in a decade).
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson | |
| | | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: DSLR's Biased Reporting said by texans20 :You should learn how to stop assuming, it's dangerous. This is coming from someone who said that it was "obvious the staff at dslreports.com are a bunch of ultra-liberal corporation hating hippies"? How do you know they are liberal or hating corporations? You may not subscribe to the conservative talk show host mantra, but when you use their language, it doesn't bolster your argument and it reeks of mindless liberal-bashing.
The reason I say what I say is because there are a lot of news articles posted on this site's front page that are anti-business. For whatever reason, I've seen a lot of articles that have to do with cell phone ETFs, as if an ETF is the devil. That's a far cry from being an ultra-liberal corporation hating hippy. Liberalism doesn't necessarily equate to anti-business and being vocal about large business practices doesn't necessarily make someone anti-business.
BTW, I don't think ETFs are evil either. I do have a disdain for wireless contracts in general, but I realize it comes with the territory. | |
| 
Broken Back
Premium
join:2002-05-19
Dallas, TX
| Mobile Phones I work with a company in my business that had over 25,000 mobile phone. The company ask that they meet another mobile phone companies prices, which were not much lower but Sprint/Nextel refused so they jumped ship to the other mobile carrier.
--
Over The Hill | |
| StanleyChan
join:2007-11-02
San Francisco, CA
| ETF Contract I am not sure why this is such a big surprise. Many companies have customized contract with service vendors that contains different fee rates and service agreements. My company has waived ETF contracts with various cell phone company too. Our average cell phone expense per employee is over $100 each month, and I definitely think they can waive the ETF. | |
| | 
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
Gainesville, FL
| Re: ETF Contract said by StanleyChan :I am not sure why this is such a big surprise. Many companies have customized contract with service vendors that contains different fee rates and service agreements. My company has waived ETF contracts with various cell phone company too. Our average cell phone expense per employee is over $100 each month, and I definitely think they can waive the ETF. Right but think about it with these large contracts, as long as they aren't jumping ship to another carrier, they might remove lines when people quit / fired / etc but they equally as much might add lines. So overall the net effect is sort of like changing the phone number and reassigning the phone to someone else. From a management point of view that's probably more effective since they don't need to keep track of active lines that are not being used. Also even for Sprint to keep many open lines just because they don't want to pay an ETF that can have fraud implications... dirty CSRs knowing about it or even just theft of phones and use that goes unnoticed since noone was using that phone.
So at face value does it seem fair that they are waving the ETF? No. Do I really want Sprint to let me out of their contract? Hell yes. But I understand the business reason behind it.... it's a large contracts and Sprint knows that unless they deliver piss poor service (I wonder what sort of customer service they provide?? because the one they provide to individual customers has been pretty much worthless) meaning they don't misrepresent what they can offer up front, there's no reason for them to jump ship. The US government isn't going to care if there are a few dead spots in a few places because in the end that's insignificant. Probably 99% of the calls they attempt to place are connected, probably only less than 5% of their calls are dropped... they understand the nature of mobile phones and overall Sprint does have pretty decent coverage. (and T-Mobile is owned by the Germans and Verizon by the British so it's AT&T or Sprint pretty much in terms of nationwide carriers)
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 | |
|
sprint sucks
@cox.net | cell phone etfs are evil i mean the service is a ripoff with the 7 - 35% taxes and fees added on....then if u cancel even 1 day before the contract is up ur charged $175 or more | |
| 
treetop1000
join:2003-11-07
Lexington, KY
| sure.... Oh yeah right, we're all corporate haters.
Got news for you, we hate anyone who takes money out of our pockets for un-fees and line item charges. Like banks charging you to make a deposit into your account, or doing business with a live teller. You know, charging the customer extra for normal business services.
Sprint just wants to keep the government happy, and not lose a significant portion of revenue because management screwed up and decided that it was good business to dog the
(major government contract holder)
customer with predatory price structuring. | |
| | soothsayer15
join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: sure.... said by treetop1000 :Oh yeah right, we're all corporate haters. Got news for you, we hate anyone who takes money out of our pockets for un-fees and line item charges. Like banks charging you to make a deposit into your account, or doing business with a live teller. You know, charging the customer extra for normal business services. Sprint just wants to keep the government happy, and not lose a significant portion of revenue because management screwed up and decided that it was good business to dog the ( major government contract holder) customer with predatory price structuring. I've worked for a company that works with the government, and we didn't charge ETF's either. Accounts for government agencies and large businesses are RADICALLY different than accounts offered to consumers. It's stupid to even compare them. Government employees are not scared to run up a bill on the taxpayer's dime. Trust me on that. Telecom companies that work with the government are not losing by not collecting ETF's.
Not charging ETF's to the government is actually a good thing. It's one less way for corporations to raid taxpayer dollars. That Attorney General is a Grade A fool. | |
| 
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud
edit:
June 12th, @04:49PM
| Gov't double standard? Say it ain't so!
In other news, the sky is blue and gas is expensive.
But then again, if I were as big as the US gov't, I'm sure I could dictate a few terms to my contractors like ditching the ETFs. | |
| 
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Slow day for sure... This isnt news. Any sizable corporation gets treated exactly the same way. Even if it wasnt standard practice, why would (some) people want the government to pay extra fees?? As has already been pointed out, WE would end up paying them! The last thing we need is to pay MORE taxes, what a joke.
--
Have YOU thanked a soldier today? If not, think about doing it as you speak ENGLISH this memorial day. God Bless America, and God Bless our troops.
| |
| 
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
edit:
June 12th, @06:29PM
| New law Ok, since Uncle Sam can apparently make it against the law to get bilked by ETF's, I'm making it against my law for me to pay ETF's. Or not, but it sounds good.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
| jsbaker
join:2002-07-13
La Porte, TX
| Not only Sprint. Sprint is not the only one that does this. I work for a higher ed institution and have a Govt. contract for a couple of my Faculty with Verizon. I was informed last week that we don't pay ETFs either since it is a Govt. contract and they are not allowed to charge ETFs on them. Mind you we are private non profit institution.
I do know that our main wireless contract which is with AT&T with about 800 lines does charge etf fees. This would be why they are waiting two years for our main contract to expire so they can take all 800 lines and jump ship. | |
| DSLdewd
join:2004-06-05
Denver, CO | I'd be more ticked if... my tax dollars went to early termination fees than not. | |
| 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Verona, PA
| Sigh.... OMG!!!!! Companies with a bazillion lines paying a bazillion dollars a month get treated better than joe user with his 1 line at $50 a month.
This is frankly the DUMBEST STORY EVER.
Seriously, if you had as many lines as the government I bet you wouldn't even have to ask the salesman who set up the contract to waive the ETF, it would be assumed that's what you wanted.
--
"Wisdom and Knowledge shall be the stability of thy times" | |
| 
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI | Big contract, specialized terms... I'm sure there's the equivalent of an ETF for large scale users... it's just not per phone. More likely covers the contract itself, minimums, etc.
--
My Site | |
| 
RickNY
Premium
join:2000-11-02
New York
·Optimum Online
| Dumb article
What a surprise, no ETF! Guess what? These are not residential contracts.. All of the terms are negotiated in the contract when dealing with large business and government contracts.. Next thing you know we'll get some revealing news article reporting how activation fees are negotiated out and how negotiations for employee discounts on personal lines are factored in as well.
Ironically, I'm sure the AP receives similar terms under their cellular contracts as well. | |
| hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Gov'ts never pay Its just not Federal Gov't that doesnt pay. Local, and state gov'ts don't either. | |
| mglunt
join:2001-09-10
Fredericksburg, VA
·Verizon FIOS
 ·VoicePulse
| I agree with ETF for the most part Look, the cell phone company is giving you a phone or drastically reducing the retail cost of the phone with your agreement that you will be a customer for a year or 2. Do you actually think that a consumer should be able to buy a $300 phone for $100 then not have to pay anything if they cancel a few months later? | |
| | 
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: I agree with ETF for the most part said by mglunt :Look, the cell phone company is giving you a phone or drastically reducing the retail cost of the phone with your agreement that you will be a customer for a year or 2. Do you actually think that a consumer should be able to buy a $300 phone for $100 then not have to pay anything if they cancel a few months later? Well, my first question is... what about those who already own their own phone? Or buy one at full price anyway, such as is the case with the iPhone? Why should these users be charged such an astronomical ETF rate when they aren't being subsidized by the phone company in the first place?
You can't tell me that those of us who do choose to buy our own phones don't get the raw end of the deal there.  | |
| | | |
|
|
While You Pay ETFs, Uncle Sam Doesn't
