What is Digg?140 Comments
- larryjgallo, on 06/13/2008, -12/+68Lawyer: I think charging consumers for wanting to cancel their cell phone service is good for the consumer.
(gun fires, lawyer's brains blown out)
Everybody: Cheers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - youareretarded, on 06/14/2008, -3/+36So how many here would prefer to pay full retail for a phone and have no contracts? How many average Americans do you think would be willing to pay more for a phone and not have a contract?
At what price difference would you be willing to sign a contract (2yr)?
$50, $75, $100, $150, $200, $250+ - Margh, on 06/14/2008, -2/+32Tom Tauke is Kelsey Grammer's long lost twin.
- BIOHazard87, on 06/14/2008, -6/+34Good for the customers? No. Good for AT&T? Sure.
- DigitAl56K, on 06/14/2008, -3/+31If early termination fees are about phone subsidies and the subsidy is paid off by the end of the contract, then I would like the early termination fee to be limited to the value of the subsidy, which the phone company should have to be able to justify in court is accurate, and be pro-rated for the term of the contract so that if you quit half-way through you only pay half the fee, and that once the fee is paid the service provide must unlock the phone since effectively you've now paid 100% for it.
THAT sounds fair to me. Why don't you get right on that, AT&T.
p.s. The best way to keep your customers is to provide good service. My BlackBerry service has been sucking lately and your customer service people provided a level of service that was akin to trying to fix computers by turning them off and on again. - sam54m, on 06/14/2008, -2/+25hey that's how the rest of the world is buying their phones. Nokia is the world's no.1 phone seller and they sell mostly in Europe where you usually have to pay full price for your phone.
Me I always buy my phones contract free, unlucked for full price, oh and with a great clean firmware, no junk-ware. - sinrtb, on 06/13/2008, -2/+21It wouldnt be so bad if you could get a real choice with scalable prices I like the 2 year contract because I can get a new phone for a couple hundred dollars off, however I would much prefer to pay a bit more for less of a contract or less of an ETF.
- Philbert, on 06/14/2008, -1/+14What's ridiculous is a $30 data plan.
- Daggity, on 06/14/2008, -0/+10I believe that lawyer's death was good for the lawyer.
- manutdfan2850, on 06/14/2008, -2/+11i so wish it was like this in the US. the rest of the world has it so much better off its unbelievable. i was recently in Dubai and couldn't help but notice that even the janitors and people cleaning the streets had better cell phones than most people in the us do (nice nokias vs cheap samsong/lg flip phones)
it made me quite sad to be living in the us and stuck with this pathetic system that only benifits the cell phone companies. - bwa236, on 06/14/2008, -1/+10here's what I don't get, if you sign up for a 2 year contract and get a new phone for free, your monthly rate is, say, $40 (and the company makes back over time what they may have lost on giving you the phone for free, plus a little more in many cases).
Now if you already have a phone, and sign a 2 year contract and don't get a new phone from them, your monthly rate is...$40 (and the company profits what they would have lost by giving you the phone, plus the little more they'd already have made).
In an age where some people are going to trend to keeping their phone for a longer period (say, iPhones, Blackberries, and comparable headsets), if you don't take the company up on the offer for a new phone, then you shouldn't have to pay the regular rate for service. In short if I don't get a phone when I sign the contract, I expect to pay less per month than the guy who did.
ETF's are just a consequence of them not making up that money they lost on giving you the phone, and a REASONABLE compromise would be a pro-rated ETF that reduces in value starting at the beginning and toward the contract end.
But companies will hold on to the profits they've enjoyed as long as they can, it's the nature of these things... - notoneofus, on 06/14/2008, -0/+9That's a typical deal in Japan. You can pay more up front and less over time, or vice versa. Don't many other countries/mobile carriers do this, too?
- rolf, on 06/14/2008, -0/+8You can buy a pay as you go phone, no contracts, at Walmart for $15. There are several different models and providers at $20 and $35.
I don't mess with cell phones a lot, but short of an iPhone/smartphone, they look decent. It's not like I can even do all that much with my previously expensive Razr.
I don't see why phones have to be expensive. Most people just want something that makes calls and keeps a history/address book perhaps. - locojones, on 06/14/2008, -4/+12One of the reasons I hate Digg is the overwhelming sense of entitlement everyone has. Not only should they be entitled to cheap unlimited data plans, but their phones should be subsidized regardless of cost, and they should be able to breach their contracts at will with no penalties. That's just ***** dumb and immature.
You signed a contract. As part of the consideration, the phone company is giving you a phone and losing money on it because they're subsidizing it in exchange for your promise to pay your bills for the next 12 to 24 months. If you break the agreement, there's a built in penalty clause where you have to pay for the benefit you were given for signing up. It just happens to be an amount to cover the companies loss on the phone. If you didn't pay that back, and you got to breach yoru contract at will and keep a cheap phone, companies just wouldn't stay in business very long. That's called unjust enrichment, and it's simply not fair to expect as a consumer. If you don't like the structure of the current system, vote with your dollar and don't get a contract. - pradaaddict, on 06/14/2008, -0/+8Its not as bad as it is in Canada. They charge you $20 for every month left and people often sign 3 year contracts. I knew someone who had to move out of the country for work 6 months after getting his phone and had to cancel. Cost him $560... his phone was worth maybe $200
- AzureRise, on 06/14/2008, -0/+7I don't kiss on the first date.
- youareretarded, on 06/14/2008, -0/+7With at&t you can buy your phone from them at full retail and do no contract or you can buy a compatible phone from somewhere else and do a no contract plan.
Even bestbuy is now carrying unlocked phones. - inactive, on 06/14/2008, -0/+6I find this hilarious. What is going to happen is the FCC is going to remove it, people that are dishonest and break contracts will get off easy, and the good customers will have to make up the difference.
I love this ideology. Help those that did bad and punish those that do good. Brilliant. - youareretarded, on 06/14/2008, -1/+7Everyone always thinks the grass is greener on the other side;)
- manutdfan2850, on 06/14/2008, -3/+9@ValleyWorker
guess what? the cell phone sysem in the US is retarded. go to europe or anywhere else in the world and you will see for yourself how much better off they have it. But you are so ignorant you probably havent even left the US before. *****. - youareretarded, on 06/14/2008, -0/+6From at&t's website, first line, second sentence:
"The fee will begin at $175 per device and decrease by $5 each month for the term of the agreement. If phone is returned within 3 days, activation fee will be refunded. If phone is returned within 30 days in like-new condition with all components, early termination fee will be waived"
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/leg ... - klineja, on 06/14/2008, -1/+7Alltel: $200 per phone line
CellularOne: $200 per phone line
Centennial: $250 per phone line
AT&T: $175 per phone line
Nextel: $200 per phone line
Sprint: $200 per phone line
T-Mobile: $200 per phone line
Verizon: Prorated (Starting at $175 per phone line, Drops Each Month $5) - andreusboy, on 06/14/2008, -3/+8Is it just me or does all these fat cat executives, prick ass lawyers, lying crock of ***** politicians, Dick Cheney all look the same? You know half bald, whitey, 50 - 60ish year old ***** faced individuals.
- uselessexpert, on 06/14/2008, -0/+5The best quote I found in the AP article:
"A spokesman for Sprint-Nextel, John Taylor, said the company determined it could not assess the termination fees in its federal contract because it would have been against the law. "
It's funny how the law only applies to the government in this case but not the consumer. - Taiyoryu, on 06/14/2008, -0/+5You do realize you're not getting the phone for free. The cost of the phone is already factored into the contract. You're spreading the cost of the phone over the life of the contract and probably then some. In fact, if you keep the service and phone after the contract ends, you're actually paying MORE for your phone because they don't drop your service price after the phone is theoretically paid-off, which encourages you to upgrade even if your phone meets all your needs.
- jbrand45, on 06/14/2008, -3/+8Of course a representative of AT&T is going to flout the ETFs as a "great deal." If this same man were to be under the employ of a consumer attempting to sue AT&T over these same ETFs I'm sure he would be denouncing them as the unfair business practices that they are.
- Rustymetal, on 06/14/2008, -1/+5If people really love the ETF, why did nexel waive them for the government employees?
Anyway, I find it funny that the original iphone was $400 un-subsidized, yet you still were technically required to get a 2 year contract. And pay the ETF. Why? the phone was not subsidized?
ETF and the whole idea of a phone contract is outrageously anti-competitive and theres alot of price-gouging techniques.. It only hurts the customer in the end
I mean cmon, there's a reason Google tryed to hard to keep the 900mhz network OPEN ACCESS. Meaning there won't be any locked or subsidized devices unless you are trying to get ripped off. - inactive, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4*applauds*
Someone that thinks rationally about things on digg. I agree totally. - bwa236, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4Actually, I expect them to make profit, but this action does not make sense, and underlines an underhanded way of doing business.
Say a phone they'd be including in a 2yr contract is $120. Over two years that would be $5/month. If I take the phone and contract, it's $40/month. If I don't need the phone, why shouldn't it be $35/month? If they're able to take the $120 hit by giving me the phone, why isn't that the same as not taking that $120 hit up front and reducing monthly fees accordingly? I'm not dipping in their pockets here, if they can cover operating costs and expand/research/develop one way, they can the other too. But it seems stupid that it's set up such that the consumer is an idiot not to take the phone, even if they don't need it. - youareretarded, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4At&t and most other nationwide carriers offer a 30 day trial (I think verizon even offers a 30 day free trial!).
But what do you say to those that did the trial and the service was great and then they moved and it no longer works, whose at fault here? Should anyone be required to pay an ETF in that situation? - vision777, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4I had a cell phone sales person at Verizon ask me what I want to do with my phone when I went in for an upgrade. I told her make phone calls and she seemed as if she could not believe that was the main reason I wanted a phone. I didn't care about a camera or music, got dedicated devices that do these things better.
- yoda133113, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4Well when I got my contract I had that option, spend more on the phone with the 1 year contract, or get the phone free with the 2 year contract, many carriers let you do that, I would rather get the 2 year contract and get the phone for free.
- et3rnalnigh7, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4The article doesn't mention that ETF's are usually pro-rated in that if its a $200 ETF at the start of the contract canceling half way through is only $100. As far as being locked into a carrier with bad service I'm pretty sure all the major carriers have at least a 30 day period you can try out their network which should be plenty of time to make sure they work fine wherever your going to be most often.
- sw33tsting, on 06/14/2008, -1/+5Did you read the headline, article, or any other comment? Or did you just randomly click on a link and scroll to that comment and decide to be a *****?
But really... you are probably just a complete moron. - awuwish, on 06/14/2008, -1/+5The whole point of early termination fees is to keep customers. Majority of the time if you are terminating your contract/service, you are moving to a different carrier, which of course ATT would not like, so they slap a hefty ETF on the contract to discourage anyone from terminating. If there were less or no ETFs or contracts, then anyone could switch around to whatever carrier they wanted for whatever phone they wanted, they would probably just have to pay a higher price for the phone. The carrier wouldn't get hardly any money for the phone, as they actually lose money when selling a free or really cheap phone with contracts. They make all their money during the actual contract. It works out to the benefit of the carrier to have contracts and ETFs because that is where they make their money. So it's hard to say that ETFs benefit the customer.
- indochris609, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4I was hammered when I wrote those two comments. I replied to myself. I'm a ***** idiot.
- lebruf, on 06/14/2008, -1/+5quick communications lesson here:
Don't assume your audience will automatically know what you're talking about.
Give context when you're quoting facts - otherwise they're useless facts
But really... what are you trying to say here? I'm guessing it's interesting. - inactive, on 06/14/2008, -2/+6if you dont like AT&T here is a simple way that worked at least with current iphones to get them to subsidize them but not pay the ETF or monthlies :)
Step 1. buy iphone from AT&T
Step 2. cancel service more than 14 days but less than 30 days
Step 3. sell iphone on ebay and profit
The iphone is only returnable (or at least used to be) if it was within 14 days of purchse. AT&T had a 30 day opt out clause in their service contract that let you cancel without penalty. In essence you can cancel but are forbidden from returning the phone. Reading contacts is fun!
Remember its legal to do this, since you are playing by their rules, they created the contracts they cant do anything to you for following them. If they have multiple bonus packages to choose from you may be able to do this multiple times, sometimes for example they have subsidised phones or credit on your bill. At some point though I am sure they will refuse to give you new service. - lmarshall8675, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4I'm sick of hearing all the boo-hoo's about ETF's. All carriers can sell you a phone with NO CONTRACT TERMS. You want it? Pay the the full price for the phone. I cant see why people don't understand they're, in most cases, holding a valuable piece of electronics in their hand. Even a POS model has an average cost between $100-$200. I'm usually the last person to stand on the side of big business, but this is just common sense. I do however favor proration of an ETF (only fair)
- mrblonde314, on 06/15/2008, -0/+3"Last Quarter Verizon made 1.64 billion (BILLION) on revenues of 23.8 billion. That was 1 quarter. I'm not going to break out the tiny violins for their infrastructure costs"
Neither am I but infrastructure costs are a very real thing whether or not you care.
"Also, I have a hard time believing that the cheap "free" phones cost much more than $35 for a discount buyer like Verizon. Maybe even less. Phone costs might have been high 8 years ago, but that is just no longer the case."
Okay, but you could argue the same fact towards any retailer. It's business not charity. Plus, you having a hard time believing it doesn't make it fact. I will agree that they probably don't pay MSRP for the phones but Best Buy doesn't pay MSRP for their electronics or car dealers don't pay MSRP for cars.
"The whole reason you sign a "contract" is for accounting reasons. Because after you sign a contract, they have a guaranteed revenue stream for a guaranteed period of time. That is worth a lot of money to them as it ensures steady income and cash flow. It's a predictable revenue model. The ETF is a way for them to make sure you don't back out, or if you do, they still get paid."
Agreed. That's obvious.
"What other industry makes you sign up for something like that? Electricity? No, Regular phone lines? No. Cable? No. It's not a free market."
None of these industries also provide you with free electronics that utilize their service. If Comcast wanted to give me a free/heavily discounted 50 inch TV with a 2 year contract and an ETF I would sign. Not to mention, most of these services are not a "free' market because, in my case at least, I have the choice between comcast and lets see... comcast.
"Should carriers be allowed to make a profit despite the fact that they are using public airwaves?"
Public? Buddy if you got a few billion lying around by all means make your own network and give yourself free access until then you're using a PRIVATE company to access it. Not to mention nobody is making you own a cell phone.
"Sure, but there needs to be more transparency in costs, and non pro-rated ETF's should be made illegal."
You started this quoting Verizon so lets stay on topic and point out Verizon does have pro-rated ETF's
Edit: Let me also state I agree with your Utopian view on wireless service but wake up and smell the ***** of greed and money - DocHoliday22, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3I would do the opposite. Mobile operators have a nack of enticing new buyers to make a purchase, but once you have made the purchase, six months down the line you find out they are offering a better service to their new customers and existing customers get scraps... I would much rather pay for the phone and get an annual contract, this way I have piece of mind on two fronts: One I can upgrade for cheaper and or receive a new phone for free, two; I'll be able to get a latest phone model and three; I can negotiate and search around for better prices and play operators off against one another to get a cheap deal.
- diggerphelps, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3Face it, a lot of math-challenged Americans would opt for free phones and higher monthly fees.
Who do you think keeps the Rent-A-Centers and pay day loan places in business? - jbrand45, on 06/14/2008, -1/+4I understand being bound to it in cases where you just want to switch providers, or are maybe tired of having the phone in general. There's no real reason to break the contract other than you don't want the service anymore.
In other cases, such as when you are not getting the services you paid for (no signal in your neighborhood, text messages aren't working properly, etc) you shouldn't have to pay an ETF to move to a carrier that will actually work. Unfortunately, most cell phone service providers do not let you test out their service before signing the contract. There are some, but they are few and far between.
If they cannot provide you the service you signed up for, the contract should be null and void. - theutopian, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3If ETF's bother you so much then pay full price for a phone. If a store won't let you pay full price then simply buy one on eBay you don't have to sign a contract if you don't want to,
- mpeters13, on 06/14/2008, -1/+4Getting raped with a rusty spoon is also much nicer than getting sawed in half. That, however, doesn't mean it feels nice.
- Vonauda, on 06/14/2008, -2/+5Too late. Gave it to my cousin. You should have asked me earlier random internet person I've never met before.
- fr0ng, on 06/14/2008, -0/+330 days. It's nobody but the customers responsibility to know what they're signing.
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -1/+4Don't sign a contract you can't pay for, how about that?
- lcohiomatty86, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3Mayby the cell phone companys only choose to carry phones that are currently expensive enough to warrant the contract to make it free. How many people do you know that buy a cell phone actually do more work than just call up the company or go to a store and say "i want a phone, what do you have?" people are not creating the demand for basic phones, thus they are not being made anymore.
- lcohiomatty86, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3At least when it comes to ATT, i would disagree. The current plans that they have are NO better than the plan that I got over 3 years ago. It is also very easy to switch plans at anytime. The contract is just that you keep service going with them, you can raise or lower your minutes in the plan at anytime.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 141 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is