digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

No Price Cuts For Verizon & BellSouth DSL Customers

news.com.com — Verizon Communications' and BellSouth's DSL customers won't see a reduction in their broadband bills, even though a special fee that had been tacked on to bills to pay for a federal program has been eliminated.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • tomboy501, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30Apparantly, the telcos still aren't finished raping and pillaging the consumer masses . I love Verizon's new "supplier surcharge" - what a bunch of snake oil with the "faster" and "slower" service charge difference. And Bell South's official statement to explain their fees? I don't think I've seen more of a corporate-speak mumbo-jumbo run-on sentence avoid-the-facts explanation ever in my life - except on the Daily Show...and that was great satire. Bell South and Verizon are serious. gah.
    • nbhagwat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19I am banking on Google to make broadband free to all and make these assholes pay for their greed.
    • kyote, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1and this is surprising how?
    • nicklinus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1well of course they arnt gonna cut prices their a telco. well I will be switching to bell south in about 6 months because they are instaling a like fios thing in my area. I hope they stoping being gready by then lol.
    • Seumas, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Are you REALLY lol'ing? Because it's unfair of you to say you're lol'ing if you're actually just smiling or chuckling. I suspect you aren't even smiling.
  • qwickone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Are we really surprised though? If they charge what theyre charging now and we pay it, why would they lower it? They surcharge was not large enough per month that most people will go through the hastle of swtiching providers. I believe it was only a couple of dollars.
  • Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -3/+54I'm sick and tired of these ***** telcos on this ***** internet!
    • chembro84, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2We got telcos on this motha' *****'!!!!!!!
  • N1tro, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5i think 15 a month is a very good price as is... i wouldn't be surprised to see it go up
    • mulling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's not that $15 is a *good* price, it's just that paying several times that much (as most people in the US do for "broadband") is really, really lame so by comparison $15 is fantastic.

      Most of us in the US are trained to think that it's perfectly OK to pay $50-60 per month, and after all the breaks the telcos got to roll out the infrastructure that's really quite sad.
  • mulling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Telco shafts customers.

    Film at 11.
  • GuyHitByTruck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Since Bellsouth is the cheapest broadband ISP in northwest Louisiana, I really can't complain.. much. Not that it ever stopped me before.
  • WDot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Looking at the Verizon DSL website, they offer their residential DSL for $14.95 per month. Although if it's anything like my cable service, it'll go up over time. However, they most likely want to keep initial prices low to hook people.

    What I did to lower my broadband bill was call with a competitor's ad in hand saying they were offering a lower price. The person there then was able to bring up an offer that my ISP had offering the same price, and simply changed my bill to that.

    It seems a little ridiculous that I have to actually call to get a lower price instead of just having the same low price consistently. But if they are willing to lower my price for simply calling and waiting a bit on hold, why not just call them every few months when they start inching up your broadband bills?
    • KJay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What my cousin did to lower his bill was get a job with comcast.
    • Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I've had Cox Cable internet access for 2+ years now. So far the only that that's increased is the speed of my connection to the internet.
    • gharding, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You can do this with so much stuff. Almost any subscription-based company has some sort of retention plan with a discount. I did this with my old cable bill, my cellphone bill, got my credit limit doubled and APR reduced. Sometimes they'll lower it for a few months then jack it back up to the regular price, but either way, it's a buck saved.
    • serpentor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1$14.95 is for their 768kbps service, which is fine if web is all you do. I'm currently "borrowing" a neighbor's 768k line and it's a godawful disgrace of slowness, so I'm going with their naked DSL 3mbps for $35. I'd go cable, but Time warner cable internet rape is $60 in NYC, and Verizon's usenet server is very good amongst ISP's..
    • samdu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Wish I could get naked DSL. :(
    • kyote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it's no different then long distance. back in the day, when i worked at at&t, we had customers on some really bad long distance plans that was costing them a ton of money. would we switch them to a lower plan automatically to save them money? no. mainly cause it was illegal though. :)

      you have to call and bitch to get a better deal. they ain't going to do it automatically out of the goodness of their hearts. it's up to you, the consumer, to stay on top of what your doing. good or bad, that's the breaks.
    • shaolinpunks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3BUT you have to have landline to get that price and a 1 year contract.
      without a 1 year contract it's like 34.99 (ish) a month.

      the cheapest landline phone service you can get is 6 dollars for SUPER basic (not correct term) and if you make ANY out going calls they charge you like 10 cents a min for a local call. plus on top of the 6$ a month you have 7$ in taxes (just for the phone part) there is then an additional bunch of taxes on the dsl.
  • Software2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This Just In: Nothing has changed in the world.
  • taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I just got an email from Verizon this weekend explaining how they will be soaking up some extra coin of mine. Sad.

    I'll tell you one thing, corporations are going to learn a hard lesson when other, better options come along (see: Firefox, Google, ISPs other than AOL) and they wonder why people can't stop buying their products fast enough.
    • Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Problem is that these "better options" will never come along. What these phone companies are doing is illegal IMHO. Through their industry associations, the telcos (and cable providers), are doing nothing more then price fixing and keeping any form of new competition away. As long as they are able to exist in the form that they exist now, nothing will ever change.
  • ChronicColonic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Can you here me now?
    http://www.mobiledatacomm.com/Uploads/can%20you%20hear%20me%20now.jpg
    Oh that's right...you can't here anything over that sucking sound coming from my wallet!
  • PowerCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6just goes to show, taxes dont make prices go up and the lack of them dont make them go down.(as long as we arent talking extremes) Companies can only charge what we are willing to pay. It actually happens a lot. A long time ago prices of soda went up do to sugar shortages, after shoratge went away, prices stayed the same, because we were used to it.
    For 70 years and through two wars, coke was 5cents a bottle.
    amazing a price can remain stable for that long.
    • dextroz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It's the same thing with gas right now. You'll never see it back to $1.15 in 2003 fall.
    • Sk3pt1k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The problem with that line of argumentation comes when there are artificial monopolies. Telecos get tax breaks to install lines, soaking the public for their profit and breaking promises they made to get those breaks. Then, once their in place, they use the $$$ they're soaking from the public to buy off congress so they don't have to share the infrastructure and can maintain their monopolies. There is no price competition and no where to go in most markets. Cable companies likewise have no significant price competition - they pay the localities a fee each year for access to the city's utility right of way to lay their cable. It's an exclusive contract and other supplies can't lay their own "pipes". You could say - well, just don't get telephone and cable services. Well, those are, for most, essential services. Granted, most could probably do without the cable, but the phone and Internet are indispensable in this age - banking, shopping, customer service, business services, etc are all on-line and it is increasingly difficult to get service without using the Internet for some things.
  • akatsuki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The real problem is that in America we don't require advertising of the full, total price. We let them just add on fees after the fact in a form of deceptive advertising. Imagine if you went to the shop and the government taxes were already on the price labels. Or any "service fees" were required to be tacked onto the advertised price. I have no idea why this is not deceptive advertising....
  • one2gamble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1sounds just like every other tax that is ever granted...they simply never go away comletely
  • bossm4n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Absolutely ridiculous. Oplink.net is a local provider here in Houston. The day that fee was dropped, they sent an email to all of their customer notifying them that the fee would be removed from their bills thus reducing their monthly charges. And that's the way it should be.
  • nilobject, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Anyone who still believes in trickle-down economics should be punched in the teeth.
    • Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -10/+9Reagan was about the worst thing that ever happened to this country...
  • mbrutsch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah, I just got that letter from Verizon. They're raising my bill by slightly more than they're dropping it. And since they are the only option in my apartments, I'm stuck with'em. Bastards.
  • Fishheadswg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you call them up and complain about how the fee is a load of crap they might take it off your bill, I've gotten my bills lowered with less-backed complaints.
  • Familyguykiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5they have been ***** us over forever why would it change
  • Highborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Verizon, Bellsouth and AT&T all deserve a good anal pounding. No lube.
  • rjcarr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I just got my letter from verizon ... it said something to the effect of, "we no longer are required to collect this fee of $2, however, we will now be charging you a 'surcharge' fee of $1.98. You're welcome". It pissed me off, but what am I to do? My service is already pretty cheap ($15).
  • cfGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Tried e-mail Verizon to tell them what I thought and there e-mail feedback page throws an error (nice huh)?

    Might try again later: http://www22.verizon.com/foryourhome/ContactUs/Contactus_email_form.asp

    Tried calling to find out where I could send a letter to complain, but according to the phone system they were "experiencing extremely high call volume...and could not take my call" again nice customer service.

    Anyway here is what I wanted to tell them:

    "Recently I received a notification from Verizon Online stating that they will stop charging the FUSF (Federal Universal Service Fund) recovery fee this month. The e-mail went on to say that now Verizon Online was going to begin charging a new fee, the Supplier Surcharge. My perception is that Verizon Online is driven by greed and I feel this is a very sleazy move on your part. I am sure that Verizon Online realized that this would upset some customers, but calculated that the potential gain and decided that the potential losses were justified. This certainly will be a factor when deciding whether to continue to use your service and I am sure other customers will be like minded. I am considering placing a formal complaint with the Federal Trade commission and hope that others do the same.

    I would like to request the name and address of the head of customer relations at Verizon Online. "

    You know it is not the couple bucks - it is a principle that companies like this never seem to make the right choice for consumers!
  • anoops, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I live on a military base, by contract *only* BellSouth is allowed to provide us Internet service. Is anyone else paying $75/mo for the slowest DSL plan that your ISP offers? I didn't think so, the people that live across the street from the base don't either, they pay about 1/3rd of what we do for the same service.

    I had to pay over $100 in activation fees, the phone lines are already in place and maintained by the base, BellSouth has no part in activation other than flipping their switch..

    Oh well, in a year I can move off base... and get Google Broadband? ;)
    • chevyorange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Good God. You'd think you'd get free service at the least!

      Uncle Sam Sez: Thanks for your service!
  • stealthdave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It seems to me that this could be grounds for a class-action lawsuit on the grounds of false advertising. It's one thing to advertise $14.99/mo + fees and to charge regulatory fees (which I already consider suspect), but quite another to advertise $14.99/mo + fees and *really* be charging $14.99/mo + 1.25/mo + fees! I would argue in this case that the price is actually $16.24/mo and that consumers should not only get a refund for any overpayments made, but that punitive damages should be assessed against any companies found perpetrating this kind of fraud.

    And I'm certain that posting in Digg is the most effective thing to do about it. :P
  • shaolinpunks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1how can verizon not be open now and only open till 6pm est?!?!?!?!
  • Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You know what *really* sucks? Verizon charges the same $29.95 per month fee whether yourr connection is 1 Mbps or 3 Mbps.

    My sister's family got Verizon DSL -- the 3Mbps plan -- about a year and a half ago. They had problems with it since day one. The usual symptom was normal, but slightly fluctuating speed during the day, but when dusk came, for some reason the speed would drop ridiculously. We're talking 9600 bauds speeds, literally. I tested it a few times with that result.

    Oh, they called Verizon tech support several times. Got nowhere. Verizon kept telling them everything was fine on their end.

    Finally, being more tech savvy than my sister, I took matters into my own hands and called Verizon. After encountering an almost impenetrable brick wall of a first-tier support person, who insisted on going through the same damn script ("let's check your browser settings again..." No, let's NOT, OK?!), I finally got it escalated to the network engineers.

    After 2 weeks, some Asian guy called my sister and left a message about as decipherable as this one:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=T0WStcdvhqY

    I called them back and was informed that "there was problem on the line, so we downgraded your speed and closed the service ticket." Um...excuse me, but if there is a problem on the line, you need to FIX IT. So after about AN HOUR of wrestling with them about that, *finally* I talk to a supervisor and hear that the reason the line was downgraded was because my sister is too far away from the CO -- even though she lives half a block away from me, and mine's okay. So they downgrade the line 1.5 Mbps down, 256 up. And close the ticket. End of story.

    I ask about a corresponding reduction in the monthly charge, and the tech support guy says that can be done but I will have to call Billing myself. (There is NO coordination between Tech Support and Billing on these issues.) So I call Billing the next day, explain the whole damn thing over again to them, and they say sorry, your only option to reduce your bill is to go down to 768K at $17.99. Otherwise, the price stays at $29.95.

    Nevermind the fact that Verizon installed this thing in the first place a year and a half ago, assuring my sister that they pass the line tests, and that they qualify for the 3Mbps speed. Nope. They cap the speed on the line at 1.5 Mbps but the price remains the same. Lovely.


    • CiXeL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1heh thats like the time my girlfriends dad visited us out here in south miami. customer service here is notoriously terrible. we know that because we live here but he doesnt.

      anyways, the pool was filthy. he asked them to have it cleaned the next day. they said they would. when he went to use it the next day and it was still filthy so we went over to the manager to ask to have it cleaned the manager said 'the pool is closed' and made us get out of the pool. typical florida customer service.

      btw if anyone wants to avoid it, its the hampton inn in florida city, florida.
    • shaolinpunks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1call yoru atorney general
      there really good about resolving things like this
  • PhillyMJS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What, you expected big companies to give up that money? Ha!

    Here's an even more egregious example of corporate greed: Comcast is trying to force all their customers onto digital cable. They are doing this by steadily decreasing the number of channels available to analog subscribers. They used to carry HBO 1, 2 and 3. Then they dropped HBO 3, but kept the cost the same for only 2 channels that it was for 3. I was stunned when I called to ask why my bill didn't go down since I was getting less service. I immediately canceled the HBO from my cable. Every couple of months I get another letter that they've chipped away another premium channel or two. Now I think all that's left are one channel of HBO, and Showtime. I bet they are still charging the same price for for that single HBO that they were for 3. I wonder if the people who had a single premium channel like The Movie Channel kept getting charged for it after it was dropped from the lineup? Wouldn't surprise me one bit.

    When Comcast finally gives me the 'go digital or else' ultimatum, and I'm pretty sure it will happen soon, I'm ditching them and going to satellite.

    ~Philly
  • tuholmes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Um... this article is actually pretty old.

    I hate to be the one to tell you this, but I got a letter just the other day from Verizon saying that they were eliminating this portion of the bill.

    Heck, if you even read the article it says "as of august 13th". So, while you may bash the companies who are providing the service, you can't claim that this article is accurate because it certainly is not.

    Verizon has eliminated the tax from their service.
  • pbarnes7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm sure they'll gouge at least as much from us with some other hidden fee! I'm a Verizon DSL subscriber for the past year and I know they're raping us!
  • sigterm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In CT they lowered the gas tax to help people out and warned sellers not to grab the money. It took about a month before all the prices were at the level before the tax break. Companies that do this should be fined for double the money they gain from this type of activity. I am still waiting for my fiber to the house that we are all supposed to have by now.

    I sure am glad we are represented so well in Washington.
  • rypaintD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've got the Verizon DSL 768K package for $15.00 package and right now I can say I am NOT happy with it. (see below)

    http://tinyurl.com/jxz68

    If I can get that fixed, i'm good. The only other option for high speed in my area is 6mb Comcast, but since I have Dish Network it would cost $60 a month.
  • mattcav1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If this is not correct why does verizon have this on the main login page


    Addition of Supplier Surcharge / Elimination of Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) Recovery Fee


    Addition of Supplier Surcharge

    Effective August 26, 2006, Verizon Online will begin charging a Supplier Surcharge for all new DSL customers, existing customers with a DSL monthly or bundle package, and existing DSL annual plan customers at the time their current annual plan expires. The surcharge is not a government imposed fee or a tax; however, it is intended to offset costs we incur from our network supplier in providing Verizon Online DSL service. The underlying supplier surcharge helps Verizon to recover the cost of a local telephone line in situations where Verizon does not simultaneously provide both local voice and Internet services. The Supplier Surcharge will initially be set at $1.20/month for Verizon Online's up to 768Kbps service customers and $2.70/month for customers provisioned at higher DSL speeds.
    Elimination of Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) Recovery Fee

    Verizon Online will cease charging an FUSF recovery fee, beginning August 14, 2006. We are eliminating this fee because Verizon Online's supplier will no longer be assessing this surcharge on Verizon Online as of this date. The impact of the elimination of the FUSF fee is as follows: for DSL customers of Verizon Online's up to 768Kbps service, the fee eliminated is $1.25.month; for DSL customers of Verizon Online's up to 1.5Mbps and 3Mbps services, the fee eliminated is $2.83/month (based on current FUSF surcharge amounts).
    On balance your total bill will remain about the same as it has been or slightly lower.
    We regret the need to add this Supplier Surcharge, but we thank you for choosing high speed Verizon Online DSL. We appreciate and value your business.
  • digitaldivider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"to offset costs incurred in complying with regulatory obligations and other expenses. The fee also recovers costs associated with additional systems necessitated by federal regulation, as well as costs associated with monitoring, participating in and complying with regulatory proceedings, and other network and servicing requirements."

    W. T. F.

    it looks like someone at bellsouth catted /dev/random and redirected it to the press. this is ***** here, folks. In other words, nothing new.
  • lychondy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a way to raise margins without potential customers really seeing what's happening. I think this might be misleading advertising and could be challenged in court via class action lawsuit or even under anti trust.

    I am part of 'Rape Me Plenty Comcast' but I enjoy 8mb( sometimes they even give me more than that). My other choice is the new monopoly AT&T but I refuse to do anything with them after I signed up for pro dsl and then they told me I couldn't get. Then I tried to cancell and they hit me with $120 in fees for a service they couldn't deliver and somehow always got disconnected with me when I tried to dispute the fees.

    they are all evil... GO GOOGLE!!!!

  • pbarnes7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah I got my notification from Verizon on Saturday. I'm pissed! Unfortunately I'm in the outskirts of a rural area so my only other option would be satellite which is totally outrageous!

    At least I've got some time before this takes effect when my annual contract expires in May.
  • devfeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So... I don't think this is for real
  • Cantrellv, on 07/30/2008, -0/+0Everett, Wash., Awards Video Franchise to Verizon
    http://www.sourcerelease.com/corp/kw0?r=xmmm8x
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.