FCC turnin up the heat on Verizons new ETF
-
You'll really teach them a lesson buying full retail. Have you checked the prices lately? Tour = $489.00, 8830WE = $519.00. Hey, at least you won't have an ETF when you quit them and take that phone to one of your other CDMA-provider choices...12-24-09 03:37 PMLike 0 - Who in their right mind would cancel a contract at 23 months and pay the 120 ETF when they could just pay the last month's bill?
You'll really teach them a lesson buying full retail. Have you checked the prices lately? Tour = $489.00, 8830WE = $519.00. Hey, at least you won't have an ETF when you quit them and take that phone to one of your other CDMA-provider choices...
I respect the opinions of all here, even if we don't agree.
You're right, why buy full retail when my monthly rate is still the same? It's still the same because the fee to recoup the cost of the device is in the ETF. Any other fee's added on to this is wrong.12-24-09 03:42 PMLike 0 - I don't believe Verizon should have complete say over what the ETF can be for. It should be about recovering the cost of the device, not for doing business, store costs, etc. Limit it to the cost of the device and I have no problem with it, otherwise it becomes a penalty for leaving them-which is anti competitive.
The mobile web thing is a non issue to me.
I think the stat ABC should check you out to make sure all the money collected from that drink goes to things associated with that drink. This would be especially relevant if you raise the price of drinks because people are breaking their margarita glasses but also give a raise to the janitor.12-24-09 03:43 PMLike 0 - Cutting off your nose to spite your face?
I dunno about you but I need my mobile phone and mobile number for as long as I'm in business/alive/need to be contacted, so I'm not going to voluntarily and intentionally ditch it at all, let alone within 2 years. That means I may as well sign on the dotted and save some bucks.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com12-24-09 03:45 PMLike 0 - Cutting off your nose to spite your face?
I dunno about you but I need my mobile phone and mobile number for as long as I'm in business/alive/need to be contacted, so I'm not going to voluntarily and intentionally ditch it at all, let alone within 2 years. That means I may as well sign on the dotted and save some bucks.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com12-24-09 03:48 PMLike 0 - Please respond to my post, cenloe. Your industry (the bar industry) grossly increases costs of products (alcohol) why is that ok?12-24-09 07:28 PMLike 0
-
- you know I asked to have my account cancelled just because im so sick of the blatant censorship on this site......and since these "mods" ahahaha cant seem to fathom that idea or have the basic politeness to respond Ill share some hate and discontent....
I just love that the fcc is rubbing VZW's nose in this......particularly where in "other" forums people are laughing at the irony of how vzw is saying the etf helps recover initial investment .....
what are the activation fees for.......ahahaah vzw......FAIL
oh and now I've got my iPhone yay.....good timing now that RIMS having outage after outage
there now ban me "mods"........
(EDIT) almost forgot ........merry christmas........12-24-09 09:24 PMLike 0 -
- Ever eat in a restaurant with a minimum tab policy? Why doesn't the government crack down on this practice? All that will wind up by happening is the consumer is going to get stuck with the tab. I definitely don't support a higher etf, but one can vote with their dollars and go to another more "consumer friendly" carrier. I don't see Microsoft or Intel really fundamentally changed business practices, neither will VZW.12-24-09 09:49 PMLike 0
- Wow! You own a bar? Talk about excessive pricing! How much do you charge for a double jack & coke on a friday night? $10? $13? Then you say that ETF's are excessive? I can get a full bottle for $20. If any business has excessive pricing it's the bar industry on alcohol.
The Verizon ETF is voluntary. You have three options for it not to apply to you. 1) Don't get a PDA. 2). Pay full retail. 3) Pick a company with a lower ETF. When you sign on the line, then complain it's excessive, that's where it gets ridiculous because you're relying on the government to protect you when, with a little voting with your wallet, you can decided what policies you do or do not agree with.
You can go down to the liquor store and buy your own or even head to a different establishment. I agree that the prices we charge are high, but part of what you pay for is the service as well as the atmosphere, which you cant get at home.
I dont have a problem with Verizon marking up the cost of what it costs to do business, just as long as it's not included in the ETF. In fact, they already do this, the markup is in the rate of monthly plan. BTW a double Jack and Coke is $10.
There is only so much spectrum with so many service providers, I cant just go out and buy my own spectrum, it doesn't work that way. Verizon "rents" spectrum from the government and thats why they are subject to federal oversight. Heck, the bar industry is heavily regulated as well, but there are more than enough liquor licenses for any given community, unlike licenses to operate a wireless communications network.
Once again, I dont have a problem with an ETF that is in place to recoup the cost of a device, but Im not for one that also tacks on the price of marketing, commissions or store costs.12-24-09 09:56 PMLike 0 - they know this cenloe....its not even about that for him.......too many on here primarily those who WORK for VZW are just so darned consumed with supporting the brand that they don't even know how when the corporation ends and they begin....
this isn't even an argument about anti trust anymore......its class warfare.....the rich just cant stand that the working class actually has a entity that will stand up and make the game fair.......
they use ridiculous arguments about govt. becoming too involved......and use stupid words like socialism......capitalism and tea party....
I started a whole new thread about this ....and I for one am glad that the prez. is pushing for a consumer protection agency and encouraging his agencies to squeeze the likes of VZW.....12-24-09 10:07 PMLike 0 - Good excuse for going back on your "I won't be posting here ever again, Goodbye Cruel World" post. It's the mods fault you have to come back!12-25-09 12:04 AMLike 0
-
- they know this cenloe....its not even about that for him.......too many on here primarily those who WORK for VZW are just so darned consumed with supporting the brand that they don't even know how when the corporation ends and they begin....
this isn't even an argument about anti trust anymore......its class warfare.....the rich just cant stand that the working class actually has a entity that will stand up and make the game fair.......
they use ridiculous arguments about govt. becoming too involved......and use stupid words like socialism......capitalism and tea party....
I started a whole new thread about this ....and I for one am glad that the prez. is pushing for a consumer protection agency and encouraging his agencies to squeeze the likes of VZW.....
However there are also things that I don't care for, like less of a choice betweens services or brands. While both countries have a pretty large tax rate, there are also many benefits that go along with it, superior health care, much better public works and services, etc.
Anyhow back on topic.12-25-09 02:04 AMLike 0 - It's not an item, it's a penalty. Oh, and I do own a business, a bar to be exact. I understand firsthand what excessive regulation is, but I deal with it. If you don't like it, don't get into the business.
Here is the key paragraph of the FCC's letter to Verizon, it's not that hard to understand.
�Late Friday, Verizon Wireless responded to the Bureau�s queries. The company�s
answers, however, are unsatisfying and, in some cases, troubling. In particular, I am concerned
about what appears to be a shifting and tenuous rationale for ETFs. No longer is the claim that
ETFs are tied solely to the true cost of the wireless device; rather, they are now also used to foot
the bill for �advertising costs, commissions for sales personnel, and store costs.� Consumers
already pay high monthly fees for voice and data designed to cover the costs of doing business.
So when they are assessed excessive penalties, especially when they are near the end of their
contract term, it is hard for me to believe that the public interest is being well served."
Enough said.
That Commissioner's response was akin to telling you that you should be only charging enough to buy more liquor.
As a business owner, dealing with regulation is one thing, but when/if the day came and they told you that you could only charge $2.50+tax for a double shot of Tangere...are you really going to take it up the @*s?
The regulations keep getting heaped on, and we're not too far off from where it's not going to be possible to build a building, or heaven forbid, get a drink...
I'd like to know how many of the commissioners in the FCC have run a business.12-25-09 02:25 AMLike 0 - You are comparing apples to oranges. It's nowhere nearly the same thing. Im not complaining about the markup of a device, that would be comparing apples to apples.
You can go down to the liquor store and buy your own or even head to a different establishment. I agree that the prices we charge are high, but part of what you pay for is the service as well as the atmosphere, which you cant get at home.
I dont have a problem with Verizon marking up the cost of what it costs to do business, just as long as it's not included in the ETF. In fact, they already do this, the markup is in the rate of monthly plan. BTW a double Jack and Coke is $10.
There is only so much spectrum with so many service providers, I cant just go out and buy my own spectrum, it doesn't work that way. Verizon "rents" spectrum from the government and thats why they are subject to federal oversight. Heck, the bar industry is heavily regulated as well, but there are more than enough liquor licenses for any given community, unlike licenses to operate a wireless communications network.
Once again, I dont have a problem with an ETF that is in place to recoup the cost of a device, but Im not for one that also tacks on the price of marketing, commissions or store costs.
$10 for a double jack and coke, How many shots are in a fifth? 24? 25? So you're basically charging up to $125 per bottle when I go to safeway and get the same thing for $20, for the experience? LOL. No, it's because you can and I support your right to do it. I would oppose the FCC investigating you too.12-25-09 03:33 AMLike 0 - You are comparing apples to oranges. It's nowhere nearly the same thing. Im not complaining about the markup of a device, that would be comparing apples to apples.
You can go down to the liquor store and buy your own or even head to a different establishment. I agree that the prices we charge are high, but part of what you pay for is the service as well as the atmosphere, which you cant get at home.
I dont have a problem with Verizon marking up the cost of what it costs to do business, just as long as it's not included in the ETF. In fact, they already do this, the markup is in the rate of monthly plan. BTW a double Jack and Coke is $10.
There is only so much spectrum with so many service providers, I cant just go out and buy my own spectrum, it doesn't work that way. Verizon "rents" spectrum from the government and thats why they are subject to federal oversight. Heck, the bar industry is heavily regulated as well, but there are more than enough liquor licenses for any given community, unlike licenses to operate a wireless communications network.
Once again, I dont have a problem with an ETF that is in place to recoup the cost of a device, but Im not for one that also tacks on the price of marketing, commissions or store costs.12-25-09 10:26 AMLike 0 -
but as far as VZW......heck Ive always been anti VZW....this isnt new12-25-09 11:35 AMLike 0 -
An ETF is a condition of use.12-25-09 12:53 PMLike 0 - Uhmmm .......incumbent licensee's who were given spectrum decades ago were offered the option for two sided auction in 2002-2003.......FCC STILL held a large never before assigned portion which was leased in latter 2005-08.......subject to conditions.....VZW purchased unallocated spectrum not previously licensed
and anyone who broadcasts in any manner over air is subject to FCC as is ANYONE or anything that can interfere with OTA transmission12-25-09 02:04 PMLike 0 - Pretty sure you charge enough for your liquor to pay your employees, keep the lights on, wash the dishes, water flowing in the toilets and mop the floor every now and again...and oh yeah, pay for, and buy more liquor.
That Commissioner's response was akin to telling you that you should be only charging enough to buy more liquor.
As a business owner, dealing with regulation is one thing, but when/if the day came and they told you that you could only charge $2.50+tax for a double shot of Tangere...are you really going to take it up the @*s?
The regulations keep getting heaped on, and we're not too far off from where it's not going to be possible to build a building, or heaven forbid, get a drink...
I'd like to know how many of the commissioners in the FCC have run a business.
great insight into how your "thinking" is so typical of the corrupt capitalist.....the rich stay rich and the poor subsidize the rich's lifestyle
and then when the only entity capable of protecting the working class and the poor (the govt.) imposes restrictions to level the playing field the elitist rich cry about wealth redistribution .....and overbearing regulation......
the problem with your argument.....the 1st wealth redistribution was when the rich fleeced the working class by unfair market practices and corrupt antitrust markets and ETF's are a perfect example...........all we want is our fair share .....or at least a level playing field going forward.....read that book and get back to me.....LMAO
and don't try to use that lame argument that nobody has to have a cell phone or a smartphone....we all know in todays society that cell technology is required as matter of safety.....especially if you have children....and if theres only 4 "real" carriers....well then we have a market where anti trust is a real threat....12-25-09 02:12 PMLike 0 - I was reading the response from VzW and found this interesting:
Indeed, in the absence of an ETF, the company would be entitled to recover a far greater amount from customers
who terminate early. Unless the ETF is viewed as a fee for the exercise of an option to terminate early, customers who
terminate before the end of the contract term would be breaching their contractual obligation and would be liable for
damages—computed as the revenue that they would have paid minus the costs that are avoided by not continuing to
provide service.12-25-09 06:44 PMLike 0
- Forum
- BlackBerry Carrier Discussion
- General Carrier Discussion
FCC turnin up the heat on Verizons new ETF
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD