12-08-09 03:06 PM
91 ... 234
tools
  1. i7guy's Avatar
    Honest question:

    If you were on the verge of losing your home via foreclosure, would you even care if you were hit with an ETF from your cell phone company? Your credit is tanking already, a cell phone collection isn't going to make much difference in the grand scheme of things.
    How many people who want to break a contract are actually losing their home via foreclosure or who want to go to AT&T to get the iphone?

    The population of people who have a smartphone purchases after 11/15 who suddenly found out they are in financial distress and are about to lose their home is probably a small (maybe tiny, almost non-existent) percentage of all subscribers. One is always welcome to purchase a phone at full retail and thus don't even get entered into a contract.
    12-07-09 04:06 PM
  2. Gawain's Avatar
    How many people who want to break a contract are actually losing their home via foreclosure or who want to go to AT&T to get the iphone?

    The population of people who have a smartphone purchases after 11/15 who suddenly found out they are in financial distress and are about to lose their home is probably a small (maybe tiny, almost non-existent) percentage of all subscribers. One is always welcome to purchase a phone at full retail and thus don't even get entered into a contract.
    Not to mention if they were on the verge of foreclosure, that would have flagged the credit report and they would have had to provide a deposit.
    12-07-09 07:27 PM
  3. Super_Mario's Avatar
    is this forum so out of touch with reality to support these increased ETF's.....people visit any OTHER forum or talk to any of your friends and or family on the street.....people are sick of this and contracts......why dont we get like the europeans.....they seem to have a pretty good paygo system over there with orange/o2/vodafone.......why is this so hard to reproduce here in the US?.......

    I dont get it....how can you shoot yourself in the foot by supporting these ETF's......oh YOU dont plan on breaking contract huh....what about the tens of thousands put out of work by the recession....you think they WANT to break contract.....but if its between a VZW contract and putting food on their tables or gas in their cars.........oh but let me guess......youll say they still have a responsibility to the contract...........must be nice up on that hill some of you are looking down from....too bad most of us arent......so whats it like to know your thumbing your nose at the majority of us in the middle class struggling right now?

    Sure hope makes some of you feel good to be so totally disconnected and to have more sympathy for a corporation than a hard working honest american who maybe chose a smartphone before he gets laid off then gets down on his or her luck.....wow (shakes head)

    and thus this will be me last post on crackberry........many of you will say good riddance....I just cant take the censorship or arrogance anymore....peace out
    Since this new ETF policy is recent, I have no sympathy for the hard-working American that gets a smartphone, when they are having hard times. So if Joe Blow gets himself a Droid under the new ETF and is losing his job or home, I could care less what he thinks about the ETF. He should have been smarter. So I have no idea how this would effect someone already having hard times, because I would hope they didn't buy a phone in the first place.
    12-07-09 10:36 PM
  4. gotblackberry's Avatar
    is this forum so out of touch with reality to support these increased ETF's.....people visit any OTHER forum or talk to any of your friends and or family on the street.....people are sick of this and contracts......why dont we get like the europeans.....they seem to have a pretty good paygo system over there with orange/o2/vodafone.......why is this so hard to reproduce here in the US?.......

    I dont get it....how can you shoot yourself in the foot by supporting these ETF's......oh YOU dont plan on breaking contract huh....what about the tens of thousands put out of work by the recession....you think they WANT to break contract.....but if its between a VZW contract and putting food on their tables or gas in their cars.........oh but let me guess......youll say they still have a responsibility to the contract...........must be nice up on that hill some of you are looking down from....too bad most of us arent......so whats it like to know your thumbing your nose at the majority of us in the middle class struggling right now?

    Sure hope makes some of you feel good to be so totally disconnected and to have more sympathy for a corporation than a hard working honest american who maybe chose a smartphone before he gets laid off then gets down on his or her luck.....wow (shakes head)

    and thus this will be me last post on crackberry........many of you will say good riddance....I just cant take the censorship or arrogance anymore....peace out
    Pretty sure those "corporations" give people jobs..
    12-07-09 10:55 PM
  5. Gawain's Avatar
    Pretty sure those "corporations" give people jobs..
    Silly, corporations don't have people...they're callous shells whose sole purpose is to suck the life blood of poor Joe-six-pack. You're just full of all sorts of silly talk...:P

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    12-08-09 01:42 AM
  6. sorlipm's Avatar
    Silly, corporations don't have people...they're callous shells whose sole purpose is to suck the life blood of poor Joe-six-pack. You're just full of all sorts of silly talk...:P

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I am pretty sure that i have never worked for a poor corp or small bus.
    12-08-09 06:19 AM
  7. mikestorm's Avatar
    Edit: You can blame the people who scammed BOGO promotions and made profits of Verizon when they had the LOWEST etf in the industry for the increase.
    Wrongo. Clearly they did not do enough due diligence to identify this phenomenon before they launched the promo.

    Either way, fool them once, shame on the customers (as you say) fool them 3 or 4 times (how many times has VZW run their BOGO promotion?) shame on Verizon. One could argue perhaps they knew it would happen and used it as leverage to impose the new ETF. Sort of like how Senator Palpatine secretly created the droid army to justify going to war and imposing martial law.

    My two cents: $175 ETF for straight phone purchases. New ETF for (both) BOGO phones. I think that's fair.
    12-08-09 07:22 AM
  8. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Really!!! do some research, the 1995 banking act started the slide, signed by your friend Clinton, and enforced by Mrs Reno, who told all the banks that didnt go along they would be investigated, i worked in the title and escrow business for 10 yrs and saw it all, the banks were told to stop redlining and loan to anyone with a pulse,
    +100

    I love how the dense like to argue irrelevance, use false data, revisionist history & sling ad-hominems.

    is this forum so out of touch with reality to support these increased ETF's.....people visit any OTHER forum or talk to any of your friends and or family on the street.....people are sick of this and contracts......why dont we get like the europeans.....they seem to have a pretty good paygo system over there with orange/o2/vodafone.......why is this so hard to reproduce here in the US?.......

    I dont get it....how can you shoot yourself in the foot by supporting these ETF's......oh YOU dont plan on breaking contract huh....what about the tens of thousands put out of work by the recession....you think they WANT to break contract.....but if its between a VZW contract and putting food on their tables or gas in their cars.........oh but let me guess......youll say they still have a responsibility to the contract...........must be nice up on that hill some of you are looking down from....too bad most of us arent......so whats it like to know your thumbing your nose at the majority of us in the middle class struggling right now?

    Sure hope makes some of you feel good to be so totally disconnected and to have more sympathy for a corporation than a hard working honest american who maybe chose a smartphone before he gets laid off then gets down on his or her luck.....wow (shakes head)

    and thus this will be me last post on crackberry........many of you will say good riddance....I just cant take the censorship or arrogance anymore....peace out
    No censorship, Larry - just no one held a gun to anyone's head & forced them to sign a new contract. They could've headed over to Sprint or T-Mobile. Or, if they were struggling to make ends meet or were on unstable employment grounds, they had really no business entering into a new committment.

    Month-to-month - stay with the old phone... but NO, they just HAD to have that new Droid. Proof positive right there that they weren't thinking properly.

    Since this new ETF policy is recent, I have no sympathy for the hard-working American that gets a smartphone, when they are having hard times. So if Joe Blow gets himself a Droid under the new ETF and is losing his job or home, I could care less what he thinks about the ETF. He should have been smarter. So I have no idea how this would effect someone already having hard times, because I would hope they didn't buy a phone in the first place.
    I should've quoted what you just said instead of posting what I just did.

    Pretty sure those "corporations" give people jobs..
    Just "pretty sure?"

    I am pretty sure that i have never worked for a poor corp or small bus.
    +100 - You will never be employed by someone poorer than you.
    12-08-09 07:24 AM
  9. mikestorm's Avatar
    Really!!! do some research, the 1995 banking act started the slide, signed by your friend Clinton, and enforced by Mrs Reno, who told all the banks that didnt go along they would be investigated, i worked in the title and escrow business for 10 yrs and saw it all, the banks were told to stop redlining and loan to anyone with a pulse,
    I'm assuming based on the above that you actually think redlining isn't a bad idea. I'm not going to touch that. Also, I (still) stand behind the legislation you speak of.

    What you fail to mention is the banks quickly realized they could make money off of these previously maligned and ignored individuals, and began to universally cultivate the predatory lending practices which contributed to the subprime fallout yadda yadda yadda.

    To paraphrase your logic:

    Banks ignoring certain people
    Government: Stop ignoring certain people
    Banks start punching the people they once ignored
    You: Government's fault for telling banks to stop ignoring people.

    Right...
    12-08-09 08:10 AM
  10. jahoobob's Avatar
    What you fail to mention is the banks quickly realized they could make money off of these previously maligned and ignored individuals, and began to universally cultivate the predatory lending practices which contributed to the subprime fallout yadda yadda yadda.
    Why would banks quickly realize they could make money off of people they had previously not touched? What is it that changed their minds? One day the banks wouldn't lend to people who they said couldn't pay off a home mortgage and the next day they made loans to those same people.
    Also, how much money did they make "off of these previously maligned and ignored individuals?" Why did Countrywide, Taylor, Bean, and Whitaker, et al. have to get bailout money from the government and/or to be bought by other mortgage companies who got money from the government. BTW, when I say government I'm saying taxpayers.

    Breaking News: Moody's has just announced that the US Government will lose their AAA rating by 2013 if the projected deficits continue as predicted. This would be a first.
    12-08-09 08:59 AM
  11. mikestorm's Avatar
    Why would banks quickly realize they could make money off of people they had previously not touched? What is it that changed their minds? One day the banks wouldn't lend to people who they said couldn't pay off a home mortgage and the next day they made loans to those same people.
    Banks transitioned from an illegal practice (redlining) to a morally ambiguous practice (gouging the un and under educated). Also, you're off base in your logic; banks weren't told to start lending to people who couldn't pay the money back. Banks were told to stop ignoring minorities as a matter of course due to their discriminatory assumption that they couldn't pay the money back. There is a disctinction.

    Also, how much money did they make "off of these previously maligned and ignored individuals?" Why did Countrywide, Taylor, Bean, and Whitaker, et al. have to get bailout money from the government and/or to be bought by other mortgage companies who got money from the government. BTW, when I say government I'm saying taxpayers.
    A combination of they got greedy and they drank their own Kool-Aid. They kept lowering the 'customer exposure' bar (100% LTV loans, interest only loans, etc.) and jacked up the collected fees/ rates that enabled customers to take advantage of these programs. Then, when customers started to walk away from their loan obligations, claiming they were taken advantage of, the banks shrugged their shoulders as of to say "How did this happen?" and started to look for a handout.

    Don't misunderstand, I don't consider these people (the customers) victims, and if I gave that impression I apologize. I'm angry as **** that "government" (read: taxpayer) money was used to bail out the financial institutions you mentioned. Personally, I think equal blame should be shared between the banks and the morons that signed on the dotted line. My previous post was in response to someone claiming the GOVERNMENT was to blame for this mess due to legislation passed in the mid nineties.

    Breaking News: Moody's has just announced that the US Government will lose their AAA rating by 2013 if the projected deficits continue as predicted. This would be a first.
    That's scary, but I would like to point out the projections are rooted in a trend that started in 2003.
    Last edited by mikestorm; 12-08-09 at 09:31 AM.
    12-08-09 09:28 AM
  12. AZNbberry's Avatar
    When enough people complain about something, the FCC will investigate. Does not mean anything will happen about it, Verizon is pretty clear about its policies. If you dont like it, go somewhere else. Unless its illegal in which case thats another story.

    Do your homework before you sign the dotted line.... Does anyone understand what a contract means anymore?
    12-08-09 10:58 AM
  13. jlsparks's Avatar
    Banks transitioned from an illegal practice (redlining) to a morally ambiguous practice (gouging the un and under educated). Also, you're off base in your logic; banks weren't told to start lending to people who couldn't pay the money back. Banks were told to stop ignoring minorities as a matter of course due to their discriminatory assumption that they couldn't pay the money back. There is a disctinction.



    A combination of they got greedy and they drank their own Kool-Aid. They kept lowering the 'customer exposure' bar (100% LTV loans, interest only loans, etc.) and jacked up the collected fees/ rates that enabled customers to take advantage of these programs. Then, when customers started to walk away from their loan obligations, claiming they were taken advantage of, the banks shrugged their shoulders as of to say "How did this happen?" and started to look for a handout.

    Don't misunderstand, I don't consider these people (the customers) victims, and if I gave that impression I apologize. I'm angry as **** that "government" (read: taxpayer) money was used to bail out the financial institutions you mentioned. Personally, I think equal blame should be shared between the banks and the morons that signed on the dotted line. My previous post was in response to someone claiming the GOVERNMENT was to blame for this mess due to legislation passed in the mid nineties.



    That's scary, but I would like to point out the projections are rooted in a trend that started in 2003.
    Well and accurately stated. Our title and escrow friend certainly implied that he agreed with redlining. And I'm sure he made more off of unqualified borrowers after redlining was prohibited than before. In any event, the pendulum has swung too far, again. The bank to whom I've given all of my business for the past 10 years recently denied my application for a signature loan. Why? Because all their underwriters look at now is FICO. And I was a few points shy. My own fault... I've got a card that I really need to just pay off, but I've procrastinated. However, 2 years ago they not only would have issued the loan, but they likely would have offered it at a higher initial principal balance, a lower APR, and thrown in a credit card offer too.

    As far as bailouts are concerned, somewhere in the neighborhood of $80B of the $150B or so lent to banks has been paid back already (inside of one year), not including around $15B in dividend payments to the US Treasury as well. We'll get the bulk of our money back. In fact, the CBO will be announcing tomorrow that its August 2009 report to Congress overstated the current year deficit by $210B. So that's moving in the right direction.

    I actually worked for a number of years for a gentleman who was poorer than me. He still employed approximately 250 people in high-paying jobs. His "poorness" though was a result of his personal actions (and more importantly, inactions) with regard to various taxing authorities. Totally his own fault, and he ultimately took full ownership and responsibility for it. Not all is what it seems. Appearances can be deceiving. There are more examples than I can point to of corporations bleeding money, posting huge quarterly losses, all while employing tens of thousands of people. So in reality the platitude the "all jobs are provided by corporations" requires one to wear blinders to the financial stability and long term potential of those corporations.

    Carrying the theme of personal responsibility forward, ETFs are irrelevant unless one intends to violate their contractual obligations. If I have a 2 year car loan, and after one year I decide I want something different and walk away from my loan I'm going to lose my car. At least VZW is letting you keep the phone :P
    12-08-09 11:21 AM
  14. Jim from NW Pa's Avatar
    people are sick of this and contracts......

    .must be nice up on that hill some of you are looking down from....too bad most of us arent......so whats it like to know your thumbing your nose at the majority of us in the middle class struggling right now?


    and thus this will be me last post on crackberry........many of you will say good riddance....I just cant take the censorship or arrogance anymore....peace out
    One... No one forces people to sign contracts. It is a voluntary decision of the consumer to get a better price on a device, and to prevent from month two month price increases. When cell carriers start holding a gun to peoples heads forcing them to sign I will hear this argument.

    Two..... Want to know who's fault it is that you are middle class and struggling? Your own. The only thing keeping you from a better job and upper class compensation is a lack of initiative on your part.

    Three........ The only times that I have seen you contribute anything on this forum is when there is a thread that gives you the opportunity to complain about vzw and drag them thru the mud. Seeing as how you have made no useful contributions to the forum, goodbye, and good riddance

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    12-08-09 12:28 PM
  15. jahoobob's Avatar
    When enough people complain about something, the FCC will investigate. Does not mean anything will happen about it, Verizon is pretty clear about its policies. If you dont like it, go somewhere else. Unless its illegal in which case thats another story.

    Do your homework before you sign the dotted line.... Does anyone understand what a contract means anymore?
    I believe that this questioning came more from the instigation of a U.S Senator that will certainly bring more pressure to bear by a governmental agency.
    As to your last question, apparently there are a few on CB that don't understand. They probably think they are akin to pro athletes who can renegotiate contracts because they are so valuable to their teams. Problem is that no one customer is worth more than $350 (sort of) to Verizon.
    12-08-09 01:42 PM
  16. gotblackberry's Avatar
    Wrongo. Clearly they did not do enough due diligence to identify this phenomenon before they launched the promo.

    Either way, fool them once, shame on the customers (as you say) fool them 3 or 4 times (how many times has VZW run their BOGO promotion?) shame on Verizon. One could argue perhaps they knew it would happen and used it as leverage to impose the new ETF. Sort of like how Senator Palpatine secretly created the droid army to justify going to war and imposing martial law.

    My two cents: $175 ETF for straight phone purchases. New ETF for (both) BOGO phones. I think that's fair.
    It would not make sense to cancel the BOGO because some people are scamming it. Most people use the BOGO legitimately and Verizon gets two contracts out of it.
    12-08-09 03:06 PM
91 ... 234
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD