12-15-09 08:42 PM
136 12345 ...
tools
  1. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Are you saying that if you break your smartphone, cant afford or don't have a different one, you can't activate and switch to an old flip phone and cancel the data portion without an ETF? Obviously you wouldn't be canceling the line in this case just the data. How is that right or fair? I could see if you cancel the data in less then a year while the phone is still under warranty but past that a lot of people could be in trouble. I don't think it is fair to charge someone an ETF because they can't afford $600 for a new phone or $30 a month for a service you cant use on the device you have already.
    Hold on a sec & reread your words.

    if you break your smartphone, (you) can't afford or don't have a different one...

    It is YOUR phone. YOU broke it. YOU can't afford a new one. YOU signed a contract promising to maintain service for X amount of time with certain obligations & minimum levels.

    How is any of that your carrier's fault or responsibility?

    On a smaller scale - take the smartphone out of the equation & make it a $300 flip phone. What if you broke that, couldn't afford another? Should the carrier let you out of your contract without an ETF?

    Another scenario - you lost your job & can't afford your bill. Should they allow you out of the contract without the ETF?

    Nowhere in the contract you sign does it state "unless you break or lose your device." Regardless of what YOU do, unless you die or you are forced to move to Lower Elbonia, the carrier still has you under contract. Even if you move out of the country or die, they only let you out as a courtesy. They could still hold you to the contract, as it isn't their fault you're moving & they could put a lien against your estate.

    I have always lived by the mantra that you do not make a commitment you're not 110% sure you will be able to abide by - this means you always look at things in the light of "what if the worst happens." What if I lose my job - can I still afford this house I want to buy? The car I am looking at? The cell phone contract I am about to sign?

    The carriers don't owe you anything - once you've signed that contract, they have you for a specified amount of time - if you are not 110% certain you can abide by that contract, the way it is written, don't enter into the agreement.

    And, if you cannot afford to replace that phone on a moment's notice, at full retail, don't get it. It is as simple as that.

    We have become a nation of entitled pansies - people who think they deserve to have all of life's conveniences. If something goes wrong, someone else should fix it. Sorry, but if someone cannot afford all of the contingencies, they're over their head & should go without.

    Sign an agreement & don't abide by it, you're tossing away your most valuable assets - your integrity & your character. Each time I see someone on these pages trying to get an early upgrade or out of a contract, I know their integrity, their character, their very being, isn't worth anything.

    Get something you can afford. If you can't afford it, then don't get it. Stand up and accept responsibility for things you do. These phones are simply toys or conveniences - nothing more. They are certainly not worth destroying your reputation & credibility over.
    11-03-09 05:02 PM
  2. gotblackberry's Avatar
    I agree with your completely. I don't mind having an ETF of $375 for a smartphone. That's a bargain.

    That lawsuit was about a different situation with very cheap cell phones and ETF that didn't decrease over the length of the contract. ETF was intended for carrier to recoup the subsidy paid to customers, which was fair. Instead ETF was used to lock a customer.
    I still do not think that lawsuit should have been brought in california. California is very anti-business. There is nothing "unfair" about it. If you don't like the $200 constant ETF.. buy the phone full retail. It's simple.
    11-03-09 05:45 PM
  3. tech_head's Avatar
    I still do not think that lawsuit should have been brought in california. California is very anti-business. There is nothing "unfair" about it. If you don't like the $200 constant ETF.. buy the phone full retail. It's simple.
    I don't like to use "anti-business", call it "pro-consumer".
    The ETF to be fair should reflect the price of the device, not some inflated number they claim. A BB Storm is not a $600 device on any planet.

    Hey, $350 doesn't bother me because, if I don't the service I'm done.
    In reality though, $350 is about what it costs to go out and get a new subscriber if you leave. This is the cost of advertising and marketing.
    11-03-09 06:19 PM
  4. leskchan's Avatar
    I don't like to use "anti-business", call it "pro-consumer".
    The ETF to be fair should reflect the price of the device, not some inflated number they claim. A BB Storm is not a $600 device on any planet.
    .
    I disagree. A Storm 2 is $539.99 retail. You are not entitled to get the wholesales price. The discounted price is $179.99. The difference is $360. So $360 is a fair ETF and should decrease by $15 monthly over the 2-year contract life.
    11-03-09 06:29 PM
  5. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I don't like to use "anti-business", call it "pro-consumer"
    You could call it that, but is it really? These things are not designed to be profit - they are intended to recoup expenses. Raise the cost of doing business & everyone pays more.

    Rising prices hurt everyone - it is better to penalize those who cost the company more.

    It would be one thing if these charges were hidden surprises, but they aren't. They are clearly published in the contract you agree to. No guns, threats, torture or pain is used by the carriers, even though you may threaten to shoot yourself, would suffer great psychological pain & be tortured because you don't get what you want...
    11-03-09 06:42 PM
  6. faf224's Avatar
    Meh whatever. I've been thinking about getting a phone that doesn't require me to pay $30 a month for data anyway.
    11-03-09 06:42 PM
  7. gotblackberry's Avatar
    I don't like to use "anti-business", call it "pro-consumer".
    The ETF to be fair should reflect the price of the device, not some inflated number they claim. A BB Storm is not a $600 device on any planet.

    Hey, $350 doesn't bother me because, if I don't the service I'm done.
    In reality though, $350 is about what it costs to go out and get a new subscriber if you leave. This is the cost of advertising and marketing.
    How are they proconsumer? They're passing laws that hurt businesses and hurt your right to contract freely. Business owners are consumers too..

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    11-03-09 06:54 PM
  8. sjsjr's Avatar
    Hold on a sec & reread your words.

    if you break your smartphone, (you) can't afford or don't have a different one...

    It is YOUR phone. YOU broke it. YOU can't afford a new one. YOU signed a contract promising to maintain service for X amount of time with certain obligations & minimum levels.

    How is any of that your carrier's fault or responsibility?


    I have always lived by the mantra that you do not make a commitment you're not 110% sure you will be able to abide by - this means you always look at things in the light of "what if the worst happens." What if I lose my job - can I still afford this house I want to buy? The car I am looking at? The cell phone contract I am about to sign?

    The carriers don't owe you anything - once you've signed that contract, they have you for a specified amount of time - if you are not 110% certain you can abide by that contract, the way it is written, don't enter into the agreement.

    And, if you cannot afford to replace that phone on a moment's notice, at full retail, don't get it. It is as simple as that.

    We have become a nation of entitled pansies - people who think they deserve to have all of life's conveniences. If something goes wrong, someone else should fix it. Sorry, but if someone cannot afford all of the contingencies, they're over their head & should go without.

    Sign an agreement & don't abide by it, you're tossing away your most valuable assets - your integrity & your character. Each time I see someone on these pages trying to get an early upgrade or out of a contract, I know their integrity, their character, their very being, isn't worth anything.

    Get something you can afford. If you can't afford it, then don't get it. Stand up and accept responsibility for things you do. These phones are simply toys or conveniences - nothing more. They are certainly not worth destroying your reputation & credibility over.
    First off Sir if you re read my post I never asked about canceling the line or contract. As a matter of fact I specifically said "Obviously you wouldn't be canceling the line in this case just the data." I ASKED if trying to switch to another phone that does not require Data would constitute a breech of contract and making you responsible for an ETF. Breaking the phone was just one example. That would be a shame because you can do it now without an ETF. However if it is going to be part of a new contract then people will just have to abide by it.

    Yes I said I did not think that would be fair but I also stated that my idea of fair is irrelevant. VZW can do what ever they want with their business as long as it is within the limits of the law. I never once claimed they owe me anything or that it is their responsibility. I was posing a "What If" scenario.

    I do not feel entitled to anything except what I pay for and Verizon has been very good about providing it. They provide me with the cell service I Use. I do not call and whine for early upgrades, complain about charges on my bill, ask for free stuff, none of it. You seemed to imply I was one of those types of people. If I took it the wrong way I am sorry but I can assure you I am not.

    And just because someone cant afford to spend $600 on a cell phone at a moments notice doesn't mean they should not have a cell phone. I am glad you have enough money to do that but not everyone in the world does. That is why I take good care of my stuff and keep my older phones so in case something bad happens I am prepared.
    11-03-09 09:50 PM
  9. jcevans7's Avatar
    It's pretty steep price to pay... All it's going to do is the ppl who want to break their contract they are going to find more loopholes and keep exploiting them to their advantage well the good customer (you and I) will pay the difference if we ever decide to leave.
    11-03-09 09:53 PM
  10. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    I disagree. A Storm 2 is $539.99 retail. You are not entitled to get the wholesales price. The discounted price is $179.99. The difference is $360. So $360 is a fair ETF and should decrease by $15 monthly over the 2-year contract life.
    value and cost is all relative!

    What it cost us on the street to buy a BB Storm 2 (for example) is not that prise that it cost Verizon to aquire the device from RIM.

    Again, its all relative
    11-03-09 10:04 PM
  11. Afangrywarrior's Avatar
    Verizon's been around for long enough that no one should be surprised by how much service they have... Thats why you have your initial 30 days, to decide if you like the service and the phone you purchased. 30 days is PLENTY of time to decide. After 30 days you're stuck with that phone unless you buy another one. I'm sick of hearing people who have called in and want a different model because its not working out for them but dont want to pay. We're not in business to give away phones, were in business for selling the airtime...

    I think the ETF should be $500, why not? Its not a surprise by now that you're in a contract for 1 or 2yrs... And of course if you join the military, die or move to an area without coverage we let you go so there arent any other reasons why you should be released from a contract. Its not going to happen on your mortgage, your car or your children. Cant just say Little Susie's not getting straight A's I think I want to terminate her now...
    11-04-09 12:49 PM
  12. blue_and_bold's Avatar
    My only question is if someone switches from bb to dummie flip phone can they cancel and pay less?
    11-04-09 12:52 PM
  13. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    First off Sir if you re read my post I never asked about canceling the line or contract. As a matter of fact I specifically said "Obviously you wouldn't be canceling the line in this case just the data."
    I read it the first time - if you've been around online forums as long as I have, you would understand that very often, a post is a springboard for many other posts & a lot of the replies veer off in a general nature. This is done as an attempt to head off the inevitable "what ifs" & finger pointing from others.

    It would be different if our discussion was in a private venue, but this one isn't. It is in a public forum. As such, my replies tend to be directed to all readers, regardless of their intent/stand & not just the person who started the thought.

    In other words, I try to head off the trolls.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    11-04-09 12:57 PM
  14. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    And, to head off yet another round of people misreading things, I found something else - in another thread, posted by someone too lazy to see that an existing discussion was already in progress, the following was posted:

    This "news piece" is 16 months ago & pertained to ETFs not beintg pro-rated. The carriers claimed, for years, that the ETF was intended to recover phone subsidies, so a California court ruled that the non-pro-rated ETFs were illegal. There was no rulings on amounts that could be charged.

    In response, the carriers initiated pro-rata ETFs. There is little doubt that this ruling & subsequent actions are what have led to this new round of higher ETFs. Some carriers are rumored to be considering ETFs as high as $500, so hold on to your shorts.

    I have a better idea - contracts that state the retail price of the device & the discounted amount if you agree to a contract. You will pay the difference, minus the difference divided by the used months, plus a $50 contract termination fee, with pro-rating not starting for six months. This way, if you buy a $340 phone for $100 with a 24 month contract, you would have an ETF of $240+$50 ($290) with$10/month removed. If you cancel in 12 months, you would then pay an ETF of $170.

    The easy alternative would be for you to simply pay the $340 & be done with it - no BOGOs & no ETFs.
    11-04-09 01:15 PM
  15. thinkamp's Avatar
    ha i wont be upgrading. or renewing my contract. im not getting stuck with a $350 ETF. Time to start looking at sprint!
    11-04-09 01:20 PM
  16. sjsjr's Avatar
    Twins I see what you are saying about that the Trolls and your answer being a general response to head off them off but you quoted me and then stated your view on entitlement. This made me believe you were referring to me personally. I wanted to respond to you in a PM but you have stated before you either never read them or have them disabled.

    Back to the topic at hand. I think the plan to raise the ETF is a good thing. I don't like people ripping any company off because it raises prices for everyone. I particularly like your idea here

    I have a better idea - contracts that state the retail price of the device & the discounted amount if you agree to a contract. You will pay the difference, minus the difference divided by the used months, plus a $50 contract termination fee, with pro-rating not starting for six months. This way, if you buy a $340 phone for $100 with a 24 month contract, you would have an ETF of $240+$50 ($290) with$10/month removed. If you cancel in 12 months, you would then pay an ETF of $170.
    I wonder if the Cell companies would consider something like that.
    11-04-09 01:32 PM
  17. itsthemusic's Avatar
    ha i wont be upgrading. or renewing my contract. im not getting stuck with a $350 ETF. Time to start looking at sprint!
    So because the termination fee is higher you dont want the service? When you have obviously been happy with the service because you have had it for close to 2 years(if you are coming close to renewing) That is just a moronic way of thinking. You are going to go with a inferior carrier because the fee to leave is less money? ha.
    11-04-09 01:47 PM
  18. thinkamp's Avatar
    So because the termination fee is higher you dont want the service? When you have obviously been happy with the service because you have had it for close to 2 years(if you are coming close to renewing) That is just a moronic way of thinking. You are going to go with a inferior carrier because the fee to leave is less money? ha.
    are you a rep that just got butthurt or what?
    honestly i have thought about leaving vzw even before this ETF raping they are about to start.
    yea i have been happy with their service for a LITTLE over a year, but honestly im tired of paying out the rear for a cellphone.
    i have moved closer to the city and i think something else will be the fix to my needs.
    11-04-09 01:50 PM
  19. blue_and_bold's Avatar
    are you a rep that just got butthurt or what?
    Hit the Nail on the Head.
    Also grats on 3k posts
    11-04-09 01:58 PM
  20. thinkamp's Avatar
    Hit the Nail on the Head.
    Also grats on 3k posts
    geez its stupid that a rep is gonna get all butthurt because im tried of paying out the rear for a cellphone when i could go with something cheaper that will work for me.
    thanks
    11-04-09 02:00 PM
  21. bluerskyes's Avatar
    customer must pay the cost of equipment that was not yet purchased fully (meaning still in contract)
    It wouldn't work, at that point you'd be adding insult to injury.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    11-04-09 02:06 PM
  22. bluerskyes's Avatar
    I still do not think that lawsuit should have been brought in california. California is very anti-business. There is nothing "unfair" about it. If you don't like the $200 constant ETF.. buy the phone full retail. It's simple.
    I believe that at that point, even if you activated your own phone, you still had to enter a contract. Which wasn't quite fair.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    11-04-09 02:11 PM
  23. blue_and_bold's Avatar
    geez its stupid that a rep is gonna get all butthurt because im tried of paying out the rear for a cellphone when i could go with something cheaper that will work for me.
    thanks
    Yeah if something works better/cheaper for you than you should go with them. I don't know why some reps live/sleep/eat vzw. Like ok you work there defend them if someone insults them but don't freak out if someone likes at&t
    11-04-09 02:16 PM
  24. sorlipm's Avatar
    Had a guy call in who has had 5 different phones this year BRAND NEW PHONES!!! So fru fru fru NEW fru fru fru NEW...and so on he wanted a droid and he had a storm 1. First of all the droid is not even out yet Second of all my sup and I offered him a a replacement not a multi fru. Then the guy was so pissed he wanted to cancel..so we sent him to cancel and he did then he had the nerve to tell customer service ok well get me back to tech support so i can get that device so i can atleast sell it on ebay!!!! Are you serious?!?!
    was this guy a lawyer? i think i had the same call
    11-04-09 02:32 PM
  25. 0837S's Avatar
    I'm really surprised that AT&T hasn't adopted something similar for the iPhone. I know someone (a friend's friend) who has been through 10 iPhone 3GS's. When he gets a scratch on his phone, he will open a new line, get a new phone, port his old number over, pay the ETF on the scratched phone and sell it on ebay and make a killing on it. He did this with the iPhone 3g also. From what I was told, the last time I talked to my buddy, AT&T cut him off and won't let him have service with them anymore, because he has scammed them out of so much money. I'm sure he will find a way around it though, people that cheat the system seem to have very creative minds.
    Last edited by 0837S; 11-04-09 at 02:48 PM.
    11-04-09 02:41 PM
136 12345 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD