11-12-09 06:07 PM
101 ... 2345
tools
  1. ComfortablyNumb's Avatar
    I don't think this will impact their subscriber growth rate one bit. The new ETF is for "smart" devices. I keep wondering what circumstances would make me want to leave VZW...and I can't think of any.

    This quote from the article sums it up:
    I totally agree with you. These threads keep popping up all over the place. People need to stop whining. Pay full price for your phone and you don't even need to worry about a contract. OR get your phone at a discounted price with a contract. But people shouldn't even be signing a contract unless they think they can fulfill it.
    11-10-09 05:26 PM
  2. papped's Avatar
    I totally agree with you. These threads keep popping up all over the place. People need to stop whining. Pay full price for your phone and you don't even need to worry about a contract. OR get your phone at a discounted price with a contract. But people shouldn't even be signing a contract unless they think they can fulfill it.
    Normally it's cheaper to pay the ETF and get contract pricing on a new phone that it is to pay full retail for an upgrade, except on Verizon now...

    You don't want to assume that everyone who pays an ETF is necessarily leaving Verizon, or even then, not all of their lines.

    It won't hurt their base in the sense that the base is massive anyways, but I wouldn't say it won't do anything bad... And if it turns out that Verizon is paving the way for all carriers to follow suit, then I **** on Verizon that much more...
    11-10-09 05:31 PM
  3. JustinD2473#IM's Avatar
    No there is a subtle difference.

    If Verizon demands that I sign say a two-year, 24-month contract for the privilige of using a Tour and I agree to that and 18 months into that contract decide I want to go to another carrier, I must pay $350. That's ridiculous.

    What I said was, prorate the cost of the subsidy. If you've used their service for X months, the cost of the subsidy has in part been paid. Prorate it..
    the cost is pro-rated as someone has already stated.

    so after 18 months of a 2 year contract...you'd still be on the hook for $170 to buy out. Making up the rest of the subsidy for them, or you could just ride out the only remaining 6 months at that point and be free and clear.
    11-10-09 05:51 PM
  4. ComfortablyNumb's Avatar
    Normally it's cheaper to pay the ETF and get contract pricing on a new phone that it is to pay full retail for an upgrade, except on Verizon now...

    You don't want to assume that everyone who pays an ETF is necessarily leaving Verizon, or even then, not all of their lines.

    It won't hurt their base in the sense that the base is massive anyways, but I wouldn't say it won't do anything bad... And if it turns out that Verizon is paving the way for all carriers to follow suit, then I **** on Verizon that much more...
    This is true, and if you want to s*** on verizon, then have fun with that, everyone's entitled to their own opinion. But looking at it from a COMPANY standpoint ONLY, you can't expect them to ever put themselves in a position to lose money- that's not how businesses work. If people are upset about the raised etf, then they can go to another carrier who has a lower one. And if other companies decide to fall in line with verizon then they're only making decisions that are best for their company. This raised ETF doesn't affect current customers that are already in a contract, only new ones or those renewing a contract getting a new smartphone. So its everyone's choice to either suck up the new etf and sign a new contract AND accept the new etf, or say screw verizon and go to another company. But if someone signs a new contract then they need to not complain about the etf. Again, no one's forcing them to sign into ANYTHING. I'm a verizon customer with a smartphone who plans on reupping my contract for a new BB in the near future. I'm not happy about the new fees, but I want my phone at a discounted price and I'm willing to take the risk that sometime in the future I may have to cancel my service unexpectedly and pay an ungodly high fee. Yet again, that's a risk I'M willing to take that may not be suitable for everyone which is why verizon isn't FORCING anyone into a new contract.
    11-10-09 06:01 PM
  5. papped's Avatar
    And if other companies decide to fall in line with verizon then they're only making decisions that are best for their company.
    This is a really grey area... You could say $800 ETFs would more realistically cover losses from contract breaking + handset subdization of all handsets and might be *better* for the company (especially if you argue that you shouldn't sign a contract unless you know you can finish it...).

    Doesn't mean the result would be good for them overall... It just means it would benefit them more in the sense that they would get more money from the cancellation.

    Big red can get away with stupid crap because they're big. Doesn't always mean it's a good move for them.
    11-10-09 06:20 PM
  6. oasissux's Avatar
    It's laughable that people are whining about paying a penalty for breaking a contract on a heavily subsidized phone.

    Why don't you try returning that leased vehicle halfway into the lease and see what kind of penalty you'd pay.

    Or maybe look at the costs associated with ditching out on your mortgage.

    Lol.

    Like the world owes you a free cell phone.

    Lol.
    11-10-09 07:05 PM
  7. ComfortablyNumb's Avatar
    This is a really grey area... You could say $800 ETFs would more realistically cover losses from contract breaking + handset subdization of all handsets and might be *better* for the company (especially if you argue that you shouldn't sign a contract unless you know you can finish it...).

    Doesn't mean the result would be good for them overall... It just means it would benefit them more in the sense that they would get more money from the cancellation.

    Big red can get away with stupid crap because they're big. Doesn't always mean it's a good move for them.
    It IS good for them overall. If people sign new contracts and break them- vzw makes money. If people leave vzw at the end of their own contracts and go to another company due to raised fees then vzw is big enough to take the hit of losing a customer. That's a risk they took when they decided to make the change.It's a good move for them because they're big and they can get away with it, just like you said. They found a way to make more money and ran with it. They're looking at increasingly rising cancellation rates and they're losing money all over the place. All they did was find a way to make a little of it back. I still don't see what the big deal is.... People can hang out here and argue about it all day if that's what floats your boat, but no matter how much people complain, its not going to change anything so suck it up and move on. At this point I don't know what else can be said without reiterating myself or the posts of others...
    11-10-09 07:13 PM
  8. papped's Avatar
    True enough, after all it's VZ customers that are paying the higher rates and higher ETFs. So I care not...

    Bring on the $800 ETFs big red! The customers are willing to pay!
    11-10-09 07:16 PM
  9. berryite's Avatar
    Sheepish about what links? You mentioned JD Power, so that's what I linked.
    I also clearly mentioned Consumer Reports and you conveniently jumped over them as quickly as you could.

    Not here to prove anything.
    Sorry the sour attitude and hostile confrontation I was picking up from your posts kind of masked that.

    Verizon has been king for years, trouncing tmo.
    Utter hogwash. Now you are making this up as you go. I will admit that my facts about J.D. Power were aged. I looked it up as promised and you are right, Verizon has upped their game. Congratulations to Verizon. But trouncing T-Mobile? More sour puss stuff. Simply dishonest too. In the not too distant past, T-Mobile and Verizon were running neck and neck in the regional competitions. Verizon has pulled ahead and that's good for them. They still have old CDMA technology which has limited use outside of the USA.

    This is all kind of funny. I come here to learn things. I have no agenda against Verizon. I had them as a carrier in years past. They did not work for me for a variety of reasons. I'm happy if they work for you. Truth be told, if T-Mobile didn't exist, I'd probably use Verizon. But insofar as today goes, I find the following to be absolutely true about them:

    1.) Over-Rated Network Claims:

    Over 1/2 the population of the United States lives 50 miles or less to one of the coasts in the nation. Over 80% of the population live in cities. Over 50% of the population live in a mere 20 of the nation's cities. Indeed, the majority of the population of the country live in very close proximity to each other.

    Verizon makes claims that their service is bigger and better than everyone else. They show maps of a red painted USA which are meaningless unless you care if coyotes can use cell phones in the middle of the country were no one lives.

    Great if Verizon has service in the middle of Nebraska. No one lives there. Who is testing this service of Verizon's in the bush of Nebraska? That goofy man roaming around the country saying "Can you hear me now?" LOL.

    2.) The WORST International Service:

    For a carrier who is 1/2 owned by the British, Verizon's international service is a disgrace. When Verizon's British partner owners visit the United States, they have to ride on AT&T or T-Mobile's networks because their phones won't work on Verizon's network. How embarassing is that? Your owners can't even use their own service because it doesn't work with their phones! HAHAA!

    If you are a subscriber of Verizon, you better have a Tour and you'd better be ready to do a lot of footwork if you want to travel outside the USA and use your phone because, embarrasingly, Verizon's phones won't work in most places you might want to visit outside the USA. This is not true with AT&T or T-Mobile.

    3.) Over-Priced Services:

    Verizon's prices are the highest in the business. That's great for them but there is no need to pay these ridiculously overpriced rates. There are better priced alternatives out there.

    4.) Locked-Down Phones:

    Scan the Verizon forums. There are always complaints about Verizon crippling their equipment so that their subscribers cannot use their phones in the ways they might have been designed to use. No one else does this. Not even AT&T.

    I could go on. No point in it. Verizon has a way to go to before they might ever become a remarkable company. Today they are just a big corporate machine focused on making money ... not necessarily in being the best cell phone service for their customers. That might be one of the reasons T-Mobile is the 6th largest mobile company in the world and Verizon is the 15th.

    I'm not counting Verizon out. Indeed, over time they could become an amazing company if some of their technology plans come to realization. I wouldn't even be surprised if I were to become a customer again someday.

    But today? Claiming that "Verizon trounces T-Mobile?" You gotta get a grip.
    11-10-09 07:40 PM
  10. papped's Avatar
    There are always complaints about Verizon crippling their equipment so that their subscribers cannot use their phones in the ways they might have been designed to use. No one else does this. Not even AT&T.
    Eh.... AT&T has had a hand in crippling the iphone to **** and back... Not to mention they crippled the Bold from switching between 3G and Edge manually for the longest time...
    11-10-09 07:44 PM
  11. brandim24's Avatar
    I was a Qwest customer for six years when I was in Montana and I would drive over to WA every weekend with no dropped calls over the passes and loved it. Then they sold their towers to Verizon and quit the wireless market, now I've been a verizon customer for almost a year now and haven't really had a problem. The ETF is high but just wait it out or don't sign up with them, I personal from travel think they have the best service. Sorry guys but I like verizon.
    11-10-09 07:46 PM
  12. berryite's Avatar
    Why don't you try returning that leased vehicle halfway into the lease and see what kind of penalty you'd pay.
    Aside from the fact that a $100,000 car and a $150.00 phone are ridiculously different, you are completely missing the point.

    You might feel differently if the Province you live in FORCED you to lease that expensive and overpriced leased vehicle ... under their terms and regardless of whether you agree or not ... in order to drive on their roads.

    Yes there are other cars being sold but you can't buy one of those. You have to buy the leased car they force on you and you have no choice in the matter. By the way, if you change insurance carriers in the middle of the car's lease, they also reserve the right to fine you and/or extend and double your lease with or without your permission.

    The leasing agent's office is right over here ... got your pen handy?
    11-10-09 07:53 PM
  13. berryite's Avatar
    I was a Qwest customer for six years when I was in Montana and I would drive over to WA every weekend with no dropped calls over the passes and loved it. Then they sold their towers to Verizon and quit the wireless market, now I've been a verizon customer for almost a year now and haven't really had a problem. The ETF is high but just wait it out or don't sign up with them, I personal from travel think they have the best service. Sorry guys but I like verizon.
    As well you should if they are the provider of service in your rural area.
    11-10-09 07:54 PM
  14. berryite's Avatar
    Eh.... AT&T has had a hand in crippling the iphone to **** and back... Not to mention they crippled the Bold from switching between 3G and Edge manually for the longest time...
    They didn't when I used them. Shame on them if they followed Verizon's lead and are doing this today.
    11-10-09 07:57 PM
  15. papped's Avatar
    For over a year after release the AT&T Bold specifically could not switch between 3g and edge manually. If you debranded the phone you could... So the carrier branding specifically prevented it.

    Kind of a problem considering one of the Bold's biggest problems was the Edge to 3g handoff causing dropped calls...
    11-10-09 07:58 PM
  16. berryite's Avatar
    For over a year after release the AT&T Bold specifically could not switch between 3g and edge manually. If you debranded the phone you could... So the carrier branding specifically prevented it.

    Kind of a problem considering one of the Bold's biggest problems was the Edge to 3g handoff causing dropped calls...
    Apparently one of the reasons you are using Sprint today.
    11-10-09 08:05 PM
  17. oasissux's Avatar
    Aside from the fact that a $100,000 car and a $150.00 phone are ridiculously different, you are completely missing the point.

    You might feel differently if the Province you live in FORCED you to lease that expensive and overpriced leased vehicle ... under their terms and regardless of whether you agree or not ... in order to drive on their roads.

    Yes there are other cars being sold but you can't buy one of those. You have to buy the leased car they force on you and you have no choice in the matter. By the way, if you change insurance carriers in the middle of the car's lease, they also reserve the right to fine you and/or extend and double your lease with or without your permission.

    The leasing agent's office is right over here ... got your pen handy?
    Um, how exactly is Verizon forcing customers to use their service? Or are you just exaggerating for effect? Your analogy sucks. Verizon isn't the State, they don't dictate how people use cell phones, just how people use Verizon's service, which is not unlike most other businesses. You can't play XBox games on a PS3 either. Look up the word 'proprietary'.
    11-10-09 08:21 PM
  18. berryite's Avatar
    Your analogy sucks.

    It wasn't my analogy. Thanks for playing. Perhaps you can learn to follow the thread in the future.

    Looks like you are just looking to fight and not post productively. Too much of that already in this thread. Have a nice day.
    11-10-09 08:28 PM
  19. oasissux's Avatar
    Don't play dumb. You suggested that Verizon's tactics are akin to gov't interference in vehicle leasing. Do I really need to quote it, or are you going to man up and take responsibility for your goof-ball comparison?

    Feel free to post productively and explain your statement.
    11-10-09 08:46 PM
  20. barbwyr's Avatar
    Now this is just a rediculous thread. You knew when they were forced to start prorating ETFs that they would raise them. This is another one of those problem that was created by people using loopholes to cheat the system. As was already pointed out, it's the BOGO offer being abused that made something like this a necesity. It used to be the only people hit with an ETF was the poor fool who lost his job and counldn't pay his bill. Now it's done on purpose to get a free phone and often at a profit.

    As long as the ETF doesn't leave VZW in a better place then when they started I see nothing wrong with it. Especially since they don't force you to sign a contract and offer month to month.
    11-10-09 08:50 PM
  21. berryite's Avatar
    Don't play dumb. You suggested that Verizon's tactics are akin to gov't interference in vehicle leasing.
    Actually it is you who are playing dumb and it was your original ridiculous statement ...

    Why don't you try returning that leased vehicle halfway into the lease and see what kind of penalty you'd pay
    Do I really need to quote it, or are you going to man up and take responsibility for your goof-ball comparison?
    It was your own "goof ball comparison" as I believe you know.

    Now, you've done nothing in this thread other than attempt to provoke a fight and I'm really not interested in taking your bait so I am putting your name on ignore. Have a pleasant day.
    11-11-09 12:28 AM
  22. mattberry27's Avatar
    This will only **** off people who have no other thread to comment on ive been with verizon for years and ive got no intention of leaving they can make it 5000 for all i care.
    11-12-09 10:38 AM
  23. oasissux's Avatar
    Now, you've done nothing in this thread other than attempt to provoke a fight and I'm really not interested in taking your bait so I am putting your name on ignore. Have a pleasant day.
    Lol.

    This guy is too much. He spouts ridiculous statements then tucks his tail between his legs and runs away when his foolishness is challenged.

    The bottom line is Verizon's ETF is in line with other carriers and they're entitled to protect their investment in their phone subsidy program.
    11-12-09 04:19 PM
  24. BlkBryAddict's Avatar
    The average cost for an ETF is $150, but Verizon is now changing it to $350.

    Yeah, I WILL NOT be renewing any phone with VZ considering every phone gets an upgrade every 12 months. $350...no thanks. What a scam.

    Verizon's Steep Early-Termination Fees | John Paczkowski | Digital Daily | AllThingsD

    Oh, and for those who think it's VZ just trying to get their money back due to the lower price attached to the contract...

    "So its certainly understandable that Verizon and other carriers want to protect the subsidies they dole out for these new smart phones. And as noted earlier, Verizons new ETF drops by $10 each month a subscriber remains under contract. But at this rate, subscribers are still bound to pay a $110 termination fee in the 23rd month of a two-year contract. The contract is nearly over, the subscriber obligation to Verizon almost fulfilled, yet the company can still slap its customers with nearly a third of the full ETF if they break it at that time."


    I've had Vzw for, going on 14 yrs, and never left. Their service would have to go to **** in order for me to leave. I guess i'm loyal or something?
    11-12-09 04:24 PM
  25. BlkBryAddict's Avatar
    HA! I wrote p00p and they starred it out!
    11-12-09 04:26 PM
101 ... 2345
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD