AT&T Agrees to $105M Settlement in Cramming Case
Well you know
Zpike said:
AT&T's customers are all pond scum and sewer slime anyway. They probably deserved it for being such crappy customers and almost bankrupting AT&T with their unprofitable contracts. AT&T needed that money just to stay afloat and their customers should have been more than proud to have been defrauded by AT&T.
Odd - I believe they're just shy of 200 billion dollars and are a fortune 11 company.
Please, do tell me where you get your information and statistics though!
105M is literally not even 1% of their company value. How much did they buy Direct TV for? 50 billion and some change?
I work for an indirect retailer who handles Verizon, and not a day goes by where we aren't hounded about our EDGE numbers. The problem is that EDGE is a crappy plan, and usually more expensive than getting a 2yr contract. So obviously we don't sell many.
me personally, i prefer the edge plan due to im one that likes to upgrade more often and it allows me to do so at a cheaper price
I think maybe some store reps may still prefer contracts because they get a higher commission or something.
To counter it, I let the customer know they thought they got a phone for a penny but in reality their plan was artificially inflated in order for US Cellular to make back the loss on the phone. With financing they are just "un-hiding" the cost of that phone from the plan.
Probably at least 80% of customer service calls are of the form 'I have phone X, it sucks, I got if from you,it has your logo on it, it is your phone, and as the carrier who gave me this phone, you are responsible for all my problems with this phone, and you better fix this problem no.''
Carriers don't want to sell phones, they want to sell SIM cards.
What they want is for people to get their phone from some manufacturer, buy it directly from Samsung or Apple or Sony or whoever, and then buy nothing from the carrier except the SIM card.
When the carrier isn't blamed for...
(continues)
AT&T had 72.6 million postpaid subscribers in Q4 of 2013 with churn of 1.11 percent.
>>Carriers don't want to sell phones, they want to sell SIM cards.
Is that why AT&T sold 1.2 million smartphones in Q4 of 2013 alone?
>>Carriers are sick and tired of taking the blame for every crappy, second rate phone that OEM's spew out,
Then why do they approve them on their networks?
>>they are tired of having to fulfill warranty obligations, sometimes giving the same customer 3 or even 4 replacement phones,
Quit spewing this lie. Carriers make a profit off of warranties. If they didn't they would stop offering them.
>>When I did customer servi...
(continues)
The Victor said:
only a few carriers actually charge for a sim card either, a few, including AT&T give their sim cards for free. just of course have to activated in the store or they have to receive it through the mail
He meant they want to sell SIM cards for service. How could you literally not get that notion? It eluded you THAT much? WOW.
WhySoBluePandaBear said:
He meant they want to sell SIM cards for service. How could you literally not get that notion? It eluded you THAT much? WOW.
Meaning they just want to be a phone service provider and not have all these annoying customers blaming them for a defective Samsung phone - It costs them a lot of money to deal with that crap. I'd show you an expense report if it wasn't internal.
Zpike said:...
>>They want people off contracts because contracts are costly and increase churn,
AT&T had 72.6 million postpaid subscribers in Q4 of 2013 with churn of 1.11 percent.
>>Carriers don't want to sell phones, they want to sell SIM cards.
Is that why AT&T sold 1.2 million smartphones in Q4 of 2013 alone?
>>Carriers are sick and tired of taking the blame for every crappy, second rate phone that OEM's spew out,
Then why do they approve them on their networks?
>>they are tired of having to fulfill warranty obligations, sometimes giving the same customer 3 or even 4 replacement phones,
Quit spewing this lie. Carriers make a profit off of warranties. If they didn't they would stop offering them.
(continues)
Your proof is where?
>>They approve them on their networks and put logos on them, because people are idiots, so that's to answer your question
Which people are the idiots? The ones using the devices offered to them, or the ones approving them for use on the network, or the ones making ridiculous statements about carriers.
>>they test them to make sure they're up to par for customer satisfaction.
So then the carriers allow these tested devices that aren't up to par because the carriers are idiots or because their customers are idiots?
>>Otherwise you'll have pissed off customers and the customer will BLAME THE CARR...
(continues)
Please tell me, explain to me, if contracts are so wonderful for the carriers, then why are all the carriers trying to GET RID of them?
Why are they so aggressive about trying to get customers off contract if contracts are working out so well for them?
Why?
And don't try to tell me that they aren't trying to force people off contracts, because they are.....
I've experienced it myself the last time I did an upgrade last December....for years, for decades even, it was not at all difficult to get at&t to waive an upgrade fee, all...
(continues)
Carriers prefer the financing option because for one, they can call it no contract and everyone loves to hear that. For 2, they get the actual exact cost of the dev...
(continues)
Why are they so aggressive about trying to get customers off contract if contracts are working out so well for them?
Why?
The number of articles from reputable financial institutions over the last 20 years citing in one form or another that contract customers are the golden cash cows of cellular carriers is astounding. And I have personally read many such articles myself. It is commonly known that contract customers are the most profitable customers for carriers.
You are the one saying otherwise. The burden of proof isn't on me. It's on you. Furthermore, I have offered positive proof of my statemen...
(continues)
Brad K said:
They want people off contracts and to finance phones because the early termination fees are not legally binding and they have trouble going after the customer for it if they cancel within the 2 years. When they sign a financing agreement the carrier does have legal recourse against you if you cancel and don't pay off the balance of the phone.
Um, no. It gets billed to you on the service bill and it goes to a credit agency.
What sources do you have? They're pretty DEAD WRONG.
Here is a case where AT&T settled a suit for $16 million to avoid going to court over ETFs:
http://communications-media.lawyers.com/telecommunic ... »
Although here is a case where a judge in California ruled that ETF's are a violation of state law:
http://gizmodo.com/5031717/judge-rules-early-termina ... »
Whether it's legal or not if they are having push back from people or judges that are causing them to pay out millions in settlements over ETF's then billing for balance of financed p...
(continues)
if i have a choice i go to the corp store due to the fact theyre typically more knowlidgeable on how to get everything done efficently and less likely to mess something up
T Bone said:
Was that a Verizon store or a third party retailer?
I think maybe some store reps may still prefer contracts because they get a higher commission or something.
On the contrary, if anything new programs are always spiffed or incentivized. They definitely don't punish you for doing new programs they roll out, they actually want you to slam that metric, and they'll offer you enticive ways to figure out how to do it.
T Bone said:
He's sarcastically making fun of me for a post I made a few days ago about how device subsidies and long term contracts tend to be unprofitable for the carriers, which is why carriers are trying to get rid of contracts. That is a true statement, I don't understand why he is so upset about it. If contracts are so profitable, then why have carriers gotten so aggressive about trying to convince people not to sign them? I mean seriously, have you tried to upgrade recently? They do everything they can to convince you to just buy the device outright and not sign a contract. They wouldn't be doing that if contracts were such a great business practice.
Well, to answer your question: You've alway...
(continues)
This forum is closed.