AT&T Agrees to $105M Settlement in Cramming Case
Well you know
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.
...
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?
...
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.
...
true really the only big carrier left that doesnt push their plans to get a device full price or through installments is verizon, theyre the only ones it seems still pushing for contracts
...
Verizon is actually pushing their non-contract.
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.
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.
...
well then maybe its the stores in my area, they never push the edge plan and always advise of contracts,
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
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 work at the Walmart wireless center, and we just received a software update on our activation kiosks which allows us to set people up on Edge, (before we were only able to start contracts or sell at full retail price) and our Verizon rep sent us a memo reminding us that we can now set people up on Edge, and that they are totally okay with it if someone wants to buy a phone outright. So from perspective it appears that Verizon is trying to get us to avoid contacts as much as possible.
...
like i said maybe its just my local stores because whe i recently signed up i had to mention it myself, they never even offered it
...
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.
I think maybe some store reps may still prefer contracts because they get a higher commission or something.
...
The financing options are hella confusing and hard to get many customers to actually understand them. People still have the whole "free upgrade" or "penny phone" idea in their heads and don't like hearing that they pay full price for the phone over the 2 years even tho (at least with US Cellular) they get a discount on the plan to make up for it. So I am sure many reps are just being lazy and continuing to sell the way they always have.
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.
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.
...
Well, the lower monthly prices for those off contract, combined with the recent refusal to waive upgrade and activation fees for those on contract (seriously, getting an upgrade fee waiver used to be the easiest thing in the world to do, but now they just absolutely refuse to do it at all, for anybody) really add up to Verizon trying to promote the idea that customers off contract are 'elite' customers who get special privileges that contract customers don't get...this is how they are trying to push people off contracts....everyone wants to believe himself to be 'special' and Verizon is really aggressively pushing the idea that off contract customers are 'better' customers.
...
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.
...
They want people off contracts because contracts are costly and increase churn, and because tying the phone to the carrier decreases customer satisfaction.
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)
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)
...
>>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.
>>When I did customer servi...
(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)
...
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
...
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)
...
>> they offer phones because It's the way it first started and it's hard to get people off of a die hard way.
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)
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)
...
If only you had the actual knowledge of the cell phone industry to back up all the insults and abuse you heap upon everyone who express an opinion contrary to your own completely uninformed opinions.
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)
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)
...
Financing programs such as at&t's next program aren't technically contracts but they pretty much are the same thing the way I see it. With a contract if you cancel before the 2 years you get billed an early termination fee that the carrier uses to make up for the lost money from the discounted equipment you purchased. With the financing programs if you cancel before the 2 years (or however long your financing agreement is) then you get billed the remaining balance to pay off the phone. Either way if you cancel early you will be billed for the remaining cost of the phone.
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)
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)
...
>>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?
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)
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.
...
Maybe using "not legally binding" was the wrong words, but it's definitely better for the carrier to bill for balance of the phone rather than an ETF.
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)
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)
...
These guys don't like facts. Nor do they pay any attention to them.
...
both actually i have quite a few around me but none seem to push the edge plan.
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
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.
