Home  ›  News  ›

FCC Taking On Verizon's New ETF

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 18 replies

Simple solution...

JeffdaBeat

Dec 4, 2009, 12:41 PM
Make the ETF equal to the amount of the total discount of the phone(s). Prorate the ETF accordingly. It's that simple.

I think the stance T-Mobile is taking where there is no contract and pay the price of the phone monthly is also a good solution. An even better one would be to give the customer the ability to set the time frame in which they want to pay off their phone as well.

I honestly see no probably with them raising the ETF especially if they are offering larger discounts.
...
dca

Dec 4, 2009, 1:16 PM
It is....

new Blackberry = $599 out of pocket, no subsidy.

On sale = $179 (Storm2 for 2yr contract)

...all in all, it's too late, the damage is done. Europe has had no subsidies for ages, to unleash something like that on the US where everyone wants 'Buy One Get One' would be worse than sending more troops to Afghanistan... Oh wait, they did, nevermind...
...
Azeron

Dec 4, 2009, 1:33 PM
The Storm 2 is downright expensive! Why is the FCC grandstanding? Oh yeah, even though these guys are appointees they are still politicians when it is all said and done. How can i get that !@#$in;' !@$$&$ to investigate all the carriers for strong arming consumers into messaging bundles when they have no cost for SMS and MMS?
...
JeffdaBeat

Dec 4, 2009, 2:09 PM
I just don't see how the government can really stop this. People effectively sign up for this knowing that this will be their ETF. The customers who signed up before this was instituted were not effected what so ever. Thing is, what if Verizon just shot back at the government and said, "If you don't like our ETF's then we will do away with discounting phones all together." It's something the carriers would love to do anyway. Then the government can start getting complaints that phones are too expensive. Either way, people won't be happy unless the regular price of a phone is $29.99.

I honestly wish this was something all the carriers would adapt. Stop putting phone problems in the hands of the service providers. Have LG, Samsung, and RIM...
(continues)
...
Azeron

Dec 4, 2009, 2:26 PM
The carriers (with the possible exception of T-Mobile) do not want to stop discounting phones. Those on the front lines (CSRs and Retail Reps) are more prone to wish phone subsidies did not exist, but the big heads LIKE locking customers into two year contracts. Hopefully, the feds will push the issue. I like this drama and we will see if Verizon backs down. *Grabs popcorn*
...
daxdc

Dec 4, 2009, 6:27 PM
That would never work, because people dont realize how expensive the devices are. How many people you know that actually think the price of the device is $29.99. Alot, probably. Remember, most people that post on here might be willing to pay for an unsubsidized phones, because we techies, geeks, gadget nerds, and early adopters. The average consumer isnt going to pay over $300.00 for a phone, and definitely not over $200.00 for a phone like the LG Rumor.
...
JeffdaBeat

Dec 5, 2009, 8:59 AM
You are right, people won't want to purchase a phone for that much (even though they are willing to buy an iPod Classic for even more that has less functions). But the thing is, if people think the phones are two expensive then they will hold on to their devices longer. But trust me, folks can't go without their phones and if they want to complain about the price, they would take it to the manufacturer, not the service provider. If phones don't sale it doesn't really hurt AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint as long as people have cell phones in general. And again, it would force them to focus on service.
...
CellStudent

Dec 5, 2009, 1:57 AM
We need to move away from the "subsidized with long-term service" model and move to the "every device is available unlocked, unbranded, and cannot be prohibited from accessing the network."

Handset makers should be responsible for advertising their wares, not carriers! Exclusivity is a beast which basically enforces "subsidy" on the marketplace because when exclusivity exists, the handset pricing model IS NOT SET BY SUPPLY AND DEMAND because there is a monopoly on the supply.

Kill exclusivity, and subsidy agreements will fall in line almost immediately. It's a two-headed beast, but only one head has to be severed in order to address the problem.

I don't care which one dies first, personally.
...
Slammer

Dec 5, 2009, 12:15 PM
I have to agree with this post. I also welcome government intervention in this matter. I sit on the side of being a consumer and have seen too much control in the hands of not just the carriers, but also the manufactures. It really is upsetting when reps for carriers take the sides of their respective carriers in extorting the subscribers for every penny. Given the fact that reps and upper management are essentially consumers themselves outside their work environment, the shoes on the their feet would pick the same fight if felt hijacked by a business. But since carrier employees get their device plans dirt cheap, they fail to recognize the reality of being taken to the cleaners. Let us get rid of exclusivity and subsidy to bring handset man...
(continues)
...
Celling_it

Dec 6, 2009, 7:52 AM
I am also a consumer. I myself am never for government regulation. It is against everyhting that our country stands for. Our government has REAL IMPORTANT ISSUES that they need to be dealing with and one of them is not what the new ETF at VZW is going to be. HOw about our elected officals first workon these few issues:

1. Make sure that we actually win the war
2. Creat a welfare system that is not able to be abused
3. End unemployement
4. End homelessness

Those are just a few things that are actually important. No one is forced to sign a contract and have and ETF, if they dont agree with the $350, then buy the phone at retail and sign up month to month, ETF prolem solved.

Why is it expected the busineses should not do wha...
(continues)
...
Versed

Dec 4, 2009, 4:15 PM
dca said:
It is....

new Blackberry = $599 out of pocket, no subsidy.

On sale = $179 (Storm2 for 2yr contract)

...all in all, it's too late, the damage is done. Europe has had no subsidies for ages, to unleash something like that on the US where everyone wants 'Buy One Get One' would be worse than sending more troops to Afghanistan... Oh wait, they did, nevermind...


Europe sure does have subsidized phones, just check their web pages out. But you do have a choice.
...
branchc

Dec 5, 2009, 8:47 AM
You have a choice here too. its not as publicized but I know with Verizon, AT&T and T-mobile you can buy a phone at full cost and get a plan with no contract.
...
JeffdaBeat

Dec 5, 2009, 9:02 AM
With AT&T, you can't start service without a 2-year. If you are a new customer, a two-year contract has to be started regardless of what you pay for the phone. That's something I don't think is fair...
...
SugaR-E

Dec 4, 2009, 3:59 PM
Exactly. Different company, different offers, prices, phones, and so on. The phones is what makes the company unique and different from the other ones. And well of course the service but I think pretty much all of the companies have decent service. If you are going to stay with the company either way, why care about the ETF? Unless you are one to get a phone just because it's cool, and you also get it at a very good discount by signing a two year agreement and agreeing to stay with the company, then after two months, you leave the company to go with a different company then bitch about the ETF you agreed to in the first place when you got the phone. It just make sense. I think it would be hectic if there were no subsidies, and ETFs. Just my ...
(continues)
...
ecycled

Dec 4, 2009, 4:17 PM
In the beginning wireless phones cost as much as a car, and service was expensive too.

So mobile companies(att) asked the government for help building out network. Prices were still high, so subsidies were invented as prices could be controlled and saturation levels shot through the roof.

Now ppl are addicted and the companies don't need subsidies, they WANT subsidies to control the ppl.
...
SugaR-E

Dec 9, 2009, 5:20 PM
They want to control THEIR customers and KEEP their customers. I think it would be better for the company. I can see where Verizon is coming from. Its a company. If you want to buy a phone and keep the services for a little while then take that phone that you got at a discounted price, to a new company, the other company you left that you got the discounted equipment loses the remaining balance for the phone that they gave you the discount. If you just want the phone buy it at full retail price then do with it what you wish. Simple?
...
jskrenes

Dec 4, 2009, 5:53 PM
JeffdaBeat said:
Make the ETF equal to the amount of the total discount of the phone(s). Prorate the ETF accordingly. It's that simple.


I'm with you. I just don't see the big deal. Why wasn't the FCC crawling all over Alltel when their ETF was $200 and not prorated? I suppose VZW could have done something like that, bump everyone's ETF up to $200, but why should Fred and Agnice who just want a Samsung Knack to toss in the glove box for emergencies have to pay for people cancelling their Blackberries and flipping them on ebay?
...
60dollarcarcharger

Dec 4, 2009, 9:09 PM
Fred and Agnice don't need a plan to call 911 🤣
...
pdajr24

Dec 12, 2009, 2:32 PM
if i was a CEO for verizon and the FCC keep suing me over ETF's, I would drop ETF's all together. Still subsidise customers phones, still do 2 year contracts, and just say when/if you leave, i will continue to bill you for the remainder of your contract at the rate that you started your contract with. If you have a 100.00 plan and you have 12 months left on contract, you WILL continue to receive 100.00 per month bills from us!

Problem solved, people will cry, and ask for ETF's back.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.