Home  ›  News  ›

AT&T Sues to Prevent Merger-Related Customer Arbitration

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 26 replies

bottom line

bobc74

Aug 13, 2011, 9:06 AM
So what at&t is saying is that it's own customers have no say in the matter. Oh, silly at&t, you should know better. Each and every one of your customers do have a choice. at&t is not the only wireless provider!
...
fashionenira

Aug 13, 2011, 10:05 AM
Thats exactly what I got from the above statement.
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 13, 2011, 10:05 AM
In all honesty some consumers will not like the proposed changes. Unfortunately you can't make everyone happy. Just as many people that dont like the merger theres more that would love this to happen for improved service and network. AT&T does care about there customers but as said you can't please everyone. They are simply putting a stop to an unreasonable lawsuit that people have signed a arbitration to not sue the company. This law firm has simply taken advantage of something like this to get there name out more so then anything.... 🙂
...
ELawson87

Aug 13, 2011, 3:05 PM
This isn't going to improve service. AT&T just wants the monopoly. They're capable of improving their service now, but they don't want to spend the money to invest in their service. Why would they change their mind now?
...
not pickles

Aug 13, 2011, 3:51 PM
Lol @ your screen name. You don't sound biased at all 🙄
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 14, 2011, 10:01 AM
Isnt that the humor in it? All the arguments about AT&T not improving are nil, they do improve there network maybe not as fast as you would like and maybe not nearly as fast as they could. I really dont get why people complain? As a thousand people have said you have a choice.... Just change service if thats how you feel.... I mean it might sound harsh but what good does it do to whine?
...
Cosmic Spiderman

Aug 16, 2011, 12:07 PM
I find it humorous that you think AT&T cares about it's customers. There is really no carrier that cares about their customers, but ALL of them fake it better than AT&T. Year after year they get the worst rating for customer service.
Additionally, it's not that easy to "Just change service." ETFs, especially in today's economy, make that very difficult.
And, people complain because they have expectations of the people they deal with. When they are not seeing those expectaions, they complain. Not sure why you "Don't get why people complain"
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 17, 2011, 8:44 AM
You are kind of ignorant... 🙄 There is a clause that allows them to leave with out the ETF in case of a merger like this. Secondly I do partially agree that they care about there profits more then customers. However if you want to profit you need customers so they obviously do not completely disregard there customers....DOH. Also considering 90% of ppl think its a good thing so that would be pleasing more customers and make buisness sense...
...
Cosmic Spiderman

Aug 17, 2011, 11:07 AM
First of all, I do understand that there is that clause that will let them leave without paying the ETF, but the people protesting the merger cannot leave until the merger happens. I'm curious as to where you get the figure of 90% think it's a good thing. And there is no point to get insulting, btw.
...
not pickles

Aug 16, 2011, 5:21 PM
I ain't complaining, dude. I'm just here to state the obvious. You've made it more than obvious that you have gone through some extensive AT&T training, is all I'm saying.
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 17, 2011, 8:45 AM
Yes via NonBiasedRep lol. However I do have more of an open mind since I am a buisness man by Heart!
...
Vmac39

Aug 13, 2011, 10:18 AM
Thing is, they do have a say so. They can choose to stay or leave the company. These customers were probably told that their monthly rates would go up, if the merger goes through. I'm not saying that's the only reason these customers agreed to sue but, I'm sure it had a lot to do with it. Now, I've been an ATT customer for several years. Had a pre paid with ATT before they became Cingular and back to ATT. I've experienced mass improvement of their network of the last few years. I use to drop calls on a regular or just wouldn't get a signal.

I'm by no means a fan boy but, my experiences have not been so bad that I don't like them, either. I have a plan that works for me, albeit, there'll plans with other companies that are a little cheape...
(continues)
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 13, 2011, 10:24 AM
Never said they dont have a choice in who they use, im saying they have no say in the merger. Also like I already stated they probably will lose some customers however what they gain exceeds that loss.
...
Vmac39

Aug 13, 2011, 11:15 AM
Understood, my point is, customers never have that much say so when it comes to major deals or anything on that level. That's any business. WOuld you want your customers telling you who you what you can buy or not, if you owned a business. Of course not, you will do what you think will make more money for the company first. The reason I even mentioned the fact that they have a choice is because, sueing over something that you think might happen seems a little pointless, when it comes to something like this. They haven't been currently affected or cheated as a result of the proposed merger. My thing is, if anyone feels that strongly about it, switch carriers. They will be heard but, at the end of the day, it will not matter.
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 13, 2011, 11:30 AM
I do agree 😁
...
Fredd

Aug 15, 2011, 10:37 AM
Why should customers expect a say in a company merger? AMC customers did not have a say in the merger with Chrysler, nor did Fireman's Fund Insurance buyers have a say in the merger with Allianz. However, governmental entities had oversight in those mergers, as they do with AT&T and T-Mo.

The class action suits will not benefit AT&T customers, but merely line the pockets of the law firm involved.
...
ifone4eva

Aug 13, 2011, 10:25 AM
Finally an intelligent response, thank you sir
...
edzero

Aug 13, 2011, 11:47 AM
I agree with everything you said up until the very end. If they dont make the improvements promised how are they supposed to pay a fine every quarter without a raise in customers rates and still manage to make those improvements. I just dont think it would be possible.
...
Vmac39

Aug 13, 2011, 12:36 PM
It's possible. It's a fine, it's suppose to make you reconsider your actions. However, I never said that the fine had to be so large that it would cripple them financially, just make them think about what they're doing. No business wants to pay a fine, if they don't have to.
...
Archer Bullseye

Aug 13, 2011, 12:59 PM
Wait till your market is divested and your sold to a reginal carrier.. 🙂 what song will you be singinng after that? ;)
...
Vmac39

Aug 13, 2011, 1:22 PM
Not to say it can't happen but, I dont see that happening anytime soon. If it did, I may decide to stay or may not. It would all depend on if there's benefit for me as a customer.🙂
...
Archer Bullseye

Aug 13, 2011, 2:21 PM
While not likely.. it is deff possible.. My best friend was a VZW cust that was sold to AT&T because of the FCC mandated divestings. There were maybe 20 (don't quote me, I don't remeber) rural VZW markets that vzw had to sell and just as many if not more alltel ones.
...
Vmac39

Aug 13, 2011, 3:25 PM
Well, I guess I will deal with that, if it were to happen. But, considering I live in an area where ATT isn't the game in town, I doubt I will have to worry about that. The areas that usually get divested first are areas that carrier has dominance.

I do realize that this wouldn't make those who areas are sold to other carriers but,it happens. As I said before, if it benefits me to stay, I will stay. If not, I will go else where.
...
Fredd

Aug 15, 2011, 10:41 AM
When divested, the customer has the right to chose to move to a different carrier - including the carrier they were divested from. It falls under the category of "material change" in the contract wording, and negates any ETF's.
...
mycool

Aug 16, 2011, 11:14 AM
Vmac39 said:
Thing is, they do have a say so. They can choose to stay or leave the company.


The point a lot of people are making against this merger is that this merger would take one of those choices away. And, although it does seem as just one choice, it was one with a national presence, fair pricing, and good customer service. That would be a huge blow for anyone who wishes to exercise this "choice" they have to take their business elsewhere.
...
connect2jes

Aug 15, 2011, 3:33 PM
I'd advise everyone who thinks this is unfair to take a look at their contracts. Everyone that signs a contract with AT&T signs an arbitration clause. AT&T is simply enforcing that clause. If you think its okay for customers to have the ability to sue for whatever reason they see fit, then be prepared for service costs to skyrocket based on the higher operating costs for providers.

btw... all major providers have that clause in their contracts... its not exclusive to AT&T.

This lawsuit is simply money hungry lawyers that are trying to line their own pockets because they think that it will be easy to get money from a large company like AT&T.
...
NonBiasedRep

Aug 15, 2011, 4:42 PM
+1 !!!!!!
...

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.