If your on a text plan, and go over the allowance of messages you are billed at 10 cents a message not 15 cents for overage

Wfine81 is correct. You need to read a little better before stating facts. The text rate increase clearly says that if you are on a text plan, the overage rate will remain at $.10/message.

And where does it say in your contract that you HAVE to have text messaging, or where does it state that text messaging is linked to a contract. It is not linked to a contract. If you are under contract and have text plan or even the pay as you go texting, call in and shut it off, then ask them if there is a ETF for doing so. Text messaging does not tie you to a contract, it is very optional, and any court, BBB, or attorney general will see it that way.

And any court,BBB, or attorney general will also see that it clearly states in the contract...
(continues)

Only a person w/ a vested financial interest would be concerned w/ not letting customers out of their contract and waiving the ETF. From your comments and position I would guess you are an employee or stockholder (maybe both), certainly not just a consumer.

I too have a vested interest, my personal $$$, and I don't like 2-year contracts. It's not the capitalist way. Fair competition is best for all, these 2-year contracts limit the consumers choices and ability to react to changes in service and the market place as a whole.

It's clear that this website is a big attraction for the employees of cell companies, since they are usually the ones who scream the loudest about people trying to get out of the choke hold which is on them.

herbf said:
I don't like 2-year contracts. It's not the capitalist way. Fair competition is best for all, these 2-year contracts limit the consumers choices and ability to react to changes in service and the market place as a whole.

Then don't sign a 2 year contract.

And at the same time, don't complain about the price of the phone.

AMEN

As duckbutter said..do not sign 2 year contracts, once you are a customer you never have to sign a contract again after the first one.

And no, I am not a verizon employee. I have no financial interest in verizon except for paying my bill every month. And I hate contracts too, that is why when I do them, I only do 1 year, I have even paid retail price before.

What you were saying for getting out with no ETF in my opinion was wrong and should not be allowed. I do not have to be a stock holder to see common sense.

There is absolutely nothing anti-capitalist about a two year contract. The consumer has the choice to sign the contract in return for lower cost on the equipment. They also have MANY other options if they do not like the terms of that particular contract. There are multiple companies to get service through (Didnt you claim that there is a monopoly?). Within these, there are various options such as 2 yr, 1 yr, and no contract services.

I'm so glad you commented on the monopoly. Although ATT and Verizon would like it differently, there are hundreds of choices in wireless companies, and in any given market at least 3 or 4, and under no definition of the word "monopoly" could you apply that to the current wireless situation in this country.

Say what you like, but without ATT and VZW, half the little baby companies, would be without most of their coverage. Last I checked most of the smaller GSM companies shared some towers with Cingy/Att, and the same with CDMA. And it's the same the other way around. They use ours, and we use theirs. Everyone would suffer if the bigger ones went away..........

That still doesn't make it a monopoly. That was my point, not that we should close them down. As long as more than one company exists in a market, there can't be a monopoly.

Ok, then you have fun paying $300 plus for a phone, i for one would rather sign a contract and get my equipment subsidized. Now I wish Verizon would come out with a no contract option. Like 100-50(mail in) on razr for 2 year. $150-50 on a one year, and let you pay 300-50 if you want no contract. I wish they offered that but realistically I don't think many consumers would want to pay $300 for a razr. This plan would be helpful for people who got phones off of friends family or ebay. Look if you get 150-200 off the phone when you sign up you are simply paying them the discount you got back to them. And interent and other services do have contracts, many offer special deals but you must sign up for a year. This is not an uncommon practice that...
(continues)

of course they have a vested interest they didnt get to being fortune 500 by giving everything away point is bro verizon is a business and yeah you say"they are trying to get rich" no crap man of course like i said how you gonna be in business not to make money get over it you dont have to have a cell phone. you want a cell phone and for that want carriers want a 2 year contract it take over a year to get the mo ney back from that discount you got when you signed on thats why they charge the etf cuz if they didnt they would lose 150 on every phone. does your cable company give you a tv when you sign up for there service no they dont thats why there is no contract because they gave you nothing

Many people don't have text plans, so this is an out.

Where would you go, most carriers have 15 cent per a msg anyways. You may get out of the contract if you don't have a txt plan and complain enough, but the Admin Fee can be waived till the end of your contract, thus, no out there.

On family plans, which I have today, ATT charges $5/line for unlimited text. Sprint charges a single $10 fee for unlimited in/out across a max of 5 lines.

Better yet, w/ a SERO account on Sprint, I get many more included services, and texting for $5/mo or even free.

I can buy a Cobalt for 12k, so Toyota had best start dropping their prices on their Camry!

Honestly, no it's not. If you're texting enough that an extra $.05 per message makes a large impact on your monthly financial planning, you need to be on a text plan. The contract DOES say admin fees are subject to change. Hell, if $5.00 more per month (the difference between $.10 and $.15 per message for 50 messages) is too much strain on the budget, that person should give up the cell phone to ensure food can go on the table as overages on minutes would positively kill them.

$5/mo or even $1/mo is not the point, it's live by the sword die by the sword. The wireless carriers want it all their way during the 2 years contract. If so, leave the contract alone, then we can't get out w/o paying the ETF. However, change it for your gain, then everything is fair game, and the carrier broke the contract, not the consumer.

At the end of the day, VzW and others raised text rates to drive more people into text plans. Texting puts absolutely no load on your infrastructure, however a 500msg plan, costs as much as adding a line w/ voice service.

GREED, it's an evil thing. 😈

I just don't see the point to canceling your plan if you're otherwise happy with your carrier. EVERY carrier has the same text rates for pay-per-message, and VZW wasn't even the first to raise their text rates this time. To coin an old phrase, it's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Consider this as well. How much will one need to spend to "start up" with a new carrier. Obviously if they want to do SOME texting, the phone DOES matter and they won't go for the freebie, then you need accessories for said phone. It's POINTLESS....

capitalism, it's how the economy works, either pay it or don't.

you might have a point on the admin charge. I was reading it as those charges can change and we were agreeing to it. I will have to look it over again and see if the admin. charge is included in the ahverse material effect.

And if you look more closely you will also notice that all those rate increases are communicated via a bill message. If the customer has any problems with these rate increases they are allowed to dispute the change prior to the date the change goes in effect. If the phone is used one way or the other on or after the date the change went in effect, they are accepting the new terms and rates. Hate to say it but it just comes down to.......read your friggin' bills people. And don't say you don't get one, cuz if you're on paperless, those same notes are on the bills you receive online.

Bummer, you loose.

Another VzW employee 🤤 Consider that Sony builds a PS3 and costs them over $1000, which they turn around and sell for $500. Nintendo, MicroSoft do the same. There no contracts, and they make plenty off the accessories and games over time. The same goes for the cell companies, but in this case, you want to play by different rules than fair market value.

Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft make their money back on royalities from the game companies. As more units are sold the price of games go down, because they lower the royality fee to the game companies. Where would a Wireless make it's money? Games/Ringtones?

Today, technology changes quickly, and so does features and services and coverage. 2-yea

...
(continues)

contracts equal easier profit planning. equal easier reports to stock holders.

You want to tell me a friggen migo costs 105 bucks to make! LOL Or how about a Krazr for 350 bucks? I can almost buy a laptop for that amount! LOL I have a family member who works for a major distributor and I know first hand that a migo had less then 20 bucks into it. The activation fee was 25...they sold the phone for 50 with a two year contract. So, they made money off the sale of the phone even if the customer disconnects one month later and never pays their bill. What VZW says a phone "costs" them and what they really paid for the phone is upwards of hundreds of dollars per phone difference! LOL

Now you are talking about the difference between what manufacturers and distributors charge for phones, and what Verizon dealers have to pay to get them into the stores. Verizon doesn't manufacture a single phone, neither does any other carrier. So, if you want to complain about phone prices, complain about Motorola, LG, Samsung, etc. The carriers have very little to do with phone pricing, only with how much they are willing to risk on a contract.

ok...let me clarify. What I said that Verizon Wireless claims that a MIGO costs THEM 105 bucks. I know a rep for LG and VZW pays about 20 bucks for this phone. It costs LG about 5 to make. VZW just claims their cost is over a 100 bucks to make it look like they are truly subsidizing these handsets when in reality they are getting at or near their true cost back out of the phones. Think about it. You think they really paid over 300 bucks for the Razr when it first was launched? They claimed the "cost" was about 425 bucks. LOL Oh, but overnight the "cost" drops by 125 bucks? No way. They were just making a freaking mint off these phones when they first launched. Yep, when an agent bought that phone from VZW for reselling, that agent...
(continues)

Actually, another Cingular employee, but no matter the company it's the same concept. And so when I look at you I must see another customer who thinks he knows every little bit about about the wireless industry. If that's how things should be start a company, give out phones on no contracts, and come see us when you are larger than Verizon or Cingular.

I'm don't know everything about wireless, but your average wireless consumer has little to no control once in a contract. We're in the hands of monopolies who for the majority push people into 2 year contracts, and once there, the consumer has little recourse.

The carriers are the 1st to inform you of your obligations, and hold people hostage by use of the ETF. Funny how one can add a line for $10/mo, $120/yr, but to cancel that line it costs $175 in ETF 😲

A contract is a contract, if they don't want people canceling and switching, then abide by the terms, make a change which costs money, even a nickel per message, and be prepared to let people out, since you cangede the contract. Otherwise, keep a persons contract in tack for the fu...
(continues)

Again, The ETF is a recoup fee on equipment, not based on how cheap a plan is. Those free phones people get cost carriers $130 or more. Anyways, if you joined/renew VZW after Nov 10th, 2006... your ETF goes down $5 every full month you complete. If you bought your own equipment, full retail, then you don't have to worry about the ETF for that line. No one holds you hostage, you have choices as I outlined before. Full Retail No Contract, 1 yr, 2 yr, of if you want a cheap phone and no contract Prepaid

Okay, as an old english teacher and history student, your use of the English language is killing me!

You can't use the word monopolies in this situation. There can't be a monopoly if there is more than 1 company offering basically the same service or product. Pluralizing the word makes it an oxymoron in this situation. Please stop using the word in place of the words large company, or mega corporation, or even just corporation. In the wireless industry, there are no monopolies, even though cingy and verizon would love to try to make one, it just hasn't happened nor is it likely to. (Sorry about the runon sentence)

So which is it? Is the ETF a fee to recoup phone equipment costs, or is it a penalty for breaking the contract, or both?

Call it what you want, you just said that once can't bring their own equipment and leave when they want. So much for many of the arguments all the employees made in this thread 🙄

Are you dense? The ETF is a penalty for breaking the contract in which we use to recoup equipment costs. It's not an either/or situation. You get penalized, we use it to gain back what we gave away. If you talk to the right rep you can. You can get a zero month contract in the right department. In your case, buy your own damn phone and get the crappy prepaid rates and coverage. What is your big thing against this anyway? None of my customers seem to mind. And if they don't get service they have their thirty days.

i thought it was 15 days for verizon?? or did that change? 🤨

I'm with Cingular. Not sure, but its the same concept.

i know cingular has 30 dayscause i work for them, and used to do buyers remorse for them, but i was curious about verizon cause i thought cingular was the only company who had the 30 day return policy, but i could be wrong

CURRENTLY it's 15. That's all I'm at liberty to say..

Hombre07, Who's the dense one here? Did you read "trucksmoveamerica" post 2 before yours? In there he confirms that even if a person brings there own equipment, Verizon still requires a 1-year contract and will charge the ETF if a person wants to leave before the year is done.

So my point all along is that these ETF's are a way to chokehold consumers into staying w/ their current carrier, in addition to equipment recoups.

If you're not satisfied with your service cancel within your allotted time frame. If you have a legit reason for leaving they will let you out. If it's just an itch to go somewhere else they hold you to it. There is a policy for everything you can think of, it's in place and it works.

Then why is the ETF charged for cancelling when a person brings their own equipment?

Herbf has a point here. I do agree with him/her here.

We always hear that the contracts are for subsidized phones, untill we bring in our own equipment, then we hear we need a contract for service or pay an additional $30/month for night/weekend and m2m minutes. The contract is a two sided story, just depends which side you are on. I have said before, it is BS if someone comes in with their own equipment that there needs to be a 1 year contract. That is why I always tell people, do not go in with your own equipment, if you have to do a year contract you might as well get a new phone, and even if you want to use the one you already have, still get a new phone, then sell the new phone on ebay.

Contracts are for one thing and one thing only. Easier accounting for shareholders. Enough said.

Why is it a sin to make money around here?

let's see, if VZW uses the money to build new transmitters, pay reps, etc plus make a return for the company (they are not a public company)...

Anyway, there is no secret that VZW is NOT a volunteer organization and is a FOR PROFIT business. It is in the company's best interest to make money where they can.

If you don't care to partake of their services, then don't sign up...

TracPhone will always take you!

Did I say contracts are a sin? I think VZW is, again, back at shafting agents and thier sales people in general...but that has nothing to do with contracts.

Contracts equal them being able to show numbers to shareholders. Plain and simple. Nothing "wrong" with that...just a fact.

There are no "shareholders" in the sense that VZW is not a publicly traded stock.

Are not Verizon and Vodafone public companies? Does VzW not add to the bottom line for both of them?

and who said anything about it is wrong for verizon to make money...If you have good service you dont need contracts to lock people in, people will stay on their own. I am talking about the ones that come in with their own equipment.

It is time cell companies survive by providing the best service. As I said, wal mart and targets would love to have the option to put contracts out and force customers to shop them, but they rely on providing good service to keep customers, something all companies should do.

Obviously, either you ior I am missing something...

You are not forced to do business with VZW...it is one of a multitude of options. The stipulation VZW has is you are under a contract. If you don't want a contract, then go where you can get service without it. It may be far inferior, it may not be, but that is your option.

It's a business model that works for VZW.

i agree w/ your point trucksmoveamerica. Doing away w/ contracts would allow people more freedom.

with out contracts, the industry would suffer with less improvments and newer technologies. the contract is guaranted money which allows them to invest into new coverage and new technologies. if you like we can go back to analog, with no texting poor call quality, and no tv 😁. also your comparison of target and walmart is different they aren't selling services they are selling products. my ISP has me in a contract for their special rate why can't cell carriers??

Thats a valid question, but it is a very rare thing. It is extremely rare that a customer activates with their own equipment.

because you have to accept a contract in exchange for any promotion.. in this case it is nights and weekends

the point we are trying to point out is...

Cell companies tell customers that you need to do a contract because of subsidized phones, so they are sure to get their money back for the cheap phone, so customers said we understand.

Then we come in with our own phone to avoid the contract, then the story changes, now we are told that there is still a contract for a year because of the promo minutes.

So when a person comes in with their own phone or buys one at retail, carriers are still scared to let their service sell itself, they still rely on contracts to gurantee income even though they have nothing invested in this customer for phones. There is enough competition out there, it is time cell carriers relied on their service to keep ...
(continues)

The contracts are to cover costs for subsidized phones.. if there is no phones the contract is recouping activation costs and is paying the people who actually do the work to get your phone activated.. which is the reason for the variable etf.. The cost of either equipment or activation is diffused by the length of service..

NO Mr...you are wrong! If ETF's were waived then I am not aware of them. Someone made a decision and that has nothing to do with me nor do I have any way of knowing why or in what circumstance the ETF was waived for any FACT. I do not believe you do either....did someone tell you..ha ha..he said she said..not a FACT! There are circumstances that the ETF would be waived, but text messages going up at the PER TEXT rate is not a reason to waive an ETF! Don't text is the option! I find it very hard to believe that a strong opinioned person like you would believe something "just because" it was on the internet or "just because someone told you" the ETF was waived, facts would be info coming directly from VZW and unfortunately I KNOW they ha...
(continues)

"The FACT is that text msgs aren't worth 15 cents each, not even a dime."




That's an opinion.

That may or may not be true. While you may not think so there may be others that feel differently about what they are worth, BUT unfortunately that isn't the issue/discussion. The discussion is about the rate increase and ducking on the contract due to the change. BUT, if you do not agree with or think they are worth .15 a message then AGAIN..you have a choice!!! If you think that is not a reasonable offer then don't text. If the value is far less to you than the cost then don't use it. CHOICE. OPTIONAL. You are not required to pick up your handset and text anything. If you enjoy or find use in text mssg'ing then you still have the option to have a package and w/ that you pay pennies for the text. So...just keep in mind anything is...
(continues)

That may be true, but the issue was that by calling the BBB or Congressman in ref to this change would get you out of contract if the ETF was not waived upon request. That is not in any M&P. Everyone was notified of the increase and if they did not agree the customer had options available to them. The issue of being rude and threatening is not going to get anyone anywhere with anything! There are many reasons that a customer would break contract and possibly get ETF waived, but unfortunately text messaging is not what they signed the contract for. So if that was an option for them and it is still available then what would be the need to contact BBB or Congressman to get out of the contract. Also per area M&P's are different and apply t...
(continues)

Your point or opinion has nothing to do w/ anything. Lord confirmed the fact that people can get out of their contract because Verizon increased there text msg'ing fees for people w/o plans. It should be no sweat off your back, just an opportunity, which I originally pointed out for people who want out, to do so w/o paying the ETF.