Interesting People mailing list archives
more on I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt Consumers
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 06:58:30 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Dana Spiegel <dana () nycwireless net> Date: October 22, 2005 6:35:00 PM EDT To: gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com Cc: dave () farber netSubject: Re: [IP] more on I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt Consumers
To Gerry's question, my $0.02: There are 3 reasons why people don't opt for Sprint or pre-pay:1) phone selection. no matter what people maintain, each phone is different. Try finding a phone from Verizon that you can sync with your Macintosh over Bluetooth. Or use the address book or text messaging of a Motorola side by side with a Nokia. You'll soon find that each brand is markedly different, from both a physical interface/ capability perspective, as well as a software UI/feature perspective.
2) Coverage. Every single person I speak to has made their choice primarily based on the coverage of their provider. I was in the South End in Boston today speaking with a friend, and he told me that he had to switch to Verizon in order to get any service on his block. I personally had to switch from T-mobile to AT&T a few years ago in order to get service in my office and in my apartment in New York City.
3) Laziness/Pain. Do you know how hard it is to change phone companies? The last time I did this, just after local number portability was introduced, it took a week to change from T-mobile to AT&T. It took my girlfriend _A MONTH_ to get things worked out properly for the same switch. Recently she upgraded her phone, and had to spend 5-6 hours total on the phone just to get a new phone from Cingular. Do this once, and you'll likely never want to switch again.
Dana Spiegel Executive Director NYCwireless dana () NYCwireless net www.NYCwireless.net +1 917 402 0422 Read the Wireless Community blog: http://www.wirelesscommunity.info On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:29 PM, David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message: From: Gerry Faulhaber <gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com> Date: October 11, 2005 9:28:27 AM EDT To: dave () farber netSubject: Re: [IP] I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt ConsumersOK, this has been a learning experience;-). Thanks to the the many informed IPers who responded. Here's what I've found out (and another question):1- The only carrier that offers a month-to-month service for "bring your own phone" is Sprint, as several IPers have mentioned. None of the others do. But in case you didn't notice, Sprint is probably the weakest of the cellphone companies (even with their merger), so it would appear that offering a month-to-month with "bring your own phone" is simply not very important to customers. Maybe to IPers, but most of those who reported this dastardly practice do not seem to have switched to Sprint. In other words, while you and I may want the option of month-to-month, it is not important enough to most customers to be a competitive advantage. Too bad.2- It's pretty obvious a multi-year contract is in the interest of the phone company. For example, magazines make much more $$ from yearly subscriptions than newstand sales. And if customers don't think it's important enough to choose a carrier based on month-to- month, it will not happen.3- Some IPers mentioned foreign phones brought to the US and operated on month-to-month, but noted they were much more expensive. Of course, that was my original point: month-to-month will be more expensive.4- I was surprised almost no one discussed pre-paid cell service, which of course involves no commitment at all, beyond the initial minutes purchased. This has been a successful business model; e.g., Virgin Mobile only does pre-paid. This is a very different model, in that there is no credit risk for the firms to bear.I would think that IPers who object so strongly to multi-year contracts would opt for pre-paid...or move to Sprint. I'd be interested to learn from our correspondents why they do not avail themselves of these options.Prof. Gerry Faulhaber ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Farber" <dave () farber net> To: "Ip Ip" <ip () v2 listbox com> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 7:45 AMSubject: [IP] I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt ConsumersBegin forwarded message: From: Tom Goltz <tgoltz () QuietSoftware com> Date: October 10, 2005 11:42:29 PM EDT To: Gerry Faulhaber <gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com> Cc: dave () farber netSubject: Re: [IP] more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt ConsumersAt 10:47 AM 10/10/2005, you wrote:Re: cell phone contracts. I think the way this works is that you can get a cellphone at a below-market price from your service provider inreturn for a one- or two-year contract, OR you can buy your phoneelsewhere and get the service without a contract (or maybe a contractof shorter duration). So this is a trade-off, you get a price break on your instrument in return for a longer contract. But you don'thave to take this; you can still avoid the lengthy contract by buyingyour own phone at a market price.My experience has been the exact opposite of what you describe. I have approached several different carriers with existing phones that were compatible with their networks. Verizon flatly refused to give me service without my signing *exactly* the same 1-year contract that I'd have to sign to obtain a discounted phone. Ditto for Cingular and T-Mobile. Only Sprint is willing to provide service on a month- to-month basis to new customers who either already have a phone or pay full price for the phone.If the cell phone companies are doing such a wonderful job for their customers, why are over 50% of the complaints received by the Better Business Bureau cellular related? If you stop ten random people on the street and ask them how they like their cellular service, why will five of them tell you that they'd switch carriers if they weren't locked into a contract?Personally, I believe that all of us would be better off as consumers if it was illegal for telecommunications companies to require long- term contracts for services.------------------------------------- You are subscribed as gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ipArchives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/ interesting-people/------------------------------------- You are subscribed as dana () nycwireless net To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ipArchives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- people/
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt Consumers David Farber (Oct 23)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on I AGREE djf more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Hurt Consumers David Farber (Oct 24)