Comments on: FCC Sends Carriers, And Google, ETF Inquisition

By: SHIRL

SHIRL — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 01:07:33 +0000

Over two years ago verizon was ordered to refund our ETF. they continue to reply by saying that the case is now in its second appeal. why does the FCC and FTC not do something about this crap. Bottom line is consumers will end up not getting crap.
If you are the victim of thios situation as well, write to your elected officials, don’t buy Verizon phones.
The only way consumers can get justice is with our pocketbooks. Get T-Mobile or Boost and let the big guys sweat.

By: Gill Williams

Gill Williams — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:35:15 +0000

I think that these contract company’s are just trying to tie you down and make it difficult to leave because if it was easy to leave then they would loose half their customers. Well, They will never tie me down again, I canceled my contract and bought a prepaid Straight Talk phone from Walmart, the first month is a little more expensive because I had to pay for the phone but from then on it’s so much cheaper that I have to laugh at my old bills. Now I have unlimited talk, texts and data for an unbelievably cheap $45 per month and I thought that prepaid was a lower quality in some way but I have been so pleasantly surprised to discover that Straight Talk is on Verizon’s network nationwide and the signal is better than it was on contract.

By: brian1972

brian1972 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 06:19:20 +0000

I hope contracts stay as they are, they are confusing enough as it is, and Tom I know for a fact that you can do NO CONTRACT on Verizon and AT&T you probably don’t get a lot of reps that explain it, also I know Verizon the contract ETF goes down ever month $10 for a Droid $5 for a simple phone

YOU have a choice now sign a 2 year, sign a one Year or do no contract (and no ETF)

I bought My Motorola Droid from Verizon the price breakdown was as follows

$569.99 no contract, no etf
$369.99 – $100 Mail in rebate 1 year contract $350 ETF
$299.99 – $100 Mail in rebate 2 Year contract $350 ETF

I get a work discount and got it for $229.99 with a one year contract $350 ETF and all Verizons ETF go down $10 each month on a PDA even with a one year

I think you guys should do some research the policies are not as bad as everyone is making it out to be

also go look at expansys and see what they are selling the Milestone for with out contract $574. That is almost exactly the same price as Verizon no contract price

that is the way cellular works in the USA, please don’t take my choice away

By: AGx-07_162

AGx-07_162 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 01:03:52 +0000

I agree with Tom 100%. It is entirely unfair that we still have to pay their $220+ ETF even if we buy the phone at full price. That makes it incredibly difficult to change carriers. I honestly dont see why this is allowed. If we choose to leave early and the carrier has the full amount of their device paid to them, I dont think we should owe them anything else but a middle finger when we say goodbye.

By: Legion

Legion — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:36:19 +0000

I know for a fact you can do month-to-month on verizon with your own equipment.

Most of what you said makes sense, but alot carriers are taking baby steps by prorating etfs.

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:58:11 +0000

5, 6, and 7 really cut to the heart of the matter.

In reality, the carrier is *extending credit* to the customer in the amount of the subsidy, expecting the customer to pay it back. But if the customer doesn’t use the subsidy, the carrier still expects the customer to pay the same rate as a subsidized user. These subsidies should be treated as CREDIT, just like with a credit card or a loan.

We need a “customer’s bill of rights”, which would stipulate:

1. If the customer buys a phone at full price, the carrier cannot impose a time limit or ETF of any kind. (Currently, all but TMO force you in to a contract)
2. The subsidy payment should be itemized on the customer’s bill, based on the length of the contract and amount of the subsidy. For example, a subsidy of $150 over a 1 year period should be billed at $12.50 a month as a separate line item from the monthly access fees. Each statement should also list the amount left on the subsidy.
3. At the end of the contract term, the subsidy fee should be dropped from the phone bill, and no new time limitations shall be imposed on the customer.
4. If the customer cancels his contract early, he shall only be liable for the unpaid portion of the subsidy.

So the long and short of it is if I walk in with a phone and just need a SIM card, I should pay $12 or $15 (or whatever) less than the guy who gets his new phone for “free”. That guy who got his free phone should also get a $15 break on his bill after his 12 or 24 month contract expires.

Banks aren’t allowed to pull the kind of BS the phone companies are. Why are the carriers getting away with it?

By: Dennis

Dennis — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:01:25 +0000

County Gross Receipts Tax$0.75
City Gross Receipts Tax $0.75
County 911 $0.25
DEAF Surcharge $0.03
Federal Universal Service Fund

By: nateo200

nateo200 — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:09:49 +0000

I hope the FCC kicks some ass like they have lately when it comes to the BS cell carriers spew out at you.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:27:19 +0000

Screw the ETF how about looking into all these bullshit fees that are tacked onto the bill?

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:52:11 +0000

The Google ERF is much easier to explain than carriers’ ETFs. In Google’s case T-Mobile cuts them a check for $350 for every new customer that qualifies, signs up, and retains service for 120 days. Google gives the purchaser an ‘advance’ on that $350 so their out of pocket cost is lower. If you cancel prior to 120days then Google doesn’t get its $350 so they charge you for it.