I read this thread with fascination as I watched Mystery go from making a valid point to being beaten into submission with skewed logic.
Mystery, stand by your principals on this one. Although Verizon might not feel much of a dent with the loss of your business, they will feel the dent when you, I, and thousands others stand up against fatuous policies such as the new data requirement policy now required on the majority of all phones sold by Verizon.
A few points I would like to address:
When someone asked why they had to pay for a coverage (data requirement) that they did not need or want, 8 snake replied
Quote:
|
“ Because Verizon is paying a lot of money to subsidize the phone that you want.”
|
No, snake, this is not a valid reason to coerce consumers into unwanted/unneeded coverage. Simply offering the phone at full cost to those that do not want or need internet coverage would be a consumer friendly option for those wanting a particular phone.
Quote:
|
“There are plenty of phones that will accomplish your basic needs and not require a data plan of any sort. “
|
No, actually there are not, well unless you are suggesting that the basic need is to simply make a phone call then yes, I think I had five choices at my local Verizon store and a dozen or so online for my region. Now, if we go by the actual need and desire of the individual which can vary greatly, we may be severely limiting many even leaving some with no options.
I have always purchased my phone based on some key priorities such as consumer and industry review rating, manufacturer (certain ones I will not purchase due to past reoccurring defects), call reception, battery life, and the ease of use such as phone size and weight, key location, and style (such as flip). For years I have used the camera, calculator, alarm clock, and vibration features so these things continue to be important to me as well. If I want to continue to choose my phone based on the way I have done so for the last ten years, I am EXTREMELY limited unless I agree to pay $9.99 for an internet coverage I do not need, or want, or would ever use. I can tell you with all honesty that not one of the handful of phone shown to me that did not require internet coverage would have been a phone that I would have chosen for myself in the past. I am being forced to change the priorities on my phone purchase or coerced into an unwanted/unneeded coverage. This is the focus of the issue for many of the people voicing an opinion against mandatory internet coverage on the majority of phones now being sold by Verizon.
In my particular situation, I have a son that suffered a traumatic head injury last year that left him with some sight and hand movement deficits. We went looking for a phone that would be user friendly with a full keyboard and easy to see wide spaced keys that did not require a monthly internet service charge (which he would never use) and found one phone that he could handle much easier than others: the LG Nve 3. This phone is marketed on LG’s website as having nice wide spaced keys and up until Feb 1, did not require the data plan. However, we went looking for a phone on Feb 4th so my son was forced with a decision- purchase a phone that best fit his needs and be forced to pay for a monthly coverage he would never use or purchase a phone that did not fit his needs. There was only one phone in the store that had a keyboard that did not require the data plan and this was the Samsung Intensity.
Unfortunately my son found this phone difficult to use due to the small closely spaced keys (mentioned continually on consumer reviews) and I found the low consumer rating on Cnet (2.5 out of 5) unacceptable as well as a number of other issues. So in actuality, we had zero choices in our area for a user-friendly phone for my son. Well, unless we dropped all of the priorities we set for choosing a phone for him and all consumer standards by which we have always chosen a phone in the past.
Quote:
|
“You just happened to pick a more expensive phone with more advanced features.”
|
Actually, no. Some of us are using the same way of choosing phones that we have for many years. While some of these phones might have come with an additional feature not high on our priority list that we elected not to use such as the internet, we certainly did not want to give up the features that we typically select a phone for simply due to the fact that a phone had internet capabilities.
Quote:
|
“Verizon has to foot the bill for that phone, whether you choose to utilize the features or not. As a result, you're required to add a data plan to your cell phone package.”
|
Verizon has to ‘foot the bill’ for that phone whether we choose to utilize the features or not??? First 8 snake, you seem to be an expert on Verizon’s cost associated with end product (phone) so please enlighten some of us as to how Verizon is ‘footing the bill’ on that phone and what this actual cost is you are referring to. Also enlighten us as to how this has changed over the last 5 years and why this cost cannot be passed along as it always has via varying the cost of the phone itself based on contract length and early termination fees.
Quote:
|
‘Verizon offers plenty of phones that are capable of sending text messages without requiring data plans. The OP chose a more expensive phone that is being largely subsidized by Verizon. For that reason, Verizon requires a data plan so that some/all of the subsidy can be recovered. Why do you feel that something is wrong with that?”
|
I think that I already covered most of this.
Quote:
|
“I said that a more expensive phone with advanced features is going to be more heavily subsidized by Verizon. For that reason, Verizon requires customers to buy data packages when getting those phones for reduced prices. “
|
Do you realize how many times you have brought up Verizon subsidizing phones (find this terminology a little interesting) as a valid reason to suddenly start forcing unwanted/unneeded coverage on consumers? The fact remains that technology advances and always will. The cost of these advancements have always been passed on to the consumer. The discussion at hand is regarding the way they are suddenly being passed on to the consumer- forcing unwanted/unneeded coverage or a less desirable product or in my son’s situation, a product that does not meet his needs. Take a look at Verizon’s stock price pattern and consider that perhaps this is one company’s way of forcing a sale (internet) that wasn’t moving fast enough for them by using strong-arm tactics with consumers.
Quote:
|
“The cell phone industry is quickly expanding in multimedia/smart phones because that is what the market, in general, demands. There's a cost associated with building up the infrastructure and technology required to support that expansion. One consequence is that some people are going to be forced to buy data packages if they wish to buy multimedia/smart phones.”
|
The cost associated with building infrastructure is not new nor are escalating demands or cost to keep up with demands. This is reflected clearly if you compare my Verizon bill over the last 10 years. Verizon has always passed on the cost, I just argue that mandating unwanted coverage on consumers is an unfair way of doing this and if consumers simply stand by and accept this, the trend will likely continue with other mandated coverage and other organizations following along with this escalating trend.
Quote:
|
“There are still options if you don't want a data package, but I can forsee a day when all plans include data. It's simply the way that the market is moving and what the majority of customers demand.”
|
We are currently facing extremely limited cell phone options without mandated internet coverage and consumers are finding that they no longer have the freedom to choose a cell phone the way they did in the past. It is no longer about what feature may best suit your need, it is about trying to find an ‘ok’ phone with a couple features you used to enjoy without paying for a coverage you do not need. Verizon is being very slippery with this coercion and this is obvious when you compare the phones that require this coverage and those few that do not. The bottom line is that many people are now required to settle for a phone that they would never have chosen prior to this data requirement policy or pay extra for a coverage they do not need or want. This is the issue many are failing to recognize.
Quote:
|
“And you're saying that you want to have a Porsche for Hyundai prices, but you promise not to use the performance. Doesn't make any sense, does it?”
|
What? - I am so lost here. No one is suggesting that lower-end phones should have the same price point as higher-end phones and if Verizon wanted to tweak that price even further by giving a price break for someone taking a contract with internet coverage - terrific. But regarding the suggestion that someone should pay for internet coverage just because the phone has the capability to reach the internet, this is absurd. All the phones that I have purchased over the last 6 or so years have had the ability to reach the internet and yet, I have never elected to utilize this feature as it is not something that I want or need. So sticking with your attempted auto analogy.... I can certainly see consumers who choose to purchase a Porsche and not use every feature it comes with. A Porsche owner does not have to race down the autobahn at 120mph to enjoy the luxury comfort of the soft leather seats, the look and feel/handling of the vehicle, the safety features, the warranty, or the quality of the vehicle itself. This is such a poor attempt at an analogy that it is almost impossible to address.
Quote:
|
“Yes, I know that Verizon doesn't make any phones. However, Verizon DOES subsidize the phones. If you don't think that Verizon is trying to capture back that money by requiring data plans on certain phones, you are mistaken. “
|
I am finding this topic almost humorous at this point. So as an expert on Verizon subsidizing phones, once again I am asking you to enlighten us on their actual cost, does it vary by manufacturer? Are you suggesting that this is a new occurrence and they have never passed this cost on to consumers in the past and are justified in doing so now with unwanted/unneeded coverage? If this is the case, please share with us why there have been varying costs for phones based on contract length and why we have early termination fees when we purchase these phones.
Quote:
|
“A phone having a keyboard and a being multimedia/smart phone are two entirely different things. I'm not sure why you keep mentioning a keyboard when that is not the issue.”
|
Actually, it very well could be the issue. If you are someone like me that went shopping for a phone that had a full keyboard and widely spaced keys and were limited to a choice of one phone with a keyboard that had cramped keys which were difficult to use and read or being forced to pay for an unwanted/unneeded coverage for a phone that fit your needs, it could very well be the issue.
Quote:
|
“THERE ARE PACKAGES AVAILABLE FOR TALK/TEXT WITHOUT DATA PLANS. THERE ARE PHONES AVAILABLE THAT DO NOT REQUIRE YOU TO BUY A DATA PACKAGE. “
|
Ok, as some of you seem to like automobile analogies, let me try one to attempt to connect.
Let’s say you are a typical white collar worker that primarily uses a vehicle to drive to and from work. Although you simply need the vehicle to drive to and from work and almost any running automobile would work for you, you take other factors into account when purchasing a new vehicle such as air conditioning, gas mileage, power windows/lock, antilock brakes, size, color…….
For the last twenty years you have been a Chevy person and your automobile of choice is a luxury passenger van with seating for eight. You only have a family of four but you like the additional roomy feel.
The automobile industry is having problems and we know that the cost of technology and manufacturing is always escalating so this year when vehicle shopping you find that Chevy has decided to enact a few mandatory changes.
Chevy found that more people are using LoJack and Sirius today than 3 years ago but yet there were so many customers purchasing vehicles with this option and not actually using it so they decided that they will now include this feature on the majority of their vehicles and make service mandatory for anyone purchasing any of these vehicles. Chevy started manufacturing ninety five percent of their vehicles with a built in Lojack device and Sirius radio. If you buy any of these vehicles, you will be ‘required’ to pay a continuous monthly fee of $42 to maintain these two services which you have never used in the past and have no desire to use now.
You ask to be shown any vehicle that does not require you to pay this unwanted monthly service and you are directed to a handful of vehicles only one of which is a van. Unfortunately it is not the plush luxury van you are used to but a lime green cargo van with seating for eight which does not have power windows or locks nor does it have air conditioning. You ask to see your other choices and discover that the the vehicle that has most (not all) of the features you have been using such as air conditioning, antilock brakes, and power windows is a Dodge neon and the only color choice is fuchsia or lavender.
Using your stance throughout this thread…… You simply need an automobile to get to work and extra features like power windows and color choice does not prevent you from actually purchasing an automobile that fits your needs so I see nothing wrong with Chevy’s policy and if you don’t want to pay $42 a month then go buy the cargo van or neon or whatever other limited choice they gave you as after all, it is a vehicle that will get you to and from work and seat your family of four.
And when every other manufacturer continues to follow suit with this coercion because everyone sat by while Chevy set the industry standard without taking a firm stance against it, don’t sit and whine when 60% of the consumers are gouged for coverage they do not need and the other 40% are driving lime green cargo vans or fuchsia neons. Don't be surprised when other organizations jump into the fray and we have extremely limited choices in everything we purchase or are forced to pay for coverage we do not want.
Quote:
|
“Saying that Verizon is shoving unwanted packages upon people is simply not accurate, no matter how many times you repeat it. People are simply choosing phones that require data packages.”
|
Yep, just like the person above who decided not to buy the lime green cargo van or fuchsia neon who is now paying an extra $42 a month for a coverage he did not want or need. After all, he had a choice too and products available that would meet his basic needs.
Bottom line: This is a stong arm tactic where many are being forced to choose between a product they do not really want or a service charge for a coverage they do not want.
Quote:
|
“Verizon sets itself apart by having the best coverage and the most reliable network. Since a phone is only as good as the network it's on, I'll take Verizon anyday. BMWs cost more than Kias, there is a reason why.”
|
I have been with Verizon for 10 years because they have better phone service (different from customer service) than other carriers in my area and believe me, I HAVE paid a higher price for this service. There were many carriers out there that offered better rates and plans during those ten years but I stayed with Verizon as I felt that they had the best coverage. However, this does not mean that I will stand by Verizon while they make me choose between forcing unneeded/unwanted coverage on me or a phone that I would never purchase of my own free will.
I do not dispute your suggestion that you pay for what you get. I have been faithfully paying my higher monthly bill to Verizon for ten years for this better coverage (same coverage $50 less per month with AT&T with added benefit of rollover) so if Verizon simply were to offer me my LG Nve Touch phone today for $300 without a monthly internet coverage or $100 with an internet option, I would not be posting in this thread.
Your statement that BMWs cost more than Kias brings home the point that almost every higher priced- higher quality phone that Verizon now sells has this mandatory internet coverage so Verizon is restricting my choice in quality of product unless I take a service/coverage I do not need. I have two choices- purchase a lesser quality phone that I do NOT want to purchase or be forced to pay for a coverage that I do NOT want nor need.
If for some reason Verizon is not making enough off of me by making me take a 2 year contract on the phone I want and adding a hefty early termination fee, then they should offer me choice by listing their actual cost of that phone and allowing me to buy it at full price without forcing a coverage I do not need or want.
Quote:
|
“Can you buy an Envy 3 (or whatever phone trips your trigger) for regular retail price and use it on Verizon's network without buying a data package?”
|
No, regardless of where you purchase the phone or the price you paid, the day it is activated on your account, a monthly service charge will begin. There is a small percentage of phones that do not fall under this mandatory/forced coverage (none of which I would purchase) and it is likely we will see less and less options until this service becomes mandatory on all phones. Even phones like the LG Nve3 which did not have a data requirement in January has one now as of February 1st. The LG Nve Touch which I have been using since last August has been working just fine for me without internet coverage but I will be forced to pay for this unneeded/unwanted monthly coverage should I remain a Verizon customer and make any changes to my current contract.
Quote:
|
”Thanks for the above opinions, I'll just suck it up and pay their stupid 9.99 bucks a month.”
|
Sad Mystery….really sad. I for one will not, I have already filed a complaint with the FTC, have shared my opinion of this policy publicly on the Verizon website, and will be contacting the CEO of Verizon Wireless in writing next week. Although someone could argue that nothing may change with my actions, my stance is that if we simply sit back and take whatever is thrown at us by these companies (and our government) such as being forced to choose between a product we do not want or a service we do not want, we will no doubt be facing more and more practices/policies like this down the road. I encourage others to also take action if they do not agree with this policy.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
some are missing the point
