MSNBC: AT&T Changes Fee Policy For Contracts

[chokaay]

Wow! First Verizon, and now AT&T! What's the world coming to... :eek: :eek: :eek:


AT&T Changes Fee Policy For Contracts
Reuters; Updated: 2 hours, 7 minutes ago

NEW YORK - AT&T Inc, the biggest U.S. mobile service, said on Tuesday that it will reduce some fees for customers who exit phone contracts before they are completed, in an effort to offer users more flexibility.

AT&T said customers who choose to exit their contracts early will no longer be required to pay a flat early termination fee, but instead will pay based upon the amount of time that has passed since the contract was signed.

In addition, existing customers who change their level of service will not be required to extend their current agreement or sign up for a new one.


MSNBC: AT&T Changes Fee Policy For Contracts (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21321382/from/RS.4/)


I wonder if T-Mobile will change... I mean, after their lawsuit.... :(

[Rzrlvr74]

:pOuch. That's gonna be painful for early deserters, lol.

[gapboi954]

it might hurt tmobile business

[j__1]

Wow! First Verizon, and now AT&T! What's the world coming to... :eek: :eek: :eek:
I wonder if T-Mobile will change... I mean, after their lawsuit.... :(Oddly, I don't find this so surprising. When fees get jacked up by one, all follow. When a promotion is launched, a majority follow.

While it is nice to see these companies give a little something back to the consumers, they have a long way to go to even begin to get back to the early PCS days.

[greenblood]

T-Mobile has "no-binding" monthly contract
buy phone in full price, or BYOP
you can stop contract anytime you want
the carriers in Hong Kong can let you do that, just buy phone in full price

[Ellen]

T-Mobile has "no-binding" monthly contract
buy phone in full price, or BYOP
you can stop contract anytime you want
the carriers in Hong Kong can let you do that, just buy phone in full price

The no contract option here is only available on T-Mobiles FlexPay "Month-to-Month plan. I think it's also important to note here that, along with the customer paying the full retail price of the handset, their coverage is limited to T-Mobiles prepaid area only. Not only that but, call forwarding is also not available on this plan.

[Ellen]

When a promotion is launched, a majority follow.

I agree with you here. In this case, it is AT&T who is following Verizon, since they recently started to offer a prorated ETF to their customers, along with giving their customers the ability to change their price plans at any time, without having to extend their contracts.....Hopefully this is something that T-Mobile will launch soon as well.

[chokaay]

I agree with you here. In this case, it is AT&T who is following Verizon, since they recently started to offer a prorated ETF to their customers, along with giving their customers the ability to change their price plans at any time, without having to extend their contracts.....Hopefully this is something that T-Mobile will launch soon as well.


I agree... not that I'll be switching from T-Mobile anytime soon... ;):D

[Railroader]

I'm glad to see this, hopefully T-Mobile follows suit. I am glad to see the bill in Congress too, the cellular companies have had their way too long.

We have three carriers here, US Cellular, Verizon and Edge Wireless (AT&T Affiliate), and of those US Cellular is the only one left who charges a flat rate ETF.

[j__1]

I'm glad to see this, hopefully T-Mobile follows suit. I am glad to see the bill in Congress too, the cellular companies have had their way too long.I think that's where we will probably always disagree, Railroader. In my short experience in the industry, and from my studies into regulation, typically, when Congress gets involved, we see the current business model getting locked in via legislative action, while costs increase due to overhead to handle regulation and incremental attorneys (no offense, darkjedi). IMO, what we need, is a new business model.

And over the years, the FCC has desperately attempted to manage the industry via auction and other action. While they've attempted each time to add choice, the end result really hasn't changed much. We still have the A and B operations (i.e., wireless and wireline), with a couple of relative newbies that came out of the PCS auctions. So do I look to the overly talkative FCC to provide assistance, HECK NO!

IMO, we need a lot of change in the industry... and i think it is happening naturally. The last thing we need is for some media hungry politicians to jump in late in the game, and attempt to win it for us all.

For example, with Standard Oil, when the government decided to take action against the evil corporations, SO had over 50% of market from top to bottom. At the time of the court action and break-up order, Standard Oil had less than 25% of the market.

Moving to the 90s, the evil corporation M$, that was already beginning to come under attack from their own customers and new competitors, began to come under attack from the government under the same theory: that government knows best.

IMO, the only one that was hurt by this action, was us, the consumer. Today, the EU uses our actions as an example to attempt to manage competition. And the remedies the EU has asked for.... like a stripped down version of Windows, no one buys. How does this help the people in the world, and how does this help the US economy?

And the politicians and lawyers that went after M$.... in retrospect, more than a few think they may have jumped the gun. So that begs the questions: Who gets shot when elitists in government get involved?

[Railroader]

Voodoo economics doesn't work ;) If we left things to "naturally" fix themselves, Lake Erie would still be dead, children would still be working in factories and mines and DDT would still be polluting our world.

[Ellen]

The staff here at T-MobileSignal values your opinions on this subject, but just a reminder to everyone, please keep the discussion friendly. Thank you.

[j__1]

Voodoo economics doesn't work ;) If we left things to "naturally" fix themselves, Lake Erie would still be dead, children would still be working in factories and mines and DDT would still be polluting our world.No doubt... but then, when I speak of naturally evolving markets, I do not mean government enforced national/international contracts.

South America is a great example of the devastation that can come from our greed.... and then we sit back and wonder why Castro and Che ran rampant.

As for your Ronald reference... I agree to a certain degree. He was a great communicator, but he also took, as all men in power do, shortcuts that in some cases did more harm than good.

Anyway, being a former welfare kid, yes, I do think a hand-up can do wonders. Where I go off track is when the expectation is that someone else should be responsible for taking care of me. I, and only I, should be accountable for me and my actions (well, at least 99.99999999999%). :)

In terms of this thread, every day we see new competitors encroaching on the established players. We also see consumers fighting back and winning with the tools they have already been provided. Are you simply impatient :) or do you see something bad on the horizon?

As always, Railroader, I appreciate the civil conversation. Thank you.

P.S.
As for the poor children... If given the choice between working and not eating/dying......... an unfortunate choice that should not have to be made must occur. We have dark times in our past (and present and certainly our future), but them were the times. Even with 'laws' in place, families still had/have to make tough choice.

Check-out the areas around Washington DC. No mother, no father, no family, and a 'corrupt' community... what do you do? Rely on broken government? My point is, there are children that work in coal mines today in the U.S.A.... they're just out-of-sight of the general public.

We need real change... I agree. But we have to start being real and having tough conversations... no matter where they may lead.