Verizon looks back at 2008...shouldn't we!

Who says that threads have to remain on topic. This is an open forum, topics continuously change based upon responses and opinions. You should not control a thread or a forum like that.

The uniqueness and adaptability of threads and forums like this is what makes them so important to the members and so informative to all.

It is censorship when "you" overstep your authority and remove comments/posts that "you" have deemed inappropriate to be viewed by the members of this forum.

Please re-post all of my posts within this thread. I see a few that you did not re-post.

"training...
I have read and reread the terms and conditions. I have also went through the mod tutorial.

Here's one of the things I saw in the tutorial.

Close thread: will lock the thread to regular users, Mods can still post. It is useful for stopping temper flare-ups, displays of ignorance, and nonsense... Oh... and that occasional "Let's bring back a 2 year old thread for no good reason" that some people have.Close thread: will lock the thread to regular users, Mods can still post. It is useful for stopping temper flare-ups, displays of ignorance, and nonsense... Oh... and that occasional "Let's bring back a 2 year old thread for no good reason" that some people have."


This is not what was happening here. I saw no ignorance on Crunks part. Does it say you have to stay on topic?? He was mad and came here to vent, I have seen many people do it, hell I've done it. It is even good for them/me to do it, and if they/us do it in this manner it makes them/us feel like someone cares and is listening. When you close the thread or give them a warning then it makes them/us feel worse and that this forum is a sham. Is that what you intended??
 
Kttm, you are absolutely right. Nicknrm and I have had a conversation via PM and I think that we have come to a consensus.... this thread remains open, he has apologized for overstepping his bounds as a mod (which is tough for an online moderator to do when anonymously saving face is nearly meaningless) and the nature of this discussion shall remain as-is.

There was some mild inappropriate comments on may part and nick sent this post off-topic. His issues were with my inappropriate exclamations... "Booo hoo" and such. Inappropriate... but I use little things like that as jokes to kind of segue into my topics. I suppose that's the blogger in me... it sometimes makes it hard to be respectful in forums since moderators tend to take it personally even if we're all supposedly on the same team.

No hard feelings Nick; the sarcasm is directed at the multi-billion-dollar conglomerate... not you.

Most people (including me) tend to budget how much each month they can afford on their wireless bill. It can get pricey... when you throw in overages or text messaging (which has no overhead as reported by the New York Times last month).

Then consider that you're gleefully handing your money over to a company that demands you sign a TWO-YEAR contract ensuring you continue giving them money throughout that duration... imagine if your barber made you sign a two-year agreement so that only he could cut your hair... and if you went to another barber, he'd fine you $100. Yeah, it's ridiculous.

Come on... the consumer loses here in every way, shape and form. People sign their contracts and pay their fees because they're no alternatives. It's time for us to discuss the injustices of the cellular system.
 
I totally agree with every statement that you have made Crunk. I have been criticized on here for comparing VZW’s tactics to other service providing industries such as a gas station (charge dif prices for gas based on the value or capabilities of your car etc…) gas, electric, water company (charge dif prices for their service based on value of your home/business or if you had a pool etc…). I was told that this comparison had no basis, and I was talking apples and oranges. I even had something posted in my profile page giving neg feedback by Nick because my comparisons.

VZW does this tactic by charging dif prices for data based on the phone you have and the capabilities of said phone and not honoring the actual plan you have when it comes to data and smart phones.

We as consumers pay for the features and capabilities of a phone (Smart phone’s included) when we pay the prices stipulated by VZW for the phone.

Data is data, it should be billed at the same price no matter what phone you have. We should be charged based on the amount of data downloaded to our phones (no matter the type of phone) not the way our phones handle/represent/display the downloaded data. No other company that provides a service gets away with this practice.

If anyone knows of another industry that has this same practice, please enlighten me.

I think they only thing I will look back on is how VZW has seperated me from so much of my money and how to stop that in 09.

But I hear that they are going to impose a manditory data plan/feature type thing (was in the doc/power point slide that was leaked on the internet talking about the manditory data plan implimentation) on all HTML browser capable phones this year.
 
I can vouch for this one.

I may have previously posted "oh no, that will never happen"...but I generally never go off of internet rumors (rumors sometimes do become true)...but I have a verifying email that says Mandatory Data Plans for all HTML browser phones. It won't effect current customers unless they upgrade to another one.

I am emailing Verizon Wireless about this one. I have several times, I receive no response from them...
 
But my point with the mandatory data plans is that Verizon will strong-arm all customers into getting a browser-based phone... because that's all they will offer. As customer's 2-year contracts expire, they will dangle that cheap, new phone in front of them for another two-year commitment and then slam them with the increased bill with the data plan.

It's all very sneaky and underhanded. Customers have very little control.
 
I don't think Verizon Wireless will begin to only offer HTML browser phones. They will, I bet, make them more tempting to customers in some way...to get more sells and to lock you with that nice $15 per month data plan.

The cool thing about Verizon, though, they have never been known to force you to upgrade. I remember once my brother was pushed off from AT&T because she refused to upgrade.
 
This is true; my Verizon contract expired in November and, although I've gotten calls asking me to upgrade my phone, I have refused.

As for AT&T, I believe that the only time they forced people to upgrade was when Cingular was started out of the "old" AT&T and then, more recently, when the "new" AT&T (SBC) bought out Cingular.

Even then I know there was a considerable period allowed for the transition. But the SIM cards were eventually incompatible.
 
True. Also, I don't believe Verizon's upgrade discount expires.

As for AT&T, I was just pointing out it is wrong to ever be forced to upgrade devices...no matter what the circumstances were. I can understand maybe during the analog conversion...but it has happened multiple times.

In reality, AT&T is the only carrier that bugs me. They do dumb things...then they get sued...then they do more dumb things...then file bankruptcy. Then they repeat. Did you know Sprint sued them over their fewest dropped calls claim? The company who tested tested in San Francisco, Ca...only. Well, Sprint has reports...that test every carrier that proves Sprint in fact had fewer dropped calls in that area. They involved third party companies to prove their point. Then they won. I'm not sure how much money was involved...but I do know AT&T ended their fewest dropped calls claim. Their new claim is Best Coverage. At the bottom it says "Based on World Coverage, including roaming."

But like Sprint, I don't mind them. They seem to be a carrier that tries hard...but has issues succeeding due to how they were built.

Also, T-Mobile is ok. Great customer service.

Verizon, well you know I love them...I personally always have. But I look beyond coverage and pricing. Most people don't.
 
Back
Top