Not about Iraq
| By scharch - Aug 25th, 2005 at 9:04 pm EDT |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Summer Blogathon |
Sorry -I'd just hate to see this turn into a one-issue forum when there are so many other important things for progressives to tend to, as well.
Today's topic is one that has been a pet peeve of mine for some time: Unfair and predatory practices within the telecommunications industry. For instance, when I signed up for my cellphone, I chose the $29.99/month plan. My last bill was $36, even though I had no roaming charges or overage fees. I can deal with the $3 of taxes, but that still leaves another $3 of "Regulatory Programs Fees" and Universal connectivity Charges." Sure these things are in the fine print of the contract, but it's still dishonest. If they advertise a $29.99/month plan, I want to pay only $29.99 per month!
Which brings me to my next rant: Most carriers don't even offer a $30/month plan anymore. The cheapest plans you can buy these days are $35/month, and I'm sure it won't be long before it becomes $40/month. Cell phone companies hate people like me who use fewer than 200 minutes a month. And don't even get me started on the long term contracts!!
This isn't just limited to cell phone companies, of course. The same type of nickle-and-diming occurs with cable TV and broadband internet, too. Progressives ought to stand up to these oppressive oligopolies and say, "Enough is enough!"
Today's topic is one that has been a pet peeve of mine for some time: Unfair and predatory practices within the telecommunications industry. For instance, when I signed up for my cellphone, I chose the $29.99/month plan. My last bill was $36, even though I had no roaming charges or overage fees. I can deal with the $3 of taxes, but that still leaves another $3 of "Regulatory Programs Fees" and Universal connectivity Charges." Sure these things are in the fine print of the contract, but it's still dishonest. If they advertise a $29.99/month plan, I want to pay only $29.99 per month!
Which brings me to my next rant: Most carriers don't even offer a $30/month plan anymore. The cheapest plans you can buy these days are $35/month, and I'm sure it won't be long before it becomes $40/month. Cell phone companies hate people like me who use fewer than 200 minutes a month. And don't even get me started on the long term contracts!!
This isn't just limited to cell phone companies, of course. The same type of nickle-and-diming occurs with cable TV and broadband internet, too. Progressives ought to stand up to these oppressive oligopolies and say, "Enough is enough!"
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Frankly, I love the two-year contract commitments.
Because using those commitments, every two years I can call up Cingular for a couple hours and bargain, cajole, haggle, and threaten my way to a much sweeter cell-phone deal than most other people get.
For instance, the usual free phone you get with Cingular in exchange for a 2 year contract is... decent. Servicable.
I got them to send me a SonyEricsson S710A -- 1.3 megapixel camera, plays movies like a dream (I've got Jet Li's Unleashed on there right now), MP3 player, great 3D games capability, etc.
If Cingular wasn't offering 2 year contracts, I'd have no bargaining leverage, and I'd have to actually pay for my phone. Not so fun.
If you want pay-as-you-go, there are plenty of services, such as T-Mobile To Go, or Boost Mobile, that offer that.
There are some really awful telecom practices in this country, but I don't see the phones offered by cellular dealers as being the real culprit. :)
My cable contract is month to month, but we have still managed to use a threat to quit as leverage. When we dedcided weren't using digital cable enough to justify the extra expense (over basic cable), Comcast cut our rate in half so that we would keep digital.
Truthfully, it's about planned obselesance. I wish I had the option to sign a bare-bones 100 min/month plan with a no-frills phone from 10 years ago. But even at 100 (peak) minutes a month, a fixed plan works out cheaper than pay-go. Because of the nature of the market, there is no ability for a start up to go in and fill that low-end niche. That's all that I'm saying.
2 year contracts are beneficial in that they allow you to guarantee your business to the cell phone company, which then prompts them to eat most of the cost of the phone.
Otherwise, there's not a whole lot of incentive for them to subsidize you.
And if you don't want to be subsidized, you can buy your own phone (try EBay) and go month-to-month on the service.
One problem with Verizon phones, setting ethics aside, is that they're far too hard to steal with (they intentionally cripple their phones so that you have to use their pay-money network to put data on them).
With Cingular, you can put your pirated MP3s, pirated games, pirated movies onto the phone via bluetooth, without Cingular getting a cut of the money.
Basically, I see this as an economic trade-off. If you want flexibility between carriers, your phones cost more. If you want a cheap/free phone, you've got less flexibility to move between carriers.
I don't see a compelling reason why people should get 'the whole barn' for free.
I'd take a two-year contract on cable service, if it meant I could bargain for a free TiVo.