[IP] more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Terminati on Fees Hurt Consumers
Begin forwarded message:
From: steven cherry <steven@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 16, 2005 10:56:47 AM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early
Terminati on Fees Hurt Consumers
Dave,
Nowhere in Mr Mills' whiny little rant does he acknowledge that all
the nationwide carriers let you "test drive" your phone for at least
two weeks before locking you into your contract. If the carrier you
picked doesn't have good coverage in your home, around your
neighborhood, at work, and other key (for you) locations, it
shouldn't take you more than two weeks to figure that out.
Mills asks, "If I buy a car and then return it because it doesn't
work, should the dealer be able to charge me a fee for selling it to
me?" as if his family's phones don't work at all. But the problem is
they don't work in a way that meets his not-necessarily-reasonable
expectations. Mills is buying a Miata and then complaining it doesn't
hold a family of five. If he then bought a mini-van, he'd complain
about its gas consumption and how long it takes to get up to highway
speed.
Every phone store I've ever walked into has a big map for each of the
services that are sold there, with huge disclaimers that the maps are
only approximations and not guarantees of coverage. How much more of
a clue does Mills need that not every phone sold by each carrier
works in every location?
I don't mind that Mills doesn't look at maps, doesn't listen to
salespeople, and doesn't read his contract. But he might want to do
at least one of those things before publishing articles on a subject,
or at least before cluttering up the IP list with them.
--
Steven Cherry, +1 212-419-7566
Senior Associate Editor
IEEE Spectrum, 3 Park Ave, New York, NY 10016
<s.cherry@xxxxxxxx> <http://www.spectrum.ieee.org>
On Oct 16, 2005, at 9:53 AM, David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mike Mills <MMills@xxxxxx>
Date: October 16, 2005 9:38:11 AM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: more on Locked In a Cell: How Cell Phone Early Terminati
on Fees Hurt Consumers
CQ WEEKLY
Oct. 17, 2005 - Page 2766
Give Me a Cell Break
By Mike Mills, CQ Columnist
I am not happy with my family's cell phone service. My wife and
teenage daughter complain all the time about spotty coverage and
dropped calls. I've stopped using my mobile phone completely,
relying instead on my employer's Blackberry, which uses a more
dependable network. If only I could fire my family's cellular phone
provider and get a new one.
But I can't. Doing so would cost me an early termination fee of
$150 per phone, or $450. So unless I want to pay their ransom, I'm
stuck with this lemon of a carrier until November 2006, when my
three two-year contracts expire.
But don't feel sorry for me. Feel sorry for a guy named Jerome in
Riverside, Calif., who posted his story on ConsumerAffairs.com: He
signed a two-year deal with his carrier, only to quickly find there
was no coverage within two miles of his home. "In this situation I
will pay for not receiving service, no matter what," he wrote.
[....]
I'm all for this free-market thing: I'm a consumer, after all, and
I want as many companies as possible beating each other's brains
out to win me as a customer. But since when, in a free-market, does
any company have a guaranteed right to recoup its costs - even when
an unsatisfied customer wants to leave early because of shoddy
service? If I buy a car and then return it because it doesn't work,
should the dealer be able to charge me a fee for selling it to me?
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/