New Activation fee

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10, Verizon will
charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract. Anyone heard
this or know if it is true?

 

[Brad]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.



"Retsamxim" <retsamxim@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040504151755.08632.00000707@mb-m11.aol.com...
> I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10, Verizon
will
> charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract. Anyone
heard
> this or know if it is true?

 

[_KC_]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Brad" <brad@home.com> wrote in message
news:TRSlc.21898$Ia6.3182065@attbi_s03...
> I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.


He said effective May 10. And yes its true.


KC

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

_KC_ <kc@kc.com> wrote:
>
> "Brad" <brad@home.com> wrote in message
> news:TRSlc.21898$Ia6.3182065@attbi_s03...
>> I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.
>
> He said effective May 10. And yes its true.

Kinda proves my theory that Verizon is slowly taking away freebies which is
not a good thing considering that they're already the most expensive US
carrier.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol wrote:
> _KC_ <kc@kc.com> wrote:
>
>>"Brad" <brad@home.com> wrote in message
>>news:TRSlc.21898$Ia6.3182065@attbi_s03...
>>
>>>I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.
>>
>>He said effective May 10. And yes its true.
>
>
> Kinda proves my theory that Verizon is slowly taking away freebies which is
> not a good thing considering that they're already the most expensive US
> carrier.
>

The price of good coverage, eh?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

ken moffat <kmoffat@drizzle.com> wrote:
>>>>I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.
>>>
>>>He said effective May 10. And yes its true.
>>
>> Kinda proves my theory that Verizon is slowly taking away freebies which is
>> not a good thing considering that they're already the most expensive US
>> carrier.
>
> The price of good coverage, eh?

I'm already paying for that coverage through higher monthly prices, and
switching anyhow because the coverage isn't quite good enough in a few spots
where I use my phone all the time. To take away freebies and justify it by
saying "well, we already have the best network, you shouldn't have a problem
paying more" is BS. Number one, although I agree that Verizon rules the roost
in many markets across the country, there are places where they have
significant problems. Number two, what are these activation fees going to
pay for that Verizon wasn't already figuring into their monthly costs?

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol wrote:
> ken moffat <kmoffat@drizzle.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.
>>>>
>>>>He said effective May 10. And yes its true.
>>>
>>>Kinda proves my theory that Verizon is slowly taking away freebies which is
>>>not a good thing considering that they're already the most expensive US
>>>carrier.
>>
>>The price of good coverage, eh?
>
>
> I'm already paying for that coverage through higher monthly prices,
....
what are these activation fees going to
> pay for that Verizon wasn't already figuring into their monthly costs?
>

I guess they figure the market will bear it, but it won't effect those
already with Verizon, and maybe they don't have a problem attracting new
members, no matter what they charge.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

ken moffat <kmoffat@drizzle.com> wrote:

> I guess they figure the market will bear it, but it won't effect those
> already with Verizon, and maybe they don't have a problem attracting new
> members, no matter what they charge.

I'd say that's an excellent guess and is probably correct. But does it
not affect those already with Verizon? I'm not so sure. I added a line
for free last year, on a Family Share plan. Are we talking about new customers
only or are we talking about new lines for existing customers too?

That's part of the reason I'm switching too, albeit not a big one (the big
issue is coverage in a couple places around Apple Valley and Victorville).

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:gs-dnZrHzJoouQXdRVn-uw@lmi.net...
> _KC_ <kc@kc.com> wrote:
> >
> > "Brad" <brad@home.com> wrote in message
> > news:TRSlc.21898$Ia6.3182065@attbi_s03...
> >> I signed up April 26 and I did not get charged that fee.
> >
> > He said effective May 10. And yes its true.
>
> Kinda proves my theory that Verizon is slowly taking away freebies which
is
> not a good thing considering that they're already the most expensive US
> carrier.

Verizon's been nibbling around the edges in a number of ways. I have an 8 PM
start for night rates, but you can't get that today. It's a thing of the
past. Each phone in aan AC family plan used to get 250 M2M minutes, but not
anymore. The cheapest family plan started out at $55, and now it's $60. Now,
if you want a detailed paper bill, you'll pay extra for it. Calling to check
your voice mail from your cell phone used to come out of the M2M bucket...
not anymore. To be honest, if I was shopping for service today, I'd pass on
Verizon. They don't have a plan that fits my usage needs at a price I'd be
willing to pay!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol wrote:
> To take away freebies and justify it by saying "well, we already
> have the best network, you shouldn't have a problem paying
> more" is BS.

You just don't get it do you? They don't have to justify anything
and you don't have to buy their service. Pretty simple right?
This is not a disagreement about what you think you paid for
and what they are providing. Or do you think you are paying
for the person to manage the gripe line? "That's OK Steve...
Everything is going to be OK Steve... I feel your pain Steve..." -

Cellular phone service is not a necessity. Cellular providers do
not have a monopoly or exclusive contracts for areas. It's not
like the electric or gas company.

And how does one "take away a freebie"? It was free in the
first place. Now they are charging for it. You should think of
it as an increase in the price of their service. This is "BS"?
How is this different from a promotion they no longer offer?

> Number two, what are these activation fees going to pay for that
> Verizon wasn't already figuring into their monthly costs?

Does it matter? Do you care? If they said they were going to use
it to make a contribution to the Save The Whales Foundation would
you feel better about it? What if they said it was simply to increase
revenue and they thought people would pay it while they still maintained
their market share? Let me guess. "Those scum! Those dirty rotten
scum! I knew thats what they were doing! They have more money
than I do and they want to make even more than that! Can you
believe it!". I didn't know that they had to report their monthly costs
to you as a customer. I also didn't know that they had to tie any
service charges to a monthly cost?

This was not the *real* Steven Sobol that posted this right?

-Quick

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:b5ydnXVBNahZ1wXdRVn-sA@lmi.net...
> Number two, what are these activation fees going to
> pay for that Verizon wasn't already figuring into their monthly costs?

Come now, since when have any of the fees been related to anything other
than increasing revenue. Let's face it, a $15 activation fee isn't going to
make a lot of difference in the choice of a carrier. Plus, they will
probably waive it if the customer makes a fuss about it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
:
: To take away freebies and justify it by
: saying "well, we already have the best network, you shouldn't have a problem
: paying more" is BS.

Isn't that how a free market works? Supply and demand... what the market
will bear, etc.

The simple economics of it are this: If they can get enough customers to
sign up despite the paltry (and $15 ain't much) fee, then why not?

If the fees drive people away (and I doubt they will) then they'll see
that it was a mistake and remove it. Otherwise, it's just not good
business to give things away if you can charge for 'em. Like it or not!

-Charles

--
Charles Robinson
Minneapolis, MN
charlesr@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~charlesr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 2004-05-05, Joe Kaffe <kaffejoe@yahoo.com> wrote:
> if you want a detailed paper bill, you'll pay extra for it. Calling to check
> your voice mail from your cell phone used to come out of the M2M bucket...
> not anymore. To be honest, if I was shopping for service today, I'd pass on

I still cant believe that people are complaining about this STILL. Who cares.
If you're that concerned about checking your voice minutes, call from a landline
other than that, the 2 minutes to check your voice mail isnt going to kill you.

--
______ ______
..-----.|__ ||__ | eXistenZ32
| -__||__ || __|
|_____||______||______|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"eXistenZ32" <fakefakefake@notahost.transparentmeat.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc9i3vu.kka.fakefakefake@jimothy.synack.org...
> On 2004-05-05, Joe Kaffe <kaffejoe@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > if you want a detailed paper bill, you'll pay extra for it. Calling to
check
> > your voice mail from your cell phone used to come out of the M2M
bucket...
> > not anymore. To be honest, if I was shopping for service today, I'd pass
on
>
> I still cant believe that people are complaining about this STILL. Who
cares.
> If you're that concerned about checking your voice minutes, call from a
landline
> other than that, the 2 minutes to check your voice mail isnt going to kill
you.

The point is that it's another way Verizon nibbles away. Most people don't
even think of the ramifications of such a policy. 2 minutes multiplied by
"x" times per month could very well be enough additional usage to cause
someone to exceed their minutes. The result for the user is less bang for
the buck, no matter how you look at it!

 

[_KC_]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"eXistenZ32" <fakefakefake@notahost.transparentmeat.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc9i3vu.kka.fakefakefake@jimothy.synack.org...
> On 2004-05-05, Joe Kaffe <kaffejoe@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > if you want a detailed paper bill, you'll pay extra for it. Calling to
check
> > your voice mail from your cell phone used to come out of the M2M
bucket...
> > not anymore. To be honest, if I was shopping for service today, I'd pass
on
>
> I still cant believe that people are complaining about this STILL. Who
cares.
> If you're that concerned about checking your voice minutes, call from a
landline
> other than that, the 2 minutes to check your voice mail isnt going to kill
you.


For high volume users I could see where it could have a drastic effect on
their minutes but for people like me, its not a big deal. I have to check
my VM maybe 3 times a week during peak times, so it may cost me a total of
20 mins a month.



KC

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
> "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
> news:b5ydnXVBNahZ1wXdRVn-sA@lmi.net...
>> Number two, what are these activation fees going to
>> pay for that Verizon wasn't already figuring into their monthly costs?
>
> Come now, since when have any of the fees been related to anything other
> than increasing revenue. Let's face it, a $15 activation fee isn't going to
> make a lot of difference in the choice of a carrier. Plus, they will
> probably waive it if the customer makes a fuss about it.

Alright, part of my issue is that they've known for months about serious
dropped-call issues around the intersection of Hesperia and Bear Valley Roads
in Victorville. While much of the Apple Valley/Victorville area, like all of
the High Desert, is hilly, being surrounded by mountains, this particular area
is flat and it's an extremely busy area, with lots of retail and other
businesses. Going to start charging people more, VZW? Spend some of that money
and fix my damned dropped call problem already - I'm tired of calling and
attempting to cajole CSRs into filing trouble tickets. (Most will do so
without me having to beg, but there are a few that apparently don't like to)

**SJS (calling CS again, after having experienced another dropped call.
I have just sat and complained for a few minutes about the lack of resolution
to my problem, and the CSR is getting a tech on the phone now, so we'll see
how this shakes out. Hopefully it'll be resolved.)

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Quick <dhorwitz@nospamcisco.com> wrote:
> Steven J Sobol wrote:
>> To take away freebies and justify it by saying "well, we already
>> have the best network, you shouldn't have a problem paying
>> more" is BS.
>
> You just don't get it do you? They don't have to justify anything
> and you don't have to buy their service. Pretty simple right?

I do understand that, and I'm planning on moving my service anyhow,
since I'm having some other issues. I'm still allowed to complain,
though... wouldn't you agree?

> This is not a disagreement about what you think you paid for
> and what they are providing. Or do you think you are paying
> for the person to manage the gripe line? "That's OK Steve...
> Everything is going to be OK Steve... I feel your pain Steve..." -

You're a riot. No, I don't expect some Verizon CSR to call me
in response to that post and say "It's okay, we'll change all
our policies just because you don't like them..."

> Does it matter? Do you care? If they said they were going to use
> it to make a contribution to the Save The Whales Foundation would
> you feel better about it?

It was a rhetorical question. And no, I hate whales, so I'd still be
pissed.

> This was not the *real* Steven Sobol that posted this right?

Read the post that I just made a minute or two earlier, if it's hit
your news server. I'm having other issues, including some coverage
issues that I've complained about multiple times. If I thought they
were spending some of the money they're making fixing my problem, I'd
be a LOT less inclined to whine.



--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The dr is embarrassed to say that "officially" we are not allowed to comment
on pre-release information. I'm absolutely sure that the VZW "watchers" are
looking for reasons to terminate people for breach of confidentiality and
are in this notes file under various alias. Therefore, I can add "no
comment" to this rumour.

PS: To the "watchers": Did I do good? Or should I just ignore difficult
questions....

The dr.

"Retsamxim" <retsamxim@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040504151755.08632.00000707@mb-m11.aol.com...
> I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10, Verizon
will
> charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract. Anyone
heard
> this or know if it is true?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Dr.wireMORE" <Dr.wireMORE@VZW-MidWESTma.com> wrote in message
news:1Kjmc.3410$eH1.1915059@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
> The dr is embarrassed to say that "officially" we are not allowed to
comment
> on pre-release information. I'm absolutely sure that the VZW "watchers"
are
> looking for reasons to terminate people for breach of confidentiality and
> are in this notes file under various alias. Therefore, I can add "no
> comment" to this rumour.
>
> PS: To the "watchers": Did I do good? Or should I just ignore difficult
> questions....
>
> The dr.

Why does "the Dr." feel compeled to post the fact that he has nothing to
add? "The Giambi" finds it useless and annoying.. as well as the whole
'Ricky Be Rickey' third person thing.
--
Jason G
Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
Remove 'WINNER' to reply.

> "Retsamxim" <retsamxim@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20040504151755.08632.00000707@mb-m11.aol.com...
> > I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10,
Verizon
> will
> > charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract.
Anyone
> heard
> > this or know if it is true?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Giambi: have a nice day. The dr. (small "d')

"Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7cl89$274cf$1@ID-192805.news.uni-berlin.de...

<snip>
> Why does "the Dr." feel compeled to post the fact that he has nothing to
> add? "The Giambi" finds it useless and annoying.. as well as the whole
> 'Ricky Be Rickey' third person thing.
> --
> Jason G
> Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
> Remove 'WINNER' to reply.
>
> > "Retsamxim" <retsamxim@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20040504151755.08632.00000707@mb-m11.aol.com...
> > > I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10,
> Verizon
> > will
> > > charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract.
> Anyone
> > heard
> > > this or know if it is true?
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The Giambi offers that 'Dr.' is capitalized in the From field on every
post.. and The Giambi is also upset that "The Dr." did not 'offer' for The
Giambi to have a nice day, as is "The Dr.'s" custom. The Giambi will now go
cry in his _own_ self-important third person corner.

<TheO.C.speak on> This is how we do it in "The Newsgroup", Beyotch!
</TheO.C.speak off>
--
Jason G
Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
Remove 'WINNER' to reply.

"Dr.wireMORE" <Dr.wireMORE@VZW-MidWESTma.com> wrote in message
news:4mDmc.4043$eH1.2115149@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
> Giambi: have a nice day. The dr. (small "d')
>
> "Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c7cl89$274cf$1@ID-192805.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> <snip>
> > Why does "the Dr." feel compeled to post the fact that he has nothing to
> > add? "The Giambi" finds it useless and annoying.. as well as the whole
> > 'Ricky Be Rickey' third person thing.
> > --
> > Jason G
> > Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
> > Remove 'WINNER' to reply.
> >
> > > "Retsamxim" <retsamxim@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > news:20040504151755.08632.00000707@mb-m11.aol.com...
> > > > I read on the Phonescoop.com bulletin board that starting May 10,
> > Verizon
> > > will
> > > > charge new customers a $15 activation fee for a two year contract.
> > Anyone
> > > heard
> > > > this or know if it is true?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>