SmartPhones Data Plan Mandate Class Action Lawsuit? (AT&T, Verizon, Sprint)

[ant1pathy]

Yeah but what the carriers are doing is the equivalent of requiring Caller ID/DSL even for Caller ID capable phones and computers that you bought unsubsidized.

The number of customers that would rather pay full price for a phone to not use the required features is extremely small. It's not worth the headache of catering to. T-Mobile has done so because they're a smaller carrier losing subs, and needed to do something different (and something popular with the demographic they draw as well). People just don't like to pay $500+ for a phone in order to save $10 or so a month.

[awj223]

The number of customers that would rather pay full price for a phone to not use the required features is extremely small. It's not worth the headache of catering to. T-Mobile has done so because they're a smaller carrier losing subs, and needed to do something different (and something popular with the demographic they draw as well). People just don't like to pay $500+ for a phone in order to save $10 or so a month.

True. I realize that I'm in the minority (actually I'm not in that group at all, because I paid full price for my phone but I use a data plan anyway). What really pisses me off is that ATT continues to gouge me for the same amount as people who took equipment subsidies, month after month, and doesn't even give the the option of taking cash back in exchange for signing a contract.

[efparri]

Why should they give cash back for a contract? The intent of contracts is to have a guaranteed revenue stream for the length of the contract. People usually don't want contracts because they want to switch carriers without additional costs, do not like the phone choices or want to save money on required features. Since you got the features anyway, it was foolish to spend extra money for a phone similar to the one offered by the carrier at a discount. Since current money is usually worth more than future money, it is preferable to pay with cheaper dollars in the future if the total cost is the same.

[lusec]

Hey, you brought up the analogy of a private road which did not match what the carriers are doing.

I just want to show the judge that these companies are getting inline after each other in pricing and data requirement to limit consumer choice and competition.

I brought up private roads because you can privately own some road. You made up a situation that cannot happen, thus your analogy is faulty. People that have farms own/build the only road that lead to their farm from a highway. You name a place where the only road leading to publicly owned point B its privately owned.

[awj223]

Why should they give cash back for a contract? The intent of contracts is to have a guaranteed revenue stream for the length of the contract.

Are you that dense that you cannot understand such a simple concept? They usually give you a subsidy on equipment, anywhere from $200-300. So why not just give people the option of taking, say, $150 in cash in exchange for signing a 2 year contract? The $150 you get for signing the contract is less than the $175 you'd pay to terminate it, so no one's going to just sign it to get the bucks with the intent to cancel, and AT&T gets a guaranteed revenue stream from the customer for 2 years instead of having said customer on month-to-month. That's good for the carrier because carriers want customers to be locked in.

People usually don't want contracts because they want to switch carriers without additional costs, do not like the phone choices or want to save money on required features. Since you got the features anyway, it was foolish to spend extra money for a phone similar to the one offered by the carrier at a discount.

No, it would have been foolish to spend ANY money on a phone offered by the carrier with all of the CRAPware they load onto it, and with tethering disabled unless I root the phone. None of the phones the carrier offers have all of the phone features I want.

Since current money is usually worth more than future money, it is preferable to pay with cheaper dollars in the future if the total cost is the same.

Okay, an alternative would be to sign a contract, and receive $150-175 in cash at the completion of the contract. Doesn't matter, you can always adjust the amounts of money to account for future dollars vs. present dollars. Or, sign a contract w/o taking a subsidy and receive a monthly discount on service, but only as long as you are in the contract (when the contract expires, so does the monthly discount, unless you sign another contract). Of course a $175 ETF would still apply to discourage customers in contract from leaving (so AT&T gets its guaranteed revenue stream), but the point is to let customers who are sure they will stay with the carrier get something back IF they don't take an equipment subsidy.

Where are the environmental groups on this one? With lots of old cell phones junking up our landfills, I'd think they'd be all over a plan like this.

[efparri]

None of the features you mention are worth spending extra money to get. Phones are primarily for making voice calls. Use a data card for connecting a computer to the Internet. You are limiting a phone's primary function by tethering it to a computer.

[awj223]

None of the features you mention are worth spending extra money to get. Phones are primarily for making voice calls. Use a data card for connecting a computer to the Internet. You are limiting a phone's primary function by tethering it to a computer.

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you, or anyone else, post here on this forum. Yeah, I'm limiting a phone's primary function by making sure that it can do stuff beyond its primary function.

My phone works just fine as a voice device, thank you. And, it even works as a voice device WHILE it's tethered to my computer, so in no way is any of its function being limited by tethering it. In fact, it's capable of surfing the net (on the phone browser), tethering to a computer, AND making a voice call at the same time. LOL.

[killerdraft]

He is an iphone user ... they are not used to quality devices

[XFF]

He is an iphone user ... they are not used to quality devices

Nonsense! You can do all three of those things simultaneously just fine on an iPhone.

[ParthG]

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you, or anyone else, post here on this forum. Yeah, I'm limiting a phone's primary function by making sure that it can do stuff beyond its primary function.

My phone works just fine as a voice device, thank you. And, it even works as a voice device WHILE it's tethered to my computer, so in no way is any of its function being limited by tethering it. In fact, it's capable of surfing the net (on the phone browser), tethering to a computer, AND making a voice call at the same time. LOL.

Might as well get Seth the Blogger to post here!

[duhjeff]

I am wondering if anyone has information about the whole process of a class action lawsuit?... Who should I contact and how do people normally get together to file a class action lawsuit?

With the new announcement from Verizon about Tiered Data Plan there are more evidence that the three major carriers AT&T, Verizon and Sprint have formed a cartel.

All these companies do the following:

- Require all customers with a “Smart Phones” (Including UNSUBSIDIZED) to have a minimal data plan regardless if you use it or not.
- Do not allow the placement of data block and opting out of the data plan.
- Taking advantage of markets where they are the only company compatible with their customers handset (Ex: AT&T where T-mobile or other GSM carrier is not present)
- Taking advantage that they are the 3 major carriers and having the same data plan mandate to tie customers to their companies.
- Limiting consumer choice.

I have seen in a lot of forums where people being mad that they are unable to use or get a smartphone and use WiFi only without paying for something that they do not need.

I understand that cell phone carriers need to make money, but they should not do it through price fixing in this free market economy. Do they want to win customers?... win them with flexible product, services and prices and not through mandates and unfair policies/business practices.

P.S

I know that there is going to be someone popping out and saying “If you can’t afford data plan, don’t get an smart phone” or “Don’t buy a Ferrari if you can’t afford gas”

Here is my answer for you: I may or may not to be able to afford data plan, however, I am able to afford to pay full price for a smart phone and I should be able to use it what ever I want. I do not have to pay AT&T, Verizon or Sprint for services that I don’t need.

We live in a free country where I should be able to get the phone that I want (without subsidy) and use it as I want, without causing detriment to the carriers.

I don't see a problem of customer bring their own equipment in and ask for data opt out. it's a free country and its your choice to do so..

and the right arguement is that people want "PDA" phones at a "normal" price and don't want the data. that's the problem there... it's more like "i want ferrari @ hyandai price but i also don't want to pay for the premium gas".

[efparri]

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you, or anyone else, post here on this forum. Yeah, I'm limiting a phone's primary function by making sure that it can do stuff beyond its primary function.

My phone works just fine as a voice device, thank you. And, it even works as a voice device WHILE it's tethered to my computer, so in no way is any of its function being limited by tethering it. In fact, it's capable of surfing the net (on the phone browser), tethering to a computer, AND making a voice call at the same time. LOL.

If you are in a non-3G area, which seems to be a complaint with AT&T, your voice calls go to voicemail if you are actively transferring data. If you are making a voice call, your data session is interrupted if you are in a non-3G area. If you use Bluetooth for tethering, your Bluetooth headset does not work. If you use a cable, you no longer have a mobile phone.

[CA]

Ah, what we have here is a LogicBox with endless scrolling and no real answer, but a good show!

[fansntt]

I don't see a problem of customer bring their own equipment in and ask for data opt out. it's a free country and its your choice to do so..

and the right arguement is that people want "PDA" phones at a "normal" price and don't want the data. that's the problem there... it's more like "i want ferrari @ hyandai price but i also don't want to pay for the premium gas".

As you said.. this country is free and who's business is to tell me that I can't buy a ferrari to have park it at home and not to pay for premium gas?

[fansntt]

Also what I was thinking. I do not see why or how the FCC could block a tower from being built in this situation.

I will ask my friend again... I think he meant the spectrum.