Verizon's response to FCC unsatisfactory and troubling, says Commissioner

Verizon's response to FCC unsatisfactory and troubling, says Commissioner
Mignon Clyburn is one of the 5 FCC Commissioners which means that anything she says regarding Verizon's written reply to the FCC for its $350 ETF and the $1.99 Mobile Web charges carries a bit of weight to it. And she is not happy, saying that Big Red's comments were, "unsatisfactory amd in some cases troubling." Not only does the Commissioner note that a triple digit ETF doesn't serve the public interest, she is "alarmed" that customers are being charged $1.99 for just merely heading to the Mobile Web home page without having a data plan. Verizon's response that such customers were not charged unless they jumped from the home page to another site, suggesting use of the Mobile Web, was met with,oh, let's call it a moderate degree of skepticism as the Commissioner writes, "press reports and consumer complaints strongly suggest otherwise. I look forward to exploring thisissue in greater depth with my colleagues in the New Year." Want to read the Commissioners letter? Check out the source link.and take notes on how to write a letter that will get results.

source: FCC via Engadget



91. DonLouie

Posts: 594; Member since: Dec 22, 2008

Some of these post defending the raise are good but they aren't what vzw is saying. They blame the raise on ads and other cost that have nothing to do with the cost of a phone, AT&T has the biggest subsidy out selling millions of them but they don't pass that cost onto their subs with a jacked up ETF. Come to think of it all post pay subs subsidize phones but only vzw is raising their fees

94. nosense

Posts: 53; Member since: Jul 19, 2009

Thank you, thats what I was saying and people started getting all defensive, the whole point of this article is verizon reasons for raising their etf, which is a dumb reason because every other carrier have found different and more reliable ways of doing it.

99. dubracer223

Posts: 46; Member since: Mar 16, 2009

they blame the raise on ads?? ive never heard that before... at all. if it has nothing to do with the phones then how can they ONLY charge it on SPECIFIC types of phones? now im just speculating but im thinking that att doesnt have to raise it yet but they will end up doing so later on. they just may not have a big enough spike in new adds to justify it yet.

90. s0nic69 unregistered

they got me like that in the past, they charged me 1.99 for just pressing on the wrong button. it took me to the verizon wireless site and they charged me 1.99. im glad that they want to stop that. to make sure it didnt happen to me again, i just called them and had them disable data on all my phones.

51. DonLouie

Posts: 594; Member since: Dec 22, 2008

I find it funny that they are passing advertising and other cost off in ETF's when they already have the highest service price and dismissing bogus fees as the subs fault

64. dongdou

Posts: 49; Member since: Jan 18, 2009

Lookup AT&T pricing the mirror Verizon. plus there data charge per mb is higher.

83. lomidr1

Posts: 1; Member since: Dec 26, 2009

ask yourself this question how can they be passing on advertising fees and other cost of doing business in etfs. What would happen if no one canceled and no etfs were collected? i guess no advertising or comissions for employees that month. No, etfs are designed to offset the price of the phone. As it was mentioned before if you do not want to have etf's or contract pay full retail for the phone and aliviate headaches

50. jherz6

Posts: 217; Member since: May 23, 2008

Does everyone forget that when you get cell phone service you sign a contract, and when doing so you obligate yourself? However I do agree that a etf of 350.00 is a bit steep just because you have a highend device. There are generally a few reasons why someone wants to early terminate. Firstly the service they pay for is poor dropped calls etc. Second there prices are to high and theyre able to find the same service for less elsewhere, and third the customer service, billing, they customers are treated is a bit lacking. When people sign up most service providers give you the device at a discount rather make you pay full price for the phone, and in having you obligate yourself gives them a chance to recoop some of that discount. So basicly dont do the crime if dont want to do the time. As far as the 1.99 mg fee there are data packages, and if your not a heavy user get a small one and then you dont have to worry about the 1.99.

59. dongdou

Posts: 49; Member since: Jan 18, 2009

The etf is not steep it actually makes up the price of the phone. secondly VZW will let you out of your contract if tech support cannot fix an issue with coverage for no ETF. And if the prices are too steep then find diff service before you pass the 30 day grace period Big red gives you. There are ways around it. peaople just need to wise up..

22. illallowit

Posts: 20; Member since: Dec 10, 2009

"Not only does the Commissioner note that a triple digit ETF doesn't serve the public interest..." Are you freakin kidding me? How did this person become the commissioner of anything? Even before they raised it, (and only for smart phones, as previously noted), it was at $175. Last time I checked that was still a triple digit number...and every other carrier charges the same or more. I am so tired of this entitlement mentality that so many Americans seem to have lately. It's a contract. If you break it, you are going to pay a fine. If you don't want a contract, don't sign one. Save up and pay retail for the phone you want. Oh but wait...that would mean having some discipline and paitence. We're Americans, we have to have everything now! And for free! lol.

24. BrokenImaege

Posts: 173; Member since: Jul 27, 2009

Thank You!!!!!! So true, so very true.........

12. vzwman

Posts: 385; Member since: Oct 26, 2009

How is Verizon loosing money if my bill for this month came at $505 and the bill for last month was at $645 Verizon I'm sorry to say but I'm getting tired of it

14. BrokenImaege

Posts: 173; Member since: Jul 27, 2009

I would have your bill reviewed by customer service to fix that. There has to be a way to bring your phone bill down

15. BrokenImaege

Posts: 173; Member since: Jul 27, 2009

It won't extend your contract either. Trust me, the customer wants a happy customer, not an unhappy one :-)

20. JocularJester

Posts: 40; Member since: Oct 28, 2009

ive been with vzw for more than 4 years and ive had a lot of different plans with as many as 4 ppl on my plan so vzwman, i just have to ask .... what kind of plan do you have that they would charge SO much each month?

21. vzw fanman

Posts: 1977; Member since: Dec 11, 2008

i have 4 lines and i pay about 200 a month. with a 20% discount.

25. BrokenImaege

Posts: 173; Member since: Jul 27, 2009

Company, not customer..... Sorry, been at work since 530 this morning.....

26. vzwman

Posts: 385; Member since: Oct 26, 2009

OK I got squared away now, I was able to get it down to 353 the problem is that when I did the bogo for the Eris the retarded Rep didn't apply the bogo discount instead he gave me a mail-n-rebate. Then they were charging me for some international text messaging Wich they gave me credit for.

38. Cali_E

Posts: 196; Member since: Sep 24, 2008

then go somewhere else. believe me, we dont need you. you cant blam a company because YOU don't sign up for the right plan for YOUR usage. everyone wants to be cheap and go on the lowest plans and go over them and then blam the company for they're high bills. it would be the same anywhere else you douchbag

40. vzwman

Posts: 385; Member since: Oct 26, 2009

A Cali e for your info I've bin with Verizon for 4 years and this is the first time this happens Oh and BTW the $$$$$$$ isn't an issue Homie

43. Illyich

Posts: 167; Member since: Oct 13, 2009

Cali, you must not have read his last post. Save your righteous fury for someone who deserves it, not this poor man. Also, you spelled 'douchebag' incorrectly.

44. vzwman

Posts: 385; Member since: Oct 26, 2009

Your a good man illyich Happy holidays to you

45. vzw fanman

Posts: 1977; Member since: Dec 11, 2008

you should be his friend on facebook vzw man.

46. vzwman

Posts: 385; Member since: Oct 26, 2009

LOL You and Facebook fanmam

11. WnnaFghtAboutIt

Posts: 149; Member since: Aug 31, 2009

verizon typically doesn not subsidize their phone prices as much as at&t, sprint, and tmobile. they typically rely ont he service to sell when people start playing bogo games....they can lose alot of money.... the etf is out there, you have an option....choose a less quality service provider, or a less quality phone... the fcc has always stepped in where there was a simple solution, levying fines to howard stern and opie n anthony or to cbs for jenet and justin...simple solution, change the channel... same solution here...

18. Striker13084

Posts: 128; Member since: Mar 30, 2009

not true! look at the touch pro 2, $100 dollars cheaper then all the other carriers.

10. BrokenImaege

Posts: 173; Member since: Jul 27, 2009

How about this to end all this ETF talk..... Lets just sign no contracts and pay full retail for every phone out there.... Lets make thsi happen!!!!! This way, its a win win for everyone, consumer and company alike. If you don't want an ETF, pay full retail and get no contract. Otherwise, stop the bitching and understand that you got the cheaper price for a reason........ Its funny, Europe for the longest time wasn't doing contracts and paid retail for phone and Asia still does.... You tell Americans this and there would be hell to pay...... People have options..... YOU don't get forced into a 2 year agreement, YOU choose it. YOU also choose the phone you use. YOU make the decision to be with a company. Plain and simple people..........

17. Striker13084

Posts: 128; Member since: Mar 30, 2009

agreed, the droid would probly have been like $300 after MIR. Seeing as the Storm at full retail was only like $470 and the droid is like $570, the Storm2 is $530, the price of smartphones is going up and if people want that cool advanced device, sorry, pay full retail.

9. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

You know what'd be nice? If the FCC would ask ATT and T mobile and Sprint about their ETFs. For instance, let's ask why none of them prorate their ETFs and why Sprint even has a 250 dollar ETF which never drops. The FCC is causing trouble for no reason.

33. PhoneUser

Posts: 78; Member since: Dec 11, 2008

Ok Sniggly apparently you dont know anything about Sprint. So let me inform you on whats going on. Sprint has an ETF of $200 not 250. Sprint does have a prorated ETF system, and this is how it goes. After the first 4 months the ETF will start to decrease by $10 each month. By the time you reach to your 23rd month you would only have to pay $50 if you wanted to cancel your contract. PLEASE do your homework and find out the TRUTH before you start saying things that aren't true and making your-self look like an idiot. I can't stand people that come on here and talk without knowing what really going on, its like some people just talk out of thier a**. This is why Sprint is smarter than Verizon when Sprint has a BOGO offer(and its not often) and a customer decides to cancel, with in the 30 days, they MUST bring back the SAME phone they got when they signed the contract or else they get charged for the phone's full retail price. Sounds to me like Big Red isn't doing that and that's why people are taking advantage of them. So who's fault is it that Verizon doesn't know how to conduct business, no one but them selfs. If they would do the same thing that Sprint is doing they would have NO problems with the BOGO scams. Like I said it's not fair that Verizon dosen't know how to conduct business so they are taking it out on "us" the customers.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless