> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
> (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts early.
> The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to customers who
> have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one or two year contract.

> The penalty will decrease by $10 for each month of service completed. If a
> customer completes five months of service, the penalty would be reduced to
> $300, for example.
> The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, “is insane,” says
> Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA’s largest consumer group. “There’s
> no justification” for a fee that high, he says. “It’s punitive to
> customers who decide to leave Verizon early.”

> Not so says Verizon. “This has to do with the cost we pay for the device,”
> says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes, can buy a
> subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon pays to
> Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, “is far north of that,” he
> says.

> The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down retail
> costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their contracts
> early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200. It was
> established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks and other
> advanced devices didn’t exist, Gerace says.

> Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as standard
> cellphones, won’t change. The current ETF is $175, and it decreases by $5
> a month for each month of the contract’s term that is completed.

> Kelsey says he’s unimpressed. “ETFs are already too high,” he says. “This
> ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."

> Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
> including smart devices, are available without a contract at a full,
> unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The Blackberry
> Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year contract and, soon, a
> $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539 -- with no contract or ETF.

> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
> (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts
> early.  The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to
> customers who have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one or
> two year contract.

> The penalty will decrease by $10 for each month of service completed.
> If a customer completes five months of service, the penalty would be
> reduced to $300, for example.
> The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, “is insane,”
> says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA’s largest consumer group.
> “There’s no justification” for a fee that high, he says. “It’s
> punitive to customers who decide to leave Verizon early.”

> Not so says Verizon. “This has to do with the cost we pay for the
> device,” says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes, can
> buy a subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon pays to
> Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, “is far north of that,”
> he says.

> The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down retail
> costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their contracts
> early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200. It was
> established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks and other
> advanced devices didn’t exist, Gerace says.

> Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as standard
> cellphones, won’t change. The current ETF is $175, and it decreases by
> $5 a month for each month of the contract’s term that is completed.

> Kelsey says he’s unimpressed. “ETFs are already too high,” he says.
> “This ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."

> Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
> including smart devices, are available without a contract at a full,
> unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The
> Blackberry Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year
> contract and, soon, a $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539 --
> with no contract or ETF.

>> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
>> (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts
>> early. The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to
>> customers who have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one
>> or two year contract. The penalty will decrease by $10 for each month of
>> service
>> completed. If a customer completes five months of service, the
>> penalty would be reduced to $300, for example.
>> The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, "is insane,"
>> says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA's largest consumer
>> group. "There's no justification" for a fee that high, he says.
>> "It's punitive to customers who decide to leave Verizon early."

>> Not so says Verizon. "This has to do with the cost we pay for the
>> device," says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes, can
>> buy a subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon pays
>> to Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, "is far north of
>> that," he says.

>> The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down retail
>> costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their
>> contracts early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200.
>> It was established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks
>> and other advanced devices didn't exist, Gerace says.

>> Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as standard
>> cellphones, won't change. The current ETF is $175, and it decreases
>> by $5 a month for each month of the contract's term that is
>> completed. Kelsey says he's unimpressed. "ETFs are already too high," he
>> says.
>> "This ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."

>> Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
>> including smart devices, are available without a contract at a full,
>> unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The
>> Blackberry Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year
>> contract and, soon, a $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539
>> -- with no contract or ETF.

> I don't have a problem with them subsidizing the cost of a device,
> which I'm paying for as part of my monthly service charge, but once
> my two year term is up, unless I get another subsidized device, my
> service charges should go down, as I'm no longer paying for a
> subsidized device, but they don't

> Nobody runs their business that way and neither do you, supposing you have
> one.  If you're not happy with the rules, either don't play or take the new
> phone. Vz is a profit-making company, not a public service.  They have a
> right to not adjust your monthly rate. Those rules are explained right up
> front. Get over it.

> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
> (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts
> early.  The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to
> customers who have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one or
> two year contract.

> And in fact, the phone is not locked to Verizon's prepaid service.  It
> may be locked to the Verizon network, but it works just fine with
> PagePlus prepaid service.  Therefore, the whole "we're subsidizing the
> cost so you'll use our service" thing is fishy right from the beginning.

> That was the way it was after my last contract expired.  And I did
> drop service for several years.  I called VZN the other day to
> re-up and was told I could get a higher no contract rate or go for
> a term contract and get a package rate and be subject to early
> terminate fee if I canceled before the end of the term.

> So what am I missing? (other than a clued in CS rep?)

>> Nobody runs their business that way and neither do you, supposing
>> you have one.  If you're not happy with the rules, either don't play
>> or take the new phone. Vz is a profit-making company, not a public
>> service.  They have a right to not adjust your monthly rate. Those
>> rules are explained right up front. Get over it.

> Actually, mobile companies in many (most?) other countries run their
> business exactly like that.  Plans which aren't paying for a phone are
> cheaper than equivalent plans which came with a phone.  Even in the US
> T-Mobile gives you a $10/month break on their contract-free,
> no-phone-subsidy plans now.

> Unfortunately the market in the US doesn't seem to be as intensely
> price-competitive as other places so the carriers can mostly get
> away with taking higher margins from out-of-contract customers.

> Dennis Ferguson

>> "XS11E" <xs11...@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9CBDB58EE3D46xs11eyahoocom@127.0.0.1...
>>> "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong if if I have my own phone I'm still
>>>> subject to the ETF.

>>> You're wrong.  You can sign on to VZW w/o a contract if you have
>>> your own phone, exactly the situation that I'm in now.

>> That was the way it was after my last contract expired.  And I did
>> drop service for several years.  I called VZN the other day to
>> re-up and was told I could get a higher no contract rate or go for
>> a term contract and get a package rate and be subject to early
>> terminate fee if I canceled before the end of the term.

>> So what am I missing? (other than a clued in CS rep?)

> A clued CS rep.  I'm paying EXACTLY the same rate for the same plan
> that I had when I left but I didn't drop service for as long as you
> did.

>> I don't understand what about Verizon's position consumers don't
>> get. The phones are expensive. Verizon subsidizes them if you take a
>> plan, which is by the way, a contract. Not a one-way contract, but
>> one with obligations by both parties. If you want to break your end
>> of the contract, you must pay for the phone. What's so hard to grasp
>> about that?

> What's wrong here is that the numbers VZW claims are the prices of the
> gear are just random numbers, pulled out of their asses to make some
> spreadsheet work.

> Example:  go to VZW's site and look for the Samsung Smooth 350.
> $70--but "FREE with two year contract!"  Right?  Seventy dollars.

> The very same phone is available on the shelf at Walmart and Target
> for $20 ($17 on sale), for use with Verizon prepaid service.

> And in fact, the phone is not locked to Verizon's prepaid service.  It
> may be locked to the Verizon network, but it works just fine with
> PagePlus prepaid service.  Therefore, the whole "we're subsidizing the
> cost so you'll use our service" thing is fishy right from the
> beginning.

> So, Carl, what is the real price of that particular phone--is it $70?
> Or is it $17?

> That $70 number that VZW puts out on its web site is just a random
> number, with no actual connection to VZW's cost of doing business in
> any way.  They just decided to price it along the random continuum of
> prices that they claim their phones "should" cost or "would cost if
> you bought it without a contract".  No, it absolutely DOESN'T cost
> $70 if you bought it without a contract. It would cost $17.

> So that $540 Blackberry crap that someone mentioned earlier--that's
> just crap, nothing more.  It's just a random price they've chosen,
> with zero relationship to any real cost of doing business with that
> phone.

> Don't worry--just as the banks are getting their comeuppance, so will
> the cell providers who play these games.

> Right now, data and smartphones are the hot things.  Voice-only phones
> are so last year, so you can get them for a song and put them on dirt
> cheap prepaid services like PagePlus, and have all the voice service
> you can possible imagine.  Soon enough, smartphones will go the same
> way, and you'll see some realistic prices start filtering through the
> system.

> What's so hard to grasp about all of this?

> But before you answer that, first you have to tell us what the real
> price of the Samsung Smooth should be--$70 or $17.  More importantly,
> tell us why, and tell us why it's advertised and available at the
> OTHER price.

>>> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
>>> (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts
>>> early. The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to
>>> customers who have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one
>>> or two year contract. The penalty will decrease by $10 for each month of
>>> service
>>> completed. If a customer completes five months of service, the
>>> penalty would be reduced to $300, for example.
>>> The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, "is insane,"
>>> says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA's largest consumer
>>> group. "There's no justification" for a fee that high, he says.
>>> "It's punitive to customers who decide to leave Verizon early."

>>> Not so says Verizon. "This has to do with the cost we pay for the
>>> device," says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes, can
>>> buy a subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon pays
>>> to Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, "is far north of
>>> that," he says.

>>> The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down retail
>>> costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their
>>> contracts early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200.
>>> It was established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks
>>> and other advanced devices didn't exist, Gerace says.

>>> Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as standard
>>> cellphones, won't change. The current ETF is $175, and it decreases
>>> by $5 a month for each month of the contract's term that is
>>> completed. Kelsey says he's unimpressed. "ETFs are already too high," he
>>> says.
>>> "This ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."

>>> Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
>>> including smart devices, are available without a contract at a full,
>>> unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The
>>> Blackberry Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year
>>> contract and, soon, a $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539
>>> -- with no contract or ETF.

>> I don't have a problem with them subsidizing the cost of a device,
>> which I'm paying for as part of my monthly service charge, but once
>> my two year term is up, unless I get another subsidized device, my
>> service charges should go down, as I'm no longer paying for a
>> subsidized device, but they don't

> Nobody runs their business that way and neither do you, supposing you have
> one.  If you're not happy with the rules, either don't play or take the
> new phone. Vz is a profit-making company, not a public service.  They have
> a right to not adjust your monthly rate. Those rules are explained right
> up front. Get over it.

> "Carl" <croth...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4af75c30$0$5017$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> : Jim_Higgins wrote:
> : > Verizon Wireless doubles early termination fee
> : > http://preview.tinyurl.com/yg57yz4
> : >
> : > Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination fee
> : > (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone contracts
> : > early.  The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays, applies to
> : > customers who have a smart phone or other advanced device on a one or
> : > two year contract.
> : >
> : > The penalty will decrease by $10 for each month of service completed.
> : > If a customer completes five months of service, the penalty would be
> : > reduced to $300, for example.
> : > The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, “is insane,”
> : > says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA’s largest consumer group.
> : > “There’s no justification” for a fee that high, he says. “It’s
> : > punitive to customers who decide to leave Verizon early.”
> : >
> : > Not so says Verizon. “This has to do with the cost we pay for the
> : > device,” says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes, can
> : > buy a subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon pays to
> : > Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, “is far north of that,”
> : > he says.
> : >
> : > The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down retail
> : > costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their contracts
> : > early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200. It was
> : > established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks and other
> : > advanced devices didn’t exist, Gerace says.
> : >
> : > Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as standard
> : > cellphones, won’t change. The current ETF is $175, and it decreases by
> : > $5 a month for each month of the contract’s term that is completed.
> : >
> : > Kelsey says he’s unimpressed. “ETFs are already too high,” he says.
> : > “This ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."
> : >
> : > Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
> : > including smart devices, are available without a contract at a full,
> : > unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The
> : > Blackberry Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year
> : > contract and, soon, a $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539 --
> : > with no contract or ETF.
> : >
> : I don't understand what about Verizon's position consumers don't get.
> The
> : phones are expensive. Verizon subsidizes them if you take a plan, which
> is
> : by the way, a contract. Not a one-way contract, but one with obligations
> by
> : both parties. If you want to break your end of the contract, you must
> pay
> : for the phone. What's so hard to grasp about that?  Verizon is not a
> public
> : service utility. It is a profit-making company. How many of you are in
> : business? How many of you have prices and rules only to benefit the
> : customers and not your bottom line?

> Correct me if I'm wrong if if I have my own phone I'm still subject to the
> ETF.

> No, but you are still paying a monthly fee for a Verizon subsidized phone,
> that you don't have.

> That $70 number that VZW puts out on its web site is just a random
> number, with no actual connection to VZW's cost of doing business in any
> way.  They just decided to price it along the random continuum of prices
> that they claim their phones "should" cost or "would cost if you bought
> it without a contract".  No, it absolutely DOESN'T cost $70 if you
> bought it without a contract. It would cost $17.

>>>> Starting Nov. 15,  Verizon plans to double its early termination
>>>> fee (ETF) -- to $350 -- for customers who end their cellphone
>>>> contracts early. The fee, arriving just in time for the holidays,
>>>> applies to customers who have a smart phone or other advanced
>>>> device on a one or two year contract. The penalty will decrease by $10
>>>> for each
>>>> month of service
>>>> completed. If a customer completes five months of service, the
>>>> penalty would be reduced to $300, for example.
>>>> The fee, the highest ever imposed by a major carrier, "is insane,"
>>>> says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union, the USA's largest consumer
>>>> group. "There's no justification" for a fee that high, he says.
>>>> "It's punitive to customers who decide to leave Verizon early."

>>>> Not so says Verizon. "This has to do with the cost we pay for the
>>>> device," says spokesman Jim Gerace. Verizon customers, he notes,
>>>> can buy a subsidized Blackberry for as little as $99. What Verizon
>>>> pays to Blackberry-maker Research In Motion, however, "is far north of
>>>> that," he says.

>>>> The wireless industry has long subsidized devices to hold down
>>>> retail costs, then charged customers a penalty if they exited their
>>>> contracts early. The standard ETF is currently around $175 to $200.
>>>> It was established years ago, when expensive smart phones, netbooks
>>>> and other advanced devices didn't exist, Gerace says.

>>>> Gerace says ETFs on other Verizon wireless devices, such as
>>>> standard cellphones, won't change. The current ETF is $175, and it
>>>> decreases by $5 a month for each month of the contract's term that is
>>>> completed. Kelsey says he's unimpressed. "ETFs are already too
>>>> high," he says.
>>>> "This ($350 fee) is absolutely ridiculous."

>>>> Update: Gerace contacted us to point out that all Verizon phones,
>>>> including smart devices, are available without a contract at a
>>>> full, unsubsidized, price. But be prepared to pay up. Example: The
>>>> Blackberry Storm 2. Verizon sells it for $179 with a two year
>>>> contract and, soon, a $350 ETF. Or you can pay full retail -- $539
>>>> -- with no contract or ETF.

>>> I don't have a problem with them subsidizing the cost of a device,
>>> which I'm paying for as part of my monthly service charge, but once
>>> my two year term is up, unless I get another subsidized device, my
>>> service charges should go down, as I'm no longer paying for a
>>> subsidized device, but they don't

>> Nobody runs their business that way and neither do you, supposing
>> you have one.  If you're not happy with the rules, either don't play
>> or take the new phone. Vz is a profit-making company, not a public
>> service.  They have a right to not adjust your monthly rate. Those
>> rules are explained right up front. Get over it.

> It's not a matter of "getting over" anything. Yes, I do run a
> business, and no, I don't charge my customers for something that I'm
> no longer providing them. It boggles me that anyone would think this
> practice is acceptable

>> Put in a shortened manner: if you believe that a sophisticated
>> electronic device like a cell phone can be sold at a reasonable
>> profit for $17, then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

> You are as dense as the sun.

>> http://nordicgroup.us/prepaid/pageplus.html
>> ....for further great information.....(c;]

> For further FALSE information.

> From that page:

>> It's important that if you buy a new Verizon InPulse handset to use
>> on PagePlus that the store NOT activate it by scanning the bar code
>> on the package that reads "SCAN BARCODE  BELOW FOR ACTIVATION." This
>> will begin the activation process on Verizon InPulse

> That's pure and utter bullshit.  Some guy gets some random thought in
> his head, and next thing you know he's set up a web site (John Navas
> comes to mind here).

>> I read with amusement a claim by someone that the PagePlus revenue
>> model is based on users losing their account balance by forgetting to
>> re-up their account every 120 days. While this claim was ludicrous

> No one ever said that their ENTIRE revenue model was based on stupid
> people forgetting and forfeiting their minutes--but the fact is, they
> do count on that happening and it is a part of their revenue plan.

> Again, some lunatic just puts random crap on a web site and thinks
> he's a hero.  Great job.