Slashdot Mirror


AT&T Threatening To Raise Rates After Merger Failure

An anonymous reader writes "In the quarterly earnings call following the defeat of his attempted acquisition of T-Mobile, AT&T's CEO Randall Stephenson was quick to lash out at the FCC, claiming that because his company was unable to acquire more spectrum to handle the explosion of mobile data users, AT&T would be forced to raise prices and take additional action against the highest data users. PCMag looked into the other side of the story, finding that 'The FCC spokesman ... pointed out that the FCC has approved more than 150 commercial mobile transaction applications in the past year and more than 300 in the past two years, "facts [that] were completely ignored in the [AT&T] conference call," he said.'"

57 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, that will show... by Ryanrule · · Score: 2

    ...yourselves?

    1. Re:Yeah, that will show... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It'll teach their customers a lesson - to switch to another carrier.

      The idea that AT&T could ask customers to pay even more while at the same time offering such a crappy data network is patently absurd.

    2. Re:Yeah, that will show... by twotacocombo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The idea that AT&T could ask customers to pay even more while at the same time offering such a crappy data network is patently absurd.

      No, the idea is entirely believable. In fact, I would question it if I heard anything to the contrary. This is how big business in America works these days: Take all you can, give nothing back. Or was that pirates? Close enough...

    3. Re:Yeah, that will show... by aztracker1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I will never, ever be a customer of AT&T again. When I heard about the AT&T offer for T-Mobile, it was a week before my contract was up. I bailed for a pay as you go service elsewhere.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  2. Ah, nothing like corporate greed by Synerg1y · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the public's defense, At&t's 4g is a joke that's lost all humor, & they drop calls like it's going out of style. Sounds more like they're saying "we can't compete without this merger". My advice = fix your customer service then your revenue margins.

    1. Re:Ah, nothing like corporate greed by PickyH3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's ridiculous that AT&T calls their HSPA+ as 4G, but, as an AT&T customer with a "4G" phone, I must say that it is noticeably faster than an iPhone 4, which is the more traditional 3G. It has also spread to a lot more places than 3G used to be at; it now blankets the town that I grew up in when 3G hardly even reached my parent's house before the "4G" rollout.

      In fact, it actually got so good at my parent's house that their MicroCell (the internet powered, fake tower for your phones in your house when service isn't actually good enough as-is) became an issue because the real signal would fight it for control on the phone, which was killing their phone's batteries.

      Also, since I have moved away from the iPhone 4, I have noticed that my dropped calls have gone away significantly, except in one dead zone near my [highly trafficked, and highly populated] local grocery store. That is to say, they're not gone entirely, but they have been significantly reduced.

      Now, with all of that, I will turn around and say, "screw you, AT&T." Their entire reason for buying T-Mobile was to remove the only significant GSM competitor in the US. They have proven that they do not compete on price, rather Verizon and AT&T play a cat-and-mouse game of raising prices, while the other follows shortly afterward. First, they removed Unlimited Data before any other network because they had refused to upgrade their own network while making significant profits. Recently, they raised the stakes again by adding a GB for an extra $5, but removing the existing plans. So, we went from $30 Unlimited Data to $25 2GB data, to $30 3GB data in the course of a year and a half. Only AT&T and Verizon could think that is reasonable. And the low-end data is an aggressive slap to the face. Originally 200 MB for $15, to 300 MB for $20. The minimum cost of entry is $20 for a nearly worthless data plan? My mother, of all people, gets too close to 200-300 MB usage to make that a reasonable plan because overages cost as much as the data plan for the cheaper option, and $10/GB for the higher plan.

      AT&T can compete without the merger, and they are doing quite well now that Verizon forced their hands by pushing LTE, which was only because, frankly, CDMA data speeds are garbage. They are just sticking it to the FCC so that people blame them when they raise rates. However, the fact is, anyone with any knowledge of the business knows that it is a bogus money grab that needs to be stopped before it gets even further out of hand.

  3. Bye Bye AT&T! by na1led · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It was nice knowing ya! They are already struggling to keep the customers they currently have, how is raising prices going to help?

    --
    -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
  4. You already mess with regular data users w/ caps by sethstorm · · Score: 2

    "In the quarterly earnings call following the defeat of his attempted acquisition of T-Mobile, AT&T's CEO Randall Stephenson was quick to lash out at the FCC, claiming that because his company was unable to acquire more spectrum to handle the explosion of mobile data users, AT&T would be forced to raise prices and take additional action against the highest data users. PCMag looked into the other side of the story, finding that 'The FCC spokesman ... pointed out that the FCC has approved more than 150 commercial mobile transaction applications in the past year and more than 300 in the past two years, "facts [that] were completely ignored in the [AT&T] conference call," he said.'"

    It's not just heavy users AT&T attacks, it's also regular users. AT&T was just denied the means to get rid of competition that was doing just fine.

    Perhaps AT&T should think about improving their own service and removing those caps. It's not like Sprint has suffered much with the iDevices having sane, flat-rate data.

    Trying to push metered data in a flat-rate world just doesn't work for superior service.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  5. Go for it! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

    AT&T already lost me as a customer permanently based on their high rates and higher opinion of themselves and their quality of service.

    Double 'em, Triple 'em, that'll show the consumer!

  6. Aren't you glad... by Ronin+X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... you can still switch to T-Mobile?

    --
    Ok my karma is maxed out. When do I become Enlightened?
    1. Re:Aren't you glad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a former customer of at&t that switched to t-mobile, then had to sweat through the fear of at&t eating my escape company, I feel like this is a double win.

    2. Re:Aren't you glad... by afidel · · Score: 2

      Virgin Mobile and T-Mobile's Walmart plan are both decent. VM's plan is unlimited SMS/MMS, 300 voice minutes, 2.5GB of data then throttled, all for $35/month (my wife has the same deal at $25/month but hers is a grandfathered plan). Oh, and no fees or anything except local sales tax. You do have to buy your own phone but there is no contract. The T-Mobile plan is 5GB of data, unlimited SMS/MMS, and 100 voice minutes for $30/month. It's also a month to month plan with no device subsidy. I'm not sure if there are any extra fees since I haven't signed up for it. The one downside to these plans is no roaming so if you live in an area with spotty Sprint or T-Mobile coverage they might not work for you.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:Aren't you glad... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      The T-Mobile plan is 5GB of data

      Worth mentioning that this is also not a hard cap, but you're simply throttled down (to EDGE) once you reach it. Meaning that's it's actually unlimited, not "unlimited" (we'll call you if you use too much!) like AT&T's.

      I'm not sure if there are any extra fees since I haven't signed up for it.

      I've switched recently, and $30 is the only thing that shows up in my monthly bill. The only other thing I've paid was to get this SIM card + activation kit from Amazon.

  7. Time to call their bluff... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, in retaliation to the government blocking their merger with T-Mobile, they're going to drive their own customers away to their competitors by raising rates and penalizing them?

    Yeah, good call AT&T. That'll teach....uh....them?

    1. Re:Time to call their bluff... by brainzach · · Score: 4, Interesting

      AT&T wants its high data users to go to a competitor and clog up their networks instead.

      It is a simple business decision. Spend billions of dollars upgrading you network to accommodate everyone, or develop a pricing structure to drive its heavy users away. You could lose 5-10% of your revenue, but get to support 50% less bandwidth over the network.

    2. Re:Time to call their bluff... by bky1701 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Data use keeps growing, though. Today's "high data users" are tomorrow's normal users. You can't survive without infrastructure. Too bad we have too many libertard types to actually properly regulate these businesses and require them to put some of their profits back in.

    3. Re:Time to call their bluff... by John+Bresnahan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Those customers will have to wait for their very one sided contracts (in ATT's favor) to come to an end.

      To the best of my knowledge, AT&T can't raise the rates on their existing contracts. If they change the contract, the customer can walk away.

  8. Prima Donna by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If higher prices were more profitable (i.e. could be used to increase revenue and offset losses), then they would've raised the prices either way. Claims that they need to raise prices now are just posturing.

  9. Childish Reaction by Deathnerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did anyone else picture this guy throwing a tantrum and raging like a toddler when they read the summary? I think that's a fair description of what's going on here.

    1. Re:Childish Reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You sir are giving a bad name to toddlers. Please refrain from besmirching their reputation.

    2. Re:Childish Reaction by timeOday · · Score: 2
      Yes, but this is typical.

      1) In response to new government rules that airlines must advertise the bottom-line ticket prices, Spirit airlines whined: "Thanks to the U.S. Department of Transportation's latest fare rules, Spirit must now HIDE the government's taxes and fees in your fares." (Which is a lie - they can still show a price breakdown, but must now show the bottom-line total).

      2) Bank of America was eager to rationalize their $5/mo ATM card fee as "unintended consequence" of new regulations on on card swipe fees. (Yet somehow they found a way around this unintended consequence when passing the buck backfired and customers got mad at them instead of the government.)

      3) Health insurance companies all rushed to blame Obamacare for steep price increases in 2010, even though none of the provisions of the law were to kick in for several years, and healthcare prices have been rising sharply for decades.

      Of course, I'm not saying there's no truth in the claims. Regulations can be costly to certain parties. But the truth is almost independent of the rhetoric. Blaming the government for price hikes (whether as retribution against regulations, or simply as a fig leaf for hiking prices) is something companies will rarely miss an opportunity to do.

  10. "cellular" means frequence reuse by DrDitto · · Score: 2

    One of the core concepts of "cellular" phones is that "cells" enable frequence reuse. Now this has to be carefully done to prevent interference, but in general, decreasing the size of cells will increase capacity. Of course this adds infrastructure cost.

    1. Re:"cellular" means frequence reuse by QuantumRiff · · Score: 2

      ATT had opportunities to purchase additional spectrum in auctions. They did not, or did not get enough.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
  11. Corporate greed??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why do you hate 'Mer'ka? Why do you love socialism? There is no such thing as corporate greed! There is only corporate glory.

    1. Re:Corporate greed??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I enjoy most is the retards that think the latter is somehow an excuse for the former.

      I'm so heartily sick of people excusing anti-social behavior as "human nature", regardless of whether it's in an individual or organization. Just because there may be an instinctual drive to hoard more than one person needs to the detriment of others around you does not make it right. I have an instinctual urge to either beat the crap out of my boss or run from him screaming whenever he calls me to his office unexpectedly, but I doubt that very many people would just say "Eh, that's just human nature!" if I did either of those things next time I get a message from him.

      Lucky for us, we have evolved a rational brain that helps us see beyond ourselves and our own situation. Maybe that's the problem? Maybe those greedy among us just haven't finished evolving beyond their own self-centeredness?

    2. Re:Corporate greed??? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

      The way America works, you're on the board for my company, and I'm on the board for yours. I think it's called 'the good ole boys network'; but it's just another name for our ruling class. That's why there's never any consequences for these people. They own America, and if you live there they own you.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    3. Re:Corporate greed??? by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      Nonsense.

      If I was getting paid ~20 million in salary+stock I'd feel no stress whatsoever. Whether I succeed or fail as CEO I'm still going to be rich enough to retire for the rest of my life. I wouldn't give a fuck.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    4. Re:Corporate greed??? by gregrah · · Score: 2

      And that's one very good reason that you'll never be the CEO of a large company. One trait that you'll find across all CEO's is that they are Driven (with a capital "D") - by greed, vanity, etc. - much more than your typical person. I'm sure that Randall Stephenson had enough money to retire comfortably before he ever took over the position of CEO at AT&T - I don't think that's his motivation.

      I do agree, though, that there are probably instances where outrageous CEO salaries have encouraged them to take risks that weren't really in the best interests of their employees or shareholders.

    5. Re:Corporate greed??? by erroneus · · Score: 2

      Corporate greed is worse than individual human greed. Because it is corporate, no one is responsible for the harm which results from the actions of a greedy corporation. When individuals do it, you can hold them accountable in some way. With corporations, not so much usually.

  12. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by blahbooboo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's easy. Verizon and AT&T collude on prices. AT&T raises, then Verizon quickly follows...

  13. Hypocrisy by ScooterComputer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AT&T is just a big bundle of fail. Now, after a merger attempt that they should have KNOWN would fail given the history of a monopoly Telecom Industry in the US (the history, in fact, of AT&T!), AT&T is complaining again that the FCC is prohibiting them from getting too big (Too Big to Fail?).

    But worse, they keep throwing out claims like "take additional action against the highest data users." Yet, just Monday, they raised the rates on their data users AND increased data caps...even though their own statements from prior in the year gave the picture that 90% of users didn't USE more than 2GB! Do they understand how pricing works in an economic model??? If you want users to use LESS data, LOWER THE PRICING ON YOUR LOWER DATA TIER AND INCREASE THE PRICE ON THE HIGHER TIERS! Furthermore, set tiers levels to actual DATA USAGE PATTERNS! There is no reason there is a 300MB tier (was a 200MB tier) and a 3GB (2GB) tier when all the study data is showing most users are consuming 500-1300MB, with an average of 850.

    I'm tired of hearing this crap from AT&T, greed shrouded in pleas of victimhood. What I don't understand is how it doesn't constitute fraud, or cause securities issues. Public companies making patently false statements face consequences. Furthermore, I'm even less impressed with the media and the tech media, in specific, for not doing a better job calling AT&T out and making them look like the greedy pricks they are.

    --
    Scott
    "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
  14. Time to head out. by echo_kmem · · Score: 2

    Verizon's line up and availability of their '4G' have already had me considering the switch from AT&T, I'd rather pay premium and get premium than pay premium and get AT&T. =/

  15. Wow! by wbr1 · · Score: 3, Informative

    /*
    Is this a case of a government agency actually turning down big business when it is supposed to, or was there an even bigger backroom deal with another company?
    */

    In all reality, I had a cheap AT&T prepay phone, and it was terrible. I know little about how GSM networks handle voice calls, but it seemed obvious that I was getting extra compression on my calls. The sound quality was so bad as to be almost unusable. I have since switched to a secondary reseller that operates on Sprint, and the quality is good, I have yet to have a dropped call, and there are no surprises. Of course, I use a different phone as well, so the phone could have had something to do with the sound quality, but it sure sounded like excessive digital compression to me, which screams network function, not phone function.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:Wow! by quarterbuck · · Score: 2

      I actually have both an AT&T (Blackberry) and a Sprint-based-prepaid (cheap Samsung Android) phone and I can confirm that my observations are the same as yours.
      I call international occasionally and use calling cards and the like. They compress the signal again, so it is important that the data be not already compressed. Every time I call using AT&T, it sounds tinny. I can immediately switch to my Sprint phone and the signal is a lot better. I had T-Mobile (G1) earlier, but I did not have this problem, so I do not believe this is a difference between GSM/CDMA compression schemes. AT&T has to be chopping off some frequency ranges.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
  16. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by Nadaka · · Score: 2

    Sprint won't mind.

  17. Re:blame the FCC? by zildgulf · · Score: 2

    I would rather blame Canada.

  18. att and the baby bells by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    just how did we let this happen AGAIN?

    in the 80's we fought hard to break up ATT.

    now, they're back again as a single entity.

    how did that happen?? and why did we care back then but don't really care, now?

    what changed over the last 30 or so years?

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:att and the baby bells by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Informative

      Reagan happened. Him and all the corporatist looters to follow in his footsteps. These days, corporations aren't just people, they're better than people.

      You remind me of working on my Economics studies with Financial News Network rattling away on the telly. Myron Kandel covering the buy-out and merger mania which ultimately looted treasuries of companies, which were then spun off with a whole new debt. And Wall Street loved it. Big news of the day was KKR and RJ Reynolds bidding insane amounts for Nabisco. Mr. Kandel was effective in detailing KKR's strategy, should they win - they'd split up the various bits of Nabisco and spin them off, while keeping all the money in the company bank accounts. Sounds evil, doesn't it? It happened time and again during the Reagan and Bush Sr. eras. Did nothing for the people of the country, company customers, but made a bunch of weasels rich, while sacking a lot of people and robbing ledgers.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  19. Re:Customers pay for bad management... by ackthpt · · Score: 2

    Investors too.

    This right after receiving, yet another 'Wow! Save on bundled services!' offer in the mail. I'm happy with my cheapskate Pre-Paid mobile and basic DSL at home. Ugly enough bill when it arrives anyway. All the better reason to route the AT&T offers directly to the shreader.

    "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  20. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Oligopolies almost always suck in customer satisfaction, always have, and always will.

  21. I'm glad that I'm still with T-Mobile. by sethstorm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not only do you get to keep a good plan, you get to keep it. For ages.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  22. Re:You already mess with regular data users w/ cap by Chas · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have you seen how slow is Sprint's network? Who cares if it's unlimited when your download speed is below 1k/sec!

    Where are you at? BFE?

    I'm a Sprint user and I have exactly ZERO issues with their service. Downloads aren't a problem (and throughput is MUCH better than 1k/sec). I can even game while tethered to my phone.

    Maybe if you come out from inside that faraday cage.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  23. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oligopolies almost always suck in customer satisfaction, always have, and always will.

    Which is exactly how America keeps getting it wrong - the government should do nothing to make their lives easier - keep a low bar to new companies/investors who want to enter the market and offer something new/better. That's real Capitalism, not this bogus Corporate Welfare system.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  24. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by Artraze · · Score: 2

    Then people switch to T-Mobile and the issue corrects itself?

  25. Go ahead, AT&T by SecurityGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And yes, I'm a customer, so this would impact me.

    We're not suckers. You're a business. If you can make more by raising rates, you will. That's an absolute given. The only reason any business led by someone with a brain doesn't raise rates is because it will cost them money because people will leave. The FCC told you no because your proposed merger would significantly reduce consumers' options to do just that. Leave.

    The irony is I, and a lot of others, are only your customer because you had an iphone exclusive. In other words, you had a deal to suppress competition. I am ditching you soon and going to Verizon now that that's over and it's about new phone time.

    I may sound anti ATT, but I'm not. Just give me good service and as good a deal or better than your competition and I'll be delighted to stay your customer. Unfortunately, that's not what you've done, and not what you're trying to do. You're trying to limit my options so I have to be your customer. That alone is reason to leave.

  26. One could hardly ask for greater vindication... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly, AT&T's threat to raise rates is exactly the sort of thing that confirms that denying them was a good idea. If a company can raise their prices and expect to make more money, rather than lose customers to less petulant firms, they already have dangerously high market power(particularly for something as relatively homogenous as wireless telco services. Certain goods simply don't have much in the way of substitutes).

    One could go so far as to say that, as a heuristic, anybody who could make, and make good on, such a threat if they don't get what they want, Should Not be allowed to get what they want...

  27. Hey ATT... by milbournosphere · · Score: 4, Funny

    fuck you, too.

  28. Re:Contract violation? by TClevenger · · Score: 2

    We may change any terms, conditions, rates, fees, expenses, or charges regarding your Services at any time. We will provide you with notice of material changes (other than changes to governmental fees, proportional charges for governmental mandates, roaming rates or administrative charges) either in your monthly bill or separately. You understand and agree that State and Federal Universal Service Fees and other governmentally imposed fees, whether or not assessed directly upon you, may be increased based upon the government's or our calculations.

    IF WE INCREASE THE PRICE OF ANY OF THE SERVICES TO WHICH YOU SUBSCRIBE, BEYOND THE LIMITS SET FORTH IN YOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE SUMMARY, OR IF WE MATERIALLY DECREASE THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA IN WHICH YOUR AIRTIME RATE APPLIES (OTHER THAN A TEMPORARY DECREASE FOR REPAIRS OR MAINTENANCE), WE'LL DISCLOSE THE CHANGE AT LEAST ONE BILLING CYCLE IN ADVANCE (EITHER THROUGH A NOTICE WITH YOUR BILL, A TEXT MESSAGE TO YOUR DEVICE, OR OTHERWISE), AND YOU MAY TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT WITHOUT PAYING AN EARLY TERMINATION FEE OR RETURNING OR PAYING FOR ANY PROMOTIONAL ITEMS, PROVIDED YOUR NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS DELIVERED TO US WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER THE FIRST BILL REFLECTING THE CHANGE.

    From the AT&T Wireless Terms and Conditions, Section 1.3.

  29. Who needs that much bandwidth? by hawguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is only tangentially related to the topic, but carriers keep promoting how fast their network is and how I can get 12mbit+ of bandwidth to my phone. But I wonder.... why should I care? Especially since I could hit my monthly download cap in less than an hour at that speed.

    I can see why faster networks benefit the carrier since faster speeds means more people can share the bandwidth, but why should I care as an end user? Even if I regularly watched movies on my phone, I don't think I can really tell the difference between a 800kbs stream and a 4mbit stream on my 3" screen. And a 90 minute movie at 4mbit will use around 2GB of my download bandwidth. (compared to around 400MB for the 800kbs stream)

    I don't have the latest phone, but with my 1Ghz single core processor, when I'm browsing the web, the browser rendering speed seems to be my limiting factor since browsing speed doesn't seem to be noticeably different whether I'm on my carrier's 3G network or my Wifi at home (with 15mbit of bandwidth to the internet).

    So, why should I really care what the peak download speed of a carrier's 4G network is? It seems like I should be more interested in the average real-world speed they can provide on a loaded network than in whether or not I can download a short burst at some high peak speed.

    Is there any reason to care about published 4G speeds? Or is it more like Megapixels in cameras - manufacturers promote megapixels because it's an easy term to explain and many people think that megapixels are most important when it's really just one of many factors (sensor size, lens, etc) that all need to be considered. A quality 5MP camera can give better images than a cheap 12MP camera.

    1. Re:Who needs that much bandwidth? by killfixx · · Score: 2

      If only I had the mod points...

      This is a perfectly reasonable and insightful argument. If they limited everyone to 1mbps downstream, that would be plenty for almost everyone. Webpages, why would you need the entire page to load instantly? It's a phone, just rework mobile http to fetch the first screen and then the remaining elements.

      But, then how would they be able to make billions? Oh No!! Well, charge by throughput, not usage. The faster it goes, the more you pay. Works great for wired ISPs.

      Hell, put a selector into the phones OS to allow for different speed settings and have them charge by incremental bumps in speed. Kinda like with gas in a car. You need to go faster, you pay for more gas.

      I would love being able to throttle my connection up every-so-often for an extra boost when needed. And for the rest of the time crank it way down. That would be spectacular.

      You'd get ppl who pay for always going fast "subsidizing" for the people who don't. Shit, it may actually produce the opposite effect.

      There are saner ways of using the bandwidth available more efficiently without having to build out infrastructure and without having to institute usage tiers.

      Use simple time slicing. The faster you wanna go, the more time slices you pay for. Simple as that. After all, most internet functionality is best effort stuff anyway. I know few people who always stream to their phones. VoIP, that's a different story and would different considerations. It's hard to best effort voice. But isn't that why you have a cellphone?

      US$.02

      --
      "Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
  30. Re:Take the phone? by ISurfTooMuch · · Score: 2

    Yes and no. You can take the phone if you get it unlocked (call AT&T and tell them you need it unlocked because you're going overseas and want to buy a prepaid SIM while you're abroad--they should do it if your account is in good standing). Then, you can use it with T-Mobile, but only EDGE data will work. Since AT&T uses 850 and 1900 for 3G, and T-Mobile uses 1700 for 3G, 3G data will not work on T-Mobile with this phone.

    If you want a similar phone that supports 3G on T-Mobile, you can pick up a Samsung Vibrant, which is almost identical. However, I'd highly recommend looking at something new. Both the Captivate and Vibrant are pretty old devices now, and you aren't going to get any more major updates to them from Samsung. Plus, compared to other phones, GPS on the Captivate is truly awful. Don't get me wrong, it's not a terrible phone. I know because I had one when I was with AT&T, but there are many better handsets available now.

  31. Not if AT&T changes their terms by pavon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You signed a contract with AT&T. They can either abide by that contract for the full two years and allow you to keep the same rates, or they can allow you to leave with no penalty.

  32. Re:Customers pay for bad management... by Pope · · Score: 2

    "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."

    "Asps. Very dangerous. You go first!

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  33. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What do you do about those industries that require such a huge investment of capital to get started and such high fixed running costs that it's basically impossible to start up a new company without prohibitively large amounts of capital?

    Imagine, for instance, a world in which there are no regulations on telecoms other than the easements required to put lines on government-owned land. Now you want to start up a telecom company, but you don't have the startup capital to set up lines all around the country, so instead you create a plan to set them up all around your town. But the thing is, even if your service is somewhat cheaper or better, nobody wants to buy it, because they want to call people in both Boston and Los Angeles. You could set the price so low that people in your town would buy it, but then you'd be losing money every month (due to the high fixed running costs) and have already burnt through your startup capital. You could negotiate a peering agreement with the big companies that control the telecom backbone, but since your service is much less valuable to them as theirs is to yours, they're going to charge you more than you can afford. Being a shrewd businessperson, you make this analysis before spending cash setting up telephone lines in your town, and don't start the company. And since all other businesspeople in your universe make the same choice, there can be no new sellers in the market, leaving the oligopoly intact. Which leaves everyone else either doing without whatever the oligopoly is selling, or going with the least bad option, and the members of the oligopoly trying to ensure that the least bad option for the customers is lousy service at a way-too-high price.

    That's real capitalism, not the bogus libertarian fantasy.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  34. Re:Bye Bye AT&T! -- Nope, Verizon raises price by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oligopolies almost always suck in customer satisfaction, always have, and always will.

    Which is exactly how America keeps getting it wrong - the government should do nothing to make their lives easier - keep a low bar to new companies/investors who want to enter the market and offer something new/better. That's real Capitalism, not this bogus Corporate Welfare system.

    However, the American government is itself an oligopoly (two parties that will do their best to keep any others from getting into the game), so expect shitty customer (citizen) satisfaction, i.e. more of the same.

  35. this blog comment says it all by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Original story here, comment is the one dated 2011-09-01 at 14:55:

    I also hate to break the news to you, the network won’t become better with the merger, it will get a lot worse before it could ever get better. That is because you are going to try and add spectrum to the issue when the reality is that this about backhaul, engineering philosophy, optimization techniques and know how. If ATT cannot make what they have work, getting another overlaying network will only complicate things, let alone the mix of billing, back end and multiple vendors.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  36. Re:You already mess with regular data users w/ cap by Chas · · Score: 4, Funny

    Re-read what I wrote. I am not talking about reliability or problems with downloads. Sprint is consistently rated the slowest 3g cellular network.

    http://www.pcmag.com/Fastest-Mobile-Networks-2011

    next time, don't be so quick to get your panties in a bunch. I personally don't care what cellular god you pray. They all suck in one way or another.

    Howsabout I just quote you from your original post again.

    Who cares if it's unlimited when your download speed is below 1k/sec!

    Look at your link again. Notice that the chart displays a download speed for Sprint 3G well in excess of your claimed 1k/sec (as in .59 mbit/sec (or roughly 590k/sec).

    Oh yes, and that piece of quote was your ENTIRE post. You said fuck-all reliability or it's rating compared to other providers. You made a single claim about speed which was pure and utter bullshit.

    Rule #1: If you want to be taken seriously at all, don't make shit up and portray it as fact.

    Rule #2: When bitch-smacked over making shit up, don't try to move the goalposts and say that you were really posting about something ELSE.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!