So what's new? AT&T has been doing this stuff since the breakup of the Bell system. (Remember that far back?)They tried this in Europe and couldn't make it work, so came back the US.
[Complaining to AT&T got him nowhere, and now he's looking to switch to another carrier.] --------------------------------- which is exactly what they want. if you're a high percentage user ... you're an unprofitable customer ... and they'd rather not have you. in fact ... they'd rather you be on their competitor's network being unprofitable to them.
they use metrics like 'life time value' (ltv) ... and 'churn rate' ... along with 'retention cost' ... to determine what type of customer you are.
they want to keep the high ltv customers ... and would be happy to shed those that represent high cost to them.
["They just guaranteed the highway. They didn't guarantee the speed limit," he said.] -------------------------------------- if this is true ... they're simply misrepresenting the usability of what they're offering.
that's like saying you can 'connect' to the network ... but you can't actually 'send' anything over it.
the network isn't there for connecting ... it's there for sending and receiving.
AT&T should provide the bandwidth necessary to accomodate their customers. If they don't have the necessary network capability. AT&T should not be enrolling new customers but should concentrate on taking care of existing customers. It is a simple matter of supply and demand. As long as the demand exists, AT&T can push its customers around.
P.S. at the end there is an interesting note: "Tallman sees few prospects for a lawsuit against AT&T." If you read the sixteen pages of 4 pt. font in the agreement there is a "performance clause" and in the law there is also an "expectation of performance pursuant to the terms of a legal agreement for services" too.
AT&T are such jerks, you pay for something that is "unlimited" and then they have the audacity to reduce it anyway they see fit. Isn't that called bait and switch? This is the kind of crap that congress needs to clamp down on. It's run-away corporatism. At a time when GOP is trying to cut out government we need more of it to protect consumers.
You have a choice, don't use their service. Don't come up with more bs for the government to do. Or would you rather just be paying more taxes than change service providers? We need less government numbskull
I have a block of AT&T users looking into a class-action if anyone gets "throttled" as we all have unlimited data plans. The carriers and service providers can't have it both ways. They have been charging exorbitant rates to families and youngsters for texting for over a decade and they KNOW that those signals are carried under the broadcast and cost them zero-nothing-nada. They are the ones at fault for not looking down the road and doing simple math to come up with the exponential growth and therefore the bandwidth that will be needed YESTERDAY. But they don't mind cashing in on all the users and our ARPU every month do they? Just wait until the satellite and cable companies get it opened up for quad-pay and watch us all switch.
do you have anymore info on this class-action suit. i have not received an text or email concerning being "throttled" but my connectivity has significantly slowed down. my map has been rendered useless. i would like to know more about this suit. i have been a subscriber for well over 14yrs and this is not the contract i signed.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
---------------------------------
which is exactly what they want. if you're a high percentage user ... you're an unprofitable customer ... and they'd rather not have you. in fact ... they'd rather you be on their competitor's network being unprofitable to them.
they use metrics like 'life time value' (ltv) ... and 'churn rate' ... along with 'retention cost' ... to determine what type of customer you are.
they want to keep the high ltv customers ... and would be happy to shed those that represent high cost to them.
--------------------------------------
if this is true ... they're simply misrepresenting the usability of what they're offering.
that's like saying you can 'connect' to the network ... but you can't actually 'send' anything over it.
the network isn't there for connecting ... it's there for sending and receiving.
Isn't THAT the dying truth........