OmniLynx was just shut off

[IRUNL8R]

Kirk and Andi,

I totally agree with your statement. I, too, am watching the TMobile process.

I am hoping it is more of a step to force the other three to into making decisions about unlimited data. We will see how the industry evolves in the next few years, but at least T Mobile is trying to offer something akin to unlimited. App makers and the like are making these apps that just chew through data like nothing and you don't realize it until it is to late and you have massive overages. Until there is a way to ensure that a user is only using data when actively doing something instead of "running in the background" then we will not see unlimited data. The costs of overages is ridiculous as well. I would love to see the bottom line made just on Overages.

[Jack Mayer]

Everyone seems to want "everything" for little to nothing. Disregarding the costs to provide the "everything". It would amuse me to no end if it was not indicative of a society-wide issue in the US.

 

The FACT is that providing UNLIMITED wireless Internet to everyone for ANY price is not a technologically achievable goal at the moment. Wish all you want - it is not the "greedy" companies withholding something. It is simply not possible to provide. Right now. One can argue that all they want, but they would be wrong.

[deecee]

Kirk and Andi,

I totally agree with your statement. I, too, am watching the TMobile process.

Personally, as a traveling RVer, I am not really watching T-Mobile so much.. They are essentially worthless, unless you are sitting steady in a major metropolitan area. Look at their coverage maps on their web-site. Remember to zoom in from the glowing dark pink overview map to an actual area; then see the light pink and white areas, where the comments list such things as "voice available outside, mostly available in small buildings, and in some large buildings". As in, no way, no how, you will see video capability. :-)

 

I am, however, watching which marketing ploys the larger carriers come up with because they know they have to entice the customers with "less technological know-how" to not jump to T-Mobile contracts just because of BingeOn. You've got to love marketing gimmicks.

 

A few of the things to keep in mind when contemplating adding a T-Mobile plan on your list of contracts..

 

a) BingeOn is essentially compressed 480p. (T-Mobile call it "DVD-quality", although I have never seen such a poor resolution DVD. ) The vendors invited into the list were very specifically asked to "work with T-Mobile software that would provide video streaming only for smartphone or tablet-size screens". As in, "sucks when shown on a TV". It is meant for kids that like watching video on their mobile devices. Unless you are the type that likes watching movies on screens the size of a postage stamp, you are expected to actively manage your BingeOn feature. Turning it off, if you want to mirror the video to watch a movie on a big screen. (Which then means the video counts against your data.)

 

Point a in a different way.. If you switch from SD to HD, BingeOn goes away on its own and it starts sucking data from your plan instead.

Essentially T-Mobile provided a toggle switch, so if a customer wants a higher quality version to mirror to a larger display, the customer can turn BingeOn off. (NOTICE: This also means that it uses data on your data-plan. NOT BingeOn data.)

c) T-Mobile means poor coverage, except in major areas. Part of that through roaming partners. As a traveling RVer, expect to see either no coverage at all, or voice only.

d) The rules state that of more than 50% of your data is seen to come through "partners", they can cut you off.. From their T&Cs this is on the list of invalid uses of their devices: "Results in more than 50% of your voice and/or data usage being off-net (i.e., connected to another provider’s network) for any 3 billing cycles within any 12 month period;".

e) Their rules also state, that if your data use is seen to be over what the "97% of users has as average use", you will be throttled. Standard network management type stuff.

See also such articles as :

 

http://www.computerworld.com/article/3004592/wireless-carriers/how-t-mobiles-video-streaming-works.html

[chirakawa]

What I am saying is this....I am all for capitalism and for business to make a profit, but Verizon and other companies violate the spirit of fairness and take greed to sometimes top shelf priority. Sometimes you have to do what is right by the consumer/customer. Verizon/At&t/Sprint/Tmobile that is truly your MONOPOLY at work or Oligopoly if you will.

 

Do you have a fact base for this greed statement? Or, is this just your gut feeling?

 

Monopoly? Seriously? I guess you could say that about any industry. The reason cars cost so much is because GM/Ford/Chrysler/Toyota/Honda/Nissan etc. are an oligopoly.

 

Like I suggested earlier, if you think the cellular industry is so lucrative, why not start your own company? You could provide a great service at a "fair" price and make yourself wealthy and all your customers happy.

 

I'm not an advocate for Verizon or the cellular industry. I just believe in a fair assessment of the situation based on reality.

[IRUNL8R]

 

If there was an actual legitimate offer for cheap Verizon Internet, I would grab at it as well. Of course. I use a lot of data..

I don't care one iota whether Verizon like that or not, as long as its not a scam.. I DO NOT accept scamming anyone as a legitimate way of doing things, no matter how "rich" the people at the other end of the scam may appear to be.

I do not drive my vehicles into the harbor just to collect insurance money from the "rich insurance company", or similar things either.

And claiming to like to hurt Verizon is just silly.. Because the largest owners of such companies are pension-plans and mutual funds in IRAs and the like.. So wanting Verizon's stock price to fall because of any large-scale "sticking it to them" program can, depending on someone's pension plan structure, cost many, many times more in lost investment/retirement value than just paying the darn phone bill in the first place. :-) One should not "stick it" to a company one owns stock in. Directly or indirectly.

 

 

Unlimited Data without SOMEONE paying will not happen.. There simply is no such thing.. At a minimum "Unlimited" will also mean "Unlimited congestion" and slowdown on that shared "highway".

"Unlimited" was a pure (and mistaken) marketing terminology, that existed only because back then they calculated the average use as fairly limited.. "Unlimited" was a marketing person's mistaken way of saying "we don't think you can over-run our capacity".. They were wrong.

 

So-called "Unlimited video (Binge-On) from HBO and Netflix" can happen only because T-Mobile is trying to take customers away from Verizon and AT&T and is willing to pay for it in the form of congestion and other limitations (such as its current low Binge video resolution 480p).

There is a reason that T-Mobile's new offer does not say "all video is Binge-On".. It merely says Binge-On for a specific set of zero-rated streaming vendors that applied to get in on the program. (Which is also why the FCC might get involved, as that zero-rating process produces a barrier of entry to new smaller vendors.. )

 

In the end, the customers should still pay for what they use, in a fair fashion.. Someone watching a constant Netflix Binge or saving many GBs/TBs in the cloud SHOULD pay a lot more than the people merely surfing a few web-sites.

 

Truly unlimited is physically not possible in a severely limited world. Its like claiming that one has invented a "perpetual energy source" or a "perpetual machine".

Wanting "Unlimited" data simply means "I want other, more limited internet users, to help pay MY internet bill.. By sharing my cost over to their bills."

 

As long as there is no such thing as "unlimited available investment money", "unlimited routing resources", and "unlimited bandwidth/capacity", a truly "unlimited wireless" will not exist either.

As more customers (and companies wanting to sell streaming video) sign up and suck out band-width, the congestion will eventually make it impossible for practical use.

 

There are simply too many fools out there that cannot handle the word "Unlimited".. Who thinks its OK to abuse an agreement, just "because I want to and I don't like paying for what I take"..

The proud "I just downloaded 200+ GB of old baseball playoffs" type people, like we saw on OmniLynx. Who absolutely must download the whole internet, just because the device allows "Unlimited"

 

All businesses are finally figuring that bad marketing strategy out. My MBA simply forbids me to see money flows and company investment needs any other way.. Without Unlimited money and Unlimited resources, there is no Unlimited Internet.

Its the same with "Unlimited storage" in the cloud.. Another poor, poor marketing decision.

 

Just see the many articles after Microsoft just killed the "Unlimited storage" in OneDrive.

 

http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/02/microsoft-kills-unlimited-onedrive-storage-will-downgrade-free-and-paid-plans-next-year/

 

As Microsoft stated:

"Since we started to roll out unlimited cloud storage to Office 365 consumer subscribers, a small number of users backed up numerous PCs and stored entire movie collections and DVR recordings. In some instances, this exceeded 75 TB per user or 14,000 times the average. Instead of focusing on extreme backup scenarios, we want to remain focused on delivering high-value productivity and collaboration experiences that benefit the majority of OneDrive users."

 

Notice, that these storage abusers are the same fools that need "Unlimited Internet" so they can send that 75 TB worth of crap up and down from OneDrive. So you there have two separate but connected marketing mistakes..

First someone gave these users "Unlimited Internet", which then allowed them to utilize an equally crazy "Unlimited Storage" offer.. Both miserable failures. In the Storage case, because hard-drives and storage units in the cloud are neither free nor unlimited.. Just like communications equipment. :-)

Unliimited Data does exist for a small minority.....And who is paying for that???? The customer is and at a reasonable cost. I have talked with people that have the grandfathered plans and "protect" them at all costs?? Why is this..Because they know how valuable it is!!! Verizon knows how valuable it is as well. Sprint offers unlimited data.... sure not the coverage area that verizon has or the speed ..but it still offers unlimited to all at a reasonable price. I personally have this one. Again, it works well for me in my area now. Andi has Verizon and she is happy with them but she does not have unlimited data either. Her bill is also 3x more expensive than mine.

You are going to have the ones that abuse the system no matter what it is and I personally dislike their practices as well. Verizon knows though that Data is where the money is right now and knows that if it has UNlimited Data for users then they have NO Way of making More of a profit in the future. So to keep profit margins up they have to have a product or service that can be offered. At this point that is more data. So lets go ahead and get rid of the "Unlimited Plans" we already have out there and not offer any more ever again. We will change our billing and plans to make as much profit now as we can before the industry evolves.

[deecee]

Everyone seems to want "everything" for little to nothing. Disregarding the costs to provide the "everything". It would amuse me to no end if it was not indicative of a society-wide issue in the US.

 

The FACT is that providing UNLIMITED wireless Internet to everyone for ANY price is not a technologically achievable goal at the moment. Wish all you want - it is not the "greedy" companies withholding something. It is simply not possible to provide. Right now. One can argue that all they want, but they would be wrong.

I agree VERY MUCH..

 

The severe side-effect of the marketing ploys of "Unlimited" (Internet/Storage/Rotten Apples/Whatever/) is that it has become the trend for people to think that they can validly want something in unlimited quantity for a fixed low price..

Both a physical and financial impossibility.. There simply is no such beast.. At any price, but especially at a price people seem willing to pay.

 

What I always find odd, is that people seem to think that Digital products are different from other products of the world. That digital movies, music, photos, internet, and other things simply appear out of thin air. No cost to neither produce or deliver.

 

No one would ever expect to buy a $50 gift-card to Walmart and for that to provide "Unlimited Shopping" or "Unlimited Groceries".

Neither does anyone expect a $50 fuel card to magically fuel their vehicles from coast to coast.

But a $50/month Internet device? Of course... It should provide unlimited GBs of data packets at high speed. Unlimited video, Unlimited Cloud backups, ..., ...

Very odd thinking indeed..

[IRUNL8R]

 

Do you have a fact base for this greed statement? Or, is this just your gut feeling?

 

Monopoly? Seriously? I guess you could say that about any industry. The reason cars cost so much is because GM/Ford/Chrysler/Toyota/Honda/Nissan etc. are an oligopoly.

 

Like I suggested earlier, if you think the cellular industry is so lucrative, why not start your own company? You could provide a great service at a "fair" price and make yourself wealthy and all your customers happy.

 

I'm not an advocate for Verizon or the cellular industry. I just believe in a fair assessment of the situation based on reality.

I am also all about fairness... I sure you comment about starting my own telecom business is to make a point. I personally have unlimited data and use it daily. It is from one of the 4 telecom businesses as well. One I don't have the financial resources to start a company of that magnitude and if I did I surely would.

Not a gut feeling

Verizon Profits and Profit Margins FY 2014

Of the $127.1 billion of Verizon total revenues in FY’14, $49.9 billion were the cost of service and sales. This resulted in $77.1 billion of gross profit and a gross margin of 60.7%. Verizon other operating costs were $57.5 billion. These include selling, general, and administrative expenses. These also include the depreciation and amortization expenses. This resulted in $19.6 billion of operating profit and an operating margin of 15.4%. After interest and other non-operating income and expenses and income taxes, Verizon had a net profit of $9.6 billion and a net margin of 7.6%.

 

[Dutch_12078]

Between Sprint's current unlimited data, albeit limited speed for the most part, and T-Mobile's "Binge" plans heating up the data market place again, I wonder what Sprints big announcement will be today where the CEO says: “The other carriers are not going to like this … guaranteed.”

[IRUNL8R]

Everyone seems to want "everything" for little to nothing. Disregarding the costs to provide the "everything". It would amuse me to no end if it was not indicative of a society-wide issue in the US.

 

The FACT is that providing UNLIMITED wireless Internet to everyone for ANY price is not a technologically achievable goal at the moment. Wish all you want - it is not the "greedy" companies withholding something. It is simply not possible to provide. Right now. One can argue that all they want, but they would be wrong.

I agree Jack, It cannot be done at the moment..So lets do away with all the unlimited plans that are out there??? If you can't offer it to everyone then not have it for anyone either.

Until it can be offered to everyone in the general public, then no general public can have it.

I for one don't mind paying a reasonable cost for truly unlimited data.. I would be willing to spend upwards to a couple hundred monthly on that. But it doesn't exist at certain telecom companies.

As I stated earlier, I have Sprint and Unlimited Data plan through them and cost is under $100 monthly. Yes I know that the coverage is weak and speed is also slower. But, I am currently in a location that it bodes well for me. Now if I was traveling then it may be a different story. But until we start traveling everyday, I won't change.

I am sure everyone has had a chance to read all the fine print of Omnilynx's Contract with Huntsville City Schools and can then use their law degree to figure out who is right and wrong..Yes I am being sarcastic on purpose. As I am Sure NO ONE has the actual contract in hand and can deliver the "legal" who is right and wrong in the matter.

What most of the General Public is upset with is the unfairness of it all and being denied services that others have at a reasonable cost to them

[deecee]

Unliimited Data does exist for a small minority.....And who is paying for that???? The customer is and at a reasonable cost. I have talked with people that have the grandfathered plans and "protect" them at all costs?? Why is this..Because they know how valuable it is!!! Verizon knows how valuable it is as well. Sprint offers unlimited data.... sure not the coverage area that verizon has or the speed ..but it still offers unlimited to all at a reasonable price. I personally have this one. Again, it works well for me in my area now. Andi has Verizon and she is happy with them but she does not have unlimited data either. Her bill is also 3x more expensive than mine.

You are going to have the ones that abuse the system no matter what it is and I personally dislike their practices as well. Verizon knows though that Data is where the money is right now and knows that if it has UNlimited Data for users then they have NO Way of making More of a profit in the future. So to keep profit margins up they have to have a product or service that can be offered. At this point that is more data. So lets go ahead and get rid of the "Unlimited Plans" we already have out there and not offer any more ever again. We will change our billing and plans to make as much profit now as we can before the industry evolves.

Yes.. Unlimited data exists for a few.. Only because Verizon cannot legally break contract, and have to wait for these accounts to die on their own. The cost of these is absorbed into the millions of normal contracts (others are paying the price for those few "Unlimited" users remaining.)

Some of these are on 3G service only.. A service scheduled to die already. Others are on both 3G and 4G, but will eventually die off (people will stop wanting them first) as Verizon is now developing 5G.

Its a waiting game for Verizon.. Paid for by the customers, as its calculated into over all cost structure. As it will be for any business.

 

You really, really need to go read the actual financial statements for these companies. (Don't read the "made $1 bill in total profit" type statements, which are meaningless unless seen in relation to company size and revenue. If the needed future investment in new technology and infra-structure out of that profit is for example $999,999,999, they actually only made $1 to provide to share-holders..

Read the relative profit numbers. As in last quarter's 2.25% per share, the profit margin numbers, and similar.

 

If one live by a "everything is the evil corporations fault", it only FEELS good. But its like peeing your pants just to feel warm for a moment.. There is no long-term reality to it.

The "corporation" is shareholders.. The largest shareholders are huge pension plans and mutual-funds sitting in retirement accounts..

As in "us all".. You, me, and everyone.. Are we all evil for having a retirement savings and preferring that savings to grow enough to shave off the negative impacts of inflation?

[IRUNL8R]

Between Sprint's current unlimited data, albeit limited speed for the most part, and T-Mobile's "Binge" plans heating up the data market place again, I wonder what Sprints big announcement will be today where the CEO says: “The other carriers are not going to like this … guaranteed.”

Yes happens in just under 2 hours.. Like you, I am waiting to see what Marcelo has to say

[IRUNL8R]

Yes.. Unlimited data exists for a few.. Only because Verizon cannot legally break contract, and have to wait for these accounts to die on their own. The cost of these is absorbed into the millions of normal contracts (others are paying the price for those few "Unlimited" users remaining.)

Some of these are on 3G service only.. A service scheduled to die already. Others are on both 3G and 4G, but will eventually die off (people will stop wanting them first) as Verizon is now developing 5G.

Its a waiting game for Verizon.. Paid for by the customers, as its calculated into over all cost structure. As it will be for any business.

 

You really, really need to go read the actual financial statements for these companies. (Don't read the "made $1 bill in total profit" type statements, which are meaningless unless seen in relation to company size and revenue. If the needed future investment in new technology and infra-structure out of that profit is for example $999,999,999, they actually only made $1 to provide to share-holders..

Read the relative profit numbers. As in last quarter's 2.25% per share, the profit margin numbers, and similar.

 

If one live by a "everything is the evil corporations fault", it only FEELS good. But its like peeing your pants just to feel warm for a moment.. There is no long-term reality to it.

The "corporation" is shareholders.. The largest shareholders are huge pension plans and mutual-funds sitting in retirement accounts..

As in "us all".. You, me, and everyone.. Are we all evil for having a retirement savings and preferring that savings to grow enough to shave off the negative impacts of inflation?

Actually the numbers I gave were from the year 2014 as were published by Verizon. Not made up numbers. As far as revenues .....

Verizon Revenues by Business Segment FY 2014

In FY’14 (fiscal year ended December 31, 2014), Verizon generated $127.1 billion of total revenues. Of these total revenues, Verizon generated

• $87.6 billion revenues, 69.0% of the total, from the wireless business segment. Of the $87.6 billion, Verizon generated $69.5 billion from retail services, $3.1 billion from other services, $11.0 from Equipment sales, and $4.1 billion from other.
• $38.4 billion revenues, 30.2% of the total, from the wireline business segment. Of the $38.4 billion, Verizon generated $18.0 billion from mass markets, $13.7 billion from global enterprise, $6.2 billion from global wholesale, and $0.5 billion from other.
• $1.0 billion revenues, 0.8% of the total, from corporate, eliminations, and other.

SO the profit statement is after taking into account the revenues as the way I understand it

[IRUNL8R]

[IRUNL8R]

[deecee]

 

I am sure everyone has had a chance to read all the fine print of Omnilynx's Contract with Huntsville City Schools and can then use their law degree to figure out who is right and wrong..Yes I am being sarcastic on purpose. As I am Sure NO ONE has the actual contract in hand and can deliver the "legal" who is right and wrong in the matter.

What most of the General Public is upset with is the unfairness of it all and being denied services that others have at a reasonable cost to them

 

There is no "Huntsville and Verizon" contract.. There is only a global 50-state contract from 2012, which Huntsville latched on to by signing a standard 2-page addendum to "agree to contract terms". Thats the global contract they applied for a patent on abusing.

And yes, I have the contract in hand, and yes I have read it.

 

There are not currently any lawyers or lawsuits running on this. I highly doubt there will be.

Its simple.. Huntsville got caught, they got stopped, and they know it. Huntsville has already publicly declared that they are out.. Will not sign a new (more clearly restricted) contract with Verizon.

Verizon COULD sue Huntsville probably, but will not.. Too small a case and too public an issue.

Huntsville can't sue Verizon in my opinion.. First, they would not have a leg to stand on, and secondly, they cannot afford to make their actions that public. Then it ALLLLLL comes out.

End of story (so far). Just two partners stopping their partnership.

[deecee]

 

 

 

Net Margin 7.6% ?

Is that what you call greedy? Margins then having to pay for future investments and technology upgrades, PLUS satisfy shareholders needs for return on investment so they do not call for the executive heads to roll.

[IRUNL8R]

 

Net Margin 7.6% ?

Is that what you call greedy? Margins then having to pay for future investments and technology upgrades, PLUS satisfy shareholders needs for return on investment so they do not call for the executive heads to roll.

Yes when the 7.6% is in billions LOL ..

As for fairness, Yes I was brought up to be fair in all I do. No I am not going to go crying to mom as you describe it..

Instead, I will use the right to freedom of speech and expression which I have earned the right to do. I have expressed my opinion and will leave it at that.

As for a contract with Huntsville, If you are not a company representative from either Huntsville or Verizon, then you have No idea if a real contract exists (only what you can find online using unlimited data...lol) and yes there are verbal contracts that do stand up in court. Next up

[deecee]

 

Net Margin 7.6% ?

Is that what you call greedy? Margins then having to pay for future investments and technology upgrades, PLUS satisfy shareholders needs for return on investment so they do not call for the executive heads to roll.

 

Just to give you a feeling for what is normal in business here a comparison of ROE (Return on Equity) and Net Margins for businesses categories under the S&P500. (2012 numbers, but good enough for comparison).

And per your earlier reply.. That the percentage is off "billions" is meaningless. Total dollars don't count. Only relative (percentages) do.. Being big also means having equivalently larger expenses, investments, more employees, more infra-structure, ..., ..., ... to pay for.. Hence the margin percentage..

 

[IRUNL8R]

 

Just to give you a feeling for what is normal in business here a comparison of ROE (Return on Equity) and Net Margins for businesses categories under the S&P500. (2012 numbers, but good enough for comparison).

And per your earlier reply.. That the percentage is off "billions" is meaningless. Total dollars don't count. Only relative (percentages) do.. Being big also means having equivalently larger expenses, investments, more employees, more infra-structure, ..., ..., ... to pay for.. Hence the margin percentage..

 

While I appreciate that you are showing other industries in your point, I was only talking about Verizon and other telecoms. I will not try to compare apples to oranges.

 

Instead, I will leave this conversation for others to look at and make their own opinions on the matter after they do their own research. I think I have expressed my opinion on the matter whether it be right or wrong in the opinion of others. Like you, I will continue to fight what I feel is not right. I understand your opinion and respect it as such. I may not agree with it but I respect it is yours and your right to express it as well. I love that I live in a country that allows me to have my opinion and others are free to have and express theirs as well.

[deecee]

.

As for a contract with Huntsville, If you are not a company representative from either Huntsville or Verizon, then you have No idea if a real contract exists (only what you can find online using unlimited data...lol) and yes there are verbal contracts that do stand up in court. Next up

 

Wow.

 

How does one have a conversation around that?

 

I am looking right at the contract (both full contract and addendum) and the original RFP) WITH Huntsville's signature on it, many megabytes of documentation, and the formal statement releases of both Verizon, Huntsville, and NASPO, and you manage to discount all of that without having seen or read any of it, by merely "believing" that there might be or could be something else to be seen.. Which of course COULD be true.. There are many things happening in the world that I don't know about.

 

But think about the likelihood..

A mysterious extra, invisible contract that Huntsville just for some reason has decided not to flip out immediately or even quote to win their argument immediately. To show that they are right, both with Verizon and with the press.

Not even willing to bring that "hidden contract" out to save the original "Internet for poor kids" part of the project. Instead they merely put out a press release finally that they will no longer work with Verizon.

Also notice, that Verizon attorneys got involved around Sept 10.. Device shipments stopped around Sept 15 and program was formally shut down on Nov 4/5.. Giving Huntsville a likely almost 2 months to argue their case using whatever invisible "contract" they might have had.

[NJTroy]

I spent my career in telecom. I've seen every incarnation of market structure for telecom companies from government owned PTTs to widespread small carrier competition to the current oligopoly. Frankly, the current system in the U.S. works pretty well as long as T-Mobile and Sprint act as market disrupters to hold the giants in check.

 

You aren't going to get ubiquitous unlimited service at this point. It's just not going to happen. The big companies will continue to build out and deepen the infrastructure & technology to compete with each other on footprint and quality while the smaller companies continue to introduce innovative new plans. To the extent that it makes sense to them, the larger carriers will create competitive offers based on the smaller companies and the smaller companies will continue to grow infrastructure to compete with the bigger ones. That's the way this market works. Everyone still needs to make enough to do the investments necessary to push the technology and service offerings forward and still make a profit for the shareholders who own the company. If you drive the profit margins down significantly by insisting that these companies operate at the significantly lower margins that ubiquitous unlimited data requires, the industry will come to a grinding halt and the network won't be able to support the service quality we demand.

 

This is the same as in any other business. I might really really want my next truck to cost me the same as the fleet buyers. Not going to happen because they need to profits to continue. Huntsville was a mess, it was not credible that Verizon really signed such a contract. The early adopters in this industry who got unlimited data plans got them because they were seen as necessary to get those customers into the services. No one ever guaranteed that the telecoms would provide that offer forever to every person who walked in the door forever which is what Hunstville was doing. It's not a fairness issue, it's business.

[IRUNL8R]

 

by merely "believing" that there might be or could be something else to be seen.. Which of course COULD be true.. There are many things happening in the world that I don't know about.

 

.

Key word is "Could"..But as I said, I am leaving this conversation, Not because i feel you are right or wrong, but as I have expressed that I feel that Verizon did not handle the "Unlimited Data" Debacle ( NOT JUST HUNTSVILLE but Milliecom and other instances) well at all and is putting profit before customers.

It is my opinion, that if one telecom can offer unlimited data then all should be able to do just that at a reasonable price. The word "reasonable" can be defined by the person defining what is "reasonable" to themselves.

As an owner of a small business myself, I believe in competition. But, I believe in fairness and providing a service/product to all that want to utilize those services/products. But, also knowing that I could not provide all things in my field or able to do it in a reasonable time or way, I make a habit to refer my competitors that I know can and will provide the service or product at a reasonable cost. Nothing wrong with referring a competitor. Too bad, we don't see the Telecom industry take on the same principles.

One may say, "All is fair in love and War" well, As a veteran of two wars, I can say even on the battlefield there is fairness..When I was in Desert Storm, we didn't just shoot those who had their hands up surrendering...No, instead we provided them with food, shelter, and sometimes clothes. It was the right thing to do.

[IRUNL8R]

I spent my career in telecom. I've seen every incarnation of market structure for telecom companies from government owned PTTs to widespread small carrier competition to the current oligopoly. Frankly, the current system in the U.S. works pretty well as long as T-Mobile and Sprint act as market disrupters to hold the giants in check.

 

You aren't going to get ubiquitous unlimited service at this point. It's just not going to happen. The big companies will continue to build out and deepen the infrastructure & technology to compete with each other on footprint and quality while the smaller companies continue to introduce innovative new plans. To the extent that it makes sense to them, the larger carriers will create competitive offers based on the smaller companies and the smaller companies will continue to grow infrastructure to compete with the bigger ones. That's the way this market works. Everyone still needs to make enough to do the investments necessary to push the technology and service offerings forward and still make a profit for the shareholders who own the company. If you drive the profit margins down significantly by insisting that these companies operate at the significantly lower margins that ubiquitous unlimited data requires, the industry will come to a grinding halt and the network won't be able to support the service quality we demand.

 

This is the same as in any other business. I might really really want my next truck to cost me the same as the fleet buyers. Not going to happen because they need to profits to continue. Huntsville was a mess, it was not credible that Verizon really signed such a contract. The early adopters in this industry who got unlimited data plans got them because they were seen as necessary to get those customers into the services. No one ever guaranteed that the telecoms would provide that offer forever to every person who walked in the door forever which is what Hunstville was doing. It's not a fairness issue, it's business.

Well said and I respect your insight.

But with respect to it isn't happening...How is Sprint offering truly unlimited data??

[Jack Mayer]

Verizon DID provide a "service or product" to all. Their unlimited plan was available to everyone. I had it as well as others. They then changed their offering to eliminate the unlimited plan. BUT they grandfathered in all the existing customers - like you. EVERY business changes its offerings over time, based on market conditions. As far as I can tell Verizon offers all its customers the same things. And always has. I have not seen any "discrimination" on Verizon's part. But perhaps I missed it.

[NJTroy]

Because at this particular moment in time, they are more concerned about growing the size of their customer base than the impact on their network. If the size of their customer base grows great enough that the service begins to degrade below what their customers will tolerate, they will begin to restrict and/or eliminate that offer. Their customer base has already proven more tolerant of service footprint restrictions, perhaps they are betting that they will also except poorer service quality if the network demand from unlimited data as well.

 

Verizon and AT&T customers are quite intolerant of poor service quality and limited footprint. And it's easy enough to switch between them to avoid those issues. They can't afford the same risk that Sprint can, but Sprint's (& T-Mobile's) presence in the market helps to hold them in check on pricing and service capabilities.