FCC Questioning All Carriers On Unlimited Throttling Policies

[WB2]

Verizon doesn't throttle all the time after hitting a limit, like some other carriers.

Verizon only throttles for the time period that it's necessary to give non-unlimited customers a decent experience on a congested cell.

I think that's pretty decent of them to allow grandfathered unlimited users (who are often paying as low as $23 a month) unlimited bandwidth most of the time, and only throttle when necessary.

You can look at other countries (UK/USA excepted) that have the same 4G LTE/fiber optic networks services and how much a dowloaded GB costs in those countries,its not a secret either........there is only one conclusion.
The guy from Ireland is the ONE person on this forum that realizes it.

"that's pretty DECENT of them"......BWAH HA HA HA HA HA !!!!

 

[zipa]

Fortunately, talk and text is all unlimited usually now. I would expect at some point all data will be as well.

Talk and texts are unlimited because nobody uses them that much and providing the service costs peanuts for the carriers. No amount of texting will really even show up in the carrier bandwidth usage statistics, and voice calls amount to a few kilobytes per second in bandwidth usage for a few minutes or so.

Compare that to someone blasting away streaming videos at several hundreds or thousands of kilobytes per second for several hours and you should easily see why texts and calls are and will remain "free", but data costs will only go up.

 

[JAT]

My entire point is that the whole Verizon thing that got this going recently is that they likely can do it and people on the unlimited plans have terms and conditions that say they can be affected like that.

That's right, pretend your comments are completely vanilla.

----------

Yup, they keep offering the same terms where nothing states about any speeds being guaranteed (and that whole thing meaning that they therefore can't throttle because that's not in the contract is stretching the whole "in favor" argument beyond what it would apply to), and it also states they can stop offering the plan or change something about it with simply notice and your rights are then to accept it or not and leave.

See, there is a big difference between not guaranteeing speed because of technology and throttling. Claiming these are the same means you just want to punish people. If you haven't thought your own thoughts through to see what they really are, don't accuse me of having no useful response.

 

[zipa]

B.E.C.A.U.S.E. that’s what their contract says.
They are connected and always will be. If you limit my speed to a rate of 10MB per hour you have just limited my data quantity. Please tell me you can see that?
Please tell me you have the nous to work out that my monthly cap would be somewhere in the region of;
10 x 24 x 31 MB. I’ve paid for unlimited so give it to me. If you can’t manage that don’t advertsise it as such.
It’s not to do with how much I paid it’s to do with what I signed up for and that applies to all contracts not just my unlimited but your limited one too.

God I have no idea how people are so shortsigted.

What nonsense is this? The bandwidth is limited at any rate so your argument is completely moot.

 

[kdarling]

You can look at other countries (UK/USA excepted) that have the same 4G LTE/fiber optic networks services and how much a dowloaded GB costs in those countries,its not a secret either........there is only one conclusion.
The guy from Ireland is the ONE person on this forum that realizes it.

I'm sorry, what other carrier on the planet gives unlimited GB of LTE for as low as $23 a month (which is what a lot of us are paying due to corporate / educational / whatever discounts)... or $30 at most?

And covers a country the size of the US?

"that's pretty DECENT of them"......BWAH HA HA HA HA HA !!!!

Well, yes, it was quite decent of them.

They had no reason to grandfather in all of us unlimited users... especially from 3G to LTE... but I'm glad they did, and I hope they don't now drop it just because some fools are rocking the boat.

 

[zipa]

Like I said, contracts aren't in question here. There are no throttled contract plans. Period.

Of course there are, and they are very common as well. You can choose between unlimited data but fixed speed or unlimited speed with a data cap after which you can either buy more data or keep using the connection at a heavily throttled speed.

----------

No one is purchasing unlimited bandwidth.

I am. It is obviously "throttled" by the physical limitations of the connection, and that is mentioned in the contract as well, but what I'm buying is an "unlimited bandwidth connection".

 

[gavroche]

Talk and texts are unlimited because nobody uses them that much and providing the service costs peanuts for the carriers. No amount of texting will really even show up in the carrier bandwidth usage statistics, and voice calls amount to a few kilobytes per second in bandwidth usage for a few minutes or so.

Compare that to someone blasting away streaming videos at several hundreds or thousands of kilobytes per second for several hours and you should easily see why texts and calls are and will remain "free", but data costs will only go up.

Providing voice and text service may be "peanuts" now, but it was not always. For those of us old enough to remember life pre-cell phones... the transition was slow. How do cell companies provide these services? Through cell towers. These all had to be built. All over the country. It took a lot of time, and a lot of money. Cell companies did not charge a lot for voice and text at that time because "they wanted to", or because "they could." They had to recoup all the millions of dollars it cost to build up that infrastructure.
Now they face growing data use requirements, as you mentioned. They can and will meet this need... but it will take time. They once again have to build up the infrastructure to handle this need. This is going to cost a lot of money. They have to pass these costs along. But I assure you, eventually this infrastructure will all exist, and eventually they will have recouped the costs. The ongoing cost of maintaining an existing system is far less than the initial buildup cost. Once we reach that point, data prices WILL get far cheaper.

 

[C DM]

That's right, pretend your comments are completely vanilla.

----------



See, there is a big difference between not guaranteeing speed because of technology and throttling. Claiming these are the same means you just want to punish people. If you haven't thought your own thoughts through to see what they really are, don't accuse me of having no useful response.

Pointlessly trying to make something up to call out people on instead of actually discussing the subject just proves the weakness of the argument. Doing so repeatedly completely devalues anything that might be said. So on that note, even if there might have been something worthy of discussing there, it doesn't seem like there's much use in paying much attention to it in those comments.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

That whole argument is a non-starter.

If you're going to claim/imply that the lack of mention about particular speeds creates any ambiguity in the contract terms, you should keep the following in mind: any ambiguity in a contract is, by law, resolved in favor of the non-drafting party. So, if the lack of specificity about the network speeds creates ambiguity, then the *user* of the plan, not the owner of the network who drafted the contract, is the one who benefits from said ambiguity.

I think your argument boils down to, "I want unlimited bandwidth for both data and speed and preferably free if I can find some way to get it that way." I mean you act as if there aren't actual restrictions on bandwidth in the current Universe and just because your contract says "unlimited DATA" and not "unlimited SPEED" that you should have the latter too because they didn't actually state it. They didn't state you'd get a free cheeseburger every month at Red Robin with your contract either, so by your logic, they should have to give it to you.

I'm sorry, but they owe you neither a cheeseburger or unlimited speed. The fact you obviously don't CARE about there being other people sharing your network that would like their smart phones to be useful ALSO for the time they paid for tells me this has NOTHING to do with a contract, NOTHING to do with what's right or fair and EVERYTHING to do with you want what's best for you and screw everyone else. They had to stop offering "unlimited" plans because their network CANNOT support it due to far more interest in smart phones that anyone on Earth ever imagined. They didn't just void your contract. They're saying they never guaranteed constant maximum speed and others have a right to use the network too, not just you. Everyone else is paying by the GB and they have a right to those GB they paid for. If giving you and others like you unlimited bandwidth (within their network's capability) means those other customers don't get their data at all, that will cost them a lot more customers than little 'ole you. It's only common sense that they would shaft the few in favor of the many.

Basically, even if you don't like it, you don't have to act like you can't comprehend it. I doubt you're going to convince the masses that they should accept having less so you can have more. That just won't go over too well.

And those unlimited contracts have been extended by AT&T time after time when people renew. They don't offer those terms to *new* customers any more, but they continue to offer those terms to existing customers who signed up under those terms while they *were* available to new customers.

And that's doing people a favor. They don't offer them anymore because they're untenable for the entire subscription base. You can argue they should just keep adding bandwidth, but that costs big money to expand the entire country endlessly and that will mean higher prices for everyone.

 

[JAT]

Pointlessly trying to make something up to call out people on instead of actually discussing the subject just proves the weakness of the argument. Doing so repeatedly completely devalues anything that might be said. So on that note, even if there might have been something worthy of discussing there, it doesn't seem like there's much use in paying much attention to it in those comments.

I don't even know what you are trying to say, but your irony is strong.

My last post discussed the exact point of the thread: throttling. Again: speed lowering due to traffic is a technological barrier which the contracts must address. Intentional throttling of specific people was never addressed. And, the people that say VZW should not be doing that are saying, in effect, "don't change my contract". Yet here you are day after day claiming they have no right to be annoyed by their relationship with VZW. Yes, they do. Quit telling them they are wrong.

 

[C DM]

I don't even know what you are trying to say, but your irony is strong.

My last post discussed the exact point of the thread: throttling. Again: speed lowering due to traffic is a technological barrier which the contracts must address. Intentional throttling of specific people was never addressed. And, the people that say VZW should not be doing that are saying, in effect, "don't change my contract". Yet here you are day after day claiming they have no right to be annoyed by their relationship with VZW. Yes, they do. Quit telling them they are wrong.

The irony of telling someone to stop telling something to someone else. Now that's where the irony is certainly not lost on anyone.

As I mentioned before, there might be something worthy of discussion somewhere there (although even all that was likely addressed a number of times before), but all the pointless personal insinuations and rhetoric make the potential for such a discussion rather moot.

 

[zipa]

The point of the bandwidth restriction is to limit the amount of data you are able to use.

That's like complaining that the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day limits the amount of data you can use.

 

[joltheadq]

Stating the obvious

All the commentors who are yay for VZN throttling don't have unlimited data and are jealous and the commentors who are against it have it and don't want to loose what they have gotten used to.

It's like anything you have that's nice and have gotten used to the Luxury of it. And as expected, everybody who doesn't have it is all skank-eyed about it b/c they don't have it and wants to join VZN in giving the middle finger to the unlimiters. One loud hurrah to join the communal masses of the s&#$ kickers.

That or either the VZN backers hold their stock. In either case they hold no grounds in the debate because it doesn't apply to them. So please, let all those with unlimited data be upset (as they're are rightful to be) and the others go Phk yourselves. You wouldn't understand what not knowing whether your connecting is getting tampered with or not feels like.

I mean, it's not like everyone with unlimited data is torrenting and downloading more than a cable modem can. But that doesn't matter because whose going to defend an unlimited customer from knowing whether 5% 50% 75% of those customers are having they're lines tampered with.

What's with the cost of bandwidth in the USA anyway? We pay the most for bandwidth out of any modern country and yet Canada has cheaper internet than the US! And you got people in gov. like Marsha Blackburn who are blocking 19 other states from developing metropolitan broadband like
Lafayette, LA and Chattanooga, TN where citizens pay a fair price for straight fiber.

HERES AN ORIGINAL IDEA!!! How about INSTEAD of antagonizing anyone on the net with an opinion (like HBO's john oliver said) and redirect that energy to something for useful like studying up on politics and reigning in this BS we've been chalking up for the past 4 decades. Make representatives and senators accountable for they're actions.

--== GOVTRACK.US ==--

----------

All the commentors who are yay for VZN throttling don't have unlimited data and are jealous and the commentors who are against it have it and don't want to loose what they have gotten used to.

It's like anything you have that's nice and have gotten used to the Luxury of it. And as expected, everybody who doesn't have it is all skank-eyed about it b/c they don't have it and wants to join VZN in giving the middle finger to the unlimiters. One loud hurrah to join the communal masses of the s&#$ kickers.

That or either the VZN backers hold their stock. In either case they hold no grounds in the debate because it doesn't apply to them. So please, let all those with unlimited data be upset (as they're are rightful to be) and the others go Phk yourselves. You wouldn't understand what not knowing whether your connecting is getting tampered with or not feels like.

I mean, it's not like everyone with unlimited data is torrenting and downloading more than a cable modem can. But that doesn't matter because whose going to defend an unlimited customer from knowing whether 5% 50% 75% of those customers are having they're lines tampered with.

What's with the cost of bandwidth in the USA anyway? We pay the most for bandwidth out of any modern country and yet Canada has cheaper internet than the US! And you got people in gov. like Marsha Blackburn who are blocking 19 other states from developing metropolitan broadband like
Lafayette, LA and Chattanooga, TN where citizens pay a fair price for straight fiber.

HERES AN ORIGINAL IDEA!!! How about INSTEAD of antagonizing anyone on the net with an opinion (like HBO's john oliver said) and redirect that energy to something for useful like studying up on politics and reigning in this BS we've been chalking up for the past 4 decades. Make representatives and senators accountable for they're actions.

--== GOVTRACK.US ==--

I'm willing to bet some smart A$$ will say "I have unlimited data and I want VZN to throttle my data connection" PLease, make me laugh! Please!

 

[C DM]

All the commentors who are yay for VZN throttling don't have unlimited data and are jealous and the commentors who are against it have it and don't want to loose what they have gotten used to.

It's like anything you have that's nice and have gotten used to the Luxury of it. And as expected, everybody who doesn't have it is all skank-eyed about it b/c they don't have it and wants to join VZN in giving the middle finger to the unlimiters. One loud hurrah to join the communal masses of the s&#$ kickers.

That or either the VZN backers hold their stock. In either case they hold no grounds in the debate because it doesn't apply to them. So please, let all those with unlimited data be upset (as they're are rightful to be) and the others go Phk yourselves. You wouldn't understand what not knowing whether your connecting is getting tampered with or not feels like.

I mean, it's not like everyone with unlimited data is torrenting and downloading more than a cable modem can. But that doesn't matter because whose going to defend an unlimited customer from knowing whether 5% 50% 75% of those customers are having they're lines tampered with.

What's with the cost of bandwidth in the USA anyway? We pay the most for bandwidth out of any modern country and yet Canada has cheaper internet than the US! And you got people in gov. like Marsha Blackburn who are blocking 19 other states from developing metropolitan broadband like
Lafayette, LA and Chattanooga, TN where citizens pay a fair price for straight fiber.

HERES AN ORIGINAL IDEA!!! How about INSTEAD of antagonizing anyone on the net with an opinion (like HBO's john oliver said) and redirect that energy to something for useful like studying up on politics and reigning in this BS we've been chalking up for the past 4 decades. Make representatives and senators accountable for they're actions.

--== GOVTRACK.US ==--

----------



I'm willing to bet some smart A$$ will say "I have unlimited data and I want VZN to throttle my data connection" PLease, make me laugh! Please!

Or someone can have it, but still understand that it's within the rights of Verizon to do what they are doing based on the terms of their service. People don't have to love or hate Verizon over it, they can just rationally understand what they are in for. It's one thing to not be happy about something, it's another to keep on saying that it can't be done and they deserve something more than what they agreed to essentially. I guess that takes somewhat more rational and in-control people than there usually are in general populace.

Having said that, you are still discounting plenty of those on unlimited plans who don't even get close to 4 GB of usage and won't be affected by any of this, and won't really waste much efferent to even care one way or another. And also those who might hit that and rationally understand that the throttling would only come into play when they are on a congested tower and only for a duration of their time there--what's interesting, without throttling at that time, everyone would be congested anyway, so people would still be throttled by the congestion, so it's not like people are actually losing anything here.

If anything this can be seen as the opposite where that those who have unlimited and are complaining about this are jealous of those who are on current plans and are paying more and might be less congested during time of congestion. Becomes kind of clear that making subjective calls about jealousy or reasons behind someone thinking this or that isn't just simply something that's just "black or white".

 

[kenroberts83]

I don't even know what you are trying to say, but your irony is strong.

My last post discussed the exact point of the thread: throttling. Again: speed lowering due to traffic is a technological barrier which the contracts must address. Intentional throttling of specific people was never addressed. And, the people that say VZW should not be doing that are saying, in effect, "don't change my contract". Yet here you are day after day claiming they have no right to be annoyed by their relationship with VZW. Yes, they do. Quit telling them they are wrong.

Verizon explicitly stated that they would not throttle anyone under contract. There is absolutely nothing preventing you from getting a different plan. This all falls under the category of "If you don't like it, shop someone else."

This all strikes me as a very immature argument, like someone demanding government regulation of Chipotle for charging extra for guacamole. Businesses have to choose a business model, and this was the one chosen by Verizon. Either deal with it or take your business elsewhere.

 

[joltheadq]

Thanks for the comic relief guys. BTW Sprint offers unlimited data on 3G. Jump on that band waggon.

 

[mac.cali]

Verizon explicitly stated that they would not throttle anyone under contract. There is absolutely nothing preventing you from getting a different plan. This all falls under the category of "If you don't like it, shop someone else."

This all strikes me as a very immature argument, like someone demanding government regulation of Chipotle for charging extra for guacamole. Businesses have to choose a business model, and this was the one chosen by Verizon. Either deal with it or take your business elsewhere.

The revised policy doesn't state being under contract protects you from data throttling. You must be still under the impression the press release is the correct policy. The policy is on the FAQ and it doesn't state anything about contract status, meaning all users with unlimited data are affected.

----------

Thanks for the comic relief guys. BTW Sprint offers unlimited data on 3G. Jump on that band waggon.

Being in Sprint 3G is already like being throttled. That's how slow they are.

 

[kenroberts83]

I don't even know what you are trying to say, but your irony is strong.

My last post discussed the exact point of the thread: throttling. Again: speed lowering due to traffic is a technological barrier which the contracts must address. Intentional throttling of specific people was never addressed. And, the people that say VZW should not be doing that are saying, in effect, "don't change my contract". Yet here you are day after day claiming they have no right to be annoyed by their relationship with VZW. Yes, they do. Quit telling them they are wrong.

The rest of us are just tired of listening to your whining. Unlimited plans were abolished for a reason, and AT&T/Verizon did you a favor in letting you keep your old plan. Now they're trying to reign in the gravy train. If you don't like it, switch plans or switch carriers. We're tired of listening to your belly aching.

 

[joltheadq]

Verizon explicitly stated that they would not throttle anyone under contract. There is absolutely nothing preventing you from getting a different plan. This all falls under the category of "If you don't like it, shop someone else."

This all strikes me as a very immature argument, like someone demanding government regulation of Chipotle for charging extra for guacamole. Businesses have to choose a business model, and this was the one chosen by Verizon. Either deal with it or take your business elsewhere.

Why do you care. You don't have unlimited data. You only squabble in others business arrogantly dignifying yourself above others for being vastly superior in maturity. Gnight Socrates.

----------

The rest of us are just tired of listening to your whining. Unlimited plans were abolished for a reason, and AT&T/Verizon did you a favor in letting you keep your old plan. Now they're trying to reign in the gravy train. If you don't like it, switch plans or switch carriers. We're tired of listening to your belly aching.

Again. You don't have unlimited data. Call sprint and hand out some tums doctor of bellyaches.

----------

The rest of us are just tired of listening to your whining. Unlimited plans were abolished for a reason, and AT&T/Verizon did you a favor in letting you keep your old plan. Now they're trying to reign in the gravy train. If you don't like it, switch plans or switch carriers. We're tired of listening to your belly aching.

If your tired of handing out tums, I have an excellent solution for you brother. Move on.

----------

Or someone can have it, but still understand that it's within the rights of Verizon to do what they are doing based on the terms of their service. People don't have to love or hate Verizon over it, they can just rationally understand what they are in for. It's one thing to not be happy about something, it's another to keep on saying that it can't be done and they deserve something more than what they agreed to essentially. I guess that takes somewhat more rational and in-control people than there usually are in general populace.

Having said that, you are still discounting plenty of those on unlimited plans who don't even get close to 4 GB of usage and won't be affected by any of this, and won't really waste much efferent to even care one way or another. And also those who might hit that and rationally understand that the throttling would only come into play when they are on a congested tower and only for a duration of their time there--what's interesting, without throttling at that time, everyone would be congested anyway, so people would still be throttled by the congestion, so it's not like people are actually losing anything here.

If anything this can be seen as the opposite where that those who have unlimited and are complaining about this are jealous of those who are on current plans and are paying more and might be less congested during time of congestion. Becomes kind of clear that making subjective calls about jealousy or reasons behind someone thinking this or that isn't just simply something that's just "black or white".

Could you in good faith bet your life or the life of your children that VZN will do precisely that? Throttle only when the tower is congested. Without independent oversight as is law by the agreements VZN took upon the purchase of Block C from the FCC. Look where trusting corp. america has gotten us now. How many life savings gone, divorces, families ripped apart and alcoholism over it all. Moral compass? Whats wrong with you people?

----------

Or someone can have it, but still understand that it's within the rights of Verizon to do what they are doing based on the terms of their service. People don't have to love or hate Verizon over it, they can just rationally understand what they are in for. It's one thing to not be happy about something, it's another to keep on saying that it can't be done and they deserve something more than what they agreed to essentially. I guess that takes somewhat more rational and in-control people than there usually are in general populace.

Having said that, you are still discounting plenty of those on unlimited plans who don't even get close to 4 GB of usage and won't be affected by any of this, and won't really waste much efferent to even care one way or another. And also those who might hit that and rationally understand that the throttling would only come into play when they are on a congested tower and only for a duration of their time there--what's interesting, without throttling at that time, everyone would be congested anyway, so people would still be throttled by the congestion, so it's not like people are actually losing anything here.

If anything this can be seen as the opposite where that those who have unlimited and are complaining about this are jealous of those who are on current plans and are paying more and might be less congested during time of congestion. Becomes kind of clear that making subjective calls about jealousy or reasons behind someone thinking this or that isn't just simply something that's just "black or white".

I agree with you. Well said. It's only that humans + $$$ = lies. And VZN is breeching it's agreement from its Block C Spectrum purchase from the FCC. There is no independent firm having oversight of VZN's measure of what should be legitimately throttled and is the tower really congested. Bandwidth cost money and they can lie to say it's congested. VZN is breeching the BLACK AND WHITE laws they agreed to when purchasing the spectrum for LTE. Check my earlier post for the link if your curious.

 

[C DM]

Why do you care. You don't have unlimited data. You only squabble in others business arrogantly dignifying yourself above others for being vastly superior in maturity. Gnight Socrates.

----------



Again. You don't have unlimited data. Call sprint and hand out some tums doctor of bellyaches.

----------



If your tired of handing out tums, I have an excellent solution for you brother. Move on.

----------



Could you in good faith bet your life or the life of your children that VZN will do precisely that? Throttle only when the tower is congested. Without independent oversight as is law by the agreements VZN took upon the purchase of Block C from the FCC. Look where trusting corp. america has gotten us now. How many life savings gone, divorces, families ripped apart and alcoholism over it all. Moral compass? Whats wrong with you people?

----------



I agree with you. Well said. It's only that humans + $$$ = lies. And VZN is breeching it's agreement from its Block C Spectrum purchase from the FCC. There is no independent firm having oversight of VZN's measure of what should be legitimately throttled and is the tower really congested. Bandwidth cost money and they can lie to say it's congested. VZN is breeching the BLACK AND WHITE laws they agreed to when purchasing the spectrum for LTE. Check my earlier post for the link if your curious.

Ah, well, if we are talking about not trusting corporations and governments and all that, well, there really isn't much to argue there as that whole approach to it doesn't really leave much room for any worthwhile discussion.

----------

The revised policy doesn't state being under contract protects you from data throttling. You must be still under the impression the press release is the correct policy. The policy is on the FAQ and it doesn't state anything about contract status, meaning all users with unlimited data are affected.

----------



Being in Sprint 3G is already like being throttled. That's how slow they are.

The news release has that information while the FAQ currently doesn't. Don't think that alone implies that it doesn't apply. But it can call it into question as far as getting some additional confirmation one way or another to be sure.

 

[unplugme71]

Glad you mentioned this. I've been on the AT&T "unlimited" plan since I got my first iPhone in 2007, and I thought that it would be crazy to give it up. But now that one of my kids has an iPhone, I might just switch to a shared data plan. The vast majority of my data traffic is on Wi-Fi at work and at home, so I doubt if I use even 1GB a month on the cellular network.

Exactly. I used 6gb myself on unlimited. I switched to 10 gb family with 3 more iPhones and our family combined uses less than 5gb now because of more wifi use.

Not only that but I can finally tether!

 

[JAT]

Verizon explicitly stated that they would not throttle anyone under contract. There is absolutely nothing preventing you from getting a different plan. This all falls under the category of "If you don't like it, shop someone else."

This all strikes me as a very immature argument, like someone demanding government regulation of Chipotle for charging extra for guacamole. Businesses have to choose a business model, and this was the one chosen by Verizon. Either deal with it or take your business elsewhere.

I already did take my business elsewhere. For people that are such sticklers for obscure "facts", perhaps reading the thread would assist you in talking to other posters.

 

[kenroberts83]

You can look at other countries (UK/USA excepted) that have the same 4G LTE/fiber optic networks services and how much a dowloaded GB costs in those countries,its not a secret either........there is only one conclusion.
The guy from Ireland is the ONE person on this forum that realizes it.

"that's pretty DECENT of them"......BWAH HA HA HA HA HA !!!!

If you only want your cost per GB to cover an area the size of Ireland or S. Korea, I'm sure you can get a great rate from one of many regional cellphone carriers in the United States.

Of course you actually want continent-wide coverage, for the same price as someone whose service only spans a few hundred miles.

----------

I already did take my business elsewhere. For people that are such sticklers for obscure "facts", perhaps reading the thread would assist you in talking to other posters.

Congrats. Then the agreements that the rest of us choose to make with Verizon are really none of your concern.

 

[sbailey4]

Nope. It’s your example that’s bad.

----------



B.E.C.A.U.S.E. that’s what their contract says.
They are connected and always will be. If you limit my speed to a rate of 10MB per hour you have just limited my data quantity. Please tell me you can see that?
Please tell me you have the nous to work out that my monthly cap would be somewhere in the region of;
10 x 24 x 31 MB. I’ve paid for unlimited so give it to me. If you can’t manage that don’t advertsise it as such.
It’s not to do with how much I paid it’s to do with what I signed up for and that applies to all contracts not just my unlimited but your limited one too.

God I have no idea how people are so shortsigted.

So how would it work if you were in a low signal area and as such the speed was slower. Same argument? I have 3G not LTE so should I complain that my data isnt "unlimited" because by default I cannot download as fast therefore " you have just limited my data quantity." Absurd logic. Show me where in your contract that it guarantees any speed rate. If you can then you have a valid point. The whole " i am limited to how much data because I am as slower speed" is shortsighted my friend.

However this probably wont be an issue for much longer as the carriers will just cancel any unlimited plans (even grandfathered) and force users to purchase their current plans. Then folks can buy what they want or can afford.

 

[sbailey4]

my god, this sounds exactly like what standard DSL plans do, except this is for mobile carriers..

I like it, but they should be more up-front with "We will slow you down after x gig" and NOT just mention "unlimited" since it is somewhat, but not at full speed after the fact. Thus, most people would either bundle more data on, or leave it.

People will get the wrong idea otherwise. So, i dunno why they are not up front, without it being buried in their Terms users must go look for.

Other than that, i see nothing wrong.

U can't actually expect a mobile carrier to let a user use as much data as you want without limiting can you ? It would bosh the network

You are somewhat correct. However remember VZW has not offered any unlimited plans for years. They have just allowed folks to keep (grandfather) theirs AFTER their current contract expired. They are under no obligation technically and could require users to change to their current plans once their existing contract is fulfilled.So if you sign up for X plan for 2 yrs then in year 3 they could say OK contract over, we no longer offer that package so pick one of these. They opted to allow folks to keep it though and never guaranteed any speed at which you can use the "unlimited amount" of data. Speed was never guaranteed during the contract term for that matter.