Re: untrue in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r7347173 en Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:52:03 EDT Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:52:03 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7388493 LegoPower77 : Tsk, tsk. You guys have ganged up on my friend over here :). (In case you're wondering, I don't work for a teleco.)
{edit}
»Re: untrue
{/edit}

[text was edited by author 2003-07-13 09:21:30]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7388493 Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:03:42 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7388467 LegoPower77 : So what's wrong with a firm raising it's prices? You're making a serious mistake when you look at this through a static lens. There's no guarantee that market conditions will be the same twelve months from now and hence no guarantee that prices will be the same. That's life.

People moan and complain about the cable bill going up, but they don't think about the increase in service (from 50 to 200 channels or so). (Insert typical anecdotes about crappy service here.) When I skip forward a chapter from the monopolistic competition one, I read about price discrimination. This is things like Microsoft making two types of OS, one for business users and one for home users, or airlines charging more as the date of the flight gets closer. People fail to see that when the eeevil corporation raises price, it's not because they are exercising arbitrary control over the market but because an economist has estimated that the gain in revenue outstrips the loss of subscribers. Everyone just wants to point the blame because price goes up (and never offering praise when the price goes down), but the reason it did is because that's what the consumer values it at. If you don't like it quit buying the product and if enough people do, the firm will realize the economist was wrong and lower price. Consumer is king.
--
"Despite the rhetoric of the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' that is so dear to the heart of the political left, a more accurate description of most Americans today would be the 'have-lots' and the 'have-lots-more'." --Thomas Sowell]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7388467 Sun, 13 Jul 2003 08:56:37 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348290 oliphant5 :
said by JakCrow See Profile:
The month to month rate is $49.95.


Not necessarily as proven in this post seen earlier in this thread. »Re: untrue

You just need the proper device to predict the future.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 23:21:20]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348290 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:20:25 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348224 JakCrow :
said by boogie74 See Profile:

I do know these details... and with SBC, there is no need to cancel to begin with. You just call and re-sign for another contract at the $29.95 rate.

You are the one saying "SBC would probably be one of those providers."

Given how the industry is? It wouldn't be unusual, correct? You forget, I escaped the prison you're currently in.

said by boogie74 See Profile:

Is it POSSIBLE that the "then-current month to month rate" will be $29.95?? Or do you see a number or price quoted in there somehow?

The month to month rate is $49.95.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348224 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:14:02 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348221 ravital : Oliphant,

That was something. I just figured out that the shills actually do serve a purpose: When they challenge people like you (with more intestinal fortitude than me), you actually go out there and get some research work done and share it with the rest of us, so we can conveniently bookmark it all and hold the shills to the facts. The exact same scenario played out over the weekend on another thread on copyright and file-sharing, resulting in plenty of good info being posted on the real figures behind CD sales vs. P2P. If these shills had an ounce of common sense they'd realize they are the catalysts for dissemination of information they either would rather ignore or don't want others to see. Then again, if they had an ounce of common sense, they'd have more than an ounce of intellectual honesty.

Thanks for the great work.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348221 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:13:43 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348133 KrK : Lower prices, higher speeds?

Wrong. Lower prices... on new lower-speed tiers. Some lower prices on introductory offers, that then go back up to full rate. BIG WHOOP.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7348133 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:03:46 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7347173 ib50MbSoon :
said by dvd536 See Profile:
ISDN pricing has a lot to do with old tariff laws on the books (at least in america). thats why ISDN was totally passed over for the consumer market. thats also why IDSL (ISDN over DSL) 144/144 is so expensive.
So the big bad government forced the telcos to overinflate the price of ISDN?
--
The whole truth and nothing but the truth at »www.teletruth.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7347173 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:34:34 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7347153 oliphant5 : More hand holding for Boogie. And as the list of increases are miles long, you can google yourself up the details on the packages. Tariff histories too can be googled by both year and state since BellSouth doesn't provide direct navigation to them (wonder why?). eg »cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/ms/filings···ing.htm

A sample tariff package notice can be seen here. As you can see it details the increase, date of increase, when it is effective and how much the increase is if the increases can be briefly described.
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/al/notice/···088.pdf

Some don't detail the amount of the increase, but do acknowledge there is are increases. This because of the insane number of increases included in the tariff filing...the changes can be to an entire service price structure in a single filing.
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/fl/notice/···027.pdf

But a simple search for any of the items in this tariff notice that were supposed to have increased and you can determine the amount of the increase. A little research into Digital ESSX services which a tariff claimed an increase for as an example can reveal what the price change is. It was a simple matter to Google up Digital ESSX, tariff, state and a previous year and I easily found the .pdf from BellSouth covering the service listing the prices charged under that tariff in the state I was looking for. Sorry to burst your bubble Boogie.

A 2003 Tariff filing by BellSouth for the state of Florida (one of many)
»cpr.bst.bellsouth.com/pdf/fl/fil···027.pdf

A 2002 Tariff filing by BellSouth for the state of Florida (one of many)
»cpr.bst.bellsouth.com/pdf/fl/fil···145.pdf

In these two tariff filing examples I've selected, you can see in section A3.13.3.1.a.1a (ESSX Per NAR Combination) the rates for ESSX service per NAR Combination for group 1 in 2002 was $16.90. In 2003 it's $20.29 A 25% increase. And this is just increase in a large price schedule in a single tariff over just 1 year...and there are literally hundreds of tariffs filed every year by the BellSouth units in each state. As the original tariff summary told, only the ESSX price schedule changed in this particular tariff. Per Boogie's request to do his work for him, the rest of the prices for services in this tariff did not change. (eg No price changes for Megalink). So as I continue doing Boogie's work for him, no tariff for a price change where one would be required means no price change. But as you can see browsing these tariff lists...there is no shortage of price increases in virtually every sector of these companies' business.

Verizon
Tariff Notifications
»www22.verizon.com/regulatory/tar···c2.html


Bellsouth Itemized Tariff Notifications By date (and state) so even Boogie can follow along
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/al/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/fl/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/ga/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/ky/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/la/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/ms/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/nc/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/sc/notice/···ice.htm
»cpr.bellsouth.com/pdf/tn/notice/···ice.htm


Will Boogie be satisfied? Hell no. Next he'll want me to bring him Michael Powell himself to read the actual tariff filing to him. Then he'll want sworn testimony from EVERY BellSouth customer who ever had an increase. LOL.

Boogie, you may be able to pull your diversion stunts with others here and think you are so clever when you do so, but if you challenge me I'll slap you down something silly.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 23:41:40]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7347153 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:32:51 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346847 boogie74 : First you say,

quote:
Yeah, constant price increases. You want me to post links to the 2000 and 2001 price increases? I will.


So I ask you to do this. In response, you reply,

quote:
Yeah right. Would you like that stapled and collated?


Did you lose your information or make it up? I vote that you made it up- as you have invented your own history for everything else.

You post a link that has the following information on it:

quote:
April 14, 2003 - Increased per minute rates for calls to Cuba - These are minor increases and Bellsouth still offers excellent Cuba rates on their discounted plans. Basic Standard and Economy per minute rates (the expensive charge when you do not sign up for an international calling plan) increased from $3.03 to $3.34 per minute. Fixed Rate Global plans increased from $0.63 to $0.64 per minute. Other, similar Bellsouth plans now have rates of $0.62 to $0.64 each minute.
As of April 14, 2003 those Bellsouth Global rates to Cuba compare very well to the discount 10-10 services.
February 1, 2003 - International Wireless Termination Charges - applies to international calls originating in the United States and terminating to wireless (mobile) phones and other wireless devices in countries other than the United States. BellSouth added charges for new countries and also increased or decreased charges to some countries. Additionally, BellSouth Long Distance made additions to the list of Dialed Digits to which the International Wireless Termination surcharges are applied effective February 1, 2003.
To view country-specific rate surcharges (which are added on top of your regular per-minute rate) and calling digits (similar to our area codes) for which charges apply, click to this link on BellSouth.com (link opens in a NEW browser window):
BellSouth Residential Long Distance International Wireless Termination Charges.
To view an Adobe Acrobat file of the country-specific calling digits (similar to our area codes) for which charges apply, click to this link on Tariffs.net (link opens an Adobe PDF file in a NEW browser window):


and

quote:
October 1, 2002 - Verizon Timeless Plan - for Customers in Western States (former GTE service area) - a new $3.00 monthly minimum on the Verizon Timeless Plan. This means if your long distance usage is less than $3 in any month, Verizon will round your bill up to $3 (before taxes). Verizon West customers on this plan were supposed to be notified via a stand-alone letter in August.
December 1, 2002 - Verizon Timeless Plan - for Customers in Eastern States - A consumer from Tonawanda, NY alerted me to the $3.00 monthly minimum on Timeless Plan affecting the East coast. Verizon tells me that Eastern customers were notified by letter in October.


I don't see SBC's rate "hikes" listed at all on this site, nor do I see BellSouth's rate "hikes" listed (ok- a penny per minute increase on calls to Cuba- which is STILL lower than anywhere the site has ever seen)- however, these are the two companies you claim have a notorious "history" of rate hikes.

Please tell me that you are arguing that SBC and Bell South are historically punching bills up higher and higher based on an increase of a penny per minute for long distance to Cuba and a minimum long distance calling fee charged by Verizon if you have the "Timeless" plan. Please tell me that you actually have evidence of what you're talking about. Not a proposed law that could mean rate increases by selected companies in one state- not a law that allows SBC to actually charge the $19 national average for wholesale lines.

Your claim is a history of rate hikes. You have shown NOTHING. You posted links to articles about a possible law being passed. You posted links regarding price increases AND decreases on certain services- however, you failed to document the services NOR did you document the price increases that took effect.

PLEASE document your claim as you offered to do.

KING Boogie

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346847 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:03:27 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346842 dvd536 : ISDN pricing has a lot to do with old tariff laws on the books (at least in america). thats why ISDN was totally passed over for the consumer market. thats also why IDSL (ISDN over DSL) 144/144 is so expensive.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346842 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:02:55 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346311 oliphant5 : Not really no. It's the way of the Shill.

Telcos never raise rates, Cali doesn't have a $38B deficit and "I'm from the IRS and I'm here to help you."
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 20:13:40]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346311 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:10:05 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346297 oliphant5 : Sure, and pigs will fly. Seeing as the current month-to-month is $50 you aren't guaranteed that rate.

It's called a INTRO OFFER guy.

You telco shills are a riot.

I guess now us Comcast customers can predict with our Telco Shill brand Magic 8-ball that Comcast service will be FREE in 12 months.

Q: "Will Comcast HSI be free in 12 months?"

Rattle rattle rattle

A: "It is decidedly so."

...Cool...

Q: "Will Boogie ever quit being a telco shill?"

Rattle rattle rattle

A: "Outlook no so good."

-sigh-]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346297 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:08:28 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346281 ravital :
said by boogie74 See Profile:
And, YES... PLEASE post the list of exact price increases that have been happening- and please organize it by company. Also please include a list of those charges that have DECREASED or STAYED THE SAME (again by company).
said by oliphant5 See Profile:
Yeah right. Would you like that stapled and collated?
Oliphant, I had no idea you became his employee... Are congratulations in order or do I get you a truckload of Pepto Bismol?

said by oliphant5 See Profile:
But that's your pattern Boogie. Deny deny deny no matter how much undeniable proof is shown to counter your argument.
Come on. Are you really surprised?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346281 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:06:58 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346135 oliphant5 : Yeah right. Would you like that stapled and collated?

You aren't interested in the truth. You shills never are. I could triple your phone bill and you would still say you want MORE links.

But that's your pattern Boogie. Deny deny deny no matter how much undeniable proof is shown to counter your argument.

And I'm sure you'll just continue dismissing the Washington Post and the FCC's reporting on this matter. You would make a great California governor with your knack of denial.

But since you asked (as if you actually cared...this is just another typical Boogie diversion)

»phone-bill-alert.com/ has a comprehensive list BY COMPANY and DATE as his Royal Highness requested of rate and fee increases for various voice services. Since I'm making no claim that any prices stayed the same, that's up to you to prove.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 20:03:08]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7346135 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 19:51:28 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345892 boogie74 : Your links are all to articles that have nothing to do with "constant" retail price increases. You actually posted an article detailing about how SBC would like to charge more than $12 for a wholesale line to AT&T and WorldCom (as the national average for UNE-P rates is around $19-22). Your Washington Post article is NOT about how the FCC is suing Verizon for overcharging on LNP, but rather that Verizon Wireless is supporting LNP for wireless service... and that they MIGHT add a 10-15 cent surcharge to cover the cost of implementing the technology necessary for wireless LNP. Your quote details two companies (not SBC NOR VERIZON) BA and Sprint- who were overcharging for LNP from 1998-1999. AND, those charges were REDUCED!

Your third link is about legislation in Florida that (if passed, no less) would allow possible price increases for phone services. There has been NO increase as of yet.

The fourth link is a lobby effort to stop this same FL legislation (still no price increases).

The fifth link talks STILL about the FL legislation (still not passed- hence- no increases in price yet).

The 6th link details a proposed (still no price increase) price CHANGE by Southwestern Bell in MO. They filed a tariff to increase prices on 126 services on April 2 and to lower rates for 27 services. The increases haven't taken effect yet- nor have the DECREASES on the 27 services.

The 7th link is your Washington Post article- which doesn't detail anything about a rate hike (15 cents for wireless LNP??) for telephone services.

So to conclude things, you are really confident that no one reads. Your articles don't detail RATE INCREASES at all. The only 2 that have anything to do with rate changes is one on a POSSIBLE wireless LNP surcharge of 15 cents and a rate increase/decrease tariff filing.

I don't see your "history of rate hikes" anywhere in these links.

And, YES... PLEASE post the list of exact price increases that have been happening- and please organize it by company. Also please include a list of those charges that have DECREASED or STAYED THE SAME (again by company).

Or were you counting on that 15 cents to be your entire list?

Boogie
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 19:38:21]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345892 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 19:24:52 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345740 oliphant5 : Huh? The Washington Post is anti-anybusiness? The FCC is anti-anybusiness? Telephony online is anti-anybusiness? The St. Petersburg Times is anti-anybusiness? Nice reach there guy.

Yeah, constant price increases. You want me to post links to the 2000 and 2001 price increases? I will. And .15 x 10 million customers is a lot...to the tune according to the FCC of $900 million dollars in over-charges for number portability alone. You don't think 200% profit is a lot...well the FCC disagreed.

$900 million in over- charges for a single feature may not be much to you, but I think it's pretty substantial.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 19:12:55]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345740 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 19:10:51 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345671 boogie74 : You are actually asking me to look at "anti-anybusiness" websites that collect complaints about 15 cents showing up on a bill? And you are asking me to conclude that this is price gouging and companies having a "history" of constant price increases?

Boogie]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345671 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 19:04:46 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345649 boogie74 :
quote:
Now you might try to say that you can cancel and reorder to get another year at the discount rate, but most providers have a "grace period" where they won't give the discount to a customer that just tries to resign up. SBC would probably be one of these providers
You're an SBC employee. You should know these details. Why don't you?


I do know these details... and with SBC, there is no need to cancel to begin with. You just call and re-sign for another contract at the $29.95 rate.

You are the one saying "SBC would probably be one of those providers."

quote:
Offer requires a one-year term agreement. After the expiration of this term agreement, the then-current month-to-month or applicable term price will apply. The regular monthly price for the service, modem charge and activation fee of $50.00 will appear on the first bill along with any corresponding and offsetting credits. Offer is available for a limited period of time and is subject to change without notice.


Is it POSSIBLE that the "then-current month to month rate" will be $29.95?? Or do you see a number or price quoted in there somehow?

Boogie
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 19:42:41]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345649 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 19:02:29 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345497 oliphant5 : Keep diggin'. The price still is $50 unless you sign a contract with bundled POTS service (running the price up another $15 minimally) and after the 12 month intro price it goes back to the $50 month-to-month price (plus the price of the POTS). And if you should move, or need to cancel service...ding ding ding, $200 penalty.

Again, with your brilliance, Comcast magically cut their rates by over 50%. LMAO.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 18:53:34]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345497 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:45:40 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345455 BBC4544 : what spin, the price used to be $50 a month, they dropped it to $30, that is decreasing the price what don't you understand??? YOU claimed

"Yep, just don't claim that they're cutting prices when they aren't."

You just proved that they dropped the price and you are too stupid to realize it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345455 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:41:08 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345416 BBC4544 : and who is suppose to be embarrassed?????]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345416 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:38:02 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345414 oliphant5 : LOL! Way to spin guy. So I guess with your logic, Comcast cut their rates for a 6 month term by over 50% to just $19.95.

You shills just crack me up.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 18:40:31]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345414 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:37:58 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345401 BBC4544 : You proved me correct, they dropped the price for a 1 year term. Thank you. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345401 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:37:03 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345381 JakCrow : I wonder where the refunds are?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345381 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:34:57 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345219 oliphant5 : »www.telcobusters.com/newsletter_···iew.htm

»telephonyonline.com/ar/telecom_s···linois/

»www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_···98.html
»home.mchsi.com/~petesimmons3/Telerates.htm
»www.sptimes.com/2003/04/17/State···r.shtml

»www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stor···57.html

»www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar···n24.html Number portability, .10-.15 says Verizon, however, FCC investigation conducted in 1999 showed BA charging 30% higher, Sprint charging 300% higher than it actually costs to provide number portability. The investigation resulted in charges being reduced by nearly $900 million nationwide.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 18:23:24]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345219 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:19:13 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345108 JakCrow :
said by boogie74 See Profile:

Actually, after the 12 months, you are welcome to re-sign your contract to get the discount for another 12 months- ad infinitum.

Seeing that the latest prices haven't yet been in force for a full 12 months to begin with, it is not unreasonable to expect that the "discounted temporary price" will wind up becoming "permanent" within the next year or so. Marketing trends have ALWAYS been that way- you see it EVERYWHERE, in EVERY industry... (ie: "It's a discount to 'special' customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to most customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to ALL customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to ALL customers- but if you are 'special' then it's permanent...;" then "It's a permanent price.")

Both SBC and Verizon are on that path already... there is no reason to expect that the prices won't become permanent for everyone within the next year or two.

Boogie


You're wrong. From SBC's own website:

---------
"*Offer requires a one-year term agreement. After the expiration of this term agreement, the then-current month-to-month or applicable term price will apply. The regular monthly price for the service, modem charge and activation fee of $50.00 will appear on the first bill along with any corresponding and offsetting credits. Offer is available for a limited period of time and is subject to change without notice.

***Available only to new subscribers.
----------

Now you might try to say that you can cancel and reorder to get another year at the discount rate, but most providers have a "grace period" where they won't give the discount to a customer that just tries to resign up. SBC would probably be one of these providers
You're an SBC employee. You should know these details. Why don't you?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7345108 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:07:27 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344983 boogie74 :
said by oliphant5 See Profile:
Maybe yeah, maybe no. You can't predict how long Verizon or SBC will honor this special pricing program. And given their history of never ending price increases in every other sector of their business, the opposite is more likely. They're trying this out to see how many cable HSI customers they can get if any.

[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 16:25:02]


What exact history of "never ending price increases in every other sector of their business" are you talking about? Last I heard, the cost of local phone service has remained the same for the past several years. Are you applying the recent rate hikes by cable companies to the Bells?

Please support your statement with exact examples- specifics please? It's a bit too vague to say, "they're always increasing prices- therefore this will go through the ROOF!"

Boogie]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344983 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 17:52:39 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344691 blackjeep : Hehe....How true! Want DSL? Move to an area that has it or wait til it's serviced in your area. DSL providers have only had the last 7-8 years to be able to build up their networks, cable companies have had at least twice that. Plus Cable hasn't been in the ground for anywhere near the time that phone lines have been in the ground. Give cable lines an extra 25 or so years on their age and see if they still hold up like new cable. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344691 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 17:21:34 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344097 ravital :
said by BBC4544 See Profile:
This cannot be happening because all the chicken littles (krk, briandamage, tofarfromco(otherwise known at 2dumb4dsl))
Does that make you Big Turkey? Otherwise know as 2smart4hisowngood?
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 16:28:00]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344097 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:27:18 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344078 oliphant5 :
said by BBC4544 See Profile:
prove that they are not!!!!


SBC's fine print. »www02.sbc.com/DSL_new/content/0,···RI=&RD=

*Offer requires a one-year term agreement. After the expiration of this term agreement, the then-current month-to-month or applicable term price will apply. The regular monthly price for the service, modem charge and activation fee of $50.00 will appear on the first bill along with any corresponding and offsetting credits. Offer is available for a limited period of time and is subject to change without notice. Early termination fee of $200 applies if service is cancelled before expiration of term.


You should probably bother looking up the answer before you ask the question. You'll save yourself these types of embarrassment.
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 16:31:22]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344078 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:25:18 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344069 BBC4544 : prove that they are not!!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344069 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:24:33 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344039 oliphant5 : Maybe yeah, maybe no. You can't predict how long Verizon or SBC will honor this special pricing program. And given their history of never ending price increases in every other sector of their business, the opposite is more likely. They're trying this out to see how many cable HSI customers they can get if any.


[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 16:25:02]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7344039 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:21:35 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343999 boogie74 :
said by JakCrow See Profile:
Huh. Last time I checked, the only lower prices are for the first year, then prices go back up to "normal". Funny that most people can't see past 12 months.


Actually, after the 12 months, you are welcome to re-sign your contract to get the discount for another 12 months- ad infinitum.

Seeing that the latest prices haven't yet been in force for a full 12 months to begin with, it is not unreasonable to expect that the "discounted temporary price" will wind up becoming "permanent" within the next year or so. Marketing trends have ALWAYS been that way- you see it EVERYWHERE, in EVERY industry... (ie: "It's a discount to 'special' customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to most customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to ALL customers...;" then "It's a temporary discount to ALL customers- but if you are 'special' then it's permanent...;" then "It's a permanent price.")

Both SBC and Verizon are on that path already... there is no reason to expect that the prices won't become permanent for everyone within the next year or two.

Boogie]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343999 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:17:18 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343788 oliphant5 :
said by JakCrow See Profile:
Huh. Last time I checked, the only lower prices are for the first year, then prices go back up to "normal". Funny that most people can't see past 12 months.


-Owned-]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343788 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:56:03 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343787 oliphant5 : Yep, just don't claim that they're cutting prices when they aren't. Telco shills, gotta love their revisionist history.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343787 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:55:38 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343313 JakCrow : Huh. Last time I checked, the only lower prices are for the first year, then prices go back up to "normal". Funny that most people can't see past 12 months.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343313 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:01:19 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343223 BBC4544 : (sniff sniff) would you like a tissue??? Heaven forbid a company bundles a product that they have every right to bundle. grow up, if you want dsl that bad without dial tone, buy a dslam, register as a CLEC, buy a dry pair and supply your own damn dsl and quit crying!!!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7343223 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:52:32 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342989 BBC4544 : Lower price but slower speed?

WRONG

chk sbc

lower prices and higher speeds, if you pay more then the current price you can call and get your price lowered and get a free modem. Also, this offer is in all areas, competition or not. NOW who is wearing the blinders ,or are you just an out right liar. Just because you say it does not make it true. KrK i will allow you a brief moment to remove your foot from your mouth and have a slice of humble pie.

BOW DOWN O STUPID ONE!!!!!
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 15:00:40]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342989 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:28:30 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342970 aztecnology :
said by 2farfromCO7 See Profile:
What are you talking about??? I have said recently that DSL prices will approach 0, and it still won't matter. DSL is dead no matter what the prices are. RBOCs are evil; they are STUPID. They won't ever beat cable until they make it available. Maybe you missed my post where I said that there are only 3 problems with DSL:
1. Availability
2. Availability
3. Availability



1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

:) lol
--
.:|:. Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe and he'll believe you. Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he'll have to touch it to be sure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342970 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:26:09 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342949 aztecnology :
said by CO_Chris See Profile:
This is whats funny-------> This cannot be happening because all the chicken littles (krk, briandamage, tofarfromco(otherwise known at 2dumb4dsl)) have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!
Actually, what they are saying is that the telcos will not expand dsl coverage to reach their front doors...if they could get it, they would pay for it...
--
.:|:. Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe and he'll believe you. Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he'll have to touch it to be sure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342949 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:23:42 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342814 2farfromCO7 : What are you talking about??? I have said recently that DSL prices will approach 0, and it still won't matter. DSL is dead no matter what the prices are. RBOCs are evil; they are STUPID. They won't ever beat cable until they make it available. Maybe you missed my post where I said that there are only 3 problems with DSL:
1. Availability
2. Availability
3. Availability

They best broadband service is the one available first. Cable is almost always first and the RBOCs are so stupid that they are ignoring most of the VERY DENSE INNER SUBURBAN spots tht will NEVER have cable.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342814 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:10:20 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342406 KrK :
said by BBC4544 See Profile:
This cannot be happening because all the chicken littles (krk, briandamage, tofarfromco(otherwise known at 2dumb4dsl)) have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!
Nice garbage there. Lower price but slower speed? Big whoop.
This is what happens in areas where there is competition.... try looking at the big picture for once, instead of wearing your Telco issued Blinders.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342406 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 13:26:30 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342269 CO_Chris : This is whats funny-------> This cannot be happening because all the chicken littles (krk, briandamage, tofarfromco(otherwise known at 2dumb4dsl)) have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!
--
AMD Duron 950Mhz/256 Ram/Win Xp Pro/EarthLink Cable 2003/366]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7342269 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 13:12:00 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341644 oliphant5 : The simple minded are easily amused.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341644 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:54:17 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341627 aztecnology : What's so funny...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341627 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:52:35 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341604 oliphant5 : Sure, too bad they require bundled crappy overpriced POTS service to get it. And SBC and Verizon are wasting no time trying to get new price hikes on POTS through to make up for these "gifts".
[text was edited by author 2003-07-08 11:55:59]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341604 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:49:44 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341312 pnh102 :
said by ib50MbSoon See Profile:
When Comcast completes the HSI upgrade in our area, it will be interesting to see if SBC will still want $180/mo for a 128kb ISDN line.

We have had Comcast HSI for over a year now and Verizon still wants that much for ISDN.

I gave up on the telegraph companies. They still insist on wanting to sell me 100 year old technology when I don't want it. They could have retained me as a customer if they had bothered to provide the services I wanted, but they didn't... oh well.
--
Jewel got Britney-fied! There is hope for the world yet!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341312 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:06:28 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341287 CO_Chris : This is to F*&King Funny.. that made my day for sure ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341287 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:03:26 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341145 ib50MbSoon :
said by boogie74 See Profile:
quote:
The bellcos only lower their prices where they absolutely have to or are forced to by law. When Comcast completes the HSI upgrade in our area, it will be interesting to see if SBC will still want $180/mo for a 128kb ISDN line.


I'm not sure what century you're living in, but the last I checked, 128Kbps ISDN is NOT DSL. From the prices I've seen, I haven't ever seen a 2 channel ISDN line costing more than $80-100 per month either. $180?

Unbelievable isn't it!
269-468-xxxx There is the exchange, pick a number!

said by boogie74 See Profile:

This is a moot point anyways- has it ever occurred to you that the Bells are trying to encourage customers to change FROM ISDN to newer technologies like DSL by making price such a large factor? This is why parts for a 1990 vehicle are so expensive to buy. Auto manufacturers are trying to encourage people to simply BUY A NEW CAR!

Has it ever occurred to you that SBC doesn't offer DSL in our area? The ISDN-car is the only model available from Coloma's Model-T phone exchange.
--
The whole truth and nothing but the truth at »www.teletruth.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341145 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:46:05 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341095 Frank :
said by ib50MbSoon See Profile:
said by BBC4544 See Profile:
... have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!

The bellcos only lower their prices where they absolutely have to or are forced to by law. When Comcast completes the HSI upgrade in our area, it will be interesting to see if SBC will still want $180/mo for a 128kb ISDN line.

And with Packet8 and Vonage over a cable line, the evil telcos may have to drop the price of that bandwidth-challenged voice line too. Good times are coming!


i live in verizon land..... there is 10mbps cable (optonline), various dsl flavors (mci,covad,and verizon) and wireless (well supposedly wireless) in my area. ISDN is still NOT cheap in fact it never was and I doubt it ever will be. Verizon still wants obscene amounts of money for something as craptacular as ISDN even though there are many other viable options which are faster. It's always been this way it will always be this way. In other words I doubt ISDN prices would drop if comcast had cable in your area.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7341095 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:40:49 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340992 boogie74 :
quote:
The bellcos only lower their prices where they absolutely have to or are forced to by law. When Comcast completes the HSI upgrade in our area, it will be interesting to see if SBC will still want $180/mo for a 128kb ISDN line.


I'm not sure what century you're living in, but the last I checked, 128Kbps ISDN is NOT DSL. From the prices I've seen, I haven't ever seen a 2 channel ISDN line costing more than $80-100 per month either. $180?

This is a moot point anyways- has it ever occurred to you that the Bells are trying to encourage customers to change FROM ISDN to newer technologies like DSL by making price such a large factor? This is why parts for a 1990 vehicle are so expensive to buy. Auto manufacturers are trying to encourage people to simply BUY A NEW CAR!

This isn't to be able to gouge consumers.

"Gee... lower prices... speed tiers... extra items and options... must be a monopolistic attempt to gouge customers- they're only doing it to run everyone out of business that doesn't want to compete... then the price will be $8 million per HOUR! Just wait!"

Right... just keep complaining about how unfair it is that you can't complain anymore.

Boogie]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340992 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:24:11 EDT Re: untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340728 ib50MbSoon :
said by BBC4544 See Profile:
... have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!

The bellcos only lower their prices where they absolutely have to or are forced to by law. When Comcast completes the HSI upgrade in our area, it will be interesting to see if SBC will still want $180/mo for a 128kb ISDN line.

And with Packet8 and Vonage over a cable line, the evil telcos may have to drop the price of that bandwidth-challenged voice line too. Good times are coming!
--
The whole truth and nothing but the truth at »www.teletruth.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340728 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:42:04 EDT untrue http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340634 BBC4544 : This cannot be happening because all the chicken littles (krk, briandamage, tofarfromco(otherwise known at 2dumb4dsl)) have said that the ILEC's will not lower their prices because they are evil. Someone please HELP!! The sky is falling!!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7340634 Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:26:31 EDT