5GB Limit. Really?
Synexis
Newbie

Does anyone know if the 5GB cap has a legitimate purpose? Is there not enough bandwidth for everyone to share? If that's really the case then I can be OK (albeit unhappy) with the policy. But if it's just so Verizon can make a fortune on 5 cent per MB overage charges then that's another discussion. Just wanted to share my 410KB worth.

Cheers.

0 Likes
Reply
84 Replies
Not applicable

Maybe, but to throw up a bunch of meaningless numbers that don't support your point makes you look silly.

0 Likes
Reply
supitsmike
Specialist - Level 2

jimfitzgerald wrote:

Maybe, but to throw up a bunch of meaningless numbers that don't support your point makes you look silly.


 

The "numbers" (because face it, making it seem like that was complex math is silly) supported exactly what I was saying. If you can't read between the lines, not my problem.

 

And especially since I was supporting what you have been stating this whole time. Anyway, I'm done with this thread, and preventing an argument with you that you won't win.

 

Cheers,

Mike

0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

My complaints are three-fold: unused data is not rolled over, the usage monitor is not accurate because it is not timely, and the overage charge is punitive in that it bears little relation to the cost of actually providing the extra bandwidth.

 

My situation is an example. I typically used half of my allotment so one month I decided to try to use it all. The usage monitor was more than 24 hours behind so I couldn't tell how close I was to the limit. I ended up going over by about 140 MB, which cost $35. I signed up for service just a month before the overuse charge was reduced from $.25 to $.05, so I can safely say the overuse fee I am paying is too high by at least a factor of 5. Then consider, at $.25 per MB, the second 5 GBs of data costs $1280, while the first 5 GBs costs just $60. That is a factor of about 21.3. I'll go out on a limb and state that I don't believe it costs Verizon 21 times as much to supply me with an additional MB of data than it did the first 5120 MBs. Those overage fees don't reflect Verizon's cost, they are to punish their customers and line their pockets with easy money.

 

Now, if Verizon were to allow unused bandwidth to roll over, my problem would be solved.  Instead, Verizon keeps unused bandwidth for itself to sell to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?

 

If Verizon were to provide me with timely usage data, my problem would be solved. Instead, Verizon keeps me guessing with usage data that, at times, is more than 24 hours old. I can risk going over and paying 21 times as much for the data, or I can be conservative and back off my usage when I get to 80%. Then Verizon can sell my unused bandwidth to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?

 

If Verizon were to reduce the cost of overuse to a reasonable level, my problem would be solved. Enough said.

 

Verizon suggests they cap usage at 5 GB per month to ensure everyone gets equal access. Is that really true? Has anyone seen the data to prove that assertion? They don't really cap the usage, though, do they? All they do is make it very expensive to exceed 5 GBs. That gives their customers incentive to limit their own usage. In that way Verizon has shifted the burden of ensuring their network is not overloaded to us.If that is their scheme for keeping their network healthy, the least they could do is provide better usage monitoring so we can do their job better without overusing. (I think ensuring their network is healthy is their job.) I see that Cricket broadband throttles back the speed to their customers who go over 5 GB, but they don't charge extra. In that way Cricket takes responsibility for the health of its own network and doesn't make its customers keep an eye on the usage guage all the time, nor does it punish them monetarliy. I like that business model better and it seems a lot more honest.

0 Likes
Reply
Not applicable

There is nothing dishonest about the Verizon pricing structure.  Maybe you should switch to Cricket.

0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

It's weird you should suggest I switch to Cricket.

 

I almost went with Cricket. I live and work in the country (aot a city) and accessed the internet via a dial-up connection until last April. Cricket's coverage map showed I was located about a mile out of range, which I thought might be okay with an external antenna. Too bad the only modem Cricket sells is a USB unit with no provision for an external antenna. I am in Verizon's coverage area, barely, and there were modems available that would accept an external antenna. Since I work from here I figured I ought to go with the more reliable connection, so I bought some piece of mind, and hopefully a better connection, with my extra $20 a month. In regards to reliability, Verizon is top notch.

 

I was poking around the 'net today and saw that Verizon is refusing to allow the store where I bought my equipment to sell their wares because this store also sells external antennae and signal boosters. According to the store, Verizon is selling their own range extender and doesn't want the competition. Now the weird part. If I couldn't have gotten an external antenna for my Verizon modem I would have gone with Cricket from the git-go. Funny how things work out, ain't so?

 

As an aside, my modem sits in a wireless router so I can't use VZAccess to monitor usage. When the cost of going over is so high, you really need to know how much bandwidth you have left.

 

As far as Cricket seeming more honest then Verizon, I mean that I can't quite trust a company that charges a fee that seems so disproportionate to its cost of providing service. I don't know that for a fact, but a 20 time's increase in price upon going over an arbitrary limit seems, well, kinda outrageous. And then to think that they impose this fee structure so its customers, each of us individually, will police our usage and keep their network healthy. That ticks me off. How many man-hours are wasted by its millions of customers watching the usage meter to avoid overage fees? Really, couldn't Verizon take care of that on their end?

 

We need the option of paying extra or having our connection slowed when we reach the limit. And the limit is too low.

 

 

0 Likes
Reply
Not applicable

Sirreel wrote:

It's weird you should suggest I switch to Cricket.

 

I almost went with Cricket. I live and work in the country (aot a city) and accessed the internet via a dial-up connection until last April. Cricket's coverage map showed I was located about a mile out of range, which I thought might be okay with an external antenna. Too bad the only modem Cricket sells is a USB unit with no provision for an external antenna. I am in Verizon's coverage area, barely, and there were modems available that would accept an external antenna. Since I work from here I figured I ought to go with the more reliable connection, so I bought some piece of mind, and hopefully a better connection, with my extra $20 a month. In regards to reliability, Verizon is top notch.

 

I was poking around the 'net today and saw that Verizon is refusing to allow the store where I bought my equipment to sell their wares because this store also sells external antennae and signal boosters. According to the store, Verizon is selling their own range extender and doesn't want the competition. Now the weird part. If I couldn't have gotten an external antenna for my Verizon modem I would have gone with Cricket from the git-go. Funny how things work out, ain't so?

 

As an aside, my modem sits in a wireless router so I can't use VZAccess to monitor usage. When the cost of going over is so high, you really need to know how much bandwidth you have left.

 

As far as Cricket seeming more honest then Verizon, I mean that I can't quite trust a company that charges a fee that seems so disproportionate to its cost of providing service. I don't know that for a fact, but a 20 time's increase in price upon going over an arbitrary limit seems, well, kinda outrageous. And then to think that they impose this fee structure so its customers, each of us individually, will police our usage and keep their network healthy. That ticks me off. How many man-hours are wasted by its millions of customers watching the usage meter to avoid overage fees? Really, couldn't Verizon take care of that on their end?

 

We need the option of paying extra or having our connection slowed when we reach the limit. And the limit is too low.

 

 


 

NetMeter.  Again, what a company charges for a product has nothing to do with their cost.  It's based on the competitive situation and what the market will bear.  If you need more than 5 GB, you can purchase two 5 GB plans.

0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

NetMeter only works on one computer. I need something that watches the modem itself, sitting in the router. I suppose I could install NetMeter on each computer and add them up myself.  I don't think it would install on my Xbox, though, so no way to monitor that. Anyone know of software that can watch usage thru a modem residing in a router?

 

Broadband is very close to becoming a utility (necessity), like electricity. Electric providers don't get to charge whatever the market bears because the government regulates the industry for our benefit. They make a reasonable profit but it isn't a free market. Like I said before, Cricket broadband didn't quite cover me, leaving Verizon the only provider in town. Companies that operate as a monopoly leave their customers vulnerable so the government regulates them. I suppose I should complain to the FCC if Verizon won't listen. 5 GBs is simply not enough, likely by an order of magnitude (50 GBs).Think of downloading a couple of movies on the weekends. That might come to 40 GBs by itself. Better make that two orders of magnitude. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

 

Your argument that I shouldn't be using it for my primary access sounds like it's coming from someone who has other means of access. (Can you count dial-up as access? I don't think so, after using it for many years and until recently. The FCC doesn't seem to think so either. See http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/broadband.html .)

0 Likes
Reply
crimedoggies
Specialist - Level 1
Verizon's mobile broadband service was not designed to be plugged into a router and provide service to an entire household (thus the reason they don't sell routers for the USB cards). And it certainly was never intended to be used with your Xbox which uses a HUGE amount of bandwidth. I wonder if your connection affects your performance online? The bill signed by Obama refers to WIFI and Wired connections only, not mobile broadband provided by cellular companies. Obtaining high speed broadband service while totally mobile is a privelege not a right.
0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

Crimedoggies said "Verizon's mobile broadband service was not designed to be plugged into a router and provide service to an entire household (thus the reason they don't sell routers for the USB cards). And it certainly was never intended to be used with your Xbox which uses a HUGE amount of bandwidth. I wonder if your connection affects your performance online? The bill signed by Obama refers to WIFI and Wired connections only, not mobile broadband provided by cellular companies. Obtaining high speed broadband service while totally mobile is a privelege not a right."

 

I have to challenge some of those those assertions.

 

Mobile broadband not intended to be plugged into a router to share internet on a home network? I don't believe that statement. Could you supply proof, other than by inference that Verizon doesn't sell routers? The folks I bought myservice, modem, router and antenna from would also disagree.

 

Not intended to be used with an Xbox? Again, have you any proof? Plus, you assume too much. I have never played an online game and wouldn't know how. The Xbox has been modded to run XBMC and I use it as a media center to play content stored elsewhere on my network. It connects to the internet to display weather info on my TV. Even so, I have no idea how much bandwidth actually goes thru it, tho I suspect the amount is very small.

 

It would be nice to be able to monitor bandwidth usage for my entire network from a central location. NetMeter and similar programs (VZAccess) don't do that as far as I can tell - they only work on one computer at a a time. I sent an email to Cradlepoint, the folks who made my router, and suggested they put that capability in their firmware but haven't gotten a response.

0 Likes
Reply
crimedoggies
Specialist - Level 1
Mobile broadband not intended to be plugged into a router to share internet on a home network? I don't believe that statement. Could you supply proof, other than by inference that Verizon doesn't sell routers? The folks I bought myservice, modem, router and antenna from would also disagree. Did you buy your service from a Corporate employee of Verizon Wireless? I would wager not. Most likely you purchased your service from a third party retailer that was just looking for a comission and would sell you whatever is required to collect that comission. Verzion corp employees are trained to convey to customers that broadband cards are not made to be networked (in fact im pretty sure i was once told that networking a broadband card is a breach of the contract that you signed with Verizon since the card is designed to provide a SINGLE secure connection, thus the need for the MIFI card to be developed.) Not intended to be used with an Xbox? Again, have you any proof? Plus, you assume too much. I have never played an online game and wouldn't know how. The Xbox has been modded to run XBMC and I use it as a media center to play content stored elsewhere on my network. It connects to the internet to display weather info on my TV. Even so, I have no idea how much bandwidth actually goes thru it, tho I suspect the amount is very small. Most users of an Xbox use the internet to play online games as well as update game data, this uses a huge amount of data. i have never heard till now somebody modding their xbox for using xbmc so your data use might be less, but displaying a full video image (weather or not) still requires a significant data flow It would be nice to be able to monitor bandwidth usage for my entire network from a central location. NetMeter and similar programs (VZAccess) don't do that as far as I can tell - they only work on one computer at a a time. I sent an email to Cradlepoint, the folks who made my router, and suggested they put that capability in their firmware but haven't gotten a response. And you won't. They manufacture a product to allow you to use another companies product in an unintended fashion. installing firmware to track the usage is a risk they wont take. should they provide you such capability and you went over when their system indicated you were within your limits what would the impact be to them?
0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

I don't believe the Xbox downloads a video image to display weather info, just the data to stick in that video image.

 

I don't believe Cradlepoint's routers are using broadband modems in an  'unintended' fashion. Those modems are intended to receive and transmit wireless broadband data. The router doesn't change that at all. You might be thinking Verizon didn't intend for a single modem to supply access to more than one computer but I see their MiFi devices do just that.

 

I also see that Verizon's new modems have VZAccess built right in so the user can monitor all the bandwidth used no matter if the modem feeds a network. That shows me Verizon is working on the problem of inaccurate usage data. Good for them.

0 Likes
Reply
Not applicable

The VZAccess software installs on your computer.  The usage meter reads the same two or three day old data you see if you log onto the Verizon website.  There is still no way to get accurate "real time" usage unless you install NetMeter on each and every networked computer.  Also, when you are using a router, you don't run VZAccess.

0 Likes
Reply
Sirreel
Newbie

I was looking at the PC 770 Express Card modem. The ad states it has " VZAccess software on board".  I was hoping that meant it was in firmware and could monitor all data flowing thru the card. (Don't know why the font seems bold - I can't change it.)

 

I only used VZA once when I enabled my modem. I wasn't very impressed with it. I didn't use it to monitor usage so I don't know if it gets its usage data from Verizon or if it counts bits as they flow thru the modem. As I recall, VZA won't install on a computer until you connect the modem. My desktop has no provision for attaching an Express Card. Since then I upgraded my desktop and laptop to Win7 64 which doesn't support my modem so I can't install the new version of VZA on either.

 

No, you don't (can't ?) use VZA with a router. The computer running VZA needs to have the modem attached to it.

 

If VZA gets its data from Verizon and doesn't count bits, it doesn't really matter if it comes embedded in the modem. What is needed is some way to count data flowing thru the modem in real time and use that count to issue warnings based on trends and/or thresholds to avoid exceeding the 5 GB limit. Firmware in the modem would be a great way to do that, and firmware in the router would be great for older modems, like mine, without that capability.

 

If I have to suffer a 5 GB limit I wish I could get accurate usage data and set up some rules to avoid overuse so I just didn't have to worry about it. That hardly seems impossible. Are the overusage charges too lucrative to let that happen? If overuse causes problems for the network, and if protecting the integrity of the network is the goal of the 5 GB limit, it seems logical that Verizon would provide an easy way for users to avoid overuse. If making a bunch of money is Verizon's true goal, then inaccurate data monitoring and no automated way to avoid overuse makes perfect sense.

 

So, how about it, Verizon? Is your network overused? Would it suffer if customers could use their entire allotment (without fear of going over, wouldn't they be more inclined to use all of what you sell them?)? Are your overcharges pure profit? Do they shift the burden of protecting your network to the users? Do they waste millions of man-hours every year when each customer spends time monitoring usage to avoid overcharges?

0 Likes
Reply
Not applicable

When it says VZAccess is loaded on the modem, that simply means it installs on your computer from the modem and you don't use a CD.  VZAccess does not keep track of usage.  It simply goes out to the Verizon site and downloads usage from there.  I don't think Verizon intentionally feeds us old information hoping we will exceed out 5 GB.  I think it's their systems capability that sucks.  The answer for me would be for CradlePoint to install metering capability in their routers.

0 Likes
Reply
Deamorei
Enthusiast - Level 2

"Mobile broadband not intended to be plugged into a router to share internet on a home network?"

 

 

Actually the MIFI-2200 was designed to do this exactly. It just doesn't require a router for multiple connections. As to limits/caps I see those changing soon. AT&T and Verizon just lowered there wireless phone prices about 30 bucks a month. Why? To try and appease wireless customers who are being raked over the coals by them. They said it was to compete with other providers but that is simply untrue as there are no competitors. They did it to try and lessen the pressure from consumers that are tired of being ripped off. Net Neutrality, FTC and FCC investigations are on the move. Net Neutrality is going to pass and I expect these measly 5GB caps to be raised to allow us a fair amount of data for our money,

 

Oh BTW side by side Verizon Acess Manager and Netmeter reflect the same per session useage. Verizon just doesn't have a reliable way to maintain up to date useage reports on their site. They were 3 days behind earlier this week. This is unacceptable.

0 Likes
Reply
Not applicable

I think his point is that 5 GB is not a lot of capacity and by inference, not intended for those uses.  I suppose you can use it anyway you want if you can keep your usage to 5 GB or purchase more than one plan.

0 Likes
Reply
Deamorei
Enthusiast - Level 2

 I heard an interesting statement the other day. If 99 percent of the user base uses less then 5GB a month then how much load can 1% of the user base put on the system. Guess what? Not very much making the argument  they give us for limiting our use about bogus.. With that being said it wont be long until Verizon wireless has to offer an affordable UNLIMITED mobile broadband plan. Millenicon offers 5GB for 59.99 and UNLIMITED for 69.99 a month. Datajack offers unlimited for around 40 dollars a month as well.

 

If I was AT&T or any other major player I would offer unlimited mobile broadband for about 70 bucks a month and put it to Verizon. Centennial has unlimited local data via cellular/wireless it just wasn't 3G in my area yet. That's why I gave Verizon a try. I needed more speed to VOIP or have a better internet experience in general but I'm in the market for a new provider now that provides unlimited data with 3G speed or better. Why doesn't Verizon offer a plan for permanent non mobile cellular plan to users like Centennial did?

 

Jim said purchase 2x 5 GB plans that's 120 dollars a month for a measly 10GB... Verizon will sell you a 10GB plan for 200 bucks a month all the while 1GB of bandwidth is priced about 1 dollar per gigabyte or less roughly from all that I've read yet we pay 12  bucks per gigabyte for the first 5GB and 50 dollars per gigabyte for every gig after the 5GB is used up. Keep an eye on Google these bandwidth caps are screwing over their network and services night and day. I suspect they will be in the broadband business very soon. I heard they were trying to get into the power distribution business on the radio today lol..

 

Compared to the rest of the world we pay way over the average price world wide for mobile broadband and broadband as a whole. Asia makes our internet "US"  look like  a Ford Model T going against an NHRA Top Fuel dragster sadly said. I would be willing to play up to 100 bucks a month for unlimited 3G/4G as would most. Hey Verizon can you hear us now? After 3-4 months I'm really sick of having to keep track of my bandwidth. I'll probably go over this month but I'm always at the 5GB limit being VERY restrictive on how I use it. If I used it how I wanted I would probably use 300-400mb a day on weekends and around 200mb or less on week days which comes out to around 8.4GB a month without downloading anything much. I'm willing to pay more but I refuse to be soaked by pricing that is unfair and unrealistic to actual costs.

 

To Zehan : Guess you never heard of American tax dollars being used to expand internet infrastructure or stimulus money programs in the United States  Check around. You/We fund alot of things we don't always know about until we actually look. Here is a little dirt for you to read. about the big players wanting to stop rural users in America from getting locally provided broadband.

 

http://industry.bnet.com/technology/10001246/verizon-att-blocking-rural-broadband-stimulus/

0 Likes
Reply
Zehan
Contributor - Level 2

All this article says to me is that Uncle Sam wants to give money to the carriers to expand their rural networks, and the carriers are declining because they don't want to have to answer to the government when making their private business decisions. Government has no place in private business (or at least it shouldn't) and the carriers are IMHO right for declining government money.

 

If the government wants to provide wireless services to the public then more power to them, but they should do it on their own. They should build their own network rather than throw money at the carriers and tell them how to run theirs. I've said elsewhere that I think a tax-funded wireless network operated as a city utility would be a good idea, but I think it's wrong to force private companies to provide it.

 

Even so, if Verizon wants to oppose any legislation that would create a large, cheap, wireless network they are perfectly within their rights to do so. After all, such a network could put them out of business or at least lose them a ton of money. A public network would certainly show that carriers don't operate based on cost, but rather on what the market would bear (Jim would be proud of me right now), and while nothing is wrong with this free enterprise model it's just not smart business to advertise that you're selling your services for triple what the cost is to maintain them.

 

If you really want to complain that the prices are unfair because Verizon doesn't spend that much to provide you service, then you might as well complain about EVERYTHING else you buy. You really think basketball shoes cost $100 dollars to make? Try a few cents. How about designer purses or shoes? Same story. This applies to almost everything you buy, from bottled water to televisions, clothing to vehicles, etc. How come nobody complains about those companies "ripping people off?"

0 Likes
Reply
Deamorei
Enthusiast - Level 2

What it said was that the big companies like AT&T or Verizon don't want per say a state to have its own internet service kicking them to the curb. They want to be dominant but don't want to be dominated as to why they are so fiercly against this or a national broadband program similar to national health care that in the US goes over like the plague when it works perfectly in other countries that are less greed driven like our nation is. Had these caps been a fair amount of data per the price we pay i wouldn't have a problem.

 

People do need to understand and most do that 5GB of data a month is nothing. A person can blow through 25-50 mb an hour just surfing the web. I just got a letter from Millenicom and i wish i had researched them earlier here is their reply. No contract and they use Verizon towers the same tower i use with my MIFI , same backbone.

 

Congratulations, you are in an excellent area for both our regular mobile
broadband service as well as our unlimited service.

Millenicom nationwide mobile broadband service* is no contract, tax-free
and we provide the mobile broadband device free of charge**.  The cost is
$59.99/month along with a $49.99 one-time fee and a $15.00 shipping
fee***.

Our unlimited service is the same as our standard service except that
there are no limits on the amount of monthly data transfe
r****.  The cost
is $69.99/month and requires the purchase of the mobile broadband device
for $99.99 and therefore is not necessary to be returned in order to
close the account.

* Mobile broadband service has the industry standard monthly 5-gig data
usage cap on our regular accounts.  Exceeding that amount may cause the
upstream carrier to reduce the speed on your account for 30 days and
egregious or repeated violation of the 5-gig data transfer may cause the
account to be closed.  This service plan gives you an option to purchase
the connection device at $99.99.  Selecting the device purchase option
will allow you 10 gigs of monthly data transfer. This only applies to standard

account holders not unlimited.


**** Please note our unlimited service is not for commercial use such as
setting up a public WiFi, broadcasting the connection to multi-dwelling
units or other extraordinary circumstances.

 

So for 10 dollars more then i'm paying now i can have NO limits. I'm don't believe in free rides either.  I like most just want a reasonable amount of bandwidth to do the things we  or  a family  enjoy over the internet. 5GB over 30 days is NOTHING. It won't be until the U.S government intervenes legally will we the users get some relief and it should never come to this. I don't think some of you folks realize how big business manipulates our lifestyles. They are as much at fault as screwing up our nation up as our politicans whose pockets they grease are. As a consumer its ultimately up to our government who can make the changes we so desire.

 

Up until they dropped the 5GB caps on us we really had no idea how much we used a month all the while being lied to by sales reps saying how enormous amount of data 5GB was. What a pitch right? It never ends. Now the cable industry wants DTV/Broadcast to not be able to broadcast at full power so we will either have to live next to a station or within a few miles or be forced to subscribe to satellite or wired TV. Being able to speak freely, protest is our right as Americans. Using that voice backed by money to manipulate our lifestyles from a business perspective is not.

 

 

I will say this if you think that 5GB of data is a fair amount for the price you pay then more power to you as your probably in the 1% percentile group that does. The rest of us either complain or contact people that can actually influence change like i do. If we don't speak up nothing will get done. You and Jim seem to be the only two i've seen that think this 5GB thing is acceptable :smileytongue:.. Prediction? Google is going to eventually become the Wal-mart of all forms of broadband.access because the real profit model is not in the internet backbone its in the services that are provided within that backbone!.

 If you cant stream Netflix then they suffer, If you cant stream music then they cant play ads and they suffer. In effect your hurting my ability to do things online to include shopping, banking, etc, etc  Remember IBM? Verizon is the IBM of internet communications right now. Verizon owns a building up the road that was one occupied by IBM  :smileytongue:.. Verizon's downfall wont be because of its service which i've never complained about. My service is excellant and that will NEVER change as the tower i use will never be loaded even if all my rural neighbors had mobile broadband. It will be because its weak in giving the customer what they want vs what Verizon wants. Have a great weekend.

 

0 Likes
Reply
Zehan
Contributor - Level 2

I agree with you that Verizon, AT&T, and the others don't want to see a government run network because it would put them out of business; that was one of the points I made in my earlier post. Can you blame them though? What do you expect them to do? "Sure! Go ahead and create your cheap network! Put us out of business, we don't mind!" Surely you can see where they're coming from. It's a bad idea to compare what Verizon is doing to what healthcare/pharmaceutical providers are doing. Wireless service in NOT A NECESSITY. HEALTH CARE IS ABSOLUTELY A NECESSITY and should be provided to everyone for free (other than the tax cost). Comparing wireless to health care is hardly "apples to apples" and should not even factor in to this discussion.

 

Millenicom might use the same towers, but it's a different network; they likely use a different receiver on the same tower. It's the same with wireless carriers; they'll use the same tower with both of their receivers on it to save money from builiding their own or if there is no space to build one, and pay the tower's owner for the privilege. It's called a roaming network. Just because AT&T and Verizon might share a tower, the networks are different and therefore have different limits. It's the same with Millenicom, which means they may be able to charge less for more data because they're running a smaller network, customer base, or both, and so they don't have to worry as much about bandwidth. This is all speculation, though.

 

My point is that Millenicom might have different rates that work for you (congratulations) but that doesn't mean anything other than they're trying to beat their competition by offering unlimited data for the same price. I'm willing to bet that if their network was as large as Verizon's we'd see a cap in their usage also.

 

No one is trying to argue that $59.99 for internet service is a great deal (we'd all like to have it cheaper), I'm just saying that it doesn't matter whether you think it's fair or not because it's not Verizon's responsibility to be fair, as Verizon is not a utility; "fair" would only happen if Verizon sold the product to you at the same cost they paid to provide it, without making any profit. Anyway, all that matters is you knew the terms when you signed up. If you don't like them anymore, cancel. Will you have to go without? Maybe.

 

Finally, 1% is a GROSS exaggeration of the people who are fine with 5GB of service. Remember, for every customer that complains, there are at least 50 more that are happy with their service, and therefore don't say anything. The few people who complain on these forums (including you) are hardly representative of the millions of customers Verizon services that are satisfied. Besides, the people that think the limit is too little are usually using the service in a way it was never intended to be used, like for heavy downloading, or as their primary ISP. It's meant to be a SUPPLEMENTAL service, not your primary provider. If it's your only option, you'll just have to limit your usage or pay the overage cost.

0 Likes
Reply
gwhnewbie
Newbie
There are only a couple of you guys who are absolutely unbelievable with your arguments, not to be swayed by any logical comments on this thread. For example below: Quote: "Wireless service in NOT A NECESSITY. HEALTH CARE IS ABSOLUTELY A NECESSITY and should be provided to everyone for free (other than the tax cost). Comparing wireless to health care is hardly apples to apples and should not even factor in to this discussion" "End Quote" Communication with the world is an absolute necessity in this day and age and for many, due to their geographical location,, wireless is the only option. Do you think the folks who run thousand-acre farms and provide the country with food see high-speed wireless communication as a "nice-to-have"? It turns out that this is a mission-critical requirement for their business, and these busineses provide benefits to us in ways we don't even realize. As for providing healthcare for FREE to everyone, well.,,,are you willing to give up over half your gross income in taxes in order to provide health care for people you don't even know? Another Quote": I'm willing to bet that if their network was as large as Verizon's we'd see a cap in their usage also. No one is trying to argue that $59.99 for internet service is a great deal (we'd all like to have it cheaper), I'm just saying that it doesn't matter whether you think it's fair or not because it's not Verizon's responsibility to be fair, as Verizon is not a utility. EndQuote: Verizon's pricing structure is what it is because Verizon, unfortunately, can get away with it, basically because they're pretty much the only deal in town (or should I say in the country?). Don't you think these executives are charging everything they think they possibly can to provide as huge a return to their exec's yearly bonuses as possible? There is a point at which "capitalism" is indeed replaced with greed. Think about when major storms come through areas and trees and electric lines are down everywhere. There is a huge, urgent demand for extremely limited services. Here comes folks in their trucks with logging chains and chainsaws, water, ice, and gas, ready to help you out...for a price...for an extremely unfair price. This is called price gouging, and it is against the law. When more networks emerge with coverage comparable to Verizon, prices will FALL, limits will DISAPPEAR, and competition will start to become based on SERVICES, not the backbone, which has no value if it cannot provide a useful SERVICE. And Another Quote: Besides, the people that think the limit is too little are usually using the service in a way it was never intended to be used, like for heavy downloading, or as their primary ISP. It's meant to be a SUPPLEMENTAL service, not your primary provider. If it's your only option, you'll just have to limit your usage or pay the overage cost. EndQuote: Why would any average, urban internet end-user pay $60 dollars a month for a limited "supplemental" ISP service, when they're already paying $60 dollars a month for an unlimited, fast, WiFi based service in their home over cable broadband? Especially with all the WiFi spots that are available for FREE out in the public domain. If these folks are doing this, I'd bet the majority of them are doing it as a business requirement, and they are being reimbursed monthly for this business expense. I could go on, but it would only result in a continuance of this thread, based on illogical, emotionally-based arguments, or fallacies framed as professional knowledge, In dealing with any issue with any business, one should be 1) unemotional, 2) stick to the facts, 3) persistent as a bull-dog, 4) cognizant of their contractual requirements, and 5) refrain from making moral value judgments. One time, several years ago, I received a huge, incorrect bill from Verizon. After multiple attempts with customer service, no one could explain my bill to me. Once it became obvious I was not going to get a desireable resolution to my issue, I cancelled my contract, and paid the ETF which was over $500. I only went back with Verizon recently because it was my only choice. Being the only choice in America does not mean you should have to be robbed by any business that comes along, especially when it is providing a service that is not a luxury. Get real, the world is getting smaller every day, and the internet is already woven into the fabric of our lives, soon to be a necessity for nearly everyone.
0 Likes
Reply