Why does Verizon require that a customer must surrender their property AND sign a 2 year contract in order to get a discount on a phone? I have had my Verizon account for 10+ years. I have the highest plan available. I have only received 1 discount, on the day I opened the account. Yet, today, I went to a corporate Verizon store today and was informed that I would need to surrender my personal property (a phone I paid 850$ cash for) AND sign a 2 year contract in order to get a 350$ discount on a new device!!! I was also told that technically I am not signing a contract but that if I cancelled my service before the 2 years is up I would be charged the 350$ that I was given as discount. So first of all, where do you get off lying to customers that they are not signing a contract when clearly they are??? You can call it peterpan but it is still a contract whether you choose to lie or not. Second, where do you get the audacity to demand my own personal property that I paid for??? These business practices are disgraceful and disgusting.
Promos exist that don't require a trade-in, you have to look for them. Verizon hasn't done service contracts for consumer accounts in years. What you have is a payment agreement, not a contract. A contract has an early termination fee if you left service early, an agreement is you just paying off the phone with an interest free loan.
If you don't like the idea of losing $350 for paying the phone off early (which you shouldn't be doing a payment plan if you feel you will leave Verizon within 2 years), keep your phone. Don't do that kind of promo, simple. It is 100% up to you to participate in a trade-in promo. Your post makes it to be this is some sort of mandatory business deal when it's not.
Wow, I am surprised by holes in your defense. Contract and agreement are the same thing in this context because they have the produce the same net result. I worked for Verizon for 7 years and I remember the constant twisting of words to "sell" customers. The promotion option used to be that an out of contract customer would get a discount on a device IF they signed up for a 2 year contrac, AND IF they cancelled early they payed a 350$ early termination penalty. Do you see the similarities so far?! However, now a (out of agreement/contract) customer CAN get a discount on a phone ($350) IF they "agree" to pay the phone off for 24 months (2 years), AND they must also surrender their own personal property (their current mobile device), BUT if they choose to "pay the new device off early" (leave verizon before 2 years) then they must pay the 350$ extra cost towards the price of the new device. NOTHING has changed except the wording AND now verizon confiscates your previous device in hopes to reduce your opportunity of leaving Verizon, plus Verizon profits off of recycling the old device. Seriously, how can you not see this???
I think you've latched on to the wrong part of his response: it's just a payment plan IF you want a discount on a new device. If not, then you can both keep using your existing device and you don't have to pay off the rest of the device if you leave early either.
You're getting upset about an optional discount. If you don't want to take them up on that offer, because you don't like terms, don't. There is nothing that requires you to go for that, so the solution is entirely in your hands and within your control. Verizon isn't doing anything remotely wrong or unethical here. On the contrary, providing options should always be viewed positively, even if the option isn't directly relevant to you, because it might be helpful to someone else.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't take them up on it either. I hand down my older devices to other family members, so the promo you described would not be of interest to me either.
I appreciate your response and you make a good point. I probably should have focused this discussion more on the fact that I am strongly offended by the new/additional requirement to surrender my personal property in addition to a required 24 month "payment plan". I had grown accustomed to a contract, or payment plan, or agreement (call it whatever), in exchange for a discount. However, this new requirement to surrender my personal property should be considered unethical. Although Ethics are personally debatable. So you are correct, options are a positive thing, and there should be an option to surrender your personal property or not, and this option should be mutually exclusive to the contract/agreement/payment-plan option.
Also, you may find it interesting to know that you are allowed to pay the full amount of the discounted price up front (no monthly payment), but if you cancel your service before 24 months has elapsed, then you will need to pay 350$. In this scenario there is no difference between the previous Verizon 2 year "contract" option and the new "payment plan with a discount" option. It's mostly just twisting of words except that now you also have to surrender your personal property. I think this struck such a huge discord with me because I have been buying unlocked phones for 10 years (since I was laid off from Verizon) and just now decided to see what kind of promotions Verizon provides currently. I guess I expected the promotion options to get better in 10 years, not worse. Thank you again for taking the time to respond. I think this will probably boil down to what each of us deem as acceptable/ethical business practices. Perhaps most people are not bothered by this overstep (as I feel it is) by Verizon. It seems that we are being casually coerced into not owning anything.