Jump to content

Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread


joshuam

Recommended Posts

That is uncalled for and blatantly ignorant. You've never indulged in anything "not necessary"? I doubt that. If someone enjoys having a new phone not based on some arbitrary timeline set by carriers many years ago, why should they not be able to do that? It's about options. Why do you care so much?

 

Excess for no apparent reason is what made America great. We don't need 1500 nukes, but hey...why not? Eat it USSR!

You're right. I don't care. My thought was related to the over indulgence of the plan. Not Johnner1999.

 

I will say that I am sorry for putting the post up directed at Johnner1999. I am willing to admit my mistake on that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right. I don't care. My thought was related to the over indulgence of the plan. Not Johnner1999.

 

I will say that I am sorry for putting the post up directed at Johnner1999. I am willing to admit my mistake on that.

I do think 3 new phones a year is a bit much, for me at least. I'm typically exclusive to iPhones, but every once in a while I'll give a flagship Android phone a try.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That means that one person can screw everyone on the plan over. If one person abuses the data and pushes it over 20GB then everyone is going to get slow speeds.

 

I feel like part of the reason why T-Mobile is able to institute throttling so well is because they don't have shared data plans. Everyone gets an equal share of data on the plan and if that specific person goes over their allotment then they get throttled.

 

Er, would you rather have slow speeds, or overage charges on your shared data? Any type of shared data plan is subject to one (or more) persons screwing the others and using up all the allotment.

 

 

I will offer this as a counterpoint -- not a refutation, mind you -- just a counterpoint.

 

Why should data users not have to pay overages?  Should operators accept that responsibility for them?  Or should consumers be more answerable and increase their data tiers or curtail their usage?  Just look at other similar situations...

 

When voice airtime was tiered, did users who exhausted their allotments get throttled -- could they speak only five words per minute?  No.  If they continued to use airtime, they paid overages.

 

If I exceed my credit limit in a given month, do my subsequent charges get throttled -- are they approved for only pennies on the dollar or are only a small fraction of transactions approved?  No.  If I continue to rack up credit charges, I pay a penalty.  Or I get cut off.

 

If you do not return a rental car on time, does the car get throttled -- does it turn into only a bicycle?  No.  For as long as you use the car beyond the return time, you pay charges and/or fees.

 

We are now about a dozen years into the mobile packet data era.  That is plenty of time to adapt.  People should manage their own data usage.  They should select tiers that are personally and financially appropriate.   That is how supply industries balance consumer demand.

 

AJ

 

My opinion is a combination;

 

On any tiered plan (shared or individual) of a specified data bucket, if you go over your limit you get throttled (at a still reasonably usable speed), however if you wish to keep full speed data rate, you pay a reasonable price per gig to extend your bucket until the next billing cycle.

 

This way there is no 'surprise' overages, yet there is both the option to continue at reduced speed, or option to pay additional for full speed.

 

 

Yeah

 

Not being argumentative, do people really keep a smartphone for 2 years or longer?

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

Lots people keep them more than 2 years, but not necessarily as the active phone.

 

Ie, hand them down to family members and/or backup devices.

 

And of course there is the option to sell them or trade them in for credit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think 3 new phones a year is a bit much, for me at least. I'm typically exclusive to iPhones, but every once in a while I'll give a flagship Android phone a try.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally agree

 

3 is a bit much.

 

But my logic is TMO is using phones as an attraction rather than "free" unlimited data. The phones might get people side tracked a bit. And that doesn't gobble up spectrum. Just a thought.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah

 

Not being argumentative, do people really keep a smartphone for 2 years or longer?

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Some people do. My dad kept his phone for 4 years. I'm actually going on 3 years with my S3(which is shocking for me) Some people don't see the need to upgrade every 2 years. Me personally, I would like to upgrade but there isn't anything that really catches my eye.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On overages here is my take. Just price your data per GB. You pay for what you eat. Have a reasonable per GB price. Maybe $7/GB or something like that. No fuss no muss! You don't have to ever change the plan. You can reduce the price

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the uncarrier pricing is complete bs, but te other uncarrier stuff has been great to the industry.

 

We only get free international 2g because Tmobile did it.

 

The not counting streaming music in the data is also really cool.

 

 

I havent seen a single pricing innovation thats been good for the customer, coming from any company, but at least weve gotten some good features.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll see if Music Freedom survives the glaring heat or Title II. It is something the Commission should take time to examine. If Verizon enacted the same policy on the Open Access waves they own, I would anticipate FCC action toward them.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll see if Music Freedom survives the glaring heat or Title II. It is something the Commission should take time to examine. If Verizon enacted the same policy on the Open Access waves they own, I would anticipate FCC action toward them.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would you like it if Sprint had that option?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you like it if Sprint had that option?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. Data should count as data. Period.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Data should count as data. Period.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I dont see it being any different than having a limited minute basket, but unlimited minutes to your pre-selected friends and family (AT&T), or Sprints very own Unlimited Moble to mobile.

 

Should voice always be counted as voice?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see it being any different than having a limited minute basket, but unlimited minutes to your pre-selected friends and family (AT&T), or Sprints very own Unlimited Moble to mobile.

 

Should voice always be counted as voice?

The days of special voice features like free calling on nights and weekends or unlimited mobile to mobile are long gone.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That isn't what he is saying. He said what is the difference between a bucket of data and having music apps be unlimited vs having a bucket of minutes and having select people or mobiles be unlimited.

 

Isn't that the same type of analogy?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as all music is treated the same, and that there is no "sponsored" data I have no problem with excluding music. You just can't play favorites!

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as all music is treated the same, and that there is no "sponsored" data I have no problem with excluding music. You just can't play favorites!

Look at this another way: it's not fair that Apple Music counts against your data allotment and Spotify doesn't. That's grounds enough for anticompetitive litigation, I'd imagine -- it's an unfair advantage for competitors in the streaming music space.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at this another way: it's not fair that Apple Music counts against your data allotment and Spotify doesn't. That's grounds enough for anticompetitive litigation, I'd imagine -- it's an unfair advantage for competitors in the streaming music space.

Supposedly Apple Music is quietly whitelisted, I doubt Legere would want to rumble with Cook and Co.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as all music is treated the same, and that there is no "sponsored" data I have no problem with excluding music. You just can't play favorites!

 

Is giving one type of data a free pass -- while holding other types of data to a different standard -- not playing favorites?  That is practically the definition of playing favorites.

 

Net Neutrality should take into account both positive and negative anti neutral actions.

 

AJ

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly Apple Music is quietly whitelisted, I doubt Legere would want to rumble with Cook and Co.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think a bunch of types are unmetered. My phone usage was about 9gb last month, tmo said I used 3.7gb.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Probably a lot of Midwest towers. Slight bias since Nebraska is a weird market, but there are tons of USCC sites that T-Mobile isn't yet co-located on. Think a similar situation in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Missouri. But some other markets, like yours, probably don't have that issue!
    • Sticky Customers - YES, and leave them flip to the T-Mobile PLMN when needed and they will be even more likely to Stick.
    • It seems to me that if the goal is to improve rural, the US Cellular buy-out would get them only part of the way there, considering there are plenty of rural areas that US Cellular does not serve.  But I also have a hard time reading it the way I think that article is, that the cost of this deal comes straight out of the $9 billion.  I mean, they're getting spectrum for their existing operations in US Cellular markets, including places that I wouldn't call rural.  (Roanoke, VA is the 9th largest city in the state, for example.)  It seems like some of it should be allocated to rural expansion, but certainly not the whole purchase price. There's also something to be said for getting the customer base of potentially sticky customers who have been used to US Cellular being the only game in town for potentially decades. - Trip
    • T-Mobile has stated 15% of their sites don't have 5g triband. In WV I know WISPs had a lot of 2.5GHz, but T-Mobile was trying to buy as much as possible. More rural FWA would be a big selling point that might overcome any soft bandwidth cap slight overages. Especially since UScellular likely started offering it on c-band.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...