OT: Technology and Geek Stuff Thread

[Tony G]

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/virgin-mobile/4505-6454_7-32905845.html

[edindetroit]

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/...-32905845.html

Thanks, I saw that but you never know if the posts are real or faked to pimp or slam a product. I was hoping someone here had first hand knowledge.

[Tony G]

CNET isn't too bad for honest posts

[Tony G]

My contract just expired 2 weeks ago. Hmm should I renew???
nah!
SCREW YOU VERIZON!!! You suck!




Verizon to charge $2 fee for online payments

By David Goldman @CNNMoneyTech December 29, 2011: 5:07 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Verizon Wireless will soon make some customers pay for the privilege of paying their bills.
The nation's largest wireless company is instituting a $2 "convenience charge" for those customers who make one-time bill payments using a debit or credit card, either online or by telephone. The fee will go into effect on Jan. 15.
There are three ways for customers to avoid the charge: Customers can make a one-time payment using an electronic check, they can pay their bill using their home banking accounts, such as Citibank (C, Fortune 500) Online, or they can use a Verizon gift card or rebate card. Otherwise, single telephone and online payments will incur a $2 fee.
"The fee will help allow us to continue to support these single bill payment options ... and is designed to address costs incurred by us for only those customers who choose to make single bill payments," the company said in a statement.
Customers can still enroll in a service that will debit their bank accounts or charge their credit cards on a recurring basis for free. They can also show up at a Verizon store to pay without incurring the fee, and they can mail checks to the company.
It's not clear how many of Verizon's 91 million customers will be affected by the new charge. A spokesman from Verizon did not reply to a request for comment.
Verizon's (VZ, Fortune 500) "convenience charge" was announced at the end of a year in which banks were vilified for charging customers a fee for using their debit cards. The banks claimed that the fees were necessary because new regulations would limit how much revenue they could make on the cards: New rules that went into effect in September capped the fees banks could charge retailers when customers swipe their debit cards.
Dumbest Moments in Business -- All those $5 debit card fees

Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) inspired by far the most outrage from customers after it announced it would charge its customers $5 a month for the privilege of using their debit card. Even after most other banks eventually dropped their fees, citing a customer uproar, Bank of America held fast to its decision
"They'll understand what we're doing -- understand we have a right to make a profit," BofA CEO Brian Moynihan stated in October. But by November, the company retreated and dropped the charge.
Verizon's fee is also akin to Ticketmaster, which famously bills a "convenience charge" and "processing fee" on top of the price of every ticket.

[Jamie H]

Verizon is a bunch of assholes, no doubt. But I'm not sure anyone else is that much better. My parents have to deal with Sprint, and they are a bunch of lying assholes too.

[-Deborah-]

I really have nothing bad to say about T Mobile. Have called them a few times regarding miscellaneous things. Each time, I've spoken to an English-native person who has been knowledgeable and helpful. They also allowed me to lower my bill without demanding a new or extended contract.

I tried Sprint for like a day, they are horrible.

I hated Verizon's landline folks, so I hope their mobile folks burn in hell as well.

[Jamie H]

Verizon's land-line division is HORRIBLE. Beyond horrible. Those m'fers tried to claim that I somehow had activated some new "long-term" contract when I agreed to something-or-other during some non-existant phone conversation I supposedly had with them. Therefore they were trying to charge me several hundreds of dollars when I moved to a new location, even though THEY DIDN'T OFFER PHONE SERVICE IN THE NEW AREA. I asked them how the hell I was supposed to continue a contract with them when they didn't even offer service where I now lived and they told me that wasn't their problem. Let's ignore the fact that I kept their overpriced service for nearly two and a half years from the point that I signed up, so it was hardly like I was cutting and running after a few months of a contract or something.

In the midst of all of this, they turned my bill over to a collection agency and tried to ruin my credit rating. Total m'fing assholes. The only way I got any traction with them was when I threatened to counter-sue them and disclose what they were doing to the Better Business Bureau. If I didn't already get a significant corporate discount on their wireless service I would have cancelled that as well, though their wireless division seems to be independent of the land-line division.

[-Deborah-]

Yes, I had similar experiences with them. Total scammers. Glad you were able to get it resolved. But they can all still burn in hell.

[Newbomb Turk]

it does not get any geekier than this:

http://ingame.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/29/9810334-man-pays-16000-for-virtual-sword

[SeattleLionsFan]

Sure it does. I wanted to write a scholarly article about property rights in virtual land/money/personalty.

For example, if that company stops supporting the servers and the sword is useless, is dummy completely out of luck??

Now that's geeky!

[Malto Marko]

Verizon's land-line division is HORRIBLE. Beyond horrible. Those m'fers tried to claim that I somehow had activated some new "long-term" contract when I agreed to something-or-other during some non-existant phone conversation I supposedly had with them. Therefore they were trying to charge me several hundreds of dollars when I moved to a new location, even though THEY DIDN'T OFFER PHONE SERVICE IN THE NEW AREA. I asked them how the hell I was supposed to continue a contract with them when they didn't even offer service where I now lived and they told me that wasn't their problem. Let's ignore the fact that I kept their overpriced service for nearly two and a half years from the point that I signed up, so it was hardly like I was cutting and running after a few months of a contract or something.

In the midst of all of this, they turned my bill over to a collection agency and tried to ruin my credit rating. Total m'fing assholes. The only way I got any traction with them was when I threatened to counter-sue them and disclose what they were doing to the Better Business Bureau. If I didn't already get a significant corporate discount on their wireless service I would have cancelled that as well, though their wireless division seems to be independent of the land-line division.

I had a similar problem with Sprint Wireless.

I migrated my number to a different service and notified them that I no longer required their service. They continued to bill me for several months after the migration. I got no where with the service reps as they were experts in giving the run around and tried to convince me I was liable for the charges despite the fact I was not under contract and.......get this.....they admitted there was no usage during the billing periods in question.

I finally wrote a letter to the CEO and CC'd the head of the legal department as well as the State Attorney General, Consumer Protection Division.

I received a call from the CEO's office several days after sending the letter out and the problem was resolved within two days after talking with one of his administrative assistants.

Two weeks later I was contacted by the State Attorney General, Consumer Protection Division. I was happy to report to them, the problem was resolved and they told me if it unexpectedly popped up again, to contact them.

[Jamie H]

Yep. The only thing that stops those guys is threatening legal action or government intervention. They depend on people just bending over and taking it.

[Dr. Emmett.L.Brown]

Verizon backtracks on $2 fee after customer outrage

Reuters – 25 minutes ago

• 
  By Sinead Carew

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless has reversed its decision to charge a $2 fee for one-time telephone and online bill payments bowing to a storm of criticism from consumers and the U.S. communications regulator.
The biggest U.S. wireless operator retracted its decision on Friday, just a day after it announced the fee, which was to have begun January 15.
The consumer victory comes after Bank of America recently decided against a new $5 monthly fee for debit card users after consumer and lawmaker uproar about the charge.
Verizon said it was making the decision based on customer input after many consumers spoke out about the fee on the company's online forum, with some threatening to leave the service as a result.
The Verizon Wireless turn-around came after the U.S. Federal Communications Commission said it was "concerned" about the fee and vowed to look into it.
"On behalf of American consumers, we're concerned about Verizon's actions and are looking into the matter," an official for the FCC said earlier on Friday.
The prospect of a $2 fee created a flurry of online activity and one consumer organization, Change.org, said that 95,000 people joined a campaign on its website urging Verizon to drop the fee.
"The era of corporations walking roughshod over consumers without consequence is officially over," Ben Rattray, chief executive of Change.org, said in a statement.
Verizon Wireless customers told the company, often in colorful language, that they would not put up with the fee.
"If this fee goes through, I will be taking my business elsewhere!!!" one person said on the Verizon Wireless website.
Another said "Victory is ours!" after the turn-around.
The Verizon Wireless uproar served to highlight practices in the communications industry. Its rivals AT&T Inc and Sprint Nextel said on Friday that they charge some customers $5 for bill payments, revising their comments from the day before.
AT&T and Comcast Corp say that they charge some customers who look for personal assistance in paying their bills but that they do not charge for online payments.
Verizon Wireless is a venture of Verizon Communications Inc and Vodafone Group Plc.
(Reporting By Sinead Carew; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

[Tony G]

Verizon Wireless


We at Verizon take great care to listen to our customers. Based on your input, we will not institute the fee for online or telephone single payments. We thank you for providing your feedback and remaining the industry’s most loyal customers.

fb posts from their page

Can you hear us now? < I guess it worked ! ! !

the real reason is that the FCC got involved nice try though

thats funny - try to make it a good thing by saying you listen to customers

I should think not and you all should be ashamed for even trying to pull a stunt like this

[Dr. Emmett.L.Brown]

I changed some of my packages on Dish Network today......
They waived the normal charges ...

hmmmmmmmmmm wonder if they felt some heat from customers (like the Verizon situation)