Favorite Files

No favorite files added yet

Recent Posts

1. Comment - FCC debates regulation of wireless early termination fees

   (Jun 14, 2008 - 1:20 PM)

   I agree with NE's Commissioner, Ms. Boyle, that month-to-month should be a required offering.
   
   The phone companies claim they are covering costs of subsidizing my phone. Let's presuppose that is "true" -- then when my contract ends, why isn't my monthly fee reduced by the phone repayment fee? Why is someone who doesn't contribute to Global Waste penalized for not upgrading? After contracts have expired, I continue to pay their "phone-replacement costs". If someone doesn't replace their phone for five years, why should they be charged the same monthly rate as those getting new phones every two years?
   
   The Telecommunications Service Providers (TSP's?) shouldn't require me to change my phone to switch providers anymore than ISP's require me to switch computers. Phones are quickly becoming small computers -- even in low end phones, the hassle of re-entering scores of addresses and settings is a waste of consumer time. Phone companies should be required to offer UNBUNDLED pricing and allow device PORTABILITY between TSPs.
   
   UNBUNDLING does not prevent TSP’s from continuing to offer subsidized calling contracts. They would still have the freedom to offer the plans they wished — but they should be required to accept & activate user-owned devices and charge only for service — not the phone.