So with that in mind it would have probably taken quite a big issue for me to resurrect this blog from its 18 month hiatus Verizon Wireless have provided that issue.
For some perspective, I have never been much of a fan of "Big Red". They have some of the most expensive plans in the US, they have arguably the worst selection of smart phones of any of the big 4, their network technology, CDMA, means any phone you buy from them is stuck on their network, and their lockdown on certain apps (i.e. Google Wallet) and slow to non-existent software update schedule is notorious among cell phone enthusiasts.
With all those minuses, why would anyone most of all me, choose Verizon in the first place? Here in South Dakota it can be summed up in one word, choices. We have very few of them.
Verizon's network in our state is unbeatable. We have 4G in most metropolitan areas and even much of our rural areas are seeing the wonderful "4G" icon these days. After Verizon our choices drop off considerably.
AT&T has finally come to South Dakota after getting Alltel's assets from Verizon and has good coverage in the state but no 4G. Sprint works up and down I29 but go West and they don't exist and T-Mobile's "nationwide coverage" apparently doesn't consider South Dakota part of the nation because they don't even have a retail presence in the here. So unless you live in Sioux Falls and never leave the city you must choose between AT&T and their 3G coverage or Verizon's 4G network.
So now we can fast forward to Verizon's not so customer friendly plan changes.
I am sure everyone was aware of the first big change a couple of years ago when they did away with unlimited data, you know that new plan that charged you the same $30 for 2gb of data that you used to pay for unlimited. Well in the 2 years since that change, the plan has since morphed into the "Family Share" plan that takes that same 2gb of data and charges you $60 bucks to use it (but at least now you can share it right?).
And finally in recent days, Verizon has announced 2 new changes that defy explanation, at least in my mind. The first change deals with how Verizon handles upgrades.
For years Verizon customers have been under 2 year contracts that were renewed each time you purchased a subsidized phone. Under those contracts though, you became eligible to purchase a new subsidized phone after only 20 months effectively meaning you were under a 20 month contract.
Beginning with customers whose contract end date is after January 1st, the 20 month upgrade date will be changed to 24 months to match the contract end date. On paper this change doesn't mean much more than we must now wait an extra 4 months to get a subsidized phone, you know one more poke in the rear to Verizon customers.
But then I started thinking about this, upgrading at 20 months means that Verizon had the opportunity to lock in the customer to another 2 year (20 month) contract at a point when the customer was still locked into Verizon. If your 20 month old phone is showing it's age, Verizon would be happy to help you out.
Now, that same phone is 4 month's older but this time your contract with Verizon is up. They have no hold over you and you are free to look at other carriers and MVNO's and in the process of shopping around you are very likely to discover that Verizon's pricing/services aren't all that you thought that they were. Why do this?
Next on the Verizon hit parade we have their response to T-Mobile's new plans that don't include phone subsidies and instead allow you to finance the full price of the phone over a period of months. These new plans from T-Mobile come with cheaper prices to take into the account that no subsidies are involved.
Verizon, not one to let a competitor dominate the news cycle has also announced that starting April 21st you can now also have a new unsubsidized phone worth over $350 any time you want and they will allow you to pay for it over 12 months. The difference being Verizon will charge you $24 and also not offer a cheaper plan.
Quite the win/win for Verizon and another take it in the shorts moment for their customers other than those looking to keep their doomed unlimited data plans just a bit longer.
As you might have gathered by my somewhat incoherent rant to this point, I've had it with Verizon. You may have also surmised that while Verizon is horrible, South Dakotan's have very few options.
3G/4G issues aside, AT&T isn't any cheaper and customer service wise they may even be worse than Verizon. Sprint and T-Mobile are not options which leaves us with MVNO's (mobile virtual network operator) like StraightTalk, Virgin Mobile, etc. which lease wireless spectrum from the big boys and then resell them to their customers at often much cheaper prices.
At one time, StraightTalk was a viable option here. In fact for a while last year I tried them out with an unlocked Galaxy Nexus and was quite pleased with the price, $45 a month for unlimited talk/text/data, and their coverage (AT&T network). I eventually gave up on them because of issues I had with their so-called unlimited data which was far from unlimited but if you can live with their data restrictions they were perfect.
You might have noticed that I precluded my StraightTalk commentary with the phrase "at one time". The MVNO option for any potential customer is predicated on the availability of the networks from the big 4 that they lease spectrum from. Some of the best options for MVNO's are companies that lease spectrum from T-Mobile and Sprint and if you remember from earlier in this piece, those 2 companies are pretty much non-starters in South Dakota. StraightTalk in particular recently put an exclamation point on that fact when they stopped offering AT&T SIM cards taking away one of our few good options.
So there you have it in a nutshell. Verizon tempts you to change carriers with the changes in upgrade dates knowing you probably won't even consider it. They raise prices, limit features and upgrades of their phones, and then nickel and dime you to death with fees all with the knowledge that most of us will just grin and bear it.
And to make matters worse, those of us in South Dakota couldn't do much even if we wanted to.
No comments:
Post a Comment