AT&T Again Raising Price of Grandfathered Unlimited Data Plans

[rusty2192]

In the past, every time I investigate an MVNO (including Cricket), there's always some gotcha like I can't get a new iPhone model (not even if I bring my own), can't tether, there's no unlimited plan, there's a vague warning that some features don't work (like Visual Voicemail or MMS), or it's on some ultra crappy network like Sprint.

I have spent hours and hours researching plans trying to get around these minefields, but always found some problem that kills the deal. Granted, things change. But before I got on this odyssey again can I just ask you, does Cricket have any of these problems?

Cricket is owned by AT&T and uses their network. You can use any unlocked GSM phone that works on AT&T, plus phones that are locked to AT&T (confirmed with my 6S). For a new iPhone, you would just have to wait till the sim free version came out, possibly earlier if you can get one without being on one of the big 4 carriers. Tethering is an additional $10. Unlimited plan for $65. It's on AT&T's network and in my testing Cricket got the same speed as AT&T, up to 8 Mbps. The only one I'm not sure about is the features you mentioned.

If you are curious to try it, you can just buy a SIM card and pay for 1 month of service. I did that with a backup phone and ran speed test side by side with my 6S on AT&T. It's $40 to try it, but it was worth it to me to see if it was a viable alternative as I would save close to that much each month vs our current plan.

 

[Stewie]

I still have my AT&T unlimited plan. I'd switch to T mobile but their coverage is very poor in and around DC. The only reason I stick with the unlimited plan is because I do not trust AT&T to track data usage, and I used to work for them....

Have you tried them again recently? I had them up until I moved south last year and it was much much better. Worked by the capital and lived in Clarendon and was very happy with the service.

 

[mattster16]

I'm not saying there is no max capacity of a wire, I am saying that there is no justification to block a user's transmission. If capacity is hit then transmission can be time delayed. I am assuming here that time is unlimited, and therefore since a component of data transmission is time there will eventually be space for the users request. Sure it might slow down, but only during congestion. This makes data caps seem oppressive. You would be very hard-pressed to convince me that the cost of operating at full capacity during peak hours is an unsustainable business model.

Except what is 'full capacity'? Greater capacity requires greater resources. By capping data AT&T is limiting the network capacity needed at peak levels and maintaining a certain level of service quality for their customers. All customers are on different billing intervals so they hit their caps and "run out of data" at different times. They can either a) stop using data for that billing cycle and lower capacity, thereby allowing AT&T to maintain the same network capacity or b) pay more for more data and allow AT&T to build out their network with greater capacity to accommodate that increased demand. Remember there is a large rolling group of customers hitting their data caps - the ratio of who chooses to pay more vs who chooses to limit their data usage determines how AT&T addresses network capacity. Nobody is ever really "blocked". Another strategy is to throttle data at a certain point in order to decrease demand on the network, most "unlimited" providers do this and is the strategy you seem to be advocating. AT&T has chosen to use the data cap strategy. Verizon & AT&T are both "premium" network providers and have decided that their customer base would rather just pay more money than suffer with throttled speeds.

Let's just say everyone is on an unlimited plan at a fixed rate with no caps or throttling. AT&T builds out a network to a given capacity, but during peak times that isn't enough and data slows down. This keeps getting worse over time because as we know, data demand increases over time. What happens then? AT&T has to invest more to increase capacity...but everyone is just paying a fixed $30/month for unlimited data. How does AT&T do this and maintain their profitability? It is just unsustainable, which is why everyone is moving away from truly unlimited plans.

 

[Stewie]

Let's compare it to something more relevant... for my in home internet, I pay a fixed monthly fee for unlimited data.

So you are obviously not using Comcast where you don't get unlimited home internet.

 

[2298754]

Incoming **** storm of people complaining about the price increase. Like, I get it. I absolutely do. But how is this a surprise? Apple raises the price of their Plus iPhone $29, and no one blinks an eye.

This. The double-standard on here is hilarious. T-Mo has been systematically increasing the price on their unlimited plan year after year, yet people defend them. But if AT&T/Verizon does it, the world is about to end...

 

[Paulshaqz]

im so happy that i left att the employee that worked there at the time did me the huge favor by screwing up my order for the iPhone 6 so i went to t mobile and never looked back!

 

[acarney]

To be honest, they've increased what, $10 in the last 8 years or something? I hate to give it up, but I have seriously been thinking of switching to the 10gb plan that allows tethering and stuff. I honestly should since most months I'm 2 to 4gb of usage a month... I just hate giving up the ability to use loads if I need :-/

 

[Stewie]

**** AT&T I have had them for over 15years. I'm stuck in a grandfathered in data plan. It's BS they keep throttling, blocking services, raising the rate but what they don't get is that every time they do that I find more and more ways to rape their data! I have increased from 3gb, 5gb, 8gb, 10gb, and now I am in the neighborhood of 16gb a month. You want to **** with me AT&T, well guess waht I know how to **** with you... hmmm how else can I drain more data?

16 whole GB a month? Wow you really showing them.

 

[Mac 128]

I have no complaints about ATT other than they often have customer service people who have no idea what they're doing, or selling, or how to resolve a customer's issues.

I have a hefty 30% corporate discount through work off my already low rate plan, and ATT is by far, hands down the best mobile phone company in Los Angeles. Verizon may have a slight edge in some areas, but it's not worth the horrible customer service and constant nickel and diming.

That said, I long ago migrated from 2 year plans and buy my phones outright, so I can switch to any carrier at any time, and hold that threat over ATT every time I call over some issue.

I do wish I had had tethering sometimes, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that I had wifi calling on a recent overseas trip, which I didn't think I had.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Many of those services you mentioned use AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint towers and pay them for the usage. So in the end they get your money anyways.

Getting a permit for a new tower takes forever. In the middle of nowhere in Texas you might get it approved in 2 months but in places like CA it can take 2 years or more. There's simply no way T-Mobile and others could grow as they have without renting towers from others, which is what they do.

Yes, fully aware that they do, which is actually a good thing for call and data quality. But, the big boys only get a small amount within the fees and none of these subcontractors charge an iPhone fee.

 

[Stewie]

They raised it in 2008, 2016, and now 2017. That's at least 3 times. If you've ever read my previous comments, which I don't expect you to have, you would see that I disagree with price hikes that don't clearly explain the reason the increase. It doesn't matter who did it. Not being that "bad" isn't a justification to me because they are using spectrum we as citizens loaned them. If the cost goes towards improving service, and they can show that they have no other way to do so without increasing rates, then fine. I expect to first see executive pay cuts though. It's harsh, but the alternative is to set up a way of allowing citizens to vote on whether ATT should be able to continue to use their spectrum, or if it should be given to another company that is more aggressive in implementing technology and providing services at a fair price. We can't evaluate wireless like we do coffee, or sweaters, or cars because entry into the market is limited to those who have government provided control over frequencies. With the number of competitors cut by more than half over the past ten years, it is even more important that we hold these companies accountable for their behavior.

No only 2. Pretty sure that 2008 was for 2g to 3g. So $10 in all this time and you are whining? But since you don't realize that your LTE data travels over more then just the 'spectrum we as citizens loaded them' I can understand.

 

[4jasontv]

Except what is 'full capacity'? Greater capacity requires greater resources. By capping data AT&T is limiting the network capacity needed at peak levels and maintaining a certain level of service quality for their customers. All customers are on different billing intervals so they hit their caps and "run out of data" at different times. They can either a) stop using data for that billing cycle and lower capacity, thereby allowing AT&T to maintain the same network capacity or b) pay more for more data and allow AT&T to build out their network with greater capacity to accommodate that increased demand. Remember there is a large rolling group of customers hitting their data caps - the ratio of who chooses to pay more vs who chooses to limit their data usage determines how AT&T addresses network capacity. Nobody is ever really "blocked". Another strategy is to throttle data at a certain point in order to decrease demand on the network, most "unlimited" providers do this and is the strategy you seem to be advocating. AT&T has chosen to use the data cap strategy. Verizon & AT&T are both "premium" network providers and have decided that their customer base would rather just pay more money than suffer with throttled speeds.

Let's just say everyone is on an unlimited plan at a fixed rate with no caps or throttling.

OK.

AT&T builds out a network to a given capacity, but during peak times that isn't enough and data slows down.

Then they didn't build to handle the capacity.

This keeps getting worse over time because as we know, data demand increases over time.

Where is the money going from the increased user base?

What happens then? AT&T has to invest more to increase capacity...but everyone is just paying a fixed $30/month for unlimited data.

Well, besides the fact that there are more users paying $30 a month, tap into the 12 billion a year it pays in dividends? Keep in mind that ATT makes about 18 billion a year to pay for development before this is accounted for. Cut that reoccurring loss significantly and they can do a lot more maintenance.

How does AT&T do this and maintain their profitability?

Invest, innovate, or die?

It is just unsustainable, which is why everyone is moving away from truly unlimited plans.

It's unprofitable well before its unsustainable. Remember, this isn't a business like Ford or Microsoft. This is a business built on a public resource. If ATT can't do it maybe someone else can.

Besides, the cost of providing wireless is going down. So even though there are more users on the network the cost per user is decreasing. Increases in the number of users also increases the available revenue to work with. Combine this with increased revenue and lowered costs and this should translate into more money to increase network maintenance and upgrades.

 

[JonKelley]

When AT&T got rid of its iPhone subsidy pricing ($199+upgrade fee), I knew it was time to consider leaving AT&T and my grandfathered plan. I understood why plans were more expensive when the phone was cheap, but now the plans are still expensive and customers pay full price for the iPhone on top of that. It's like paying for the phone twice, which no doubt titillates Randall Stevenson at AT&T, but does't benefit the customer.

When the iPhone 7 came out, I bought it outright and changed to the Cricket brand on AT&T. I'm now paying $35 a month, taxes & fees included, for an unlimited voice and text plan, and 2.5 gigs of LTE data, after which it is throttled. This more than meets my needs. The Cricket tradeoffs have been pretty minor so far: LTE speeds are limited to around 8 Mbps (my AT&T speed was not much faster in my area), no Voice over LTE, no Wi-Fi calling as a cellular fallback, and no printed bill. I save $5/month with AutoPay.

I should also mention I was previously on an individual plan on AT&T, which tend to have the worst price/plan choices. They often spammed me with offerings of how i could 'save' buy adding a bunch of lines I'm not going to use as a single person.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

I left AT&T late 2014 because of their aggressive throttling practices on my grandfathered unlimited. Went to T-mobile, which was night and day better from the beginning.

 

[4jasontv]

No only 2. Pretty sure that 2008 was for 2g to 3g. So $10 in all this time and you are whining? But since you don't realize that your LTE data travels over more then just the 'spectrum we as citizens loaded them' I can understand.

2008: $10 http://appleinsider.com/articles/08...hone_plans_compared_cost_increases_detailed01

2016: $5
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...customers-to-give-up-plans-raises-price-by-5/

2017: $5
http://arstechnica.com/information-...e-hike-on-grandfathered-unlimited-data-plans/

Three. Adding 3G doesn't buy them disregard of a price hike.

Those assets were acquired due to revenue made off of that spectrum and the universal service charges. So yeah.

 

[Kirb112]

Starting in March of 2017, AT&T will raise the prices of its grandfathered unlimited data plans by $5, according to information obtained by DSLReports. The price hike is AT&T's second price increase in the last 12 months and will raise prices from $35 to $40.

DSLReports forum users began receiving notifications about the $5 price increase in early January, and the site was able to confirm AT&T's plans. AT&T's statement on the new pricing is below:AT&T no longer offers standalone unlimited data plans to customers, but a small number of people continue to hold onto unlimited data plans that were purchased before AT&T discontinued them in 2010. Those plans allow customers to use an unlimited amount of data, but throttling does occur with excessive data usage.

AT&T previously raised prices for its unlimited data customers in February of 2016, increasing data plan costs from $30 to $35. AT&T's data plan costs are charged in addition to voice and text plan costs for unlimited customers, putting the minimum price on an unlimited data plan with text and voice (not unlimited) in the neighborhood of $90.

Over the course of the last several years, AT&T has used price hikes, data caps, and throttling to attempt to get its grandfathered unlimited customers to switch to new plans. In 2014, the FTC launched a federal court complaint against AT&T for its throttling practices, which led AT&T to scale them back.

At the beginning of 2016, AT&T reintroduced $100 unlimited data plans but limited them to AT&T users who subscribe to an AT&T DirecTV or AT&T U-Verse plan.

Article Link: AT&T Again Raising Price of Grandfathered Unlimited Data Plans

[doublepost=1484096007][/doublepost]Keeping mine. They wont get me to switch!

 

[macTW]

Incoming **** storm of people complaining about the price increase. Like, I get it. I absolutely do. But how is this a surprise? Apple raises the price of their Plus iPhone $29, and no one blinks an eye.

But these telecom companies raise the price on your plan, and this one they haven't offered for almost 7 years and you're surprised? I'm not defending what they're doing, and I know this is going to trigger a lot of people, but getting worked up over a trivial amount of money just isn't worth it. Especially when you knew it was coming.

And if you want to flame me, keep it civil please. There's worse things in the world than getting worked up over $5.

People got raged about the iPhone price change...

 

[mattster16]

OK.

Then they didn't build to handle the capacity.


Where is the money going from the increased user base?


Well, besides the fact that there are more users paying $30 a month, tap into the 12 billion a year it pays in dividends? Keep in mind that ATT makes about 18 billion a year to pay for development before this is accounted for. Cut that reoccurring loss significantly and they can do a lot more maintenance.


Invest, innovate, or die?


It's unprofitable well before its unsustainable. Remember, this isn't a business like Ford or Microsoft. This is a business built on a public resource. If ATT can't do it maybe someone else can.

Besides, the cost of providing wireless is going down. So even though there are more users on the network the cost per user is decreasing. Increases in the number of users also increases the available revenue to work with. Combine this with increased revenue and lowered costs and this should translate into more money to increase network maintenance and upgrades.

One question is whether the increase in user base profits is enough to offset the increase in data usage and inflation. Decreasing costs of providing service is certainly there, but again - is it enough to make up for the steady increase in data consumption? I remember a few years ago when most people would use a max of 2GB of data - now people are using triple that regularly.

Unprofitable=unsustainable in the world of publicly traded companies.

 

[Boatboy24]

I'm sure many have already said it, but I'm glad I dumped them this past fall. Don't use a lot of data, but was hesitant to give up the unlimited plan. I figured unlimited will be the standard in another couple years.

 

[SkippyThorson]

I expect everything AT&T does to be the absolute worst -- yet, somehow, they still manage to exceed my expectations.

I'm on AT&T - and my first reaction was "THIS IS THEIR ANSWER?"... Of course, this is in reference to the T-Mobile bill simplification and the Verizon contract removal. They do in fact manage to make the worst of a good situation.

 

[AFDoc]

All to maximize profit . . .

Of course it is.... they are a company and that's what the exist to do.... make money. Some may not like it but People have options.
[doublepost=1484097418][/doublepost]

Their (AT&T) new data plans are awful. We go through our 6 GB of data and then after that they lower the speeds to 2G (128Kbps). You can't do anything these days with that speed.

We'll likely switch carriers. We burned through our 6GB of data in the first week and now have 3 weeks of practically no internet.

Go with a family plan and get the unlimited data. I have 4 phones on a family plan have the unlimited plan.... Bill date was 9 Jan and we've already used 10.1gig of data. The only time it's "throttled" is when it's in a high congestion area which typically my family isn't. I use it mostly working nights to surf the pron and play games.
[doublepost=1484097924][/doublepost]

Let's compare it to something more relevant... for my in home internet, I pay a fixed monthly fee for unlimited data.

Yeah I used to as well... Until Comcast kicked in their 1TB limit starting this month.... depends on where you live but here in Colorado they did. If both my kids are home from school (such as the Christmas break) we can hit that easily with all the Youtube watching and streaming. I can pay an extra $50 for unlimited but will have to see if, while in school, they come close to going over.

 

[Dorv]

There's worse things in the world than getting worked up over $5.

Truth. So my bill goes up another $5? It's still close to a wash if I changed to a 10gig plan (I use about 8g / month, though I need to check that since I upgrade to more storage on my phone when I got the 7 Plus).

 

[Bako-MacAddict]

I'm really considering moving to T-mobile tonight. I'm not sure if I should do it though.

 

[Stella]

All to maximize profit . . .

Like all companies! They aren't charities.

 

[kenflynn]

Just to be clear - anything saying that his is to cover increased expenses blah, blah, blah is typical corporate gobbley gook. It's simply another revenue line in their P&L that they are flexing because some other revenue line is stressed. They need to show earnings and revenue growth, and this helps them do that. It's really quite simple. Annoying. But simple.