When I was on the nightshift I would get throttled at 4am watching Netflix. Where's the network congestion? Everyone is sleeping. I have UNLIMITED! So many people left their unlimited plans because they became completely useless if you went over their 3, or 5gig plans. Haha no harm, such a joke.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T Urges FCC to Drop $100 Million Fine, Says Data Throttling Doesn't Harm Customers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So for everyone saying good for the fines, you do realize that corporations don't pay them. They pass them along to the consumers. Does this mean an increase in our bills? Maybe not, but I bet it'll take them longer to fix the tower that's been down for the past couple of years.
Or they could take it from the owners. So if you own any major mutual funds expect that to take a dive. But yay! Government gets more money to waste!
Or they could take it from the owners. So if you own any major mutual funds expect that to take a dive. But yay! Government gets more money to waste!
Hey I have a great idea everyone post their take on the politics of this instead of the legal aspect then it can be sent to PRSI so a good part of the community won't be able to comment.
How can there be no harm when throttling affects the product/service the company provides? Their answer to the complaint is wholly implausible. What stinks is that this wouldn't be an issue for ATT had they just made their customers aware.
Throttle is already a pro-ATT word. What they did was "limit" the rate of data on unlimited plans.
And the "they'll only pass this on to the customer" is such a crappy argument. The reasons fines work is because they increase the cost of doing business to crappy companies, as it should be, making them less competitive, and thus passing the impact of their increases costs to the shareholder, which then in turn affects the demand of the stock, reducing prices, impacting management options, who then in turn have incentives to behave more responsibly.... In theory...
The only way it passes wholly to the customer is if you have an abusive, noncompetitive situation, like an unregulated monopoly, which again, is solved by consumer protection in the form of regulation...
And then theres the whole idea of justice, as in, the unjust enrichment that ATT enjoyed because of a lack of disclosure about their product.
Anyway you cut it, putting a fine on seems like a good thing.
And the "they'll only pass this on to the customer" is such a crappy argument. The reasons fines work is because they increase the cost of doing business to crappy companies, as it should be, making them less competitive, and thus passing the impact of their increases costs to the shareholder, which then in turn affects the demand of the stock, reducing prices, impacting management options, who then in turn have incentives to behave more responsibly.... In theory...
The only way it passes wholly to the customer is if you have an abusive, noncompetitive situation, like an unregulated monopoly, which again, is solved by consumer protection in the form of regulation...
And then theres the whole idea of justice, as in, the unjust enrichment that ATT enjoyed because of a lack of disclosure about their product.
Anyway you cut it, putting a fine on seems like a good thing.
It's not that simple. The burden of fines (and taxes) paid by corporations are borne by a combination of customers, employees, and owners. The problem is that it is theoretically and practically impossible to determine how the burden of corporate taxes and corporate fines are allocated among customers, employees, and owners.
In cases such as this, I favor holding the executives who approved the policy personally liable for any fines.
They aren't being fined for throttling, the FCC claims they didn't adequately inform the customers on the plan, which is entirely true. I don't know anyone who didn't know about throttling before they started it.
Instinctively and for the most part I'm against the mobile company on this, but here's a question: if these unlimited plans are several years old, presumably they began before LTE rolled out, yes? If so, are even the throttled speeds slower than the average speed the user would have expected when they began the contract? If not, then I'm not sure there's a problem (depending what the terms say).
Regarding your first point - that only works if they have a near monopoly, or all companies in the field are similarly fined. Otherwise market forces will prevent them raising prices or lowering quality of service. That is if you believe freemarket capitalism works, which given your small diatribe against state interference I assume you do?
Don’t know if I agree or disagree with the fine. Whether I think it should be larger or smaller I just don’t know.
But, tighten up on advertising - there should be a regulated body that deals with this. Properly.
If it’s against the rules the body should have the power to fine. The size and decision on whether to fine should be tied to the size of the company, and it should pay something that covers inconvenience to customers plus a little extra to get the message across.
There should be clear rules. If it’s not unlimited, do not use that word anywhere in the ad. Simples. (BTW I know nothing is unlimited but if you throttle something then that’s different).
But, tighten up on advertising - there should be a regulated body that deals with this. Properly.
If it’s against the rules the body should have the power to fine. The size and decision on whether to fine should be tied to the size of the company, and it should pay something that covers inconvenience to customers plus a little extra to get the message across.
There should be clear rules. If it’s not unlimited, do not use that word anywhere in the ad. Simples. (BTW I know nothing is unlimited but if you throttle something then that’s different).
Dictionary Definition
Unlimited-without any qualification or exception; unconditional
Throttling= restriction
How can something so simple be turned into a 54 page document.
ATT's argument -pointing out that its Unlimited Data Plan customers were more likely to renew their contracts than non-Unlimited Data Plan customer. Of course- it was and still would be the better deal if they honored what they sold- but as a big company they think it is a one way street. They can make changes to the plan but if you the customer are not allowed to..
Too bad the FCC cannot fine the CEO's directly for their actions- That would get results quickly and fairly as that is where the profits for making these decision ends up at.
Unlimited-without any qualification or exception; unconditional
Throttling= restriction
How can something so simple be turned into a 54 page document.
ATT's argument -pointing out that its Unlimited Data Plan customers were more likely to renew their contracts than non-Unlimited Data Plan customer. Of course- it was and still would be the better deal if they honored what they sold- but as a big company they think it is a one way street. They can make changes to the plan but if you the customer are not allowed to..
Too bad the FCC cannot fine the CEO's directly for their actions- That would get results quickly and fairly as that is where the profits for making these decision ends up at.
Alright, of all of y'all who say "the "they'll only pass this on to the customer" is such a crappy argument," have y'all ever looked at your bill? These are on mine:
Federal Universal Service Charge
Regulatory Cost Recovery Charge
State Cost-Recover Fee
Texas Universal Service
9-1-1 Service Fee
911 Equalization Surcharge
What are they? Federal and state regulations imposed on AT&T, which added expenses to them. Guess what they did! Passed it right on to me. I'm sure this fine will fit nicely under Regulatory Cost Recover Charge.
In your next business class we'll discuss why gas and hotel prices rise when a hurricane is on its way.
Federal Universal Service Charge
Regulatory Cost Recovery Charge
State Cost-Recover Fee
Texas Universal Service
9-1-1 Service Fee
911 Equalization Surcharge
What are they? Federal and state regulations imposed on AT&T, which added expenses to them. Guess what they did! Passed it right on to me. I'm sure this fine will fit nicely under Regulatory Cost Recover Charge.
In your next business class we'll discuss why gas and hotel prices rise when a hurricane is on its way.
That sums it up!!!! I've been throttled twice for using just over 5gb of data. I've had unlimited data since day 1 and they throttled me on the first offense. That is just insane.
Ok I don't know AT&Ts packages so meybe this is not possible, but if you use mora data evry month it might be time to get a package with more data included. Or dump any "unlimeted but throteled after 5 GB" plan
Last edited:
However, the data is unlimited, but not the speed at which you receive the data. They have not stopped you from getting data, just the rate at which you get it; they never guaranteed any particular speed of the data in your contract.
I feel so restricted with this "unlimited" data plan, always being very cautious of what I do while on LTE. Really getting tired of that. The activation fees are another big blow.
I'm not in that unlimited data, but with adding 2 more lines, I went from VZW to ATT because its cheaper, that is not the case and I see I can save at least 50 bucks a month by going to T-Mo.
I don't like the moves that ATT has been doing lately, adding the fees, and of course this, which is ludicrous
Word of advice, try them out first before fully changing to them. Their service sounds great but can be crappy. I tried them out and the only reason why I didn't change was because I could not go in any type of building without losing service.
Agreed and in fact lack of coverage in Boston/Massachusetts is why I've avoided them up until now,
To be honest, I'd rather go back to VZW because where I live and we I go often (New Hampshire), VZW is superior but I cannot justify the price when I add on my daughters.