What the FCC needs to do is stop the double billing of consumers by the carriers. Why do we (u.s.) page for incoming calls. That is the caller and reciever are paying for the same call. This is daylight robbery and everyone seems to accept it.
[cough]LTE[cough] When it comes out, that is.Tell Verizon to adopt the same standard as the rest of the world, there would be no reason for exclusivity agreements. All it does is give Apple a reason to produce on,y one type of phone while getting a kickback from AT&T.
For instance, there are huge physical chunks of the USA (about 1/3 of it) where you cannot own an iPhone because ATT doesn't have home towers in those locations. Why should everyone in North or South Dakota, or parts of Colorado or California, not be able to own an iPhone simply because ATT doesn't serve them directly?
Then to be fair, the government should investigate car dealers and fast food franchises. They also have exclusivity agreements for their areas.
I think the real question is how many of these rural carriers would make the necessary infrastructure investment to make the iPhone fully usable. I don't think the demand would be high enough to justify the investment.
While the phone will still work, some of the features of the phone (Visual Voicemail) won't work without carrier support.
How has capitalism failed in this instance? Prices too high? Really? People are obviously still willing to pay this much for texting, so maybe it's worth what people are paying. Just because texting isn't dirt cheap doesn't mean it's a huge failure, it means you're a whiny baby.
You guys have obviously never taken an economics class.
This is a similar situation to a monopoly. When companies raise their prices too high, it isn't feasible for another company to enter the market because of the huge sum of money they would have to spend in order to put up cell towers. That is why you don't see new cell phone companies pop up every time people complain about high prices. Since we are basically locked in to the couple cell companies that are around, they are able to (and do) charge what they please. It is the government's job to protect the consumer in this case.
You guys have obviously never taken an economics class.
This is a similar situation to a monopoly. When companies raise their prices too high, it isn't feasible for another company to enter the market because of the huge sum of money they would have to spend in order to put up cell towers. That is why you don't see new cell phone companies pop up every time people complain about high prices. Since we are basically locked in to the couple cell companies that are around, they are able to (and do) charge what they please. It is the government's job to protect the consumer in this case.
No kidding.
+1
The government serves a purpose, if you don't like it move to northern Canada and be a hermit.
With a little money under the carpet this will all go away quietly.
I would rather them go investigate data and texting prices from carriers.
Amen, especially texting. I'd also love to know why the rates among the big 4 carriers (AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint) are so damn similar. I mean none of them have any non-prepaid plans less than $40/month? You'd think that over the course of however many years cell phones have been mainstream (a decade?), they would reduce the entry fee with four major competitors. Yet somehow it's all pretty much the same. They just keep adding services and charges.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/06/15/technology/tech-us-telecoms-congress.html?_r=1
US Congress has asked the Federal Communications Commission to address the effect that exclusivity agreements between handset manufacturers and wireless carriers have on competition!
Excellent! Let's hope the finally wrest control of the iPhone away from ATT.
I'd much rather have Congress and the FCC investigate the raping roaming charges, the high text plans and other nickel-n-dime you type of charges on all carriers.
I'd much rather have Congress and the FCC investigate the raping roaming charges, the high text plans and other nickel-n-dime you type of charges on all carriers.
Respect your fellow forum members, stop calling them socialists because they support Obama and don't agree with you, and stop calling them idiots, whether you believe they are or not.
This is not the PRSI. Stop treating it like it.
Then ask the FCC to investigate this:
Government Fees & Taxes (Primary)
911 Service Fee 0.70
Alabama Communications Service Tax 6.47
TOTAL GOVERNMENT FEES & TAXES $7.17
Government Fees & Taxes (Secondary)
911 Service Fee 0.70
Alabama Communications Service Tax 1.86
TOTAL GOVERNMENT FEES & TAXES $2.56
I'm paying close to $10 per month in TAXES on my cell bill. And I know for a fact, Alabama is one of the cheaper states. If the FCC and the federal government want to lower cell prices, they can cut their taxes.
Also, if AT&T makes a profit of $100 on your plan, they have to pay $35 in taxes. So, AT&T will adjust their prices to cover their losses due to taxes.
The government, as usual, gets to act like the fair outsider when they have their paws in the middle of it.
There is no monopoly. There are 4 big carriers to choose from and many smaller, regional ones. How can you have a monopoly when you don't meet the mono requirement?