Verizon shared data

[boomhower]

It's squeezing a balloon. If AT&T comes out with better plans, Verizon will move to respond. In the end, they will come out equal and your only chance for better deals lies in going with an inferior provider like Sprint.

I fully expect AT&T to offer what looks like a better shared data plan and am counting on Verizon to counter by bringing theirs in line with same. So I save now (versus Verizon legacy pricing) and save again later (when they adjust to match AT&T).

It's the now-minority holdouts with grandfathered unlimited data plans that get screwed and its clear their plans and expectations are relics of the past.

I really don't think AT&T will undercut them, I think they will essentially match them. They know the two of them have an overwhelming large majority of the market share. By undercutting them they will be giving up money. They might but I seriously doubt it.

 

[RainCityMacFan]

I really don't think AT&T will undercut them, I think they will essentially match them. They know the two of them have an overwhelming large majority of the market share. By undercutting them they will be giving up money. They might but I seriously doubt it.

We need a price war in this industry. Because in the end, money is the biggest factor in marketshare. If AT&T came out with something drastically cheaper, ****** LTE market or not, I will switch and so will most Verizon users I'm sure.

I would love to see Verizon just cut that smartphone attachment fee from $40 to $20 and how the market reacts.

 

[aneftp]

We need a price war in this industry. Because in the end, money is the biggest factor in marketshare. If AT&T came out with something drastically cheaper, ****** LTE market or not, I will switch and so will most Verizon users I'm sure.

I would love to see Verizon just cut that smartphone attachment fee from $40 to $20 and how the market reacts.

Think both AT&T and Verizon do not care about market share anymore. They are clearly number 1 and 2 (105 vs 100 million customers) where Sprint is a distant number 3 at 60 million. The cell phone market is saturated with cell phone customers.

I think we have 330 cell phone customers in the USA. We only have 300 million citizens plus 15 million illegals.

So it's hard to grow the consumer base anymore.

AT&T and Verizon are more concerned with revenue growth. And it's data that is the money marker the past 3-4 years.

 

[boomhower]

Think both AT&T and Verizon do not care about market share anymore. They are clearly number 1 and 2 (105 vs 100 million customers) where Sprint is a distant number 3 at 60 million. The cell phone market is saturated with cell phone customers.

I think we have 330 cell phone customers in the USA. We only have 300 million citizens plus 15 million illegals.

So it's hard to grow the consumer base anymore.

AT&T and Verizon are more concerned with revenue growth. And it's data that is the money marker the past 3-4 years.

That is why it this would be the prime opportunity for them to come in with a lower price. About the only way to get new customers is to poach them from another provider, coming in at a lower price point with a better plan would enable them to get an influx of Verizon's customers.

 

[ReallyBigFeet]

If AT&T came out with something drastically cheaper, ****** LTE market or not, I will switch and so will most Verizon users I'm sure.

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

 

[aajeev]

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

Just responding to your previous post. It looks like you benefit a lot from the new plan mostly because of you already have unlimited plan. In my case, I think I'm about even out after tax and discount.

Old family plan(I have two):
First: 3 basic phones with 700 minutes no text or anything (for the elders in the family).
Second: 4 smart phones with 1400 minutes, unlimited text and unlimited data plan for each of us

Total monthly (after discount + tax): $343 (This is with the employee discount as well as a -$10 monthly credit for one year due to some Verizon problem).

New plan:
4 smart phones = $160
3 basic phones = $90
Data share 8Gb = $90 (to be exact we really never exceed 4Gb, so the 4Gb or the 6Gb plan will work for us as well, but just to make the number comparable I'm using 2Gb per line). Also, I was told the employee discount for me is around 19% so the data will really be $72.90

Total: 160+90+73 = $323 + 6% tax

So, in a way I guess it's some what better for me...

 

[aneftp]

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

Like I have stated previously. Cell phone carriers really do not want to admit their "subscriber" growth the past 5-6 years isn't really growth.

It's just the additional "subscriber" being added to the family plans. It could be a "ghost" line many add just to get a subsidized phone as immediately switch to a feature phone to avoid data charges for that ghost line.

That's the reason smartphone "average" has gone down. It's not really going down. It's the user switching those lines to feature phones as ghost lines.

Many people do it than the cell phone industry likes to admit. They won't admit it because it hurts their nice press numbers about how they gained "x" amount of new subs

 

[ReallyBigFeet]

^ Clearly you are right. And that is precisely why Verizon made the new Shared Data plans the way they did. You can't 'ghost' a line on a family plan to get a high-end smartphone on the cheap any longer under their new plans.

 

[gmanist1000]

The price went from $80 a month to $100 a month for me. Really screwed me over. I'm considering Sprint now because they are the only other carrier that has service in my area. Wish they had rolled out their LTE faster.

 

[dave420]

The price went from $80 a month to $100 a month for me. Really screwed me over. I'm considering Sprint now because they are the only other carrier that has service in my area. Wish they had rolled out their LTE faster.

If the price when up then why didn't you just stay on your old plan? The new plans are only required for new customers.

 

[alent1234]

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

been on at&t for a few years and was waiting for verizon to come out with some nice plans, and then they did. AT&T will do something similar. yes i know AT&T and VZW and Sprint have to do this but i don't care. cell service is a commodity and cheapest is good enough. i bet a huge part of my bill goes to TV ads anyway, like with a lot of commodity products

my wife's iphone 4 contract is up next month. i have a 4S. we are dumping AT&T, going to get our phones unlocked and going to straight talk. $35 a month can't be beat. i don't even care about the ETF.

when i tell other people about this their eyes light up as well

even if i have to buy a new iphone every 2 years its still a lot cheaper. and at this point i don't care if i keep the same phone for 3 years or more
apple is going 3 hardware versions back for OS upgrades.
i don't play a lot of games and most games don't need the fastest GPU.
i don't use Siri
don't care about the new apple maps

at this point its cheaper to just buy a $1.99 app for some feature rather than a new phone

 

[boomhower]

What? $40 for every smartphone...I don't even see the value in this.

For the vast majority of users there is no value here. Of course for some users there will be, most of those are high voice/low data users. But for most of use that use low voice/high data it's a serious downgrade. Hang on to what you have for as long as you can.

What will be interesting is to see if Verizon pulls an AT&T and starts throttling unlimited users to get them to switch to shared plans.

 

[surma884]

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

Good info. I read the article and I really hope they switch to the "bring your own phone model". This way they can concentrate on providing a better service rather than trying to get customers by selling the "best super-duper new phone" with not so good service. The reason why they need 2 year contracts and why they need to lock phones is because of the phone subsidies. Let people pay full price for their phones. The manufacturers will battle it out and keep their prices competitive. Right now with the phone subsidies the manufacturers don't have to worry about price that much because the carrier covers some of the cost.

 

[ReallyBigFeet]

Good info. I read the article and I really hope they switch to the "bring your own phone model". This way they can concentrate on providing a better service rather than trying to get customers by selling the "best super-duper new phone" with not so good service. The reason why they need 2 year contracts and why they need to lock phones is because of the phone subsidies. Let people pay full price for their phones. The manufacturers will battle it out and keep their prices competitive. Right now with the phone subsidies the manufacturers don't have to worry about price that much because the carrier covers some of the cost.

Good post and spot on. The telco's have done this to themselves and we are caught in the crossfire. The whole phone subsidy model has created these ridiculous rate plans. I think Europe telco's have the better approach...you pay more for the phone (no/little subsidy) but you get much better monthly rates without all the games.

 

[nw9]

For the vast majority of users there is no value here. Of course for some users there will be, most of those are high voice/low data users. But for most of use that use low voice/high data it's a serious downgrade.

I've noticed that many people are reducing their voice usage and increasing their data usage. The consumer habits seem to be heading this way. I no longer make as many calls as I used to, but I do need more data than voice minutes.

With Verizon's new plans they are forcing people to get unlimited and charging people for it when it seems many people no longer need it. With the old plans, paying a little more than $40 gave me enough voice minutes a monthly even for a family plan. Adding two smartphones is $80, which for me is already more than what I'm paying with AT&T voice and I think it would also be more than Verizon's equivalent old voice plans. The pricing gets worst as I add more phones. I have 4 phones on my family plan, but all of us combined barely use 400 minutes a month.

If Verizon would use their old pricing and only added shared data then the prices would be more reasonable. It's too bad about these new plans because I really wanted share data and have been waiting for it.

Good post and spot on. The telco's have done this to themselves and we are caught in the crossfire. The whole phone subsidy model has created these ridiculous rate plans. I think Europe telco's have the better approach...you pay more for the phone (no/little subsidy) but you get much better monthly rates without all the games.

I agree. They really should end the subsidies and simply concentrate on being the pipes for voice, text, and data. Overcharging consumers just to get back all their paid subsidies isn't going to make customers happy with all these terrible rate plans.

Also when customers aren't locked into long contracts, they are more willing to switch which will make these phones carriers think twice before they start overcharging the consumers.

 

[boomhower]

I've noticed that many people are reducing their voice usage and increasing their data usage. The consumer habits seem to be heading this way. I no longer make as many calls as I used to, but I do need more data than voice minutes.

With Verizon's new plans they are forcing people to get unlimited and charging people for it when it seems many people no longer need it. With the old plans, paying a little more than $40 gave me enough voice minutes a monthly even for a family plan. Adding two smartphones is $80, which for me is already more than what I'm paying with AT&T voice and I think it would also be more than Verizon's equivalent old voice plans. The pricing gets worst as I add more phones. I have 4 phones on my family plan, but all of us combined barely use 400 minutes a month.

If Verizon would use their old pricing and only added shared data then the prices would be more reasonable. It's too bad about these new plans because I really wanted share data and have been waiting for it.


I agree. They really should end the subsidies and simply concentrate on being the pipes for voice, text, and data. Overcharging consumers just to get back all their paid subsidies isn't going to make customers happy with all these terrible rate plans.

Also when customers aren't locked into long contracts, they are more willing to switch which will make these phones carriers think twice before they start overcharging the consumers.

Verizon fully understands people are using less voice and more data, that's the whole reason they constructed the plans the way they did. Charge you for unlimited voice whether you want it or not and overcharge for data. Just the fact the the whole point is shared data and they are going to still charge you extra to connect a data only device(tablet or mifi) and even worse charge different amounts for those devices. They still don't get that data is data.

 

[Leonard1818]

Good info. I read the article and I really hope they switch to the "bring your own phone model". This way they can concentrate on providing a better service rather than trying to get customers by selling the "best super-duper new phone" with not so good service. The reason why they need 2 year contracts and why they need to lock phones is because of the phone subsidies. Let people pay full price for their phones. The manufacturers will battle it out and keep their prices competitive. Right now with the phone subsidies the manufacturers don't have to worry about price that much because the carrier covers some of the cost.

Good post and spot on. The telco's have done this to themselves and we are caught in the crossfire. The whole phone subsidy model has created these ridiculous rate plans. I think Europe telco's have the better approach...you pay more for the phone (no/little subsidy) but you get much better monthly rates without all the games.

Not to mention if the industry goes to "BYOP" (bring your own phone) it would hopefully cut down on the "New android every 3 weeks" model that is in place now. My wife and I got Samsung galaxy S phones that were huge pieces of crap. No support from Samsung (verizon) for the phone and the actual hardware was horrible. She's not even at 2 years and it's been flaking out for a good 6 months. I can almost guarantee that the reasoning is because Samsung had "too many irons in the fire" so to speak and were busy developing the SGSII and SGSIII to give 2 flying ducks about the original SGS.

If "BYOP" becomes the standard, maybe we'll see manufacturers supporting devices better/longer, giving longer lead times between new device releases, and actaully spending a decent amount of time R&D-ing a handset that lasts and is quality (which, in my opinion, Apple is #1 at). That would be really nice.

 

[gmanist1000]

If the price when up then why didn't you just stay on your old plan? The new plans are only required for new customers.

I am a new customer. I'm waiting for the next iPhone to switch from AT&T to Verizon. Not sure if I want to switch to Verizon now, though... Why would they price jack the plans like that for new customers? They had me locked in and now I'm not so sure I want to go with them.

 

[boomhower]

Not to mention if the industry goes to "BYOP" (bring your own phone) it would hopefully cut down on the "New android every 3 weeks" model that is in place now. My wife and I got Samsung galaxy S phones that were huge pieces of crap. No support from Samsung (verizon) for the phone and the actual hardware was horrible. She's not even at 2 years and it's been flaking out for a good 6 months. I can almost guarantee that the reasoning is because Samsung had "too many irons in the fire" so to speak and were busy developing the SGSII and SGSIII to give 2 flying ducks about the original SGS.

If "BYOP" becomes the standard, maybe we'll see manufacturers supporting devices better/longer, giving longer lead times between new device releases, and actaully spending a decent amount of time R&D-ing a handset that lasts and is quality (which, in my opinion, Apple is #1 at). That would be really nice.

I don't see that happening. Main reason is the American consumer is to ingrained into subsidized phone pricing. If all the sudden that was taken away and everyone had to pay full retail price phone sales in the US would completely nosedive. The stocks of everyone involved from the carriers to the manufactures would tank. In short, it ain't happening.

 

[Spectrum Abuser]

No, "most" won't switch unless they are out of contract and have complete freedom already to do so.

Industry facts:*

-Average customer retention for AT&T and Verizon is about 51 months. That's over 4 years.
-Average revenue from Smartphone users has declined for 3 years straight. It's down to $83 per month in 2011. That's a drop from $86 in 2010 and $93 from 2009.
-The subsidy that must be paid to the handset manufacturers have quadrupled from $70 just 4 years ago (for a feature phone) to more than $280 per handset today.
-Profit margins are falling rapidly because so many customers quit using voice (existing infrastructure) and switched to heavy data use. Coupled with early subscriptions of unlimited plans, and its pretty apparent why the telco's gouge us so hard on text and data plans anymore. They have oodles of what most customers no longer want, have to invest heavily for what users do want and are earning less from each customer than 3 years ago...substantially less.

I don't "pity" the telco's, but I do understand what is happening. They report to Wall Street first and their customers second (if not last), just like any other utility company. Look at the taxes you pay each month....try and figure out those as well. Its a huge revenue stream for the government at the state and federal level and the FCC has become nothing more than an outlet for the IRS.

"Most" people won't switch. A few will. But for everyone that switches from Verizon to AT&T, an equal number likely defects the other way. Maybe not on the same day, but it all comes out in the wash.

What is needed is not another wireless telco with a new business model. What is needed is ubiquitous public connectivity. Look at how the data-enabled messaging apps like iMessage and Google Voice pretty much nullified the business model for texting plans. I just wonder how long before data-only users (text/Internet) become so dominant that all that remains is for some of the VOIP carriers to create their own competing standard to CDMA/GSM altogether?

*SOURCE

Finally! Someone posting actual information rather then resort to calling the carriers 'evil' or 'greedy'. Add me!

 

[Gregintosh]

I don't know what all the complaining is about. These plans are for people who have multiple lines and they are a better deal for that.

Previously, I was paying $165 + taxes for 2 lines, with 1400 minutes, 250 texts on one line, 1000 texts on the other, and each line with 2GB.

Now I have unlimited talk, text, and 4GB of data to share for $150 per month + taxes. And on top of that, I now get free tethering which I did not get before.

So I save $15, adding functionality, removing caps on minutes and texts, and the same 4GB can be used any way I want (and I use more data then the wife, so sharing a pool makes more sense).

And for $10 more, I can add my Verizon iPad if I want. At that point I am still saving $5 off my original bill, but I have all the aforementioned benefits AND the ability to flip on my cellular data on the iPad and tap into that same pool of data should I need it (though with free tethering now enabled, I can just use that in those rare instances).

Granted, that's not as cool as paying $50 for unlimited text, data, and minutes from someone like T-Mobile but it's still an IMPROVEMENT over the previous system. And I have the benefit of being on Verizon which is just a great network pretty much everywhere so I can actually use my data and voice without frustration.

Going forward, I think the carriers will all get more competitive and the $50-$60 range for unlimited everything + reasonable data allowance are going to become the norm.

In the mean time its good to see prices come down anyway until the other carriers catch up to service quality and all get good iPhone support.

So Good on Verizon for doing this. As much as we all wish we can save more money, it's a good step in the right direction.

 

[einmusiker]

Yah bro! These plans are FANTASTIC for people that are still clueless enough to be paying for texts! Yaya! Thumbs up!

Ugh and those ridiculous vzw commercials on hulu are really getting on my nerves

 

[chrfr]

I don't know what all the complaining is about. These plans are for people who have multiple lines and they are a better deal for that.

My complaint is that I have one iPhone, with no need for a text plan, and only need maybe 200 voice minutes. The least expensive shared plan adds about $30 to my monthly bill and offers me no benefit, yet there's no other option available from Verizon.

 

[gmanist1000]

My complaint is that I have one iPhone, with no need for a text plan, and only need maybe 200 voice minutes. The least expensive shared plan adds about $30 to my monthly bill and offers me no benefit, yet there's no other option available from Verizon.

Exactly. I'm in the same boat.

 

[Gregintosh]

My complaint is that I have one iPhone, with no need for a text plan, and only need maybe 200 voice minutes. The least expensive shared plan adds about $30 to my monthly bill and offers me no benefit, yet there's no other option available from Verizon.

Yeah, I see your point. I thought this is just replacing family plans, which would make more sense.

For your needs, I guess other carriers would be better, like virgin mobile which would make your bill $30 a month.