Verizon to Cut Off Unlimited Data Customers Who Exceed 100GB of Usage Per Month

[itsmeaustend]

This is BS. When I first moved out at 16, I had to get Unlimited data to provide internet to my apartment due to my inability to get broadband or otherwise. My carrier at the time's softlimit was 1024 TB. I think at one point I reached 1000GB one month.

Some people just need a lot of data

 

[BeSweeet]

There is absolutely zero. It's MOBILE data. I use a **** ton of it and never go over 6gb

People have posted examples. With today's speeds, it's really easy to go through more than 100GB.

 

[0007776]

Well, then that wouldn't be "unlimited" data.

How do you even get that much without tethering? The contract is for unlimited data on one device, so tethering would be breaking your side of the agreement by using the data on more than one device. I have yet to see or hear about anyone getting close to 100GB without tethering.

 

[baypharm]

I live on a 1250 acre spread that is an hour and a half from the nearest town. There is no other internet option for me other than my Verizon unlimited data plan. I tried Dish internet but it was totally dismal. Please have respect for those of us who live in areas where fiber optics simply don't exist. At 4G LTE speeds, it is quite easy to consume large amounts of data. Verizon will happily sell you a 100GB data plan for $450 monthly. It's about greed and profit - not about data usage and strain on their infrastructure. As someone who travels the world on business I can tell you that other countries treat internet as a utility like phone or electric. It is infinitely faster than anything we have in the USA and it's cheaper as well. Only in America is internet treated as a luxury commodity. When Verizon rolls out 5G in the coming years you will see data consumption skyrocket.

 

[BeSweeet]

I have yet to see or hear about anyone getting close to 100GB without tethering.

I regularly exceed 75GB per billing period without tethering (T-Mobile buckets tethering usage separately, making it easier). This post (https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-usage-per-month.1983910/page-2#post-23150594) explains how it wouldn't take long to use 393GB in a month. 100GB would be much easier.

 

[bearda]

yes it's streaming video that is the data hog.
amazon prime video need to offer SD, I think netflix does- for folk that rely on wireless.
Also people in rural areas who can't get standard broadband shouldn't be charged more than $50 for 100GB and elderly and disabled should have a subsidy in these areas.

...and everybody should get a pony, too!

$50 for cellular service to replace broadband in rural areas? Comcast barely provides rates that low (without TV or phone).

 

[MacSince1985]

And I am sure that said term is specifically defined in the customer contract that the customer(s) signed. And if the contract is typical of what is in AT&T, Sprint, and others, "unlimited" isn't defined as a customer being able to use as much data as can be had every day of every week of every month, whereby the carrier believes that the customer is, or has abused the carrier's services, and such actions are not in line with what the carrier defines or may define as "reasonable."

Typical situation: The marketing department gets a lot of attention by promoting "unlimited" something, then the accounting department figures out they can't afford that offer. Unless the small print defines the rules (including options to change the rules), I sense a lawsuit in the making.

 

[v0lume4]

The way I look at it is this--when smartphones first exploded into the marketplace, no one ever thought that individual people would be using 100's of gigs of data per month. I don't think that was ever even considered. Then tethering became easy and accessible to the mainstream at no additional cost (used to, you'd have to pay for tethering). Slowly but surely, some people began using their cell carrier as their sole internet provider. Rare, but it happens. The 1% of data users use over 50% of the bandwidth or something like that, I think?

I'm in no way in support of the big carriers like Verizon and AT&T. But at some point we have to at least see where they are coming from. That said, there's no excuse for the nickel-and-dining that happens everywhere else.

 

[Zimmy68]

Glad I'm on T-Mobile.



I (and others) can think of dozens of reasons. Want some?

Yes, please.

 

[sbailey4]

Then that means Verizon is false advertising by claiming "unlimited" data. The customer is not wrong here. 100 GB or not.

Keep in mind these were OLD plans and they were generous enough to grandfather folks. Things change. Back when unlimited was probably like 20gb or so actually being used. They could have said "Ok we are cancelling these plans so pick a new one of our currently offered ones " after the 2yr or whatever contracts are up. Once the contract is up they are no longer obligated to allow you to use the old no longer offer plans. When folks abuse it then they are forced to change it for all.

Typical situation: The marketing department gets a lot of attention by promoting "unlimited" something, then the accounting department figures out they can't afford that offer. Unless the small print defines the rules (including options to change the rules), I sense a lawsuit in the making.

Again these were old plans no longer offered for several years now. Once the contracts are up they could go with the idea that you HAVE to change to the currently offered plans.

They didn't do that. Times have changed dramatically and people abused that offering so they are forced to make a change to be in the best interest of ALL their customers. Not sure MOBILE data was ever intended to be your main broadband service for your entire home. As stated times have changed and that is a new thing they need to work through.

 

[BeSweeet]

Yes, please.

1. Video playback (YouTube, Slingbox, FOX Sports GO, NBC Live Extra, Twitch, etc.)
2. Large app / file downloads
3. Device backups over cellular
4. Tethering
5. Music / radio streaming
6. Speed tests
7. OS updates

Okay, I didn't provide "dozens" of reasons, but I imagine those 7 take up the majority of high data usage.

One could say that those things should be used over Wi-Fi. I would argue that why would I use Wi-Fi if my phone has a high-speed, always-available data connection of its own? The only reason to use Wi-Fi would come down to area. If the areas visited frequently are typically congested, it would be best to use Wi-Fi to free up the network for others. Otherwise, use all the data you want.

 

[Waxhead138]

- Verizon: "This is data on a wireless network."
- Guy 1: "Look a door!"
- Guy 2: "Let's all go through it together."
- Verizon: "When it gets busy, it can get overwhelmed."
- Verizon: "A better network prepares for heavy traffic with more capacity"
- Guy 1: "The door is bigger!"

...

- Verizon: "No, we just closed the door on everyone who used over 100GB of their "Unlimited" Data."

You've just touched on one of my biggest complaints about the big TELCOs. They try and justify the high rates by yapping about network upkeep, expansion, and upgrading.

Then almost in the same breath (it's damn insulting really) they will come back and tell you of data caps put in place to make sure the network (that they have so diligently built, upgraded, and expanded upon) can keep up. They can't keep up with their own explanations, aka lies, to such an extent that they contradict themselves constantly and without fear.

I worked for VZW for a long time. IMO its not an accident, but a flat out tactic....and it's disgusting and arrogant that they flaunt it the way they do.

 

[AManInACan]

[Deleted] Only in America is internet treated as a luxury commodity. When Verizon rolls out 5G in the coming years you will see data consumption skyrocket.

"Since July 1994, the FCC has conducted 87 spectrum auctions, which raised over $60 billion for the U.S. Treasury." In the end the customers pay for this cost of business. Ask your congress-person where they spent the money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_auction

 

[teslo]

So these old grandfathered plans will now only let you use 100GB of data per month for $50 a month.
That still sounds pretty good.
A normal plan today offers only 4GB for $50 a month... or else it costs $450 a month to get 100GB.
But no... you're getting 100GB for $50 a month....

i don't understand how all this works. i was with verizon grandfathered up until ~1 year ago when the plan was automatically raised from $70ish (plus $30ish in taxes/fees) to $95ish + taxes/fees. so my bill was essentially $120 which i couldn't afford anymore, so i bumped down to a basic plan (bye bye 'future-proof' grandfathered) which brings me down to about $75 total.

where are the people who still had grandfathered for $50? and can now use up to 100gb (which would be A-OK by me!)

i feel gypped.

 

[sundog925]

How do you even get that much without tethering? The contract is for unlimited data on one device, so tethering would be breaking your side of the agreement by using the data on more than one device. I have yet to see or hear about anyone getting close to 100GB without tethering.

When you legit pay for mobile hotspot, it shouldn't matter how the data is used, period. How is that breaking an agreement when you pay extra for a feature that is included on your account? Whole point of a mobile hotspot is to share your data, when your data is unlimited, why are they telling you how much to share?
[doublepost=1469203075][/doublepost]

i don't understand how all this works. i was with verizon grandfathered up until ~1 year ago when the plan was automatically raised from $70ish (plus $30ish in taxes/fees) to $95ish + taxes/fees. so my bill was essentially $120 which i couldn't afford anymore, so i bumped down to a basic plan (bye bye 'future-proof' grandfathered) which brings me down to about $75 total.

where are the people who still had grandfathered for $50? and can now use up to 100gb (which would be A-OK by me!)

i feel gypped.

Problem is you did not research ways to keep your unlimited data and be under contract without paying the extra $20 a month.

There are documented ways that this is possible, and I took advantage of one of those Ways so I was not subject to the $20 increase, my bill is $74 a month with unlimited data, messages and 400 minutes. Contract until 2017 Sept. Yeah, you were gypped.

 

[Huracan]

Agreed. And it's in line with other carriers

Let's do some math:
After 22GB T-Mobile throttles to 3G (T-Mobile unlimited is $95)

Verizon 100GB LTE is $450
So T-Mobile 100GB untrottled LTE (with meh coverage) is $415

So Verizon's deal isn't as bad when you compare it to other carriers

Slight correction. I believe the watermark of gigabytes might currently be higher, but let me paste what actually happens. It is not an automatic throttle as you say:

"Based on network statistics for the most recent quarter, customers who use more than XXGB of data during a billing cycle will be de-prioritized for the remainder of the billing cycle in times and at locations where there are competing customer demands for network resources."

So, if you use the phone (after crossing the watermark) at times when there is sufficient bandwidth you shouldn't have an impact. So, Verizon $415 deal is ridiculously expensive when you compare it to other carriers.

 

[naeS1Sean]

I've had several friends use their unlimited Verizon mobile data as their home internet. When they were home they plugged their phone in and created a wifi network. They ran their Xbox, tv, PC, etc all off their mobile plan because it was cheaper than home internet.

Most of these people have now moved to legit home cable/fiber optic internet plans now that Verizon is raising prices and whatnot.

I'm actually on Verizon's side on this. 100gb is still insanely generous for the price but they're trying to stop people from abusing the system.

Oh wow. I didn't think of that. I agree with Verizon as well. 100GB...(shakes head)

 

[ignaciolt]

I honestly think that phone companies can just cancel your account if you don't have a service agreement/contract. If your contract has expired and you are on a month to month, I would believe that they can cancel your account with as little as a months notice.

However, if you renewed your contract for a year or two at the unlimited data rate...they would have to wait until the end of that contract/agreement.

 

[AntonLee]

Look at all the people defending the limiting of unlimited plans. So much for upfront language anyone can relate to.

They better have stipulated that you must choose a new plan after 100gb expressed in the contract you signed.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Apparently Verizon and its customers disagree on the definition of 'unlimited'.

Problem is when the smartphones came out, especially the iPhone which was initially an exclusive to ATT, Verizon had to do anything to match what was being offered.

So, ATT had unlimited and Verizon thus offered unlimited.

Neither one of these gangsters had the foresight to realize that it was only going to be a matter of time when more users coming online would take up the network capacities.

Add LTE and they can't build towers fast enough to keep up.

Now they are faced with breaking their "UNLIMITED" promise (I am sure ATT will follow Verizon shortly)
ATT already raised their $ 30 rate to $ 35, just for having an iPhone and even after a contract is up they still charge extra for that.

Sorry, if I cannot follow the "Verizon is right" crowd, because UNLIMITED means UNLIMITED, not to a certain point, not until 100GB, it means NEVER LIMITED.

ATT and VERIZON should just grid their teeth and suffer out their own mistake. As written it is a small number.
Let it be!

As soon as ATT cancels my UNLIMITED, I'll be looking around.

Dishonest business practices (marketing/false advertising)should not be rewarded.
No need to f$%% consumers with fine print.

 

[C DM]

Problem is when the smartphones came out, especially the iPhone which was initially an exclusive to ATT, Verizon had to do anything to match what was being offered.

So, ATT had unlimited and Verizon thus offered unlimited.

Neither one of these gangsters had the foresight to realize that it was only going to be a matter of time when more users coming online would take up the network capacities.

Add LTE and they can't build towers fast enough to keep up.

Now they are faced with breaking their "UNLIMITED" promise (I am sure ATT will follow Verizon shortly)
ATT already raised their $ 30 rate to $ 35, just for having an iPhone and even after a contract is up they still charge extra for that.

Sorry, if I cannot follow the "Verizon is right" crowd, because UNLIMITED means UNLIMITED, not to a certain point, not until 100GB, it means NEVER LIMITED.

ATT and VERIZON should just grid their teeth and suffer out their own mistake. As written it is a small number.
Let it be!

As soon as ATT cancels my UNLIMITED, I'll be looking around.

Dishonest business practices (marketing/false advertising)should not be rewarded.
No need to f$%% consumers with fine print.

And how is it all done with all-you-can-eat places where they've certainly had to deal with people that they felt were utilizing their product in an excessive way (despite being all-you-can-eat)?

 

[ActionableMango]

I can't believe people are defending advertising one thing but delivering something else, and saying that's okay because it's in the contract. Regardless of whether the 100GB limit is or is not reasonable, and what is or isn't in the contract, it's still deceptive advertising.

It reminds me of this "unlimited" toppings pizza ad (notice the actual limit in much smaller print):

There's always some guy that's going to say "well, 1 million toppings would be physically unreasonable, nobody would think it's really unlimited".

You know what the fix for that is? Advertising "5 toppings", not "unlimited".

Secondly, there's more than 5 goddamn toppings in the picture, so this is extra deceptive.

 

[aristobrat]

Sorry, if I cannot follow the "Verizon is right" crowd, because UNLIMITED means UNLIMITED, not to a certain point, not until 100GB, it means NEVER LIMITED.

IMO, the counter side to that was that when AT&T and Verizon created these unlimited data plans, there was no way to realistically use 5GB of data, much less 100GB.

Netflix didn't exist then.
Hulu didn't exist then.
Spotify wasn't in the US then.

AT&T and Verizon did a very poor job of predicting how people would use data 5+ years after the unlimited plans were introduced, IMO.

So hindsight being 20/20, they never should have created unlimited data plans. What you're seeing now is them dealing with the repercussions of that.

I'm surprised they don't just simply force people off of them and be done with them, forever. IMO, they made a mistake by creating them, and they're trying now to keep it under control.

I don't know how anyone here can think they shouldn't be allowed to "contain" that mistake they made on a plan that was discontinued (from being sold) years ago.

 

[Michael Scrip]

IMO, the counter side to that was that when AT&T and Verizon created these unlimited data plans, there was no way to realistically use 5GB of data, much less 100GB.

Netflix didn't exist then.
Hulu didn't exist then.
Spotify wasn't in the US then.

AT&T and Verizon did a very poor job of predicting how people would use data 5+ years after the unlimited plans were introduced, IMO.

So hindsight being 20/20, they never should have created unlimited data plans. What you're seeing now is them dealing with the repercussions of that.

I'm surprised they don't just simply force people off of them and be done with them, forever. IMO, they made a mistake by creating them, and they're trying now to keep it under control.

I don't know how anyone here can think they shouldn't be allowed to "contain" that mistake they made.

It wasn't necessarily a mistake... it's just that our needs have evolved over time.

When data plans were created... they were more like "always on internet" for devices like Blackberries. Nobody considered how much data they were using... just that they had data.

In contrast... remember the "web" button on old flip-phones? You had to manually connect to the internet. At $2 a minute or whatever. Nobody pressed that button

But a smartphone expected to always be connected to the internet getting push email and such. So the $30 data plan was required. I remember people complaining about that too. It cost a lot more to have a Blackberry than a normal flip-phone or "featurephone"

Hell... back then the plans were centered around how many minutes and text messages you wanted... not how much data you expected to use.

There weren't different packages with different amount of data. It was just a $30 flat-fee always-on internet connection. I don't even remember if there was a bandwidth limit using my old Blackberry Curve. I checked email on it... but I barely used it for anything else. Even browsing the web was a frustrating task. It was nearly impossible to use a lot of data on a Blackberry, PalmOS or Windows Mobile phone.

Fast forward to today... and people are using their smartphones as their primary computer! Services like streaming music and video are now commonplace. And some people even use their smartphone to tether as a substitute for home internet. It's a different world.

So yeah... maybe the carriers should have put limits on those original data plans.

But they didn't know what it would become. Nobody knew.

 

[Sefstah]

Keep in mind these were OLD plans and they were generous enough to grandfather folks. Things change. Back when unlimited was probably like 20gb or so actually being used. They could have said "Ok we are cancelling these plans so pick a new one of our currently offered ones " after the 2yr or whatever contracts are up. Once the contract is up they are no longer obligated to allow you to use the old no longer offer plans. When folks abuse it then they are forced to change it for all.


Again these were old plans no longer offered for several years now. Once the contracts are up they could go with the idea that you HAVE to change to the currently offered plans.

They didn't do that. Times have changed dramatically and people abused that offering so they are forced to make a change to be in the best interest of ALL their customers. Not sure MOBILE data was ever intended to be your main broadband service for your entire home. As stated times have changed and that is a new thing they need to work through.

Did you say "back when unlimited was probably like 20 GB"?? Unlimited should be just that my friend. Unlimited. Not probably, not maybe. Im still grandfathered into my unlimited data plan with ATT. But not because they are being nice or generous. Its because they would get sued by everyone for violating their own terms of agreement. Ive been contract free for almost 3 years now. You wouldn't believe how many offers I get from ATT to switch plans. Not gonna happen! Ive never used more than 10 GB a month and I do believe 100 GB is excessive but again, it's not the customers fault for using their "unlimited data" that they signed up and are paying for.