Home

Share this Story

Verizon CEO Gets What He Asked for, 85,000+ Customers Sign Petition to End Contracts

Verizon logo 2

At the beginning of the month, when speaking at Verizon event, CEO Lowell McAdam acknowledged that he was “happy” to see T-Mobile try something different with their UNcarrier approach to mobile service plans, a move in which they are attempting to eliminate 2-year contracts and phone subsidies. McAdam even went on to say that he would be open to something similar should customers ask for it. Well, Lowell, customers are asking. As I write this post, more than 85,000 of them have signed a petition at Change.org, asking Verizon to end contracts. 

We typically chuckle at petitions, as they tend to accomplish very little or target silly subjects, but the numbers associated with this one in particular are growing enough that it’s now on our radar. It has also now been promoted to the front page of Change.org as a petition to keep an eye on.

We should point out that this petition isn’t necessarily like the petition pushed through the Whitehouse that involved the unlocking of phones. Should this petition grow to 200,000 or 500,000 signatures, there is no guarantee that Verizon will even comment on it, let alone decide to make a change. But hey, there is nothing wrong with trying, banding together to get your voice heard, and seeing what can happen.

So if you’d like to join the ever-growing list of customers hoping to rid the world of wireless contracts, hit up the Change.org link below.

Via:  Change.org | CNET

Cheers EC8CH, Ty, Oscar, and Tyler!

  • http://twitter.com/P0iS0NXX P0iS0N

    The way Verizon is going these days makes me want to sell my phone, pay off the contact and switch over to AT&T. Big Blue is looking more attractive these days.

    • Keith Black

      Good point… why not switch to crappier service with the EXACT SAME POLICIES? Makes perfect sense.

      • http://twitter.com/P0iS0NXX P0iS0N

        Right, let’s see, AT&T offers 1 year contacts still, VZW doesn’t. VZW is also 20 dollars more a month. In my area, AT&T and VZW have the exact same coverage. LTE everywhere. So if I go with AT&T not only will I save myself $20 a month but I’d be getting 3GB of data a month for $30 compared to 2GB for 30 a month on Verizon. So, thank you Captain Condescending!

  • foghorn67

    I’m just putting my money where my mouth is.
    My VZW contract is up early July. Hello TMO.
    SAYING NO TO THE FOLLOWING:
    -bloatware
    -Locked bootloader demands to handset makers
    -Optioning out on phones on fears of cannablizing existing phones.
    Why no HTC One? Let ME choose between the Droid DNA and the One.
    -Stupid tiered data plans. Really? Unlimted down to 2GB for the same price.
    Make it 4GB, then we will talk.
    -Reduced new product return time. 30 days to 14 days.
    -No Any2 anymore. No incentive to stick with the carrier.
    -Fighting tethering apps.

  • http://twitter.com/vtorch V.A.N.

    People are saying that I am paying for the subsidy, Well, I am looking at my bill right now. There is nothing in the breakdown that says that I am paying for the “subsidy.” Can anyone see what I can’t see on my bill? The point is this, nothing is stopping Verizon, AT&T, etc… from charging whatever price they want to charge. NOTHING. Ending subsidies and contracts is going to do nothing except empower them even more. Here is also another little known fact…..Verizon doesn’t even REQUIRE phones to be under contract. People who have been grandfathered on Verizon’s unlimited plan should know this as I know a number of people already have upgraded their phones to newer models, thus not having their monthly fees changed.

    The only way….ONLY WAY to reduce prices is competition. People will have to look towards Washington for that. However, if people actually think that this action is actually going to lower their bill….you gotta be kidding.

  • http://twitter.com/vtorch V.A.N.

    LOL…if someone can tell me that Verizon will lower their monthly fees as a result of removing contracts, then I’ll sign. If Verizon removes contracts, BUT keeps their pricing….I am seriously gonna laugh at that person’s face.

    • Steve

      I highly doubt Verizon will lower their prices as a direct result of removing contracts.
      However, I do believe it will lower prices as an indirect result of removing contracts. If Verizon gets rid of contracts you can almost assume AT&T and Sprint will follow. The contracts are what keeps the carriers from going into a price war with other carriers. If everyone is free to move carrier to carrier, they will have to be very competitive with pricing just to keep people from switching.

  • Robert MacDonald

    This is BS. I started a blog about this long ago and then the person who started this verizon petition stole my idea. I have a whole blog up about this. Nice ppl are.

  • ObviousNinja2

    People think that ending contracts will magically make their verizon bill lowered. …it won’t. You will still have that expensive monthly bill, but instead you just paid for a full price phone.

  • udispyn

    So if I gather this right, they can now raise the price for their services at anytime because there is no contract to hold them to a certain price………..we thought we were going to get robbed before.

    • http://twitter.com/Milleniumlance LANCE

      yup expect some kind of new fee out of their a-holes… Convenience of being on Verizon fee $10

      • Steve

        I don’t think that will happen. I think the opposite will happen. If they jerk you around there is nothing to stop you, and everyone else, from moving to another carrier. If anything, I think a world without contracts really scares Verizon and AT&T.

  • deltaraven97

    I’m still hoping Google starts its own phone business with Google fiber.

    • http://twitter.com/Milleniumlance LANCE

      i so hope so, time warner sucks! 1mbs upload in 2013… seriously!!!

  • eli

    I am the troll droid life needs, but not the troll it wants….

  • nobody72

    Well they lower rates if they drop contracts ?

  • jisaac16

    Is there a petition for them to drop CDMA and finally get a better phone selection?

    • Tim242

      They are going to drop CDMA just the same as at&t will drop GSM. CDMA has provided Verizon the best network for years. You shouldn’t bash it. GSM = most dropped calls.

      • brkshr

        Exactly. I don’t like VZW, but CDMA is vastly superior to GSM for voice services. CDMA is what got VZW to the top. VoLTE is the future and that’s what pretty much all carriers will switch to. I’m pretty sure I heard VZW has a VoLTE phone coming out sometime in the next year.

      • jisaac16

        I’m well aware of all of that and it doesn’t change the fact that phone makers prefer to make phones for GSM, hence better hardware on GSM. I have used both and haven’t found much difference in dropped calls.

        • Tim242

          The phones that come out on GSM, also come out on CDMA. Name one example of this not being the case. Before you say the HTC ONE, it is being released on Sprint, which is CDMA.

          • jisaac16

            Nexus 4 = no CDMA

          • Tim242

            You found the one and only example. The reason though, is not CDMA. It doesn’t have LTE either

          • jisaac16

            Nexus One. iPhone was also At&t exclusive to begin with.

          • Tim242

            Nexus One was not a carrier released phone. iPhone was a carrier exclusivity deal. Neither have anything to do with CDMA. Sorry, you lose on those

          • Tim242

            Verizon actually passed on the Nexus One, for the Dinc.

      • http://www.deathbycone.com Jared Kotoff

        If i remember correctly, doesn’t Verizon plan to drop CMDA by 2015?

        • Tim242

          I think the earliest was 2017, but more likely 2020.

  • Markuz

    Who cares!! I’m leaving F****** verizon!! My contract ends next month that’s the only thing I’m happy about. The end of corruption!! the end of Bad service, Bad Signal on my phone, No updates and when they finally update is all fucked up! F*** verizon for sure!!

    • Tim242

      Yeah yeah yeah

  • bionicwaffle

    Why are people signing this? Don’t they understand that Verizon will not lower the monthly fee?!?!? Take the cheap phone and be happy. Especially if you’re on Verizon since you can’t get better coverage from anyone else.

    • Tim242

      You are incorrect. They are already providing payment plans starting 4/21. This is to end contracts, removing subsidies from the plans.

  • Steve

    People who are saying this doesn’t matter and that you can be on Verizon without a contract are missing the big picture.

    First of all, Verizon doesn’t have a payment program for a new phone unless you go into a 2 year contract. A lot of people don’t want to pay $600 up front. I’m not saying they need to give the phone away for free, but do like T-Mobile has done and setup a payment program.

    Here’s the main point. IF Verizon follows T-Mobiles no contract plan you can bet that AT&T and Sprint will as well. Once all the carriers are without contracts they’ll have to work that much harder to keep people from switching. This means price wars and better deals (unlimited everything?) to entice you to switch carriers. I don’t think it’ll be long (year or two?) before a single phone will work on all the major carriers, so moving between carriers will be easy once that happens.

    Just a thought.

    • Tim242

      A contract is not required for full retail payment plan.

      • Steve

        Are you saying that I can go into Verizon and buy a phone on a payment plan and not sign up with a contract?

        • Tim242

          Yes. The payment plan is buying the phone at full price. You only sign a contract on a subsidized phone

          • Steve

            That’s not a payment plan. That’s just a payment. T-Mobile will allow you to sign up without a contact, and they will set you up with a monthly payment plan for the new phone. You are free to move to another carrier at any time, but you will still need to make your monthly phone payments. This allow people to sign up and get a new phone just like they always have, but without the contact.
            That’s a big difference from paying full price for a phone. A lot of people can’t, or won’t, pay $600+ for a new phone up front.

          • Tim242

            You are misunderstanding. Verizon has a payment plan starting April 21. You can pay out the full price of the phone over 12 months. No contract is required.

          • Steve

            Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn’t heard that before. Looks like it’s not for all devices, so it’ll be interesting to see what devices they allow to be put on a payment plan.

            I’ve also seen conflicting information on if they’ll allow this for out of contract customers, or if it’ll only be for customers in a current contract.

          • Tim242

            It’s for phones $349.99 and higher…so all smartphones. People out of contract can already buy at full price. We can also use the payment plan. But, I am not giving them a $24 finance charge. I will pay up front.

          • Steve

            Good information there. Thanks!
            However, I still say that if all the carriers stop using contracts we’ll see prices go down. Contracts make the carriers feel safe that the majority of their customers can’t pick up and leave at any given moment. Without contracts nothing stops the masses from picking up and leaving one carrier for another if there is a better deal. This will be especially true if phones start to support all of the major carriers. I think this will create stronger competition between the carriers and drive prices down. I could also be wrong. :)

          • Tim242
  • gcurry

    The only thing he’s open to is 15% CAGR.

  • I_shower_naked

    I don’t care how good Verizon’s network is, I will never give them my money again. They treat their customer with contempt, ripping them off every chance they getting, nickel and dime-ing them to death, locking down their phones, etc. etc.

    Contracts or no contracts Verizon will not make things cheaper for their customers. At&t and Verizon are a corrupt oligopoly and that ain’t changing any time soon.

    In my next comment I will tell you all how I really feel.

  • joejoe5709

    This is a crossroads for Verizon. Betray us and gouge us and you’ll start losing customers. You’ll start a dangerous slippery slope that will take years to recover from. Find a way to make this more convenient without making it more expensive for the average customer. Give us a good reason beyond coverage to stick around. Trust me, you’ll make far more money than any rate hike will give you.

  • jazzzy

    I see this as a way to end unlimited data

  • GawkerRedesignSucks

    This only matters if VZW will actually adjust pricing accordingly. On T-Mobile you can get unlimited EVERYTHING for 70 bucks if you bring your own device. Maybe I’m cynical from years of Verizon’s abuse, but I think McAdam would just see this as an opportunity to make it so VZW doesn’t have to subsidize phones anymore, but they would keep pricing as is.

  • http://techonblogger.ward.pro/ Stynkfysh

    These contracts couple the cost of the network and the phones which masks the cost of each which confuses and misleads consumers who end up paying too much for both.

    Phone prices are not set by the market, they are given extravagant retail prices and then sold with contracts, probably at a price much closer to their true value. Most profit margins anywhere else in the consumer electronics industry are much much lower. Mobile phones, relatively speaking, are enormous.

  • brkshr

    Even if VZW does go contract-less, it’s not going to do any good for us. Where else are we going to go with our CDMA phones? Sure, there are a couple crappy MVNOs out there, but no one wants to do that. The only way this will help consumers is if VZW uses the same technology as other carriers, giving us the freedom to move around & forcing VZW to lower there prices to keep us happy. I’m hoping VoLTE will push the nation towards carrier freedom.

    • Mr. Burns

      They may encourage you to use expensive LTE one because of Verizon Wireless 4G SIM Card.

    • Tim242

      All new Verizon LTE phones come SIM unlocked and can be used on GSM carriers.

  • scoobymystery69

    Obviously don’t buy a phone through VZW again??

    • punkBOY

      This should open the flood gates for the branded company to swoop in and make a sale!

  • ineedthatpurse

    the majority of those people have no concept of what a subsidized phone means. Sad little sheep.

  • shooter50

    what would that be and who’s better in your opinion?

  • Captain_Doug

    Just went and signed it. I do really like Verizons network but if they could let go of that leash, I’d be more willing to stay.

  • zepfloyd

    0.00088% have spoken now! I’m sure he’s really concerned.

  • http://www.facebook.com/collin.chapin.7 Collin Chapin

    Why do people want to end contracts? Just buy your phone’s “off contract” and you won’t have a contract…

    Am I missing something here?

  • trbasil

    I kind of got chills as I read the title of the article, as every time VZW’s CEO gets what he wants it turns out very bad for us the customer.

  • DJyoSNOW

    I’ll have to read the nickel & dime fine print on this one. Though I bough my DNA out right so….huh??

  • ntrddragn

    meh, they DONT CARE! i moved into a house get 0 reception. Called them, they said i can buy the extender or i can get out of my contract ( 11 months left) 2 lines. They wont give it to me for free… 150 vs ~2000. so im off shopping for phone on AT&T. everyone with AT&T or T-Mo and Sprint have service in my house.

    • Jason Ward

      The problem is YOU moved. Verizon didn’t make you move. Verizon didn’t tell you to move. You don’t ask your utility company to give you ~$300 for free (which is what the net extender actually costs), why would you expect a cell phone carrier to do so?

      • pappy53

        Extender does not cost VZW $300.

    • shooter50

      sounds like alot of people living in your house.

  • DJyoSNOW

    So could we the customer’s get and out number our own petition?

  • Keith Black

    And too bad your logic is incorrect. The companies that have “lowered their monhly fees” have LOST profit AND customers over the last several years, not doubled them. I.e. T-Mobile and Sprint.

    • EC8CH

      and he’s not talking about T-Mo and Sprint… he’s talking about VZW… big difference.

      • Keith Black

        If you would have comprehended my statement, I would not need to explain that VZW would wind up in the state that T-Mobile and Sprint are in if they were to do as he said. That’s how they got where they are, at the bottom of the totem pole. Cutting your prices decreases profit, which in turn reduces your budget with which to develop your network (and new technologies) which makes you indesireable to current and potential new customers. That is why T-Mobile and Sprint’s customer bases continue to decline and Verizon’s continues to increase.

        • RaptorOO7

          Verizon claims they need to cover subsidies, well that is true unless you remove subsidies in which case they need to lower their prices. WE are paying for THEIR network. It should be THEY are paying for THEIR network.

          • Keith Black

            So they should simply break even and not pocket any profits? That sounds totally fair. ((heavy sarcastic undertone))

            If that’s your mentality, you must be on welfare.

        • Mike Zhang

          First of all, take an economics course and then get back to us about profits and prices. Second, Verizon has received huge subsidies from the government to develop their networks. They should have managed their budget better.

          • Keith Black

            Please, oh wise professor, explain to us the error in my statement. I’ve got to hear this.

          • Mike Zhang

            Your understanding of prices and profits is too simple. For a company with monopoly power, lowering prices actually raises profits. This is because the company is facing a downward sloping demand curve. Lowering prices will attract more customers and increase profit to a certain extent. The wireless industry is not in perfect competition, which your statement explains.

        • chris125

          sprint and tmo lost customers because they had subpar network/coverage. If verizon lowered the prices they could gain a ton of new customers since they pretty much have coverage everywhere. You are delusional if you think they would lose money and be where sprint and tmo are……

          • Keith Black

            Wait wait wait… The reason that Sprint and T-Mobile continue to lose customers is because of an inferior network? And Verizon’s is superior?

            So what magical fairy gave Verizon better toys and gave T-Mo and Sprint crappy ones? Or… are they supposed to use their… profits? .. to build them?

          • chris125

            Except verizon has always had a better network than sprint and tmo from the start, just because tmo and sprint couldn’t put enough spectrum to use to be a larger network and attract more customers has nothing to do with their plans, they just had to continue being cheaper since they already provided a lesser reaching network.

          • Keith Black

            That could not be any farther from the truth. You say that as though spectrum is just some thing floating around that can be utilized with a magic wand. There is a massive infrastructure that each wireless company must put in to place, consisting of towers and antennas, data centers, and the list goes on and on. There is tons of equipment and software that must be engineered, maintained, upgraded and constantly expanded to reach new areas. Each company has its own cell phone towers and antennas, each covering a radius of 3-5 miles. and it takes a crap ton of infrastructure to get that signal to each tower so that it can be broadcast throughout that radius. And it takes a crap ton of employees to make all of these wheels turn.

            All of this was not just “there from the start”, it has taken a lot of time, money and labor to build these things from the ground up, one bolt at a time, one wire at a time.

          • chris125

            Exactly, it wasn’t there to start with why is it verizon exploded yet tmo and sprint were left behind? maybe the fact that that sprint and tmo did not put money into their network hence they have less customers and a worse network that the gap has only widened between them and verizon/att

          • Keith Black

            The wireless industry was a fairly level playing field until AT&T paid out the butt to get exclusivity on the iPhone for the first few years of the iPhone’s existence. The first iPhone came out almost SIX YEARS ago, and that’s when things became imbalanced. Not because of fate, but because of poor decisions on the part of certain carriers like Tmo and Sprint.

            AT&T’s data network did not have the capacity to handle the massive influx of smart phones (iPhones) but at the same time, they had spent a fortune for the exclusivity, therefore they were not generating enough profits to invest back in to the network and expand it to handle to larger capacity of smart phones.

            While AT&T was gaining customers, Sprint and T-Mobile began lowering their prices gradually over the next several years and bending over backwards trying to keep customers. Their price reductions led to their current demise, as their data networks did not evolve with current technology (such as LTE, etc) not to mention their actual coverage areas, which did not expand either.

            Verizon, however, stuck to its guns and did not waiver on its pricing. This has kept Verizon more profitable than any other carrier, including AT&T while they were the only carrier with the iPhone. Verizon now leads the industry in innovation, network reliability, coverage, data speeds, etc. They were only able to achieve because they did not lower their prices when others did.

    • Joe

      wait, are you serious? you’re comparing T-Mobile and Sprint to VZW? you should probably do some research before you say stupid sh*t.

      “The latest jumble of spreadsheets says yes, revealing that Big V turned a profit of $1.95 billion whilst adding 677,000 new subscribers to its wireless service” – http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/18/verizon-q1-2013/

      VZW has posted profits and subscriber growth for as long as i can remember; year over year, quarter over quarter. They continue to make their policies less consumer friendly and more business oriented.

      • Keith Black

        I think you may have completely mistaken something I said, could you quote me on what you’re responding to? I’ve made several statements that have long thread replies. You might be misunderstanding something.

  • Mapekz

    If you move in the middle of your contract and in that location your carrier sucks (there are many locations even in metropolitan areas where VZW has failed me but T-Mobile as exceeded not).

    If you have to visit a different country but your ISP doesn’t offer a global device that you want to use (i.e. Nexus devices on VZW).

    If you want to use the latest and greatest technology but don’t see the point because locking into a contract reduces the upfront cost of the device with a high monthly bill but buying full retail doesn’t reduce the cost of the monthly bill.

  • Keith Black

    Too bad 99% of these petitioners have no clue what they’re asking for. No contract means $650 devices instead of $200. The majority of people cannot afford that upfront. Following T-Mobile’s model, customers will perceive their bill as being “higher” because of the installment plans on device financing. The funniest part about all of this is that CUSTOMERS HAVE HAD A NON-CONTRACT OPTION ALL THIS TIME. Stop being a bunch of brats with an unrealistic sense of entitlement. Wireless carriers are not non-profit public services. If you have a problem with prices, get a flip phone with no texting and you’ll have your cheap bill.

    • EC8CH

      “Wireless carriers are not non-profit public services.”

      No, but the wireless carrier market in the US is a duopoly and in bad need of regulation reform.

      • jak_341

        No. I don’t want the government anywhere near it. Let the free market handle the regulation. And there is not a duopoly. I can name 6 or more carriers in the U.S.

        • EC8CH

          So you think that not only is the wireless industry not under regulated, but that it should be completed unregulated all together?

          That’s a fairly extreme position.

          AT&T and Verizon control more than 70% of the US market, a number that would have been even higher without regulation that blocked the AT&T T-Mo merger.

        • Fattie McDoogles

          Its not about how many you can name. It’s about how many considered equals. There’s 4 MAJOR carriers and theres a HUGE drop off in customer numbers from AT&T & Verizon to Sprint and T-Mobile. There’s an even bigger dropp off from The Big 4 to the regional carriers like Metro PCS.

          • droidify

            So are you saying because there are only 4 major players in wireless the government should step in? What about Apple and Microsoft. Are we also in a stranglehold by our computer OS providers? Should google be penalized for being the only ‘good’ search option?

          • Fattie McDoogles

            No not at all. I was just explaining his argument. Four major players is plenty actually. Your arguments however are comparing different things. AT&T and Verizon no longer fight each other. You could argue that there is a strong case of collusion and price fixing. Their plans are mirrors of each other. They are working to keep everyone else out of the competition instead of competing against each other.
            Microsoft actually bought majority shares of Apple about 10 years ago to keep them from going under and Microsoft from becoming a monopoly. So actually that is a reality for them. They need each other to keep from becoming a monopoly. However Microsoft and Apple have very different business strategies and practices that keep them from becoming a duopoly. They are in constant competition for supremacy. Since search engines aren’t a paid service I don’t believe you can have a monopoly on it. I could be wrong on that.

          • droidify

            Just google (how ironic) “google congressional hearings” and you will find all of the instances where the government has debated regulating google. I remember when it started with nextag stating that google could dictate what businesses could succeed based on what companies they returned in search results. Even Microsoft has started the “don’t get scroogled” campaign. Google’s defense was you can always type in bing or yahoo but people choose google. Then congress moved to their privacy policy, next it was street view.

        • New_Guy

          Yeah but 2 of them are either regional or irrelevant, and the third is only recently a player. Sorry, but EC8CH is right. ..

        • RaptorOO7

          What free market, the entire industry is controlled by a few companies who are unwilling to change. T-Mobile may not be the best but its a start.

          • droidify

            That is a great example of the free market at work. When people get fed up with VZW’s greed it opens the door for T-Mobile to grow by being the “uncarrier”. Look at their numbers, they are turning around and gaining thousands of customers per day instead of losing customers like a year ago. They are also using their financial growth to deploy an LTE market and expand coverage. That is why the free market should pick the winners, not the government.

          • Keith Black

            Greed?! Are you serious?!? Your wireless service is not welfare, and it is not a non profit industry. Maybe you should ask your employer for a reduction in pay instead of a raise next year, because wanting more money would be very greedy of you.

            And anyone who buys in to T-Mobile’s new marketing strategy is a moron. You are simply buying your phone at full retail instead if getting a subsidy and signing a contract. You have that option at any carrier, including Verizon.

          • droidify

            Wow personal attacks because you don’t agree with someone. A bright one you are.

          • Keith Black

            Please quote the personal attack, I see none.. ?

          • droidify

            The “anyone who buys into T-Mobile’s marketing plan is a moron” part will suffice. Specifically since I had just praised T-Mobiles marketing plan. I wouldn’t expect you to see that since you attempted to draw a comparison between a request for a paycut from your employer and VZW continuing to move the goal post after posting record profits each and every quarter. That is just silliness. You don’t have to agree that taking away unlimited data, extending upgrades from 20 to 24 months, charging $100 more for virtually every device compared to the competition, and not offering a price reduction in your bill after your 24 month subsidy is fulfilled. But it does appear to be a little greedy when you do these things to the very customers that bring you those record profits all in the name of maximizing profits and offering less for more. I am all for the free market, that was my entire point. I am leaving VZW because I’m sick of all this. T-Mobile’s plan is different. Go look at their prepaid plans and compare them to going month to month with VZW and you will (or should) understand.

          • Keith Black

            THERE IS NOT A SUBSIDY CHARGE INCLUDED IN THE COST OF VERIZON’S PRICE PLANS. Holy crap I don’t know what fool started this silly assumption/rumor, but I see a lot of people using this argument and it is absolutely invalid and not even close to true. Verizon’s monthly price plans are what they are because they are a premium quality compared to other carriers. You sign a contract because it takes a long time for Verizon to make a profit from you, not just because of the subsidy, but from overhead in general. The 24 months is not just to compensate for your subsidy, and they are not looking to “break even” but rather to make a PROFIT just like any other business, and there is never a point when what you pay monthly becomes pure profit. And my analogy was entirely valid, expecting a company to willingly surrender profits is just as ridiculous as asking you to surrender part of your income. In regards to T-Mobile’s new strategy:

            **iPhone 5 on T-Mobile:
            – $100 up front
            – $20 added to your bill each month ON TOP OF your price plan for 24 months = $480. (This is a finance agreement, thus you are contractually obligated to pay the full $480 regardless of how long you retain service… wait whaaat, a contract? Hmm. I thought we were “Un-carrier”-ing) $100 + $480 = $580 that you pay for the equipment regardless of how long you keep service.
            1 month = $580
            12 months = $580
            16 months = $580
            24 months = $580

            **iPhone 5 on Verizon:
            – $200 up front
            – No additional charge on your price plan, but rather an Early Termination Fee if you cancel service; which starts out at $350 and reduces by $10 each month. $200 + $350 = $550 or LESS depending on how long you keep service.
            1 month: $200 + $350 = $550
            6 months: $200 + $290 = $490
            12 months: $200 + $230 = $430
            18 months: $200 + $170 = $370
            24 months: $200 + $0 = $200 (No termination fee, contract fulfilled).

            Now would you like to continue refuting the mathematically inarguable fact that anybody who buys in to T-Mobile’s new “Un-Carrier” marketing schemes is a moron?

          • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 jonathanM21

            Dude, your example is all kinds of messy and off. You’re not considering the price of monthly plans and unlimited vs capped data. Not to mention with T-Mobile you can have unlimited data for $70 a month and bring a Nexus 4 for $299 with no contract. Verizon can’t compare to that setup from the “Uncarrier.” That’s a huge benefit.

          • Keith Black

            My example is 100% correct. Verizon and T-Mobile’s price plans are both appropriately priced according to the quality of their networks. It’s the same reason that there is a price difference between a Honda Civic and a Maseratti. Anyone who has a clue what they’re talking about is aware of the difference in quality between carriers. If you can’t explain said differences, you have no business replying to this thread.

          • Rhett

            Having worked internally with Verizon, this is not the case. In meetings, we were informed multiple times by upper management that on an individual sale, we recouped the loss of a subsidized device (Android based smartphone) within 1-3 months. To be quite frank, we charge the prices we do because we can. If the general public could see our profit margins, they would riot.

          • ThatONEGuy

            I have worked as a Market Manager for T-Mobile and a District Manager for Big Red. When it comes to things like this, there is lot more going on behind the scenes than you could imagine. Over the last 4 years the scope of consumers and handsets have changed. You can thank Apple for that. And it is a good thing, I feel. Consumers are now open to paying the true cost of the device from the manufacturer regardless of the price (Think opening day of new iPhone release). If that is the majority and with 61% of VZW consumers using a smartphone, that day of No contracts is fast approaching. I think that the announcement on May 22 will be the release of their new device payment plan. You can be rest assured that AT&T will be right behind them within the next 90 days with something similiar. And if this is the case then there is no need for the contracts because the carrier gets their money upfront and without need for it to be stretched out over the next 2 years. Then you can may see a reduction in cell plans to capture customers because the customer is paying the huge cost of things up front.

            Remember what happen to landline cost of services when the majority of users got a cellphone. You can get a landline now for around $12/mo… now.

            All of this takes time. It takes a while for 300 million people to change what their comfortable with on a device that they have learned to depend on everyday.

            And if the UN-carrier works, then great. But it will be a long time before T-MO catches up with any of the networks in network availability and reception.

          • kg215

            You are forgetting 2 important things: T-mobile has lower rates to start off (even with the phone subsidy) and most importantly will lower your rate after the phone is paid off. Verizon is now offering the option to split the 600+ dollar phone cost into monthly payments but gives no discount after your phone is paid off or you are off contract to begin with. The logic that “oh they are for profit so they can screw us all they like” is the logic of a moron or a Verizon shill. Yes Verizon has the best coverage and therefore can charge more before losing customers, that does not mean everything Verizon does is right and not a rip off. Verizon is EXTREMELY greedy, but they haven’t been punished for it yet. I hope in the future they will be. BTW I am a Verizon customer, it’s just hilarious you think Verizon isn’t greedy and isn’t trying to rob customers every chance they get. It will be better for everyone if companies like T-mobile and Spring grow, right now there is no competition to keep Verizon and At&t in check. In fact I don’t even think At&t is that strong of a competitor for Verizon.

        • http://twitter.com/jdk2 jdk2

          None of which are viable for a majority of the people in the US. VZW or ATT are the only options for people who need RELIABLE coverage when travelling.

        • Geoff Johnson

          Go ahead, please. The only nationwide carriers that I can recall off the top of my head are Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, and maybe MetroPCS if you consider them a national carrier.

        • chris125

          there is a bunch of carriers but verizon and att are clearly a duopoly. Sprint and tmo don’t compare in terms of coverage, etc.

        • Drew Landgrave

          Think he meant oligopoly

      • Fattie McDoogles

        The problem is that T-Mobile and Sprint are making enough noise to make it feel like its not. Look at the poll we just took for what carrier your buying your S4 on. The top 2 were Verizon and TMobile. Android Central posted the exact same question and most of yesterday and this morning Sprint was in the lead with TMobile and Verizon right behind them. T-Mobile is working on purchasing Metro PCS and Sprint now has 2 offers to be purchased. It looks like a lot of awesome things are happening in the mobile industry right now.

        • EC8CH

          I’d just like to see the market restructured to address the new reality that these are data networks, not just telephones anymore.

          • Fattie McDoogles

            Right, But the 2 carriers who do offer unlimited data are the one’s making moves to re-position themselves. It looks like there have a shot to make a difference and flourish.

          • EC8CH

            Agreed. Maybe the market will force VZW and AT&T to follow suit, but I doubt it.

          • Fattie McDoogles

            If T-Mobile and Sprint are smart they will start investing serious money in bolstering their networks not just upgrading to LTE. If they do it only makes sense that they will start gaining more and more customers

      • Keith Black

        The root influence of your statement is that you are dissatisfied with price. If that’s the case, buy a cheap flip phone and you can cut your bill in to one-third of what it is right now with a low amount of minutes and no data or texts. Otherwise, don’t expect to pay the price of a Civic while feeling entitled to a Ferrari.

        And it is far from a duopoly, that was an uneducated statement. Besides, only monopolies are illegal :P

        • EC8CH

          I’m actually most concerned about their attempts at blocking Google wallet and attempting to charge more for certain types of data like face time.

          • Keith Black

            Ok, well that’s an entirely different matter and has absolutely zero to do with your previous statements. I’m tired of wireless consumers raising pitchforks left and right and acting as though the carriers are bad guys. If you don’t like them, stop using them and communicate with your friends and loved ones through pen, paper and the Postal Service. But wait, they’ve increased the price of stamps tremendously… darn them! There’s no winning.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000615318329 Kevin Kaykay Kim

        Oligopoly is the word you were looking for.

    • TSY87

      I think you’ve missed the point of non-contract plans and how it affects the way we buy phones. Right now, your cellphone bill covers a subsidy to pay off your “discounted” phone. Once that 2 year contract is over, your cell phone bill is STILL covering a subsidy even if you do not get a new phone. For people who always change phones every 2 years its not so bad but for those who go for years (more than 2) you are getting ripped off.

      • Trueblue711

        Exactly. Let’s not forget about the ridiculous markup the carriers purposely put on the phones so you can get a “discount.” There’s no reason these phones should cost $600-800 full retail. Google sells almost equivalent phones at $300-400.

        • brkshr

          Google basically sells them to us at cost. They make their money through ads & have other reasons for providing a cheap developer phone. Pretty much just like gaming consoles cost more to manufacture than what they sell them for (at least for the first few years of market availability). They make their money on the back end through games, because no one will pay $800-$1000 for a gaming console. So, any other phone manufacturer needs to make a profit on the phone to stay in business. Yes carriers have their small markup, to make some profit, but not nearly what you are thinking.

          • kdo23

            Not to mention the pricing structure they have introduced with share everything makes it even more complicated. Since you pay access and for data, they are splitting up the areas where the make up the subsidy and would likely only lower one of them a fraction of that margin.

          • Keith Black

            THERE. IS. NOT. A. SUBSIDY. CHARGE. INCLUDED. IN. THE. PRICE. PLAN.

            Your device subsidy is only a fraction of what it costs Verizon to run the largest and most technologically advanced network in the freaking country. Your price plan is to pay for services rendered and generate a profit, not so that Verizon can merely break even on the subsidy.

          • OBK1352

            Why can’t carriers sell at close to cost? They are getting monthly fees from their users.

          • http://www.scaryuncledevin.com/ Devin Rodriguez

            Wait wait wait… make less money when we can force you to pay us more up front? Naaaaaaaaaaaah.

          • brkshr

            I agree.

          • RaptorOO7

            Carriers also load bloatware which they are paid for and we cannot remove, block applications, want us to use ISIS which is a failure while they block Google Wallet which is ready today.

          • Keith Black

            When you buy a smart phone at $199, you are getting it for about $300-400 below cost. Look up the word “subsidy”. Carriers don’t make cell phones… Apple, Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, LG etc make cell phones, and the carriers buy from them. The manufacture has to make a retail profit. For example, Verizon would pay Motorola roughly $500-550 for each Razr HD, then you buy it from Verizon at $200 if you sign a 2 year service agreement (with a $350 termination fee if you cancel service). OR, you can buy it at $599 without a service agreement and cancel any time you want.

            Not only that, your device subsidy is only a fraction of what it costs Verizon to run the largest and most technologically advanced network in the freaking country. Your price plan is to pay for services rendered and generate a profit, not so that Verizon can merely break even.

          • kg215

            Would you stop making up numbers and passing them off as facts? You don’t know that Verizon pays Motorola 500-550 per Razor, you have no idea if that is even close. It’s okay if you think crappy devices like the Razor are actually worth 600+ dollars without subsidies, doesn’t mean the rest of us should think that way or are being entitled brats like you keep saying. There are no rules for setting the retail price, good for you that you agree to any price they set and swallow what they tell you hook line and sinker. I hope you continue to pay them a lot. Not all of us want to be that stupid and do that no questions asked. Yes a lot of us are Verizon customers for a reason (coverage) doesn’t mean we should bend over like you. Verizon doesn’t have to listen to us but it’s still good to give feedback and yeah if they piss us off too much we can leave.

          • Trueblue711

            According to Forbes, Google makes a profit, but a very small one. The iPhone is estimated to cost $210 to manufacture. Let’s say $410 to include third parties and marketing costs. Where’s the extra $300+ going?

          • brkshr

            That’s the iphone buddy. There’s a reason they are/were the richest company in the world. People throw their money at them. They make the cheapest phones & sell them for the most because people are stupid and want the Apple logo. So the $300+ that you speak of goes directly to Apple.

          • Trueblue711

            Yes, but other manufacturers price their phones modeled after the iPhone. There’s no way Verizon’s Voyager cost $599 back in the day when the far, far superior iPhone was the same price at the time. It’s the same reason every high-end phone is targeting the $199-$299 price range now.
            Also, why is it that MVNO carriers can offer almost the same phones under different names, for half the cost?

          • brkshr

            That’s freaking crazy if the voyager really cost that much back then! I can’t remember what phones cost that far back, so I guess you win.

          • Trueblue711

            I remember because my sister paid full retail at the time. Ridiculous!

          • http://twitter.com/gintoddic Todd Vernick

            there is no customer care or support for google “nexus” phones. Only thing they pay for is designing and manufacturing.

          • brkshr

            There is definitely customer support. I’ve had to call them a few times for returns. They also give support through email & have at least 3 different tiers of support, that I know of.
            Edit: & I’m sure there is a lot more than just designing & manufacturing. Such as advertising, which is a huge expense.

          • http://twitter.com/gintoddic Todd Vernick

            when have you seen a nexus phone on tv? Yes they do advertising but only online, which is much cheaper compared to advertising on tv.

          • Keith Black

            It goes to P.R.O.F.I.T.S.

            That is why any company does business- to make money, not to break even just so that you can pay a little less. That would be ridiculous.

          • Trueblue711

            Obviously. That was the point of my “question.”

        • middlehead

          That part’s not the carrier’s fault; go try to buy an unlocked GS3 from Samsung, it’s no less than $600, depending on how much built in storage you choose. Motorola’s RAZR developer units are right up there too.

          • Trueblue711

            The reason they’re like that now is because the carriers set the precedent for the pricing.

      • Kevin

        If people think Verizon Wireless will offer lower price points for people who are not under contract, they are kidding themselves. As many people have pointed out, non-contract options exist today; however, pricing plans are the same as in-contract customers. T-Mobile may be trowing around the idea of discounted rates; however, Verizon’s “Cadillac of carriers” mentality will not change simply because their customer’s are not in contract.

        All that MAY come out of this is the option to offer payment plans on full retail purchases… which will only cause the cost of service to go UP. Right now, it is exactly the same; however, you pay a pro-rated ETF instead of a partial equipment fee if you terminate early.

        One gain I do see coming out of this, is that equipment prices will hopefully be more transparent. However; the best bet would be to eliminate buying equipment from VZW all together.

        • Fattie McDoogles

          If Verizon responds to this and does change there stance on contracts they will lower their prices as well. Now they definitely won’t be competing with T-Mobile for lowest priced plans but they will definitely lower them a bit. It’s all strategy. Customers want lower prices so you give them slightly lower prices as it makes them feel like they are getting a deal, while you haven’t lost much if anything as you are no longer subsidizing phones for customers. Its a win-win.

          • RaptorOO7

            The real problem is Verizon can lower the prices or not, you can’t really use their phones on any other network and even if it has GSM abilities it needs to be unlocked, which they may not do, they may cripple the GSM abilities or not activate them at all. Its a game they like to play.

        • EC8CH

          “the best bet would be to eliminate buying equipment from VZW all together”

          on this point we agree

          • Jaron1226

            Yeah, but not a lot of carriers work in certain areas. VZW is monopolizing the cell phone industry. For me crappy US Cellular would be my only option if were to leave VZW. USCC is horrible, and their phones suck.

          • Keith Black

            Please enlighten us all as to exactly how it is that VZW is monopolizing the industry. Because they’re better? That’s all I gather from your statement.

      • Keith Black

        That’s not how it works at all, actually. You act as though there is some extra subsidy charge included in the price plans and when you’ve completed the contract, your monthly rate should drop? Absolutely not. First of all, a device subsidy is not the only cost to the carrier when you start service. The are all sorts of FCC licensing and registration fees associated with your device and your actual phone number, plus the subsidy. The reason you sign a contract is to cover these items; and the carrier, depending on the plan you select, does not even begin making a profit on you until 14-16 months. That is a FACT. And a network does not run itself, there is a MASSIVE amount of overhead included staffing, maintenance and continuous network build-out. So no, your bill does not “continue covering a subsidy even after 2 years”. It is you who has drastically missed the point, so let me make it clear:

        All of this is not so that you can break even, or so that Verizon can break even. It is strategically designed for the carrier to make as much of a profit as possible. Your wireless company is not a non-profit public service. It is a privilege, just like driving a nice car. If you cannot afford an expensive one, get a cheap one. If you have a problem with smart phone monthly/device pricing, get a flip phone and a plan with no texts and you will have a very affordable monthly fee.

    • flyinggerbil

      Good. I’d rather pay more for a phone. Not sure why people (like you) don’t get this.

      • Keith Black

        If you’ve read anything that I’ve said, you would realize that your statement makes no sense. I fully advocate non-contract full retail pricing. It would mean a lot less whiny brats who think their phone is only worth $200.

        • flyinggerbil

          “Too bad 99% of these petitioners have no clue what they’re asking for. No contract means $650 devices instead of $200.”

          pretty sure i read what you said. you’re just wrong and you know it. it’s ok to admit it, cnn of posters.

          • Keith Black

            Please try to make sense… If you would rather pay full retail and not sign a contract, then you and I are on the same page. I don’t understand what you’re saying that I am wrong about?

          • flyinggerbil

            It’s ok. You’re wrong. Keep responding though and proving my point.

          • Keith Black

            Troll. And incapable of an intelligent response, apparently. “You’re wrong” conveys nothing.

          • flyinggerbil

            Right. Just admit you’re wrong dude. You’re the troll. The more you respond the worse you look. Pwned again and again.

    • LiterofCola

      Eh-friggin’-xactly

    • kendokan

      You haven’t thought this all the way through, or at least haven’t taken the time to understand T-Mo’s new plan. I’m switching three phones from VZW to T-Mo this week. Basically T-Mo will let you either (1) bring your own device, (2) buy a device from them up-front, or (3) pay them monthly for your device. In all three cases there is no service contract commitment. In case (1) and (2) you can leave whenever you like. In case (3) you can also leave whenever you like, but your device is carrier locked until you pay it off.

      Verizon only offers option (3) and not only required a monthly device payment but also required a 2-year service contract, because the device payment is built into the cost of service. At a substantial markup, I assume, but there’s no way of knowing since the total cost of the device subsidy is completely hidden.

      This isn’t about entitlement, it’s just about math.

      • Keith Black

        Not only have I thought this all the way through, but you have no clue the extent to which I know what I am talking about. Speaking of, you apparently don’t know your facts.

        1) You can provide your own equipment when starting service with Verizon, and there is no contract in this scenario because there is no subsidy.
        2) You can buy a device up front from Verizon, again, with no contract.
        3) You can buy a $600 piece of equipment at $200ish and sign a two year contract, but pay an early termination fee of $350 or less (because it decreases $10 each month), which can actually turn out to be LESS EXPENSIVE than paying off your device through T-Mobile if you cancel service within the first year.

        Lastly, you are incorrect in saying that there is some sort of “device payment” built in to Verizon’s monthly price plans. The price is simply for service, and the length of the contract is for Verizon to maximize its profits, as it does not start making a profit from you until 14-16 months of service, depending on what plan you select. This is a fact and not up for debate. T-Mobile does not “lower the price plan” when you pay off your device, they simply remove the charge for the device once the installment (aka loan) is paid off. It’s no different than adding a loan payment to the monthly cost of your cell phone bill. Does this help you understand better?

        • http://twitter.com/jonathanM21 jonathanM21

          So where do you think Verizon is recouping the cost of the device subsidy? You sign a contract for a discounted iPhone. Verizon recoups that somewhere. You keep saying Verizon’s plan costs are to “strategically maximize their profits” and such – ok, sure, their plans cost what they cost for Verizon to make money and also to recoup phone cost. The plan costs could be lower – T-Mobile’s plans demonstrate that by transparently showing where the phone subsidy goes and when it should go away.

          • Keith Black

            They would recoup the subsidy one of three ways:

            1) By providing no subsidy at all (I.E. customers buys full retail, no contract. Or they already have their own equipment).

            2) Customer receives a subsidy and completes 2 year contract (between subsidy and overhead of running the company/network, Verizon does not begin making a profit until 14-18 months of service, depending on the price plan the customer selects.

            3) The customer cancels service and pays the pro-rated Early Termination Fee. If the customer cancels before 14 months, Verizon will have barely broken even. This sucks, as nobody would start up their own business with the intentions of merely trying to break even and not maximize profits.

            Lastly, the mentality which you have suggested of being willing to take in less profits due to competition is exactly why Sprint and T-Mobile have networks that are significantly inferior to Verizon and AT&T. Lower profits = less capital with which to expand your network and position yourself at the forefront of innovation and invest in new technologies. This is why Verizon is 2 years ahead of all other carriers when it comes to LTE roll out.

    • RaptorOO7

      Verizon can offer two options, option 1 stays the same, you pay a lower phone price and a subsidy over 2 years for the phone. You then could take option 2 which is you have your own phone or pay up front for your phone and get a lower priced plan since their is no subsidy.

      The problem is the carriers are getting their subsidy regardless of contract, no contract, retail or discounted phone prices. I am not in the business of paying for their network expansion that is their job. They are supposed to take profits and pay for it, not gouge me extra to pay for it to keep their profits artificially high.

      • Keith Black

        In response to paragraph one: THERE. IS. NOT. A. SUBSIDY. COST. BUILT. IN. TO. THE. MONTHLY. PRICE. PLANS.

        Paragraph two: This pure ignorance. “I am not in the business of paying for their network expansion that is their job. They are supposed to take profits and pay for it” … So what you’re saying is that Verizon should simply break even and not pocket any profits? This is not a non-profit public service. You must be on welfare as well if that’s how you view wireless service.

        • GovernmentCheeseTroll

          Oh and there it is. I was waiting for that laissez-faire free market jab at public services that actually benefit people who need them. And there it is.

          • Keith Black Thecheesetrollolol

            I see what you did there with that name. Two points for cleverness. Mais il etait justifiee. :P

    • WickedToby741

      You’re paying more than $650 for your devices anyways. With a contract, while you may get the device for $200, you pay for that subsidy monthly in perpetuity. Even if you have already “paid off” the subsidy, your monthly bill doesn’t drop.

      With T-Mobile’s new plan structure, it does. You pay for the device until it’s paid for and then your bill drops. If you pay the full price of the device up front, your bill never goes up. You’re the only one misunderstanding here. There’s incredible consumer value to the contract free route that T-Mobile has chosen. It would be beneficial for consumers if the industry as a whole adopted that approach as well.

      • Keith Black

        You are quite mistaken, there is not a monthly subsidy cost built in to contract price plans. The focal point is not the monthly price, but rather the length of the contract. The purpose of the length of the contract is that due to the subsidy, company overhead (network, employees), FCC licensing and registration fees, etc, it takes anywhere from 14-16 months for the carrier to start making a profit from you, depending on what plan you select. This is fact, I work in the industry and have a thorough knowledge of its inner workings. And make no mistake, the goal IS to make a profit, not to break even. Simple business, this is not a non profit public service.

        Secondly, you are also mistaken about T-mobile’s plan. The price plan does not go down once you pay off your phone, you have paid off your phone so your monthly device charge goes away. It’s no different than paying off a loan, except that the monthly payment for the loan is added ON TOP OF your monthly price plan, not included IN your monthly price plan. There is a big difference. And like I’ve said a million times, Verizon has ALWAYS offered a contract-free option.

    • Mike Zhang

      You don’t understand this at all. It’s not about saving money, it’s about having more competition. Competition is what drives innovation. All of you complain about slow internet speeds and this is because our telecom infrastructure is old. Verizon is doing nothing to upgrade it since there is no incentive to do so since there is no competition. Technology is what drives the economy. Better technology will lead to economic growth. You’re just ignorant and listen to everything the stupid media feeds you. I feel so sorry for you.

      • Keith Black

        Holy crap… you have to be kidding me. That was the most ignorant and uninformed post I think I’ve ever seen. I’ll explain this as simple as I can so that hopefully you will understand:

        1) I work in the wireless industry and have a thorough knowledge of its inner workings. I don’t learn anything from the media.
        2) Competition helps drive the NEED for innovation, but you can’t innovate without capital. And without good profits, you have no capital. Follow that?
        3) You speak out of complete ignorance. Verizon LEADS the industry in network coverage, network speed, network quality and especially innovation. I can’t go on, I feel as though to do so would be the equivalent of beating my head against a brick wall

        • Mike Zhang

          You probably already beaten your head against the brick wall. Verizon has enough capital to develop, yet they only develop where they feel it’s worth it. The United States is the most powerful country in the world and yet we’re lagging behind in telecom infrastructure. Everybody should have access to cheap, fast internet. Why do other countries have speeds ten to twenty times faster than ours at a lower price? Competition. And like you said, “competition drives the NEED for innovation.”, but what if they were no competition? That’s exactly what’s happening right now. I’m not denying the fact that Verizon is the best carrier on the market, but their way of going about getting customers does not promote competition. Contracts virtually decrease competition because people are being locked in. America is too in love with contracts, it’s time for change.

    • regkilla

      That’s why there is eBay and Craigslist. -_-

      • Keith Black

        Lol indeed! :)

    • http://twitter.com/fritzo2162 DougZ

      Phone prices are ridiculous and there’s no reason for a phone to be $650 in this day and age. Subsidies are what keeps the prices high.

      • Keith Black

        Wrong. Wireless carriers do not manufacture phones. I can’t fathom why people don’t understand this. The phones are designed and manufactured by Apple, Samsung, Motorola, Lg, Nokia, etc… These are separate entities that must make their own profit. They do this buy SELLING THE DEVICES TO THE CARRIERS, for a PROFIT, not to break even on raw materials. Sheesh. At most, there might be a $50-75 mark up on the “full retail” price from what the carrier paid to the manufacturer for each device. Subsidies are, in fact, what allow you to pay much less. Carriers lose money up front when you buy a device at the subsidized price, which is why you sign a contract. Or, you can pay full retail and not sign a contract. Hopefully this gives you a better understanding of device pricing.

  • Ryan

    I bet they will change “early termination fees” to “Monthly device installment”. No matter what Verizon will be expensive. The way I see it Verizon ETF fees drop off every month and you dont pay for that on a billing statement. however if it became device installment the monthly bill will probably jump up.

    • RaptorOO7

      Hey if they want to cut the monthly fee and add a separate fee for phone subsidy then fine because once the subsidy is done my bill drops until I get another one. Too bad that will NEVER happen on Verizon.

    • Keith Black

      Um, T-Mobile has “early termination fees” to “Monthly device installment”. You should check your facts buddy. T-Mobile’s new strategy is total BS.

  • EC8CH

    just shows carriers have no fear of competition… I wonder why.

  • EC8CH

    It may be wishful thinking, but I think it takes us one step closer to phones being sold separate from the wireless service outside of the control of the carriers. Buying phones through the carriers gives them control over the hardware and software, and hinders competition between phones on pricing.

    • Mapekz

      And availability, i.e. if you really really want an HTC One you are really really pissed if you’re stuck on VZW.

  • http://twitter.com/tarund TarunD

    Uh, Kellex – your source link says CNET but it’s actually CNN. Just thought I let you know…

  • Daniel Maginnis

    Not even LTE and reliable coverage?

    • fallenshell

      It’s why I stayed with them, in hindsight wish I had not. 4 lines, 2 smart 2 dumb, both smart have unlimited data. When we bought our house 4 years ago we had great service, as the LTE lit up in the DC Metro area VZWs coverage has just gotten thinner and thinner. Can no longer make calls inside the house… which is awkward given we don’t have a land line. Outside sure no problem, inside by a window maybe… and they say they are working on it… been this way for over a year and half now.

    • http://twitter.com/havens1515 Randroid

      I have LTE in my area, and the coverage is not exactly reliable where I am.

  • eli

    Still have unlimited data on my droid DNA, u mad guys?

    • sonofskywalker3

      No, because I have it on my GS3

      • eli

        u mad no 1080p? u mad no 5 inch screen? u mad no quad core? yeh u mad

        • Austin Warren

          You suq dik? yeah u do

          • eli

            Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

          • shooter50

            No ebonics in droid-life, ok?

          • eli

            no need to have your jimmies rustled

          • Ian

            Haha, I see what you did there! Well played!

        • flosserelli

          I’ll gladly trade a 1080p screen for the 3100 mAh removable battery and expandable memory in my Note 2. How many HD movies can you store on a DNA? I am genuinely curious to know.

          • eli

            I think you might have something wrong with your brain. Why are you trying to be all cyberbully on me. Do you really think anyone cares about you. You talk to people like they are trash. Why would you want to come off like that. Does it make you feel tough? Are you trying to make up for having a small smelly dick? You need to see a shrink. Have fun going through life wondering why people don’t like you. I’ll give you a hint though, you try to make others feel like ****. But you have failed on me. I know what you are. See, the thing is, I’m a nice guy. You on the other hand can’t control your stupidity. You really don’t even realize that you are a jerk ,do you? When your older maybe you can look back on times like this and see that you where unnecessarily rude to people you don’t know. Right now you think you are being cleaver and it is just a fun time. Keep treating people like you do and see where you end up. You can not compete with my intellect so I warn you to give up before you embarrass yourself further..

          • RaptorOO7

            Great, but the Note 2 is 720p.

          • S2556

            I think he is aware. He said trade the 1080p DNA screen for the battery and sd slot in the note 2.

        • JoshGroff

          I’m mad my DNA isn’t on unlimited. >.>

          • eli

            There is no need to be upset, friend

    • Chris Hollenbeck

      Trollgasm

      • eli

        shhhh, no tears, only dreams now

    • shooter50

      So you’re the one who purchased a DNA. I knew at least one person must have. How’s that bluetooth working out for you? And your sim card error. Is your wifi working properly yet? How about hot spot connectivity? I could go on, but the DNA problem list is far too long. Enjoy your HTC piece of junk.

      • eli

        heh thats funny because every last one of those works perfectly…u mad windows phone owner?

        • ihateeli

          why mention windows phone? the fact that it is on your mind shows that you want to give it a shot sooner or later. go ahead, any windows phone is better than your HTC LOL

          • eli

            Honestly, that’s what I call a cool story bro. Such a riveting tale, I honestly copy and pasted it to word, saved on my hard drive, backed it up on a jump drive, drove to the bank, put the jump drive in the safe deposit box, and will leave it there until my kids turn about 12 (when they can actually state their age, and ask what it is I’m showing them), when I will pick it up, put it in an old USB drive reader and relay this cool story to them and tell them, “kids, this is what a cool story should look and sound like…not like the stories your generation tells.”

          • ihateeli

            ahhh, as long as i was able to get you to spend one ounce of effort on me, i am happy :) thank you

          • eli

            copy and paste son

          • ihateeli

            just like you “copy and pasted it to word” earlier right? ;) i got a long enough rope to help you out of that hole when you are done :) just let me know

          • PopeFrancis

            eli shooter50 • a day ago

            heh thats funny because every last one of those works perfectly…u mad windows phone owner?2

            Reply

            Share ›

            ihateeli eli • a day ago

            why mention windows phone? the fact that it is on your mind shows that you want to give it a shot sooner or later. go ahead, any windows phone is better than your HTC LOL0 1

            Reply

            Share ›

            eli ihateeli • a day ago

            Honestly, that’s what I call a cool story bro. Such a riveting tale, I honestly copy and pasted it to word, saved on my hard drive, backed it up on a jump drive, drove to the bank, put the jump drive in the safe deposit box, and will leave it there until my kids turn about 12 (when they can actually state their age, and ask what it is I’m showing them), when I will pick it up, put it in an old USB drive reader and relay this cool story to them and tell them, “kids, this is what a cool story should look and sound like…not like the stories your generation tells.”0

            Reply

            Share ›

            ihateeli eli • a day ago

            ahhh, as long as i was able to get you to spend one ounce of effort on me, i am happy :) thank you0

            Reply

            Share ›

            eli ihateeli • a day ago

            copy and paste son0

            Reply

            Share ›

            ihateeli eli • a day ago

            just like you “copy and pasted it to word” earlier right? ;) i got a long enough rope to help you out of that hole when you are done :) just let me know

    • ihateeli

      how does it feel to pay $500+ retail for a piece of junk HTC LOL how is sense treating you? LOOOL

      • eli

        paid $199, [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/SmaHAKf.jpg[/IMG]

        • ihateeli

          $199 still too much for a HTC Sense device LOOOL bro just admit you don’t understand that much about the smartphone that is in your hand. it’s alright

          • eli

            I do know that it is currently on of the best displays on the market at the moment, has a top contender processor, no gay home button, cm10.1 in the works, and it’s all I need. But thank you for the input genious

          • ihateeli

            at the end of the day, it’s still a HTC. no longer want it? im sure you can pay someone $199 to take it off your hands, now THAT’s $199 well spent ;)

          • eli

            at the end of the day, you still made a username about myself, insulted my cell phone 6 times, and posted the same thing twice. have a nice day smegma

          • ihateeli

            at the end of the day, it’s still a HTC. no longer want it? i’m sure you can pay someone $199 to take it off of your hands. now THAT’s $199 well spent ;)

  • Daniel Maginnis

    Their response will be: you can certainly have your phone without contract. It costs $789. Oh, and you can ALREADY do this! His statement was vague enough that he would never have to retract it. Now, if he said, we might lower monthly plans for people that buy unsubsidised phones and people that are not in a contract ….. THAT would be something.

    • http://www.hammertechnologies.net/ Chase Johnson

      I concur. This is a fruitless effort. Verizon doing what consumers want? HA!

    • EC8CH

      Exactly, Verizon isn’t going to make any changes that lowers the revenue they receive per customer.

      • VZWch8

        I disagree. I think if Verizon makes $50 per customer now, they would be willing to receive $45 per customer if it meant increasing their customer base by 25%.

        • EC8CH

          Cutting fees to expand their customer base? When’s the last time Verizon did that?

  • Chris Hollenbeck

    If Verizon can’t make (more) money they won’t change a thing. Maybe if 85,00 people left they would look into it.

    • fallenshell

      With 90 Million subscribers to Verizon I don’t think that is enough to make them blink.

      • Chris Hollenbeck

        Agreed now that you mention overall subscribers.

  • CEOSAREALLTALk

    CEO’s just talk, never walk. VZW makes too much money with contracts to just stop cuz customers say so. Money makes the world go round, not fairness and equality. DUHH

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=705034 Jeff Simpson

    It’s too bad it doesn’t matter. Verizon DOESN’T require a contract currently. Nobody does! Contracts are OPTIONAL. You only get one if you opt for a new subsidized-by-the-carrier phone. If you want to bring your own phone or buy one at full retail price, you can pay month to month. The month-to-month rate is the SAME as the rate on contract, though, so all you’re really doing is throwing away money by not getting a contract. Even with a $350 Early Termination Fee, it’s STILL cheaper to get a subsidized phone and then cancel the contract. If you’re planning on staying with a carrier for 2 years anyway, that $350 is back in your pocket. Even if you’re NOT staying for 2 years, the ETF is prorated.

    “Eliminating contracts” will not do anything to help the consumer, period.

    • http://twitter.com/ToysSamurai Toys Samurai

      Exactly. I did not and will not sign this petition as the people behind it clearly have no clue what they really want.

      See, Verizon can advertise tomorrow that “We do no contract, too.” But they will continue to charge you the same for your monthly plan, but you will have to buy your own phone, or you have to stick with us and pay a monthly payment until the phone is fully paid. Nothing will be changed this way. On top of that, what are you going to do with your brand new Verizon LTE phone? You can’t use it anywhere else.

      What we really need is top open Verizon’s tight grip on what phones can be used on its network. If a phone doesn’t require approval from Verizon to be used on its network, it ill encourage manufacturers to make phones that work across multiple carrier.

      • Stewie

        Spot on, going to no contract and paying outright for the phone means nothing if I still have to pay the same rates for minutes and data as someone on subsidy.

        Eliminate contracts if you wish, however I’d love to see the end of this tiered crap!

        Pay for what you actually used each month, period. We don’t have to guess how much electricity or water we use each month … neither should we for wireless.

        When it comes down to it, they are utility companies, I love this even as I wrote it, yes, they are UTILITY companies, and as they provides utility in the form of data and phone service, we should be billed in the same fashion as the others.

        Of course they lose the overage fees and all the other fracking nonsense they have smacked us with forever, but that’s the kind of petition that should be rammed thru for gov’t oversight on them all. Utility – Pay for what you use. Remember that, first.

        • http://www.scaryuncledevin.com/ Devin Rodriguez

          It reaches beyond just wanting lower rates, it also incentivises Verizon to be a better company and keep you as a customer. Once you aren’t on a contract, you can leave at any time without penalty. Because of that they should be working to make sure you are a happy customer so they can continue taking your money, from carrying better phones to improving their network to providing better customer service.

      • RaptorOO7

        Verizon is free to do just that, and guess what people will then have to compare the monthly rates on contract and off contract. Either way they will be found out and lose customers.

    • Jason Ward

      Honestly, this is the first sensible post on this blog that I have seen. Contracts ARE optional. Don;t know why people think they are so damn entitled when it comes to a cell phone. Expecting a company to just give free handouts non stop. It’s annoying.

      • fallenshell

        I think the idea is that if you buy the device outright, there should be a different tier of costs, contract or not. Part of the idea of offering higher monthly fees but offering subsidized phones was to turn a profit that is much bigger in the long run. If people want to bring their own device or buy one outright, the theory is they should not pay as much as someone who is subsidizing. Do I think that will happen here in the U.S. no. Do I enjoy those differences when I’m over seas, yes.

      • VZWch8

        As Jeff said, the monthly rates are the same if you are under contract or not. This is crazy. I would hope the rates would decrease since I’m not subsidizing a phone under contract. I also think my rate should decrease if I don’t upgrade after my 2 yr contract expires, since again, the subsidized price of the phone is no longer being paid. Does that mean I’m entitied?

        • RaptorOO7

          You are absolutely correct!

      • Mike Zhang

        Free handouts? Nobody is saying that. We just want more for what we pay for. Also, this is not about money, it’s about eliminating the monopoly that wireless companies have on this country. We need more competition to drive technology forward.

    • RaptorOO7

      You can only bring your own Verizon or Spring phone IF you buy it outright, off eBay or otherwise get it but they are device specific to the carrier by ESN.

      If you want GSM the options are much easier.

  • Austin Warren

    If you get unlimited on verizon, you’re one of the few. And if another carrier were to advance into faster data speeds, we can say F u verizon at any time.

    • Frank Fiorta

      Oh how I love my sweet verizon unlimited to abuse monthly…

      • http://techonblogger.ward.pro/ Stynkfysh

        When Verizon eliminated unlimited plans I got vindictive, canceled my home Internet service, and ran the 8 or so devices at my home off of Verizon LTE through an old PC setup as a router. I used tons of data. Before that I used about 3GB a month max, but I didn’t have to worry about overages. After a few months of this I sold my unlimited account on eBay for $350. While it made me feel kinda good to stick it to them a little, I am guessing they didn’t feel a thing.

    • Keith Black

      If other carriers were to match or exceed Verizon’s data network, they would also do away with unlimited data. There’s a little thing called “bandwidth” and it is not unlimited. Verizon is a premium network, more comparable to an exotic sports car. Having unlimited data on a slow network is like having unlimited mileage on a bicycle.

  • KennyVeltre

    My thoughts exactly. I just want unlimited data.

  • noleman

    This is the key question. Without this, it doesn’t matter.

  • Austin Warren

    85,00 x $120 is 10.2 million. Not a lot compared to their profits, but still a lot of money, and will quickly add up when more people sign it.

    • http://twitter.com/BrooksBarnes1 Brooks Barnes

      You’re making the assumption that EVERY one of those people who sign will go elsewhere. I would say that’s a bit of a stretch.

      • Austin Warren

        Never said they would. Just calculating the signatures and how much money those signatures are worth to them.

      • Synaptic13

        Especially considering that they were the carrier that had the highest gross gains last year. Both tmobile and sprint lost customers. Where do you think those customers went….that’s right big red (admittedly some went to at&t). The truth is the only thing that hurts vzw profits is the smart phone to smartphone upgrade. They lose $400+ every time they subsidize a phone. They will be happy to eliminate contract subsidies. to be honest the only way they would ever consider lowering their plan rates is if another company could actually challenge their network coverage… Which as most of us know is not going to happen for at least two+ years.

    • http://www.facebook.com/ryanlaursen Ryan Laursen

      That’s only per month… 85,000 x $120 x 12 = $122,400,000

      I pay 197 per month.

      • Austin Warren

        Haha didn’t even realize that. Then yes, $122 mil is a lot.

  • sc0rch3d

    Google needs to capitalize on this and offer wireless contract with the folks in the Google Fiber neighborhoods. I don’t know how they could get the spectrum, but it’d be nice for me not to deal with 3-4 companies every month.

    • Bazar6

      The rumors were there a while ago, suggesting they’d partner with Dish who already has spectrum… haven;t heard anything about that in a long while tho, which is a shame because I was hoping they’d become a wireless service provider as well, dethrone VZW and AT&T

  • Gus

    I love refreshing the page and seeing the signature number increase.

    • NIGHTSCOUT

      89,047 :D

    • New_Guy

      I singed it yesterday and I’m not even on Verizon anymore :)…