How about Verizon's slimy sales forces (third party? I don't know for sure -- they identify themselves as Verizon) who try to rip off the elderly?
Verizon: "We Record You, but Don't You Dare Record Us!" -- and a FiOS Order Canceled http://bit.ly/68f4rY (Lauren's Blog) Verizon FiOS Scamming the Elderly http://bit.ly/6dohhe (Lauren's Blog) --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator ----- Forwarded message from David Farber <[email protected]> ----- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:53:44 -0400 From: David Farber <[email protected]> Subject: [IP] Re: This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T Reply-To: [email protected] To: ip <[email protected]> Begin forwarded message: From: "Bruce Kushnick" <[email protected]> Date: March 29, 2010 8:03:28 PM EDT To: "'Dana Spiegel'" <[email protected]>, "'George Ou'" <[email protected]> Cc: "'Dave Farber'" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T The thing of ?why people hate the phone company? --- a) Verizon has been able to get local rate increases to fund ?fiber optics? in many states ? so they are simply failing to upgrade the utility, but get utility customers to pay for the upgrades. ? in New York there has been a 90% increase to local phone rates and associated services like call waiting since 2004 --- thanks Verizon. b) Verizon?s advertisments on their packages are essentially fraud? They advertise a $79 dollar ?promotional price, but don?t tell the customer that when it comes there?s an additional 35%+ in extra fees, which are mandatory and should have been in the advertised price ? and when you call Verizon to ask about what the service will cost after the promotion they say ? Oh, we can?t tell you that? there?s too many other factors involved --- and we can?t calculate the other charges you will incur --- B. From: Dana Spiegel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 1:43 AM To: George Ou Cc: 'Bruce Kushnick'; 'Dave Farber' Subject: Re: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T Unfortunately, George, you've got a poor memory. Even Verizon was pretty open about this one: http://www.multichannel.com/article/316516-Verizon_Sees_FiOS_Price_Hikes_Helping_Margins.php And again, while they indeed offer a new mid-tier package, no one in my building (and I believe this is true throughout a lot of NYC) can take advantage of it. So we get the jacked up price to just increase their profits, and we see no added benefit. -- Dana Spiegel Executive Director, NYCwireless [email protected] +1 917 402 0422 ------------------- NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and enables the growth of free, public wireless networks ------------------- On Mar 29, 2010, at 1:13 AM, George Ou wrote: I get my info from Verizon?s website. http://www22.verizon.com/residential/internet/ Prices look the same to me since I last looked at it in 2008. George Ou From: Dana Spiegel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:55 PM To: George Ou; Bruce Kushnick Cc: Dave Farber Subject: Re: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T George, > Verizon FiOS prices stayed the same from what I can gather and I am not > seeing where you are getting this 15% number. I'm not sure where you got your information, because I have the bills to prove that they raised rates by $10 in November/December 2009 ($10/$57 = 17% rate increase). In fact, here's the copy of the email bill (I'd give you PDFs of the actual bills but they are both not much more descriptive, and unavailable since Vzn only provides the 3 previous bills to you via their online account manager). Nov 16, 2009 ------------------------- Important Information Regarding Your Verizon Online Account Your Verizon Online Account Number 0083320764441 For your convenience, your monthly Verizon Online bill is now available online for review at http://www.verizon.net/myaccount . Your monthly Verizon Online charges have been submitted to your credit card company. This month's total charges are $57.99 and will appear on your credit card statement as a charge from "Verizon Fios Internet" 12 days after the bill date. The monthly charges do not reflect credits or adjustments that may be applied prior to debiting. If you have any questions about your bill, you may contact a Billing Representative at 1-(888) 553-1555. Thank you for using Verizon Online services, Verizon Online Billing Services ------------------------- Dec 16, 2009 ------------------------- Important Information Regarding Your Verizon Online Account Your Verizon Online Account Number 0083320764441 For your convenience, your monthly Verizon Online bill is now available online for review at http://www.verizon.net/myaccount . Your monthly Verizon Online charges have been submitted to your credit card company. This month's total charges are $67.99 and will appear on your credit card statement as a charge from "Verizon Fios Internet" 12 days after the bill date. The monthly charges do not reflect credits or adjustments that may be applied prior to debiting. If you have any questions about your bill, you may contact a Billing Representative at 1-(888) 553-1555. Thank you for using Verizon Online services, Verizon Online Billing Services ------------------------- Note the line that begins "Your monthly Verizon Online charges..." I will hopefully find out tomorrow when I'll be able to get more than 5mbps uplink speed, which at this point may never happen since FiOS is no longer something that Vzn is pushing. Oh, and note that the prices above are for 20/5 service, which is I believe $2 cheaper than 25/25 service. But I can't upgrade to 25/25 service because Vzn software on FiOS building routers don't allow more than 5mbps upload speed. So *I AM* stuck paying almost as much as a much higher service level would pay, and can do nothing about it. > Comcast on the other hand were pressured to boost speeds from 6 Mbps down to > 15 Mbps with no price increase to remain competitive. I'm not sure how this is "the other hand" except that (a) 15mbps isn't really that competitive, since "competitive" would likely be defined as *higher* speed at *lower price* than the "competition, and (b) in the end it may not matter much, since Verizon marketed FiOS like they were rolling it out to *everyone*, but just announced that any location that didn't already have FiOS wasn't going to get it. Talk about redlining! -- Dana Spiegel sociableDESIGN +1 917 402 0422 [email protected] On Mar 28, 2010, at 8:26 PM, George Ou wrote: ?Thank you for making my point for me. People (individuals) aren't charged for Google's services, which goes a long way towards making those people feel good.? Actually, I just pointed out how meaningless your use of gross profit margin is. I did not say people aren?t charged; I said people aren?t *directly* charged. We pay for Google services indirectly because the price of advertising is worked into the price of the goods. We simply don?t see it directly. Another way we are charged to use Google services is that we give Google the right to data mine us. So please do not twist my words. Verizon FiOS prices stayed the same from what I can gather and I am not seeing where you are getting this 15% number. Comcast on the other hand were pressured to boost speeds from 6 Mbps down to 15 Mbps with no price increase to remain competitive. George From: Dana Spiegel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 1:59 PM To: George Ou; ip Cc: Dave Farber Subject: Re: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T George, > So if I start a small company that spends $1000 on R&D in 2010, but that?s > 50% of my total expenses, then that would make me a bigger R&D spender than > Google? > R&D is great, but how many people does Google?s R&D employ and how much > network infrastructure did they build (which indirectly employs people as > well)? Google sent less than a billion on all capex in 2009. Clearly not. Don't turn my statements into a straw-man argument. I didn't say any of the things that you claim I said. Read my statements carefully, and also note that I made no qualitative assessment as to the value of booking vs. not booking R&D expenses. Google builds their own data centers or contracts that work out. They build their own backbone networks or contract out their building. They obviously spend a lot less on such network building since they are overwhelmingly a software and services company, not an infrastructure company, with 1/6th the revenue of one of the big telcos. But then again, VZ, AT&T, etc. outsource most (all?) of their wireless network building expenses to subcontractors. > No, people tend to not dislike Google because they aren?t charged directly > for any of Google?s services. Thank you for making my point for me. People (individuals) aren't charged for Google's services, which goes a long way towards making those people feel good. That phone and cable companies not just charge people, but constantly increase rates without offering better quality service or more/better functionality, goes a long way towards making people dislike them. Verizon FiOS increased my rates by >$10 (>15%) this year, with no increase in speed, and (due to "software issues") haven't upgraded my FiOS router in my building to enable me to get more than 5mbps upload speeds. Hmm... 15% increase in costs, exactly the same service, no possibility for an upgrade to higher speed tiers that they are offering to others... *THAT* is a great reason to dislike my "phone company." -- Dana Spiegel Executive Director, NYCwireless [email protected] +1 917 402 0422 ------------------- NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and enables the growth of free, public wireless networks ------------------- On Mar 28, 2010, at 4:28 PM, George Ou wrote: Dana, you should start a new company that lives off of gross margins instead of net margins. Let?s see if you can bank on it. ?They book 12% of their revenue for R&D expenses, vs. 0% for the phone companies? So if I start a small company that spends $1000 on R&D in 2010, but that?s 50% of my total expenses, then that would make me a bigger R&D spender than Google? R&D is great, but how many people does Google?s R&D employ and how much network infrastructure did they build (which indirectly employs people as well)? Google sent less than a billion on all capex in 2009. ?That people tend to "like" google and "dislike" at&t et al is very likely due to the way that those companies make those people feel? No, people tend to not dislike Google because they aren?t charged directly for any of Google?s services. George From: Dana Spiegel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 12:49 PM To: George Ou; ip Cc: 'Dave Farber' Subject: Re: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T With all due respect, George, I was very clear in what I posted - GROSS profit margin. "2008 Profit" (I was reporting 2009 numbers, btw.) is filled with *a lot* of complicated calculations. Though many of these line items and financial classifications are legitimate, a number of them are performed to either make the business "appear better" in the eyes of investors, and to reduce tax liabilities. You can look at whatever numbers you wish. I chose to look at those number that were the closest to selling and costs of doing business. Google does have a 10 point higher NET profit margin than the phone companies. They also have about a 10 point higher GROSS profit margin. They book 12% of their revenue for R&D expenses, vs. 0% for the phone companies. And they GIVE AWAY quite a lot of their products and services to individuals (and businesses in some cases - Gmail, Docs, Search) and charge prices for the vast majority of their other products determined by a set of (arguably) competitive marketplaces. That people tend to "like" google and "dislike" at&t et al is very likely due to the way that those companies make those people feel, and the public presence the companies have in influencing legislation in their own favor (regardless of the impact on the common citizen) and "doing good" for the world. And hatred about the phone company extend back decades. -- Dana Spiegel Executive Director, NYCwireless [email protected] +1 917 402 0422 ------------------- NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and enables the growth of free, public wireless networks ------------------- On Mar 28, 2010, at 3:15 PM, George Ou wrote: Nice of you to leave out all their expenses. http://finance.econsultant.com/verizon-communications-2008-revenue-profit-2009-fortune-500-rank/ Name: AT&T Website: www.att.com 2008 Revenue: $ 124,028 million 2008 Profit: $ 12,867 million 9.64% profit margin Name: Verizon Communications Website: www.verizon.com 2008 Revenue: $ 97,354 million 2008 Profit: $ 6,428 million 6.6% margin Name: Comcast Website: www.comcast.com 2008 Revenue: $ 34,256 million 2008 Profit: $ 2,547 million 7.44% margin Name: Google Website: www.google.com 2008 Revenue: $ 21,796 million 2008 Profit: $ 4,227 million 19.39% margin George Ou From: Dana Spiegel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 10:03 AM To: Dave Farber; ip Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [IP] re This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T Just to correct a statement that George Ou made: the 4 major wireless telco's in the US have Gross Profit Margins around or above 50% (not 6-10% as he states): Deutsche Telecom (includes all parent company operations as well as USA's T-mobile) - Gross Profit Margin: 65.4% http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/Ratios.jsp?tkr=dt AT&T (wireline and wireless) - Gross Profit Margin: 59% http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/Ratios.jsp?tkr=t Verizon (wireline and wireless) - Gross Profit Margin: 58.9% http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/Ratios.jsp?tkr=vz Sprint Nextel - Gross Profit Margin: 49.1% http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/Ratios.jsp?tkr=s Also, AT&T had total 2009 revenues of >$123B, which makes their $17B wireless 3G infrastructure about 13.8% of their revenue. Certainly not a small amount, but given the number of complaints and their gross profit margins, perhaps it seems too little (as in just enough to make a claim that they are "upgrading"). I agree that we should be sticking to the facts, but I think the "hate" comes from a lot of different practices that were performed by AT&T (and the companies that it has acquired over the years), many (possibly most, depending on how you count) of which have not been in the interest of their customers. AT&T was also the 3rd largest national campaign donor ($5.4M), and both Verizon and AT&T are among the top 20 lobbyist spending organizations in the US in 2009 ($17.8M and $14.7M, respectively). All of this is not surprising, given the size of the companies. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list_stfed.php?order=A http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=2009&indexType=s -- Dana Spiegel Executive Director, NYCwireless [email protected] +1 917 402 0422 ------------------- NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and enables the growth of free, public wireless networks ------------------- On Mar 28, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Dave Farber wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: George Ou <[email protected]> Date: March 27, 2010 3:08:25 AM EDT To: 'Lauren Weinstein' <[email protected]>, [email protected] Cc: 'Richard Bennett' <[email protected]>, 'Brett Glass' <[email protected]>, 'Dave Farber' <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [ NNSquad ] This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T So this is the extent of debate on telecom policy? It all boils down to "HATE THE TELCOS". "One of those carriers who aren't sitting on an iPhone monopoly and praying that the 3G network doesn't completely crumble before 4G is ready (you have been investing in 4G, right? You sure as hell aren't spending anything keeping 3G awesome)," Really? $17B in 2009 that AT&T spent on wireless 3G infrastructure going onto $19B in 2010. Let's not let the facts get in the way of our "HATE". Damn these EVIL Telcos with 6% to 10% profit margins and over a million employees. They all need to be good like Google and the other dotcoms and be more stingy about capex and job creation so that they can have 20% profit margins. George Ou -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lauren Weinstein Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 8:24 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [ NNSquad ] This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T This Is Why People Hate the Phone Company, AT&T http://bit.ly/95hnW8 (Tested) --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator Archives ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message -----
