5GB Limit. Really?

[#1]

Maybe, but to throw up a bunch of meaningless numbers that don't support your point makes you look silly.

[supitsmike]

---

jimfitzgerald wrote:

Maybe, but to throw up a bunch of meaningless numbers that don't support your point makes you look silly.

---

The "numbers" (because face it, making it seem like that was complex math is silly) supported exactly what I was saying. If you can't read between the lines, not my problem.

And especially since I was supporting what you have been stating this whole time. Anyway, I'm done with this thread, and preventing an argument with you that you won't win.

Cheers,

Mike

[Sirreel]

My complaints are three-fold: unused data is not rolled over, the usage monitor is not accurate because it is not timely, and the overage charge is punitive in that it bears little relation to the cost of actually providing the extra bandwidth.

My situation is an example. I typically used half of my allotment so one month I decided to try to use it all. The usage monitor was more than 24 hours behind so I couldn't tell how close I was to the limit. I ended up going over by about 140 MB, which cost $35. I signed up for service just a month before the overuse charge was reduced from $.25 to $.05, so I can safely say the overuse fee I am paying is too high by at least a factor of 5. Then consider, at $.25 per MB, the second 5 GBs of data costs $1280, while the first 5 GBs costs just $60. That is a factor of about 21.3. I'll go out on a limb and state that I don't believe it costs Verizon 21 times as much to supply me with an additional MB of data than it did the first 5120 MBs. Those overage fees don't reflect Verizon's cost, they are to punish their customers and line their pockets with easy money.

Now, if Verizon were to allow unused bandwidth to roll over, my problem would be solved.  Instead, Verizon keeps unused bandwidth for itself to sell to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?

If Verizon were to provide me with timely usage data, my problem would be solved. Instead, Verizon keeps me guessing with usage data that, at times, is more than 24 hours old. I can risk going over and paying 21 times as much for the data, or I can be conservative and back off my usage when I get to 80%. Then Verizon can sell my unused bandwidth to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?

If Verizon were to reduce the cost of overuse to a reasonable level, my problem would be solved. Enough said.

Verizon suggests they cap usage at 5 GB per month to ensure everyone gets equal access. Is that really true? Has anyone seen the data to prove that assertion? They don't really cap the usage, though, do they? All they do is make it very expensive to exceed 5 GBs. That gives their customers incentive to limit their own usage. In that way Verizon has shifted the burden of ensuring their network is not overloaded to us.If that is their scheme for keeping their network healthy, the least they could do is provide better usage monitoring so we can do their job better without overusing. (I think ensuring their network is healthy is their job.) I see that Cricket broadband throttles back the speed to their customers who go over 5 GB, but they don't charge extra. In that way Cricket takes responsibility for the health of its own network and doesn't make its customers keep an eye on the usage guage all the time, nor does it punish them monetarliy. I like that business model better and it seems a lot more honest.

[#4]

There is nothing dishonest about the Verizon pricing structure.  Maybe you should switch to Cricket.

[Sirreel]

It's weird you should suggest I switch to Cricket.

I almost went with Cricket. I live and work in the country (aot a city) and accessed the internet via a dial-up connection until last April. Cricket's coverage map showed I was located about a mile out of range, which I thought might be okay with an external antenna. Too bad the only modem Cricket sells is a USB unit with no provision for an external antenna. I am in Verizon's coverage area, barely, and there were modems available that would accept an external antenna. Since I work from here I figured I ought to go with the more reliable connection, so I bought some piece of mind, and hopefully a better connection, with my extra $20 a month. In regards to reliability, Verizon is top notch.

I was poking around the 'net today and saw that Verizon is refusing to allow the store where I bought my equipment to sell their wares because this store also sells external antennae and signal boosters. According to the store, Verizon is selling their own range extender and doesn't want the competition. Now the weird part. If I couldn't have gotten an external antenna for my Verizon modem I would have gone with Cricket from the git-go. Funny how things work out, ain't so?

As an aside, my modem sits in a wireless router so I can't use VZAccess to monitor usage. When the cost of going over is so high, you really need to know how much bandwidth you have left.

As far as Cricket seeming more honest then Verizon, I mean that I can't quite trust a company that charges a fee that seems so disproportionate to its cost of providing service. I don't know that for a fact, but a 20 time's increase in price upon going over an arbitrary limit seems, well, kinda outrageous. And then to think that they impose this fee structure so its customers, each of us individually, will police our usage and keep their network healthy. That ticks me off. How many man-hours are wasted by its millions of customers watching the usage meter to avoid overage fees? Really, couldn't Verizon take care of that on their end?

We need the option of paying extra or having our connection slowed when we reach the limit. And the limit is too low.

[reallyniceguy]

Cricket is for people with poor credit to no credit. It is a low class company with horrible service... I cant believe I payed 300 dllrs for a nokia (back in the day) that would heat up all the time and give me dropped calls everywhere. Ohh ohh.. send a pic message and they wont receive it until 4 am. I cant begin to imagine how their internet is.. I miss the alltel data card, unlimited and reliable

[#7]

---

Sirreel wrote:

It's weird you should suggest I switch to Cricket.

I almost went with Cricket. I live and work in the country (aot a city) and accessed the internet via a dial-up connection until last April. Cricket's coverage map showed I was located about a mile out of range, which I thought might be okay with an external antenna. Too bad the only modem Cricket sells is a USB unit with no provision for an external antenna. I am in Verizon's coverage area, barely, and there were modems available that would accept an external antenna. Since I work from here I figured I ought to go with the more reliable connection, so I bought some piece of mind, and hopefully a better connection, with my extra $20 a month. In regards to reliability, Verizon is top notch.

I was poking around the 'net today and saw that Verizon is refusing to allow the store where I bought my equipment to sell their wares because this store also sells external antennae and signal boosters. According to the store, Verizon is selling their own range extender and doesn't want the competition. Now the weird part. If I couldn't have gotten an external antenna for my Verizon modem I would have gone with Cricket from the git-go. Funny how things work out, ain't so?

As an aside, my modem sits in a wireless router so I can't use VZAccess to monitor usage. When the cost of going over is so high, you really need to know how much bandwidth you have left.

As far as Cricket seeming more honest then Verizon, I mean that I can't quite trust a company that charges a fee that seems so disproportionate to its cost of providing service. I don't know that for a fact, but a 20 time's increase in price upon going over an arbitrary limit seems, well, kinda outrageous. And then to think that they impose this fee structure so its customers, each of us individually, will police our usage and keep their network healthy. That ticks me off. How many man-hours are wasted by its millions of customers watching the usage meter to avoid overage fees? Really, couldn't Verizon take care of that on their end?

We need the option of paying extra or having our connection slowed when we reach the limit. And the limit is too low.

---

NetMeter.  Again, what a company charges for a product has nothing to do with their cost.  It's based on the competitive situation and what the market will bear.  If you need more than 5 GB, you can purchase two 5 GB plans.

[Deamorei]

 I heard an interesting statement the other day. If 99 percent of the user base uses less then 5GB a month then how much load can 1% of the user base put on the system. Guess what? Not very much making the argument  they give us for limiting our use about bogus.. With that being said it wont be long until Verizon wireless has to offer an affordable UNLIMITED mobile broadband plan. Millenicon offers 5GB for 59.99 and UNLIMITED for 69.99 a month. Datajack offers unlimited for around 40 dollars a month as well.

If I was AT&T or any other major player I would offer unlimited mobile broadband for about 70 bucks a month and put it to Verizon. Centennial has unlimited local data via cellular/wireless it just wasn't 3G in my area yet. That's why I gave Verizon a try. I needed more speed to VOIP or have a better internet experience in general but I'm in the market for a new provider now that provides unlimited data with 3G speed or better. Why doesn't Verizon offer a plan for permanent non mobile cellular plan to users like Centennial did?

Jim said purchase 2x 5 GB plans that's 120 dollars a month for a measly 10GB... Verizon will sell you a 10GB plan for 200 bucks a month all the while 1GB of bandwidth is priced about 1 dollar per gigabyte or less roughly from all that I've read yet we pay 12  bucks per gigabyte for the first 5GB and 50 dollars per gigabyte for every gig after the 5GB is used up. Keep an eye on Google these bandwidth caps are screwing over their network and services night and day. I suspect they will be in the broadband business very soon. I heard they were trying to get into the power distribution business on the radio today lol..

Compared to the rest of the world we pay way over the average price world wide for mobile broadband and broadband as a whole. Asia makes our internet "US"  look like  a Ford Model T going against an NHRA Top Fuel dragster sadly said. I would be willing to play up to 100 bucks a month for unlimited 3G/4G as would most. Hey Verizon can you hear us now? After 3-4 months I'm really sick of having to keep track of my bandwidth. I'll probably go over this month but I'm always at the 5GB limit being VERY restrictive on how I use it. If I used it how I wanted I would probably use 300-400mb a day on weekends and around 200mb or less on week days which comes out to around 8.4GB a month without downloading anything much. I'm willing to pay more but I refuse to be soaked by pricing that is unfair and unrealistic to actual costs.

To Zehan : Guess you never heard of American tax dollars being used to expand internet infrastructure or stimulus money programs in the United States  Check around. You/We fund alot of things we don't always know about until we actually look. Here is a little dirt for you to read. about the big players wanting to stop rural users in America from getting locally provided broadband.

http://industry.bnet.com/technology/10001246/verizon-att-blocking-rural-broadband-stimulus/

[Zehan]

All this article says to me is that Uncle Sam wants to give money to the carriers to expand their rural networks, and the carriers are declining because they don't want to have to answer to the government when making their private business decisions. Government has no place in private business (or at least it shouldn't) and the carriers are IMHO right for declining government money.

If the government wants to provide wireless services to the public then more power to them, but they should do it on their own. They should build their own network rather than throw money at the carriers and tell them how to run theirs. I've said elsewhere that I think a tax-funded wireless network operated as a city utility would be a good idea, but I think it's wrong to force private companies to provide it.

Even so, if Verizon wants to oppose any legislation that would create a large, cheap, wireless network they are perfectly within their rights to do so. After all, such a network could put them out of business or at least lose them a ton of money. A public network would certainly show that carriers don't operate based on cost, but rather on what the market would bear (Jim would be proud of me right now), and while nothing is wrong with this free enterprise model it's just not smart business to advertise that you're selling your services for triple what the cost is to maintain them.

If you really want to complain that the prices are unfair because Verizon doesn't spend that much to provide you service, then you might as well complain about EVERYTHING else you buy. You really think basketball shoes cost $100 dollars to make? Try a few cents. How about designer purses or shoes? Same story. This applies to almost everything you buy, from bottled water to televisions, clothing to vehicles, etc. How come nobody complains about those companies "ripping people off?"

[Deamorei]

What it said was that the big companies like AT&T or Verizon don't want per say a state to have its own internet service kicking them to the curb. They want to be dominant but don't want to be dominated as to why they are so fiercly against this or a national broadband program similar to national health care that in the US goes over like the plague when it works perfectly in other countries that are less greed driven like our nation is. Had these caps been a fair amount of data per the price we pay i wouldn't have a problem.

People do need to understand and most do that 5GB of data a month is nothing. A person can blow through 25-50 mb an hour just surfing the web. I just got a letter from Millenicom and i wish i had researched them earlier here is their reply. No contract and they use Verizon towers the same tower i use with my MIFI , same backbone.

Congratulations, you are in an excellent area for both our regular mobile
broadband service as well as our unlimited service.

Millenicom nationwide mobile broadband service* is no contract, tax-free
and we provide the mobile broadband device free of charge**.  The cost is
$59.99/month along with a $49.99 one-time fee and a $15.00 shipping
fee***.

Our unlimited service is the same as our standard service except that
there are no limits on the amount of monthly data transfer****.  The cost
is $69.99/month and requires the purchase of the mobile broadband device
for $99.99 and therefore is not necessary to be returned in order to
close the account.

* Mobile broadband service has the industry standard monthly 5-gig data
usage cap on our regular accounts.  Exceeding that amount may cause the
upstream carrier to reduce the speed on your account for 30 days and
egregious or repeated violation of the 5-gig data transfer may cause the
account to be closed.  This service plan gives you an option to purchase
the connection device at $99.99.  Selecting the device purchase option
will allow you 10 gigs of monthly data transfer. This only applies to standard

account holders not unlimited.


**** Please note our unlimited service is not for commercial use such as
setting up a public WiFi, broadcasting the connection to multi-dwelling
units or other extraordinary circumstances.

So for 10 dollars more then i'm paying now i can have NO limits. I'm don't believe in free rides either.  I like most just want a reasonable amount of bandwidth to do the things we  or  a family  enjoy over the internet. 5GB over 30 days is NOTHING. It won't be until the U.S government intervenes legally will we the users get some relief and it should never come to this. I don't think some of you folks realize how big business manipulates our lifestyles. They are as much at fault as screwing up our nation up as our politicans whose pockets they grease are. As a consumer its ultimately up to our government who can make the changes we so desire.

Up until they dropped the 5GB caps on us we really had no idea how much we used a month all the while being lied to by sales reps saying how enormous amount of data 5GB was. What a pitch right? It never ends. Now the cable industry wants DTV/Broadcast to not be able to broadcast at full power so we will either have to live next to a station or within a few miles or be forced to subscribe to satellite or wired TV. Being able to speak freely, protest is our right as Americans. Using that voice backed by money to manipulate our lifestyles from a business perspective is not.

I will say this if you think that 5GB of data is a fair amount for the price you pay then more power to you as your probably in the 1% percentile group that does. The rest of us either complain or contact people that can actually influence change like i do. If we don't speak up nothing will get done. You and Jim seem to be the only two i've seen that think this 5GB thing is acceptable .. Prediction? Google is going to eventually become the Wal-mart of all forms of broadband.access because the real profit model is not in the internet backbone its in the services that are provided within that backbone!.

 If you cant stream Netflix then they suffer, If you cant stream music then they cant play ads and they suffer. In effect your hurting my ability to do things online to include shopping, banking, etc, etc  Remember IBM? Verizon is the IBM of internet communications right now. Verizon owns a building up the road that was one occupied by IBM  .. Verizon's downfall wont be because of its service which i've never complained about. My service is excellant and that will NEVER change as the tower i use will never be loaded even if all my rural neighbors had mobile broadband. It will be because its weak in giving the customer what they want vs what Verizon wants. Have a great weekend.