If it's not too hard to charge the fees it's not too hard to name them. Period.
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
1096 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
58061 readers
31 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah that's the most brazen part. They're more than happy to pull in a dozen set of fees, but cry when they have to clearly list them so people aren't taken advantage of. This is the type of rubbish that the "free market" produces and why there needs to be some level of government oversight.
"Too hard to list our fees" = "consumers will see how hard we're fucking them before they sign a contract"
Sounds like posturing to add a new fee for being required to list their fees if their weak argument gets thrown out by the FCC.
With ISP what is really need is Local-loop unbundling but extending to ISPs.
Those that are old enough to use DSL in early 2000, might remember there was a lot of ISPs to chose from. The reason for it was that due to Title II telco companies were required to lease lines to their competitors. When cable started to be popular, ISPs lobbied politicians to categorize it under Title I which removed that requirement. We got Internet back to be categorized as Title II, but this specific rule was excluded and this is what is necessary to bring the competition.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Let me get this right... they're lobbying their way out to not even list what they're charging for?
I hope FCC doubles down without lube.
Yeah how does that even work? Don't they have to list what they sell for their accounting? Isn't it tax evasion or fraud if they don't keep track of everything?
It's about transparency to the customer at point of sale. It's like nutrition facts for your internet, literally.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That's weird because they don't seem to have an issue charging me for a bunch of weird little shit while also keeping close tabs on my usage.
Perhaps they could stop doing both and then it would free up time to innovate like we've given them public funds to do time and time again.
Why would anyone care what the ISPs think about how much work they have to do? We’re paying for it, so in what world is it not misleading to withhold information about charges?
load more comments
(1 replies)
It sounds like providers are trying to hide monthly fees in an attempt to obscure them. My ISP will let me 'rent' a modem for $10 a month, but I just decided to buy my own for $60 fifteen years ago. My brain says that's $1800 (it could be wrong, it's late). If I didn't know I was paying a $10 monthly fee, I'd never have bought my own.
And if a fee is actually a tax, just put that on the bill. It's pretty simple.
My isp used to charge $10/mo for a modem rental, so I just bought my own. Now they don't charge for the rental but all their prices went up by at least $10/mo.
Comcast tells me I can use my own modem but if I do then I'm capped at 1.2TB a month on my "unlimited" plan.
I have the same cap. Data cap for home internet is a load of bullshit that should be prohibited entirely.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You were only paying $10/mo. for your modem?? They were charging me $15/mo. for just the television remote! Fuck these companies, seriously (especially Comcast).
load more comments
(8 replies)
If you want to make and add all these fees, I think it is only fair that your are required to list them all.
Stop hiding behind your pussy corporate bullshit, and take some responsibility for your money grabbing thoughtlessness.
Customers want to be able to determine who is of best value, and if you advertise $5 a month but add $45 of "fees" then you are just a cunt, and you don't deserve the business; even if your SUM TOTAL of $50 a month is less than some other ISP that just says its $54 a month and that's it.
If you are sneaking about and skirting shit like this, we can only assume you are like that at a corporate level, and everything you are doing is dodgy as fuck.
CEO yacht club fee - 5.99
CEO bonus fee - 10.98
CEO bottle service fee - 2.99
Idk doesn't seem that hard...
load more comments
(1 replies)
Boo fucking hoo. Shut the fuck up and start using the money you get from grants to fulfill promises you're to abide by, assholes.
Why are “fees” above the advertised price? It’s just lying about the price of the service.
And they have the audacity to claim it is an issue of "making labels too confusing for consumers".
They could always fold fees into the overall price, but that would be counterproductive to their real goal: lying about the price in advertising.
Billing charge: 4.99
Itemised bill charge: 10.99
Fee listing fee: 7.99
Issue with you bill? Call our hotline (calls charged @ 1.69/minute)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Exactly, if it is something that every customer has to pay no matter what, it's not a fee it's the cost of the service.
Can't the FCC just tell them they'll be fined if they don't comply? Don't tell them how much they'll be fined. Let them make their decision, then tell them how much it will cost.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Seems easy enough to charge all of them
almost like they're asking to be nationalized...
I'll believe the US will nationalize a private industry when I see it and then I still won't believe it.
The GOP would shit themselves
Not technically "nationalized", but we gave local and state governments control over sewers and water...
load more comments
(3 replies)
I see no downsides here
load more comments
(2 replies)
Let me do it for you:
- O&M - $3
- R&D - $1
- Tech Support - $0.25
- CEO's cocaine addiction - $25
- Selling your personal information & browsing history - ($10)
- Profits for Executive Bonuses - $50
- Stock Buybacks to Inflate Value - $25
Fake news–they would never give you a $10 discount for selling your personal information. That's like taking food right out of those poor shareholders' mouths!
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
My ISP regularly tacks on extra charges for $1-$5. I suspect they do this to millions of people assuming nobody will call in to complain about five bucks. But at that scale they rake in tens of millions for no extra service. Massive theft.
If you have the accounting power to bill for it, you have the power to list it up front. The only way you can't list fees is if you can't figure out how to charge people for them.
It is amazing how billing departments never have a problem with these things
What if we got really twisted and included tax and fees in the advertised price?
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's too hard to pay my bill too, so I'm gonna not do that.
The fact that ISPs in the US are not considered utilities and are regulated as such is baffling but kinda on brand
The US's concept of capitalism is the east india company, standard-oil, robber-baron version of capitalism — corporations should be free to pollute, murder, exploit, enslave, and extract as much value from the working class and planet as physically possible. If you don't think that's moral or ethical fuck you; you're free to die, you filthy socialist!
Feudalism with the illusion of both freedom and choice.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's not like seeing the fees will help anything. Can't switch to other ISPs since the cable company has a monopoly. Useless government pretending to do work instead of actually doing anything to help.
Where I live, as far as I am aware, the only ISP with any decent speeds is Xfinity and it feels like a monopoly because the other options are much worse.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
If it's too hard to disclose those costs up front, then how in TF are they able to figure it out down to the last cent on the first and subsequent bills?
Demonstrating that they have the ability to do it is not a very good argument for claiming it's too hard.
RCN aka Astound doesn't just not list fees, they don't list what their Internet service base cost is except for new sign ups. After the new signup period runs out, the price is several times that.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Five lobby groups representing cable companies, fiber and DSL providers, and mobile operators have repeatedly urged the Federal Communications Commission to eliminate the requirement before new broadband labeling rules take effect.
The filing was submitted by NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, which represents Comcast, Charter, Cox, and other cable companies.
The trade groups met on Wednesday with the legal advisors to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioner Brendan Carr, according to the filing.
The FCC rules aren't in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.
The five trade groups complain that this would require ISPs "to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label."
ISPs could instead include all costs in their advertised rates to give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they would have to pay each month.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Jeez if they cannot even identify what they're charging for, then should they be charging for those things at all?
Sounds shady as fuck
view more: next ›