At least he stopped threatening customers who email him.

Hunter_S_Thompson: clyph: Profit is up to $3,580,000,000. Share prices are up by 4%. And you're complaining?

Cry me a farking river. What, a $27.3 million bonus isn't enough for you, you greedy motherfarker?

Torches and pitchforks, people... torches and pitchforks.

Exactly. As someone into things like technology, infrastructure, moving forward as a society, I do sometimes wonder what the world would be like, today, in the year 2012, if the billions and trillions of dollars that were funneled into the executives' bank accounts since the 80's were actually used for improving the infrastructure, both physically and in places like telecom, for research and development of new technologies, especially in the energy sectors, you know, kind of like businesses used to do before they were told "Greed is good, Greed works"?

The old AT&T, Ma Bell, had a R&D firm called Bell Labs, you might have heard of it. A great majority of the high technology and inventions we take for granted in modern society today came out of Bell Labs. It was a national treasure. This is what people forget, is the reason we, as society, used to be so great is because we innovated. Today, innovation is seen as a "disruption". I'm not making excuses for a company that would shut your line off if you hooked up your own telephone, but actually using your profits to improve society, then taking a modest amount so you and your family can live very comfortably, shouldn't be taboo. The culture of the 80's has killed our nation and is bringing Western Civilization down with it.

30 years, trillions of dollars that could have been spent on research, we could have probably had renewable, clean energy sources, had revolutionary communications tools, revolutionary breakthroughs in health care. It would be a very different world. A more enlightened one, I imagine. Just imagine what it would be like if we actually cared about our fellow man rather than padding our bank accounts with another $50 mil. But, all those things would have "disrupted" the executives.

Disrupted. Could you imagine people like that and peasants like us being on a level playing field? No wonder we can't have any "disruption". It doesn't just break their "business models". It breaks their socioeconomic control systems too, and us slaves can't be allowed to get too uppity.

I'll tell you what killed this off: publicly traded company. Take some CEO who was hired first the job, he'll give 2 shiats about the actual company, just meeting their quota. Fins me aCEO/owner who cares/loves what his company does, I'll show you an innovator, market changer.

Get more Asian slaves like Apple then profit.

If you're with AT&T you're a farking idiot. Simple as that. Why is there even an argument over this?

Because People in power are Stupid: The bottom line is that AT&T just wants people to give them money and do nothing in return. Get customers to lock in to lame contracts pushed by obnoxious salespeople.


I personally blame the 1996 Telcom Deregulation act,

Don't blame the Telecom Act. Real prices of telecom services are a slight fraction of what they used to be before 1996. Sure, the general quality of customer service was WAY better, but Americans given the choice would rather not pay for that today.

/worked for MCI on the Telecom Act at the time.

I don't have a dataplan anymore because it's just stupid expensive..and for what?
We have 2 ipads at home and use Wifi..there, we have everything we need. If I need to text someone, I call them or I can text if I REALLY have to for .10c
I refuse to pay $30,40,...,$99 a month for data.

TheGreatGazoo: I'm on the $35 Virgin Mobile plan for Android. $110 phone, no contract, and I get 300 minutes, 2.5 GB of data, and unlimited texting. Yes, the data rate sucks, and the Android phone is a couple of years old, but it works for what I need it to do.

Shouldn't that be unlimited data? Mine is and it's still listed that way at their site.

Link To Virgin Mobile

Click on Phones Plans and More to get to the table of costs and services.

The_Time_Master: steamingpile: spman:
After spending time in Europe I can say you full of shiat, no carrier has to deal with how spread out the USA is or that people here use their phones a lot(even at dinner) we felt all eyes on us when we used our phones at dinner in Paris.

They were staring at you because you were being a dick and using a phone during dinner!

Yeah I got that, its why we ended up putting the phone away and actually paying attention to each other while over there, it was torture!

eljefe_bmore: If you're with AT&T you're a farking idiot. Simple as that. Why is there even an argument over this?

Like other carriers are a better option? It took the suck that is ATT for people to forget Verizon used to get complaints every damn month.

steamingpile: eljefe_bmore: If you're with AT&T you're a farking idiot. Simple as that. Why is there even an argument over this?

Like other carriers are a better option? It took the suck that is ATT for people to forget Verizon used to get complaints every damn month.

This. I'm using Verizon only because they're the least worst option.

If US cell companies would worry about taking care of existing customers as much as they do trying to acquire new ones, they wouldn't be in this position.

ox45tallboy: fanbladesaresharp: ox45tallboy: HempHead:
Some of the Straight Talk phones use AT&T SIMs. For example, you can get a refurbished Nokia e71 directly from their website for $49.95 + tax with free shipping (if there's a Wal-Mart in your state, you have to pay sales tax).

Well Wally World is just up the street from me and I'm in Oregon. No sales tax!

/even though they raise prices slightly to offset that it's still cheaper.

Yeah, the new phone is like $129.95, I believe. You have to order it from the website to get a refurb.

You do not have to buy a sim you can get just the sim card

http://www.straighttalk.com/shopsims

Don't waste money on the phone from them

yagottabefarkinkiddinme: F AT&T.

Filed a FCC complaint and BBB complaint, called them daily to complain and then AT&T came out with unlimited data throttled at 3 GB a month.

Funny conversation, I wanted to speak with this guy via phone or email him. They insulate him from customers. I could write and mail it to him they said.

I told AT&T the CEO does not know how to effectively speak to his customers using his own technology.

/sending this using my iPhone using wifi because AT&T can handle the data.

Why would you not use wifi in your home or available? Why are there so many idiots not hooking there smartphones to their home wifi ? It amazes me how many people rack up 4-10GBs a month, what are you doing to drive the much traffic? Are you never on Wifi? I use the crap out of my phone because my job is managing the wireless assets for a fortune 500 company. We actually run the infrastructure that gets the Internet to your home and your phone and ATT are the cheapest SOBs on the block and we hate dealing with them.

CitizenTed: FTA: "You lie awake at night worrying about what is that which will disrupt your business model," he said. "Apple iMessage is a classic example. If you're using iMessage, you're not using one of our messaging services, right? That's disruptive to our messaging revenue stream."

Spoken like a true monopolist dinosaur. I wouldn't want this guy running my local pizzeria, much less a huge telecom. Isn't America is supposed to be the place where clever and daring new thinkers revolutionize markets?

That last question was rhetorical. We all know the answer.

Ya damn right. This jackass is supposed to lay awake at night thinking about how he's going to disrupt his own business model in order to stay ahead of the competition. That's the way it worked when I was in Si_valley. You developed better products and obsoleted your old ones before the competition could.

/Waaaaaa!
//fark AT&T
///Proudly using all the unlimited data I can on my old AT&T plan

Bucky Katt: I haven't heard "Ma Bell" for years. Thing got dismantled 30 years ago.

And they've been working the past 30 years to put it back together.

Praise Cheesus: Mabman: From the article: "And it's a variable cost model. Every additional megabyte you use in this network, I have to invest capital."

This doesn't sound right.

Why does AT&T have to "invest capital" for *every* additional megabyte? I can see that if they hit certain capacity thresholds in certain areas they may need to upgrade some equipment and/or their upstream data circuits, but I think he's significantly exaggerating here. Unless, of course, their data network is poorly planned and they're paying massive bandwidth overages for their upstream data usage.

You are familiar with how a wireless phone works, right? It uses a radio signal to connect to the nearest tower, which is then sent down a cable from the transceiver antenna to a switch, which then sends the connection out to the network. Now, like most wireless signal routers, you can only have so many devices connected before the connection quality and the ability to connect goes to crap.

So, in order to feed the needs of wireless voice and data connections, you have to have two sets of antennas on the towers, since voice and data do not operate on the same frequencies. With more devices connecting, you need more antennas. Oh, but there are limits to the number of antennas you can hang on one tower - the combined RF signal power for any single tower is limited by FCC regulations.

So, more towers you say? Okay, that requires zoning permits, building permits, clearances from the FCC, FAA, EPA and a handful of state agencies. Then you have to buy or lease the land, construct the tower and the switching building, install the equipment and the back up power systems. At each phase of this, you have to keep the FCC and FAA apprised of the process. In addition to the cost of the equipment, you have a small army of folks that have to install, verify, apprise and audit the process in order to stay on the good side of the regulatory agencies. Bonus: You get to go through the same process if you upgrade ...

Hey genius AT&T and Verizon don't build their own towers anymore they lease space from companies like "Towers of America".

If the CEO has regrets over customers signing up with AT&T, I can only imagine how bad their customers feel.

sammyk: hubiestubert:

I know there a Sprint haterz and I'm not going to argue with them.

I live basically in the sticks and Verizon is the only network that is available outside of immediate town centers. Four years after I moved here, it remains no contest. The good news is they've actually been really flexible (had to 'up' the plan one month when my dad was really sick, then lower it again) and I've only felt like once they maybe sorta screwed me for like $30, and I'm still not 100% sure I didn't just miss something with pro-rating .

steamingpile: Earpj: Seems I've used 561MB since Apr. 29th.
I always forget. Is that a lot?

In less than two weeks? Yes.



Lol. In 2003.

You charge $20 for 300MB and $30 for 3,000MB.
You charge $0.20 for 1kb of data transmitted in text-message form. If I were to send 300MB worth of text messages, it would cost $60,000. Shockingly, of course, it's not possible to count SMS as data, thus requiring the different price structure. Bonus: Also costs $0.20 to receive a text message, including all the ones about free iPads and gift cards.

In conclusion, fark you.

Because People in power are Stupid: The bottom line is that AT&T just wants people to give them money and do nothing in return. Get customers to lock in to lame contracts pushed by obnoxious salespeople.

The last time I bought a phone I was asked no fewer than five times if I would recommend ATT/the store/the guy asking me. At first I said no, but after half a dozen farking followup questions about why I wouldn't recommend them, my balls just shriveled up and I agreed to recommend them to everyone. The sales rep looked so farking smug.

Hunter_S_Thompson: Exactly. As someone into things like technology, infrastructure, moving forward as a society, I do sometimes wonder what the world would be like, today, in the year 2012, if the billions and trillions of dollars that were funneled into the executives' bank accounts since the 80's were actually used for improving the infrastructure, both physically and in places like telecom, for research and development of new technologies, especially in the energy sectors, you know, kind of like businesses used to do before they were told "Greed is good, Greed works"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a6cNdhOKwi0

/something like that

spman: I'm posting this from my iPhone right now, so I'm getting a kick. Seriously though, from what I've read, European carriers have no problem at all with capacity and offer unlimited data at even faster speeds than we currently have, so fark you AT&T and your unwillingness to upgrade your systems. And don't even start with the BS about losing revenues from text messages that literally use no data and don't cost anything, but you still have to gaul to charge $30 a month for. fark you.

i see what you did there...

Oh the pathetic rants of oligopolists.

spman: but you still have to gaul

Which has been divisa in tres partes.

Crosshair: Because People in power are Stupid: The bottom line is that AT&T just wants people to give them money and do nothing in return. Get customers to lock in to lame contracts pushed by obnoxious salespeople.

You have described every company from the independent plumber to the largest corporation. Problem is that they can't with competition.

I personally blame the 1996 Telcom Deregulation act,

That's more accurately described as "Re-Regulation". It was setup to still benefit the larger companies. The way the regulations are written it is cheaper for us to route calls in Minnesota through our ND switch than through our MN switch and likewise the other way. Why? Dammed if I know, the regulations are the size of the NY phone book.

spman: I'm posting this from my iPhone right now, so I'm getting a kick. Seriously though, from what I've read, European carriers have no problem at all with capacity and offer unlimited data at even faster speeds than we currently have, so fark you AT&T and your unwillingness to upgrade your systems. And don't even start with the BS about losing revenues from text messages that literally use no data and don't cost anything, but you still have to gaul to charge $30 a month for. fark you.

The reason they don't have as much of a problem is because Europe has a much smaller area to cover and higher population. To cover the empty areas of the US, which the US government requires them to do, costs a lot of money. Europe needs less infrastructure over a smaller area to serve more people, which means lower costs for them vs US companies.

[sandcat.nl image 428x226]

AT&T may indeed be behaving like jerks, but don't pretend that comparing Europe telecom to the US is anything except apples to anvils.

/Considering moving me and my parents over to StraightTalk prepaid vs Verizon.

I don't think the US doesn't requires wireless carriers to cover empty areas. They subsidize it if you do, but it's not like universal service on landlines which is required. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund

Now, US consumers are decidedly more mobile than Europeans. It's not unusual for Americans to have family in (for example) Texas, Illinois, New York, and California, all of whom they might visit from time to time while few Europeans would have relations in Spain, Norway, Munich, Warsaw and Greece.

pxlboy: Praise Cheesus: Mabman: From the article: "And it's a variable cost model. Every additional megabyte you use in this network, I have to invest capital."

This doesn't sound right.

Why does AT&T have to "invest capital" for *every* additional megabyte? I can see that if they hit certain capacity thresholds in certain areas they may need to upgrade some equipment and/or their upstream data circuits, but I think he's significantly exaggerating here. Unless, of course, their data network is poorly planned and they're paying massive bandwidth overages for their upstream data usage.

You are familiar with how a wireless phone works, right? It uses a radio signal to connect to the nearest tower, which is then sent down a cable from the transceiver antenna to a switch, which then sends the connection out to the network. Now, like most wireless signal routers, you can only have so many devices connected before the connection quality and the ability to connect goes to crap.

So, in order to feed the needs of wireless voice and data connections, you have to have two sets of antennas on the towers, since voice and data do not operate on the same frequencies. With more devices connecting, you need more antennas. Oh, but there are limits to the number of antennas you can hang on one tower - the combined RF signal power for any single tower is limited by FCC regulations.

So, more towers you say? Okay, that requires zoning permits, building permits, clearances from the FCC, FAA, EPA and a handful of state agencies. Then you have to buy or lease the land, construct the tower and the switching building, install the equipment and the back up power systems. At each phase of this, you have to keep the FCC and FAA apprised of the process. In addition to the cost of the equipment, you have a small army of folks that have to install, verify, apprise and audit the process in order to stay on the good side of the regulatory agencies. Bonus: You get to go through the same process if you upgrade ...

They got money to do it and didn't. So they can eat a dick.

No joke. Its the same thing with the local major electric players. "Oh, we need to raise rates 8% for uhhhhh....ummmm....infrastructure upgrades."
"What about the last 12% hike you got for that?"
"We had dividends to pay, yo!"

I'm on AT&T, due solely to my grandfathered unlimited data plan. I got it back when the only choice in carrier for the iPhone was AT&T.

If Verizon would give me permanent unlimited data at the rate I'm currently paying AT&T, I would switch to them in a heartbeat. As is though, I check in on my data usage every so often, and my normal monthly use would put me in the higher bracket plan, so screw that.

Just got a call from an exec at AT&T. I put in a complaint to the FCC about their throttling policies.
Felt good to tell him what I really think, even though I know nothing will be done about it.

Oh look, another corporation that extracted a profit of over 3.5 billion from its customers last year, whining about how heavy users cost them money.

How about the customers that only use a fraction of their data plans each month, but you still charge them some arbitrary minimum amount "just because"? That's just fine I assume.

Bucky Katt: Jamdug!: If there wasn't such a high barrier to entry in that industry, AT&T would have been out of business long ago.

Ma Bell can suck it.

I haven't heard "Ma Bell" for years. Thing got dismantled 30 years ago.

They got the ill communication.

/RIP MCA

Nightsweat: Crosshair: European carriers have no problem at all with capacity and offer unlimited data at even faster speeds than we currently have,

The reason they don't have as much of a problem is because Europe has a much smaller area to cover and higher population. To cover the empty areas of the US, which the US government requires them to do, costs a lot of money. Europe needs less infrastructure over a smaller area to serve more people, which means lower costs for them vs US companies.


AT&T may indeed be behaving like jerks, but don't pretend that comparing Europe telecom to the US is anything except apples to anvils.

...

The last comment is right, US and "European" telecom are quite different.

The future of telecoms is data, with voice on its way to being just another service made possible by the telcos' data network. The obvious way to make money despite competition by skype, whatsapp and other free alternatives to calling and texting is to extract maximum revenue from data.

I don't think costs are particularly lower in "Europe" (bit of a generalization there as there are lots of countries with different conditions in Europe). Labor and electricity costs, two huge ones for telcos, spring immediately to mind as more expensive for most European countries vs. the US.

That being said, Vodafone Italy gives 500 mb/week of data for 2 euros, pay as you go, not a bad deal. None of the providers in Italy, there are four, offers true unlimited data and no one tells you how much data you've used (how close you are to your limit). Vodafone and another big carrier are both investing heavily in LTE (4G) networks.

AT&T posted a net income of 3.4 billion dollars last year. Go fark yourself and your whiny complaints.Mr CEO.