3 ms·
I’m a little troubled that consumers would have an expectation that they may have to rely on that as a result of arbitrary rate increases. Do the vast majority
by ovao 8y ago
I’m a little troubled that consumers would have an expectation that they may have to rely on that as a result of arbitrary rate increases. Do the vast majority of consumers know about those opportunities?
I’m definitely for consumers being wise about what they get themselves into, but I’m also of the opinion that a reasonable contract would preclude the addition of arbitrary fees. If I contract you to work for me at $80/hour, for example, I would not be particularly happy if you turned around and forced me to pay you $85, or be forced to pay some kind of fine.
- mcny 8y agoI'm more troubled by spectrum "auctions" than by anything else. If it were up to me, I'd dig up the bones of whoever was in charge of this asinine decision and have them hanged, quartered, and drawn. Then, I would nullify existing contracts and return all their money. There has to be a better way than to grant a single company monopoly over the spectrum slice for a market.
- pas 8y agoYes. Shared network, transparently operated by all the service providers. (See also: in response to a similar what to do comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17417243 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17417243 )
- sanderjd 8y agoYep. It's definitely the contract part of this that is wrong. A price change should trigger a no-penalty renegotiation of the contract.