3 ms·

A big portion of fault lies with the consumer. If 20% of CenturyLink customers canceled their service for a week in a very publicized way, CenturyLink would scr

A big portion of fault lies with the consumer. If 20% of CenturyLink customers canceled their service for a week in a very publicized way, CenturyLink would scramble. For example, they could all wear yellow vests and block the entrance to the CenturyLink parking lot.

eridius 8y ago
Given that most consumers don't have any reasonable choice in their ISP, it's counterproductive to blame the consumer.
- freeopinion 8y ago
  Most consumers do have a choice. "Reasonable" is a pretty squishy word often used to kill discussion. If a consumer is abused by their vendor and continues to fund their abuser, who should be blamed? Obviously the abuser is to blame for the abuse. But shouldn't the person funding the abuser also get some blame? Or is it all the government's fault? Blame the police. It seems to be a common response to consumer abuse to blame the government while continuing to fund the abuser. That strategy has made Wells Fargo number one. And Century Link number one. And Facebook number one. And the list goes on. If you can't live without their service for one week, maybe their service isn't so bad. If you're not willing to lift even the smallest finger the smallest amount, just keep belly aching to the wind. That will fix the problem.
  - eridius 8y ago
    No, most consumers in the US either do not have a choice at all, or they have a choice between two equally-shitty companies. > If a consumer is abused by their vendor and continues to fund their abuser, who should be blamed? If the consumer does not have a reasonable choice in vendor, then the vendor should be blamed. That's kinda the whole point of this thread. > If you can't live without their service for one week, maybe their service isn't so bad. That makes no sense. If you can't live without their service for one week, that says nothing about their service, it just means the product is indispensable. > If you're not willing to lift even the smallest finger the smallest amount, just keep belly aching to the wind. That will fix the problem. What choice do people have? If there's no alternative ISP you can use, or if the only alternative is just as bad as what you already have, then there's very little you can do except complain.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    > Most consumers do have a choice. "Reasonable" is a pretty squishy word often used to kill discussion. Fine. Let's define 5 options as the bare minimum to inspire healthy competition. Now we can decisively say that they don't have that many options, with no squishy words.
iad 8y ago
> If 20% of CenturyLink customers canceled their service for a week in a very publicized way, CenturyLink would scramble. Their customers can't do that without incurring ridiculous early termination fees. And many of them don't have any other option for broadband anyway. Further, I suspect boycotts very rarely work even against companies that aren't quasi-monopolies.
- freeopinion 8y ago
  First, you need to substantiate your claim about early termination fees. Second, most of them do have other options for broadband and in fact use an alternative provider every day. Third, well organized boycotts commonly work well. Even a 10% drop in revenue really gets the attention.
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    "Second, most of them do have other options for broadband and in fact use an alternative provider every day." Are you sure? I don't know anything at all about the market in that part of Utah, but I do know that in almost every place I've lived, there has been exactly one broadband ISP available. If you don't want to use them, then you don't get broadband.
    - freeopinion 8y ago
      I am sure. I am very familiar with that specific market. I know exactly what it is like to compete with CenturyLink, Verizon, ATT.
FlyMoreRockets 8y ago
Not a whole lot of broadband competition in the areas where CentruryLink operate, such as Utah. In some states, it's a sanctioned monopoly in exchange for rolling out subsidized rural broadband (which somehow never gets built...).

eridius 8y ago

Given that most consumers don't have any reasonable choice in their ISP, it's counterproductive to blame the consumer.

freeopinion 8y ago
Most consumers do have a choice. "Reasonable" is a pretty squishy word often used to kill discussion. If a consumer is abused by their vendor and continues to fund their abuser, who should be blamed? Obviously the abuser is to blame for the abuse. But shouldn't the person funding the abuser also get some blame? Or is it all the government's fault? Blame the police. It seems to be a common response to consumer abuse to blame the government while continuing to fund the abuser. That strategy has made Wells Fargo number one. And Century Link number one. And Facebook number one. And the list goes on. If you can't live without their service for one week, maybe their service isn't so bad. If you're not willing to lift even the smallest finger the smallest amount, just keep belly aching to the wind. That will fix the problem.
- eridius 8y ago
  No, most consumers in the US either do not have a choice at all, or they have a choice between two equally-shitty companies. > If a consumer is abused by their vendor and continues to fund their abuser, who should be blamed? If the consumer does not have a reasonable choice in vendor, then the vendor should be blamed. That's kinda the whole point of this thread. > If you can't live without their service for one week, maybe their service isn't so bad. That makes no sense. If you can't live without their service for one week, that says nothing about their service, it just means the product is indispensable. > If you're not willing to lift even the smallest finger the smallest amount, just keep belly aching to the wind. That will fix the problem. What choice do people have? If there's no alternative ISP you can use, or if the only alternative is just as bad as what you already have, then there's very little you can do except complain.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  > Most consumers do have a choice. "Reasonable" is a pretty squishy word often used to kill discussion. Fine. Let's define 5 options as the bare minimum to inspire healthy competition. Now we can decisively say that they don't have that many options, with no squishy words.

iad 8y ago

> If 20% of CenturyLink customers canceled their service for a week in a very publicized way, CenturyLink would scramble. Their customers can't do that without incurring ridiculous early termination fees. And many of them don't have any other option for broadband anyway. Further, I suspect boycotts very rarely work even against companies that aren't quasi-monopolies.

freeopinion 8y ago
First, you need to substantiate your claim about early termination fees. Second, most of them do have other options for broadband and in fact use an alternative provider every day. Third, well organized boycotts commonly work well. Even a 10% drop in revenue really gets the attention.
- JohnFen 8y ago
  "Second, most of them do have other options for broadband and in fact use an alternative provider every day." Are you sure? I don't know anything at all about the market in that part of Utah, but I do know that in almost every place I've lived, there has been exactly one broadband ISP available. If you don't want to use them, then you don't get broadband.
  - freeopinion 8y ago
    I am sure. I am very familiar with that specific market. I know exactly what it is like to compete with CenturyLink, Verizon, ATT.

FlyMoreRockets 8y ago

Not a whole lot of broadband competition in the areas where CentruryLink operate, such as Utah. In some states, it's a sanctioned monopoly in exchange for rolling out subsidized rural broadband (which somehow never gets built...).