4 ms·

My favorite is when wireless carriers can charge a "Regulatory Recovery Fee", which is basically part of the price, but can magically change and magically appea

My favorite is when wireless carriers can charge a "Regulatory Recovery Fee", which is basically part of the price, but can magically change and magically appear on your bill. The fact that the FTC is fussed about free chat apps rather than wireless carrier practices in the US is obscene.

myself248 4y ago
You know it doesn't have to be one or the other, right? They can care about both?
- claytonjy 4y ago
  They have limited resources, so caring about one they don't currently care about necessarily removes resources from something they currently care about.
- TuringNYC 4y ago
  Regulatory recovery fees have been around for over 20yrs in the US. Sure, the FTC could tackle both, but they 20yrs have gone by, and you still cannot actually get the final price for a wireless contract in the US until after you sign up for a 2yr plan. Instead we're focusing on chat apps which were born in the past decade, require no 2yr plans, and for that matter, dont even cost money and have 50 free competitors. Great prioritization.
Alupis 4y ago
Along these lines - does anyone comprehend how the taxes and fees can vary month-to-month on your phone bill? For an unlimited plan, there's really no variation month-to-month. It should be the same freaking bill each month - yet it's always a few-to-a-dozen cents different each time.
- kriskrunch 4y ago
  A Verizon rep told me it's because the taxes are per day, and the total is impacted by different number of days one month to the next. I haven't compared to verify.
  - TuringNYC 4y ago
    when you sign up, it isnt $7 vs $6.93...rather, it is shown as 0 (by not including it.) It doesnt even show up on the cost when you sign up. Suggesting this is a ACT/365 issue is really a slight of hand to ignore the bigger issue. Also, the calendar can be calculated for the entire year (or the next 100 years for that matter.) It makes no sense that you can sign a 2yr contract and be locked in yet they cant present a table of actual charges for each month for the next 2yrs when you're signing up. Mortgage paymnets also vary by days due to interest accruals, yet they have developed the "sophistication" (read: regulation) to create a chart of what each month's charge will be for the next 30yrs. Not to mention, you could also calculate the yearly regulatory fee and just amortize it on a 30/365 basis if you so desired. There are 10 ways to slice this cake, this isnt rocket science, this is straight up customer abuse and the FTC is just as guilty for ignoring it. Imagine any other industry that could get away with this. Imagine you sign up for a $13.99/mo Netflix plan and you mysteriously got charged an additional $3 or $5 "because we cant calculate days per month in advance, because reasons." Or imagine you buy a burger at McDonalds but get charged a different amount once you pay and commit to purchasing the burger "because we cant calculate in advance whether you get 30 fries or 33."
flandish 4y ago
It should be law that “recovery” fees, for a service as critical to infrastructure, be tax deductible as charity/donation. If Eversource fucked up and didnt have enough resource to deal with a storm, and the state paid with our taxes to bail out, how is that different than them charging us a line item for that same end goal?
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  Please someone tell this to Entergy.
kmoser 4y ago
This reminds me of the old land line "touch tone fee" you'd pay for touch tone service, even long after nearly everybody had migrated away from the original pulse dialing. Not only did the phone company charge for it long after they really needed to, but you had no assurance the fee was really going to pay for that particular part of the service you were getting. This is one of the big problems with these add-on fees: they claim to be for one service, but there's nothing preventing the company from using the money for something else entirely.
- BizarroLand 4y ago
  I remember reading that early on in the telephone age, some people had leased their phones from the telephone company for $5 a month or so rather than buying one outright. They then proceeded to pay that lease fee for decades, ultimately paying hundreds or thousands of dollars more than the cost of the phone, and continuing to pay that fee even when replacement phones could be had for $10 or less.

myself248 4y ago

You know it doesn't have to be one or the other, right? They can care about both?

claytonjy 4y ago
They have limited resources, so caring about one they don't currently care about necessarily removes resources from something they currently care about.
TuringNYC 4y ago
Regulatory recovery fees have been around for over 20yrs in the US. Sure, the FTC could tackle both, but they 20yrs have gone by, and you still cannot actually get the final price for a wireless contract in the US until after you sign up for a 2yr plan. Instead we're focusing on chat apps which were born in the past decade, require no 2yr plans, and for that matter, dont even cost money and have 50 free competitors. Great prioritization.

Alupis 4y ago

Along these lines - does anyone comprehend how the taxes and fees can vary month-to-month on your phone bill? For an unlimited plan, there's really no variation month-to-month. It should be the same freaking bill each month - yet it's always a few-to-a-dozen cents different each time.

kriskrunch 4y ago
A Verizon rep told me it's because the taxes are per day, and the total is impacted by different number of days one month to the next. I haven't compared to verify.
- TuringNYC 4y ago
  when you sign up, it isnt $7 vs $6.93...rather, it is shown as 0 (by not including it.) It doesnt even show up on the cost when you sign up. Suggesting this is a ACT/365 issue is really a slight of hand to ignore the bigger issue. Also, the calendar can be calculated for the entire year (or the next 100 years for that matter.) It makes no sense that you can sign a 2yr contract and be locked in yet they cant present a table of actual charges for each month for the next 2yrs when you're signing up. Mortgage paymnets also vary by days due to interest accruals, yet they have developed the "sophistication" (read: regulation) to create a chart of what each month's charge will be for the next 30yrs. Not to mention, you could also calculate the yearly regulatory fee and just amortize it on a 30/365 basis if you so desired. There are 10 ways to slice this cake, this isnt rocket science, this is straight up customer abuse and the FTC is just as guilty for ignoring it. Imagine any other industry that could get away with this. Imagine you sign up for a $13.99/mo Netflix plan and you mysteriously got charged an additional $3 or $5 "because we cant calculate days per month in advance, because reasons." Or imagine you buy a burger at McDonalds but get charged a different amount once you pay and commit to purchasing the burger "because we cant calculate in advance whether you get 30 fries or 33."

flandish 4y ago

It should be law that “recovery” fees, for a service as critical to infrastructure, be tax deductible as charity/donation. If Eversource fucked up and didnt have enough resource to deal with a storm, and the state paid with our taxes to bail out, how is that different than them charging us a line item for that same end goal?

selimthegrim 4y ago
Please someone tell this to Entergy.

kmoser 4y ago

This reminds me of the old land line "touch tone fee" you'd pay for touch tone service, even long after nearly everybody had migrated away from the original pulse dialing. Not only did the phone company charge for it long after they really needed to, but you had no assurance the fee was really going to pay for that particular part of the service you were getting. This is one of the big problems with these add-on fees: they claim to be for one service, but there's nothing preventing the company from using the money for something else entirely.

BizarroLand 4y ago
I remember reading that early on in the telephone age, some people had leased their phones from the telephone company for $5 a month or so rather than buying one outright. They then proceeded to pay that lease fee for decades, ultimately paying hundreds or thousands of dollars more than the cost of the phone, and continuing to pay that fee even when replacement phones could be had for $10 or less.