5 ms·
> Besides the five-year price guarantee, there's at least one more notable pricing detail. T-Mobile's previous plans had "taxes and fees included," meaning the
by SOLAR_FIELDS 1y ago
> Besides the five-year price guarantee, there's at least one more notable pricing detail. T-Mobile's previous plans had "taxes and fees included," meaning the advertised price was inclusive of taxes and fees. With the new Experience plans, taxes and fees will be in addition to the advertised price.
One of my least favorite things about the States is how this continues to be legal. Hiding the true cost of a product from consumers is anti capitalist and violates free market principles. And no, this isn’t “too difficult” to achieve. Basically every other developed nation roll taxes into the listed price and businesses still manage to operate in those nations.
- Arkhadia 1y agoNoticed yesterday Verizon is offering a price lock also. I feel like this is just a rebranding of a way to punish you for switching companies but maybe I’m wrong? Either way, each state has different taxes and fees and sometimes even cities, burrows do too. I don’t think there is a way that could easily be fully transparent. Not defending their actions because I can’t stand all these companies who get big enough to, to your point, become overtly anti capitalist.
- sokoloff 1y agoMany more humans live in buroughs than burrows.
- dboreham 1y agoMarriott has a check box on their site to add taxes and fees. Of course it defaults off. Presumably because all other hotel sites quote ex-tax rates.
- Marsymars 1y agoSame with airlines - it's recently become even more obnoxious for price comparison (in Canada) since base economy fares no longer include any (checked or carry-on) baggage allowance, and baggage cost is non-transparent - you basically have to go through an airline's website checkout process to figure it out.
- whynotminot 1y agoTo be fair to Marriott, it would put them at a huge disadvantage in aggregation sites where their price (including fees) would be compared with companies that are lying about their price (fees come at checkout). This is why we need regulation. It’s really hard to be honest when everyone else is lying.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 1y agoThis is what happened with airfare in the States. The reason the government changed the rules recently to force airlines to include the fees for bags is because Southwest, who didn’t charge for bags at the time, operated at a major disadvantage because their prices were displayed alongside other airlines who had these hidden fees tacked on. If you ever wondered why you were not able to find Southwest’s flights on aggregators like Google flights until recently, that is why. Until that regulation went into play southwest prevented their engine to be used in aggregators for this exact reason.
- SoftTalker 1y agoSince they don't control taxes and at least some fees, it makes sense to me to exclude them from their price guarantee. But to expect a company advertising something like a "price lock" didn't build in escape clauses for themselves is just being naive.
- kevin_thibedeau 1y agoMint has had flat rates from day one. T-Mobile wholly owns them now and doesn't seem to have a problem with that payment structure.
- ooterness 1y agoAmerican telecom companies have been caught making up fees that don't correspond to any government-imposed tax. Sometimes they do control that portion of the bill.
- SoftTalker 1y agoWhich is why I said "some" fees.
- hiatus 1y agoBut they didn't include "some" fees in the price lock did they?
- SoftTalker 1y agoThe whole "price lock" concept is a blatant marketing ploy in the first place. As always, "buyer beware" and read the fine print. "Certain exclusions may apply." https://youtu.be/AtK_YsVInw8 https://youtu.be/AtK_YsVInw8
- deathanatos 1y ago> As always, "buyer beware" and read the fine print. And what some of us consumers are saying is enough of this bullshit. Corporations should not be able to promise something, and then walk back the entirety of the promise in the fine print. If you want to advertise it, then it had better be true.
- lotsofpulp 1y agoThe most (supposed) consumer friendly state in the US couldn’t even enforce advertising final prices before taxes, much less after taxes. California went as far as passing legislation requiring businesses to advertise total pre tax price, and then worked overtime at the last minute to exempt restaurants. Such an embarrassment.
- barbazoo 1y agoApparently it’s “too complicated” is what I hear over and over which is obviously bs.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 1y agoThey’re just insulting themselves then, because they’re saying by proxy that they are dumber than the whole rest of the world who somehow managed to figure this out and operates on that system
- iambateman 1y agoSame, but it's just the culture. Not enough people in the US complains if "the actual price" ends up being 10% higher than "the price." A $20 burger actually costs $30 at a restaurant. Last week I was at a car dealer and they had a car priced at $24.7k which they insisted they could never sell for less than $28k. I'll never understand why we can't all agree to just make the price the price.
- ElevenLathe 1y ago> I'll never understand why we can't all agree to just make the price the price. Not sure if you're being rhetorical or not, but the reason is very simple: Sellers want it this way because it makes their job (selling you stuff) easier. The sellers are the ones in charge of the laws about selling (there are a few scattered consumer lobbying organizations but they are nothing compared to industry lobbyists in basically every industry). As a result, the preferences of consumers do not matter, at least on the margin.
- iambateman 1y agoMostly rhetorical. I do believe that if a super-majority of consumers revolted, sellers would be forced to make changes. Tipping is a good example of where social norms are playing a big role along with the law.
- ApolloFortyNine 1y agoSales tax I generally defend because it's not going to the business, it goes straight to the government. Removing it leads to cases where Europeans complain that the price of x is higher for them, forgetting their price includes a 20% VAT from their government. I think it's good to keep every citizen (obviously a large number do understand VAT, but it's not all) be reminded of what they're paying their government for. But I recently was buying a vehicle and the otd price was 20% more than the price on their site, before sales tax/license fees. That practice is obviously anti-consumer.
- BurningFrog 1y agoWe don't forget the price includes a 20% VAT. We're just annoyed that you pay more than what's advertised. If you're used to truthful labels, that feels insane. And intentionally deceptive.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 1y agoSo if you want to separate them out, put them both on there then. In fine print right above the total of them both added together. Even more price transparency
- milch 1y agoIME that is certainly the norm in many European countries. Where I'm from the labels usually say the full price and then the tax rate next to it, e.g. "120 EUR incl. 20% VAT" meaning the actual product is 100 EUR and the 20% VAT is already included in the 120 EUR price