Comments on: In the Red? Sprint Says Gouge the Customers http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/ The Business of Technology Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:08:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: Dale http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-883392 Dale Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:06:27 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-883392 I don't know which is more pathetic, Allen's naïveté, or this reporter's resentment of Sprint. In either case, this article is not what most would consider "news worthy", nor what I would consider professional writing. Instead, it's nothing more than a bitch-fest. It is quite obvious that the author, Ms. Higginbotham, has been wronged in some way by Sprint, and is looking to aleviate her over inflated hatred by the only means she has. I don't know what her particular complaint was, but I'll be willing to bet that the reason for her animosity is no different than any other consumer of any other service provider. This type of slander is ignorant and irresponsible. I don’t know which is more pathetic, Allen’s naïveté, or this reporter’s resentment of Sprint. In either case, this article is not what most would consider “news worthy”, nor what I would consider professional writing. Instead, it’s nothing more than a bitch-fest. It is quite obvious that the author, Ms. Higginbotham, has been wronged in some way by Sprint, and is looking to aleviate her over inflated hatred by the only means she has. I don’t know what her particular complaint was, but I’ll be willing to bet that the reason for her animosity is no different than any other consumer of any other service provider. This type of slander is ignorant and irresponsible.

]]> By: Matt http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-882940 Matt Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:30:58 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-882940 I came across Allen's site and then this story. Allen, buddy you were given a price and agreed. Step up and be a man and take responsibility for your actions. I came across Allen’s site and then this story. Allen, buddy you were given a price and agreed. Step up and be a man and take responsibility for your actions.

]]> By: slim http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879929 slim Sat, 24 May 2008 11:09:45 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879929 I don't think that anyone at Sprint deliberately lied to Allen. I think it's more about a misunderstanding about what the customer actually wanted and what Sprint felt he was requesting. Allen states "I signed a two (2) year agreement with Sprint in April 2002 for 2 T1 circuits (3mbit)" and then states "Looks like the pricing has dropped *again* for a DS3 (2 T1's)". In this configuration a (2 bundled T1's) become a fractional Ds3. Often times, a 6 Mbps fractional DS-3 will be more expensive from a monthly recurring cost standpoint than simply bonding more T1s (NxT1). There is a Big difference between a DS3 price and a T1 price. I don’t think that anyone at Sprint deliberately lied to Allen. I think it’s more about a misunderstanding about what the customer actually wanted and what Sprint felt he was requesting. Allen states “I signed a two (2) year agreement with Sprint in April 2002 for 2 T1 circuits (3mbit)” and then states “Looks like the pricing has dropped *again* for a DS3 (2 T1’s)”. In this configuration a (2 bundled T1’s) become a fractional Ds3.
Often times, a 6 Mbps fractional DS-3 will be more expensive from a monthly recurring cost standpoint than simply bonding more T1s (NxT1).
There is a Big difference between a DS3 price and a T1 price.

]]> By: Financial Blog » Blog Archive » News flash: telcos will take advantage of you http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879803 Financial Blog » Blog Archive » News flash: telcos will take advantage of you Fri, 23 May 2008 16:20:26 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879803 [...] favorable to the seller than to the customer. Cue the world’s smallest violin and see what GigaOm had to say about it: As detailed by Allen Harkleroad (who is one wrathful Southerner) on his web site, Sprint [...] [...] favorable to the seller than to the customer. Cue the world’s smallest violin and see what GigaOm had to say about it: As detailed by Allen Harkleroad (who is one wrathful Southerner) on his web site, Sprint [...]

]]> By: Noel Huelsenbeck http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879628 Noel Huelsenbeck Thu, 22 May 2008 15:15:23 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879628 Wow I had no idea there were so many people interested not only in Sprint but all sorts of carriers issues. As a company helping small and medium enterprises manage telecom expenses, and that has staff that spends a lot of time on the phone getting credits and refunds, I feel we should find a forum to discuss these issues. Does anyone know of an active forum for discussing carrier billing? Perhaps we could set one up for exchanging information on how best to get credits and refunds for over billing? What carriers offer the best service in certain parts of the country etc. If you would like to set up a forum or know of one where we could continue this discussion please let me know Wow I had no idea there were so many people interested not only in Sprint but all sorts of carriers issues. As a company helping small and medium enterprises manage telecom expenses, and that has staff that spends a lot of time on the phone getting credits and refunds, I feel we should find a forum to discuss these issues.

Does anyone know of an active forum for discussing carrier billing? Perhaps we could set one up for exchanging information on how best to get credits and refunds for over billing? What carriers offer the best service in certain parts of the country etc.

If you would like to set up a forum or know of one where we could continue this discussion please let me know

]]> By: Ponderings For 2008-05-20 » Ponderings Of Guy http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879304 Ponderings For 2008-05-20 » Ponderings Of Guy Wed, 21 May 2008 06:12:50 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879304 [...] Yet more evidence of Sprint’s wonderful customer service. [...] [...] Yet more evidence of Sprint’s wonderful customer service. [...]

]]> By: chet j flocko http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879300 chet j flocko Wed, 21 May 2008 05:35:56 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879300 SPRINT/NEXTELL lied to me for 2 yrs about extra charges that were on my bill. Once I found them , they HAD to pay me back. I went 3 months without my phone. SPRINT paid over 600 dollars on my bill because they new they were wrong. I just got my phone back and they are charging ME a reconnection fee. I DO NOT THINK SO. SPRINT/NEXTELL lied to me for 2 yrs about extra charges that were on my bill. Once I found them , they HAD to pay me back. I went 3 months without my phone. SPRINT paid over 600 dollars on my bill because they new they were wrong. I just got my phone back and they are charging ME a reconnection fee. I DO NOT THINK SO.

]]> By: Larry B. http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879287 Larry B. Wed, 21 May 2008 04:02:49 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879287 There appears to be a lot of misinformation at work here. In 1984, the divestiture decree separated local companies from long distance companies. The long distance companies (formerly MCI, AT&T, Sprint, etc.) purchase access (T1's) from the local companies (formerly the seven Bell Companies, now down to three.) Over time, the FCC got the great idea to allow the local companies to offer long distance, if they opened their network to competition. So SBC has now bought Pacific Bell, Ameritech, SNET, AT&T, Cingular, AT&T Wireless, and BellSouth. Bell Atlantic has bought NYNEX, GTE, and MCI. Their cost basis for a T1 used to be 15%, but since they've been increasing the prices to the remaining long distance carriers.... Sprint may be telling the truth - their cost may be $2K, and the "phone company" may be offering $500 to take the business away from Sprint. Of course, that $500 may still be a 100% markup. There appears to be a lot of misinformation at work here. In 1984, the divestiture decree separated local companies from long distance companies. The long distance companies (formerly MCI, AT&T, Sprint, etc.) purchase access (T1’s) from the local companies (formerly the seven Bell Companies, now down to three.) Over time, the FCC got the great idea to allow the local companies to offer long distance, if they opened their network to competition. So SBC has now bought Pacific Bell, Ameritech, SNET, AT&T, Cingular, AT&T Wireless, and BellSouth. Bell Atlantic has bought NYNEX, GTE, and MCI. Their cost basis for a T1 used to be 15%, but since they’ve been increasing the prices to the remaining long distance carriers…. Sprint may be telling the truth - their cost may be $2K, and the “phone company” may be offering $500 to take the business away from Sprint. Of course, that $500 may still be a 100% markup.

]]> By: Ian Maddox http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879241 Ian Maddox Tue, 20 May 2008 20:28:58 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879241 I don't think this article would have been printed if there wasn't already a well-developed undercurrent of distaste in the general populace towards Sprint. I probably doesn't help that the telco industry has a somewhat shady reputation as a whole. I feel bad for Mr. Harkleroad; it doesn't matter whether it's technically legal or an industry standard, Sprint acted poorly. He got screwed, legally or not. As soon as my Sprint contract is up, I'm running as far away as I can. I don’t think this article would have been printed if there wasn’t already a well-developed undercurrent of distaste in the general populace towards Sprint. I probably doesn’t help that the telco industry has a somewhat shady reputation as a whole.

I feel bad for Mr. Harkleroad; it doesn’t matter whether it’s technically legal or an industry standard, Sprint acted poorly. He got screwed, legally or not.

As soon as my Sprint contract is up, I’m running as far away as I can.

]]> By: Aaron Glenn http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879237 Aaron Glenn Tue, 20 May 2008 20:04:52 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879237 I really should proofread before hitting submit. Apologies for the misspellings and omissions. Hopefully you get the idea :) I really should proofread before hitting submit. Apologies for the misspellings and omissions. Hopefully you get the idea :)

]]> By: Aaron Glenn http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879236 Aaron Glenn Tue, 20 May 2008 20:03:13 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879236 I'm sorry, Julie but you are sorely mistaken. Yes, a T1 is 1.544Mbps and network providers have every right to market it as such. Will you get 1.544Mbps from iTunes or YouTube? No. Is that th enetwork providers fault? Are they gouging you? Lying even? No. Sure, a smart salesmen could either a) explain the issue himself or b) get a sales engineer to explain it but what's the point? You'll be surprised how much people just *dont* care. "I need two T1s from point A to point B" or "I need more than a T1s worth of internet bandwidth". Great, but 1.544x2 = 3Mbps of throughput. And if you're running a business and spending $2K/m on such a service, wouldn't you want to *know* what you're buying before you do? If you don't, thats you're problem. A provider is under zero obligation to explain to you what you're buying if you're specifically requesting it. It'd be a far different animal if they sold him two T1s and then actively capped it, but for christsake he got 2.8Mbps? That's pretty much @ the theoretical limit you could push out those puppies what with PPP overhead/etc. You really want to tell me Sprint has to explain TCP and PPP overhead to each T1 customer...otherwise it's lying and false advertising? Give me a break folks. It's your money...show some effin' responsibility with it! I’m sorry, Julie but you are sorely mistaken. Yes, a T1 is 1.544Mbps and network providers have every right to market it as such. Will you get 1.544Mbps from iTunes or YouTube? No. Is that th enetwork providers fault? Are they gouging you? Lying even? No. Sure, a smart salesmen could either a) explain the issue himself or b) get a sales engineer to explain it but what’s the point? You’ll be surprised how much people just *dont* care. “I need two T1s from point A to point B” or “I need more than a T1s worth of internet bandwidth”. Great, but 1.544×2 = 3Mbps of throughput. And if you’re running a business and spending $2K/m on such a service, wouldn’t you want to *know* what you’re buying before you do? If you don’t, thats you’re problem. A provider is under zero obligation to explain to you what you’re buying if you’re specifically requesting it. It’d be a far different animal if they sold him two T1s and then actively capped it, but for christsake he got 2.8Mbps? That’s pretty much @ the theoretical limit you could push out those puppies what with PPP overhead/etc. You really want to tell me Sprint has to explain TCP and PPP overhead to each T1 customer…otherwise it’s lying and false advertising?

Give me a break folks. It’s your money…show some effin’ responsibility with it!

]]> By: Chris Taylor Jr http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879226 Chris Taylor Jr Tue, 20 May 2008 18:14:18 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879226 Well I have several issues. First it sounds like many people are using the wrong parts of our vocabulary. Cheating for one. I just looked up the word cheating and it says "1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases." Now this DOES get iffy here. They are "in the grey" for cheating. Charging you $2k for $500 in service is NOT CHEATING. THats business. Deal with it. BUT there is a gotcha here. When he asked what it costs them they justified it by claiming that they get charged $1,998 from the provider so they have to charge more than $2k. Well this is lying. They are under no obligation to disclose what "there" costs are but in this case they chose to disclose and with a lie. THAT is a form of cheating but I am reluctant to use the word cheating I call it "lying" and that is one thing companies should NOT be allowed to do. While the due diligence IS on the head of the customer Companies should not be permitted to hide behind that when they lie. There should be penalties for that. By lying to him with that specific bit of information its even a form of deception since if he assumes what they tell him is truthful he now has NO REASON to call the phone company unless he thought they were lying. See the problem? A trusting or naive person would just assume this company was honest and end it there and keep getting raped. SO while I do not think sprint did anything wrong in how they PRICED the service I DO find great fault in how they "secured" the customer with a lie. That should not be permitted. I DO question the story though. $1998 and they charged him $2000? ONE support phone call to sprint costs more then $2 somethings fishy here. Well I have several issues. First it sounds like many people are using the wrong parts of our vocabulary. Cheating for one. I just looked up the word cheating and it says “1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases.”

Now this DOES get iffy here. They are “in the grey” for cheating. Charging you $2k for $500 in service is NOT CHEATING. THats business. Deal with it.

BUT there is a gotcha here. When he asked what it costs them they justified it by claiming that they get charged $1,998 from the provider so they have to charge more than $2k.

Well this is lying. They are under no obligation to disclose what “there” costs are but in this case they chose to disclose and with a lie.

THAT is a form of cheating but I am reluctant to use the word cheating I call it “lying” and that is one thing companies should NOT be allowed to do.

While the due diligence IS on the head of the customer Companies should not be permitted to hide behind that when they lie. There should be penalties for that.

By lying to him with that specific bit of information its even a form of deception since if he assumes what they tell him is truthful he now has NO REASON to call the phone company unless he thought they were lying. See the problem? A trusting or naive person would just assume this company was honest and end it there and keep getting raped.

SO while I do not think sprint did anything wrong in how they PRICED the service I DO find great fault in how they “secured” the customer with a lie. That should not be permitted.

I DO question the story though. $1998 and they charged him $2000? ONE support phone call to sprint costs more then $2 somethings fishy here.

]]> By: ed http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879219 ed Tue, 20 May 2008 17:23:43 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879219 I'm going to agree with the other commenters that this is just a bad business decision on Allan's part. The electric company example is false, since that is a sanctioned monopoly. Compare this situation to buying a car. Some people get better deals, some people buy the first thing they see; rarely is the price listed the actual price of the car even if you think you are seeing the 'invoice'. The only mistake Sprint made was in not telling Allan that the wholesale price is none of his business, what matters is the price we are willing to sell it to you for. I’m going to agree with the other commenters that this is just a bad business decision on Allan’s part.

The electric company example is false, since that is a sanctioned monopoly. Compare this situation to buying a car. Some people get better deals, some people buy the first thing they see; rarely is the price listed the actual price of the car even if you think you are seeing the ‘invoice’.

The only mistake Sprint made was in not telling Allan that the wholesale price is none of his business, what matters is the price we are willing to sell it to you for.

]]> By: Your title here - Just another WordPress weblog » Sprint Losing Money, says “Gouge the Customers” http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879218 Your title here - Just another WordPress weblog » Sprint Losing Money, says “Gouge the Customers” Tue, 20 May 2008 17:11:33 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879218 [...] leads a customer down a confusing line of lies and inflated charges in the hopes of making a buck.read more | digg story This entry is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry [...] [...] leads a customer down a confusing line of lies and inflated charges in the hopes of making a buck.read more | digg story This entry is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry [...]

]]> By: Hong Kong Fuey http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879209 Hong Kong Fuey Tue, 20 May 2008 16:46:39 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879209 @ casey. Is it really price gouging when someone pays what they are quoted? If I sell you a widget for $20 and the guy next door sells it for $40. Is that gouging? $200 vs $400, $2,000 vs $4,000. You can't set a finite dollar amount on what is gouging. The store with the better price and customer service wins. It's called capitalism, look it up. @ casey.

Is it really price gouging when someone pays what they are quoted? If I sell you a widget for $20 and the guy next door sells it for $40. Is that gouging? $200 vs $400, $2,000 vs $4,000. You can’t set a finite dollar amount on what is gouging. The store with the better price and customer service wins. It’s called capitalism, look it up.

]]> By: casey http://gigaom.com/2008/05/19/in-the-red-sprint-says-gouge-the-customers/#comment-879208 casey Tue, 20 May 2008 16:40:13 +0000 http://gigaom.com/?p=13481#comment-879208 It is price gouging and it is illegal. What do you expect? It is price gouging and it is illegal. What do you expect?

]]>