Skip to comments.Verizon $2 fee Fuels a Customer Revolt
Posted on 01/01/2012 6:25:43 AM PST by BobNative
"Of all strategic mistakes the leadership of large corporations makes, one stands out: Taking the customer for granted."
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Governments at all levels do not respect their Customers. Taxpayers and Voters are taken for granted and are continually screwed and dictated to by faceless Bureaucrats and politicians.
A relatively few Verizon Customers rose up and said NO the the new $ 2 fee and Verizon quickly withdrew the fee.
We have already had one Tea Party in the United States. Clearly it is time for the Second Tea Party!
Verizon didn’t learn anything from Netflix, just as elitist Republicans didn’t learn anything from 2010.
Progressive government can raise taxes and there isn’t a peep. But, charge $2 for a transaction and it hits the fan.
Unlike what happens in government, people have control over their own transactions, ripley... believe it or not. ;)
Verizon may have wanted all it’s pay-as-you-go and “one-time transaction” customers to go to their competitors, who will spend more time and money on them.
They are the most high-maintenance ones.
Just a theory.....
The ones with credit cards or stable checking accounts are more stable and profitable - and wouldn’t be subject to the fees.
Remember the “NEW COCA-COLA?”
No one was fired over the brilliant decision to make a new Coca-cola formula that saved the company raw materials costs to REPLACE the classic coke.
That stupid decision almost broke Coca-Cola.
Remember the old Saw: “Dance with the one who brung ya.”
Verizon didnt learn anything from Netflix, just as elitist Republicans didnt learn anything from 2010.Nomination to committee chairmanships, the promise of committee assignments, the subtle pressure of 'go-along to get along' and 'make nice' - all these are very powerful forces that most people 'bend' in response to in order to gain power and prestige and avoid conflict ...
Someone posted in a related thread a day or two previous that this fee increase was only subterfuge.
It was intended to get attention and then be withdrawn, so as to direct attention away from a smaller fee increase ($0.16) that will hit EVERY Verison customer.
Remember the NEW COCA-COLA?Remember the white 'polar bear' (cans) ... also 'canned' (in part) ...
Coca Cola drops 'polar bear' cans because consumers prefer to see red
A campaign by Coca-Cola to draw attention to the plight of the polar bear is being diluted after consumers complained that the cans were changed from red to white.
Perhaps it's because many of those that uprise against Verizon don't pay taxes and they benefit from what the government steals from us to give to them. The $2.00 Verizon fee applies to them which indicates what they really think about taxes and fees: Fine for thee, but not for me...
“Progressive government can raise taxes and there isnt a peep.” Probably because the tax increases can be buried and effectively concealed, whereas the consumer can immediately identify the extra charges on a monthly basis when they pay their bills.
It is interesting that millions of people can mobilize over two dollars almost overnight, but when freedom is at stake they silently accept that government can’t be altered.
It’s a shame that we don’t get off our lazy a**es and revolt against the Socialist Government, that we have, like folks revolted against Verizon. The Government steals more than $2 a month from us. But, stupid Americans keep electing the same Marxist President and corrupt Congress critters and sending them back to Washington. We get what we deserve.
>>>The ones with credit cards or stable checking accounts are more stable and profitable - and wouldnt be subject to the fees.
Actually, even those customers could have been hit with the fee too depending on how they pay their bill... like if you paid on-line via MyVerizon with a credit-card - you’d pay the fee... but, if you enrolled that same credit card in Verizon’s AutoPay - no fee. It was ridiculous. They bowed to an FCC review... they have enough other stuff pending with the FCC they didn’t need to rock the boat with this stupid fee.
As was pointed out on ?Geri Willis? Fox Business Show, AT&T? rewards people making automatic payments. Better, much better customer feel and relationship.
Now if the Obama Admin were doing this, the people making auto pay would be surcharged for being the wealthy while those making sporadic payments would be subsidized.
Brilliant AND FUNNY!
They revolt over a $2 fee and NOT THIS??????????
From Zero Hedge:
The Federal (Un)Balance Sheet $65 Trillion Financial Hole = $550k Per Household (Or $2.2 Million Per De-Facto Taxpayer, Take Your Pick!
Well, I am not a Verizon customer but I do have some bills that reoccur monthly. I pay them when they come due and do not allow auto-deductions. This is not because of a checking account that is “not stable” and I am not “high maintenance” either. I do not believe in turning over control and allowing someone to have open access to my checking account.
If you check your bills, the government nickles and dimes us to death with fee’s under a dollar. One of the fee’s on my bill was for 19 cents....2 fee’s to cover 911 calls. it frosts your buns to read your bills...
I am astonished at how bad editing has become. For example:
“It was the first time in 125 years that the regular product had been switched from its trademark red cans. “
Man! When I was a boy in the 50’s they didn’t have any Coke cans. Maybe I am not 65, I may really be 125. Huh?
Same here. I don't mind cutting out the middle man, except when I AM the middle man.
Yes, and $2 for phone payments doesn’t seem out of line. I think I have to pay that for several of the bills I have, if I choose to pay that way instead of electronically or sending a check. What the heck? Why shouldn’t they charge that? I think it’s more an issue of silly, short-sighted, anti-”corporatism” than anything else.
I just have to wonder if the threat from the FCC to “investigate” was what made Verizon drop this stoopid a$$ 2.00 fee ?
Or was it really customer complaints that did it ?
I’ll take a bet that it was the FCC threatening investigation ~!
I also heard on the radio ( conservative radio station that carries Rush, Sean, Levin and Beck ) that the 2.00 fee *might* have rendered contracts null and void and that people would be able to end their contract without penalty.
Perhaps that is what the FCC was going to investigate?
I suspect the union animals, who were beaten back from a strike last year, are doing what they do best: fighting dirty.
Omglol that is a work of art!
Progressive government can raise taxes and there isnt a peep.
That is because the folks who don’t pay taxes are equal in number to those who do. If this fee was used to give a cash payment to 51% of Verizon customers, it would be tough to get rid of it.
a quaint sentiment, that.
“I am astonished at how bad editing has become. For example:”
Had they simply said “red trademark” it would have been sufficient.
If Freepers are interested, check out who is the CEO now of Coca Cola. Came across this because of a news article about the original formula recipe being taken out of its protective vault at Trust Co.Bank of Georgia (now SunTrust) and “put on display” at the Coke museum in Atlanta. Why on earth would anyone want to do that, except in replica form. The oldest basic formative legacy relationship of this huge company and its main original product— fountain syrup.
The CEO is a Turk Muslim!!! His father supposedly famous for protecting jews in Marsaille in WWII as Turkish consul.
It is a long way from Roberto Goizueta, and the older Cuban pure sugarcane sugar that was so much better than corn syrup sweeteners.
Regretfully, you do have a good point.
We only recently had the “war tax” to fund the Spanish American War removed from our telephone bills—unbelievable!
The Al Gore “wiring the schools for the internet” tax is still on our bills though. Having gotten this— and technology now making this ridiculous (everything is wireless- no need for wired expensive infrastructure)-— the tax continues as a “service fee” it’s there alright.
And the Al Gore red dye diesel tax is still here— so that a farmer who drives a truck CAN’T put the same diesel fuel in his truck that he puts in his tractor....or in the long haul truck he has to drive to make a living to remain on his farm— isn’t that nice?
Al Gore has just a WHOLE lot to answer for.
I always think of what Rush says on things like this. Funny how people can get so fired up about $1.00 ATM fees or the $2.00 bill pay, but can’t get hepped up over our taxes.
Progressive government can raise taxes and there isn’t a peep. But, charge $2 for a transaction and it hits the fan.
I was going to write....watch what the other hand is doing....I see you were watching.
Well then you are perfectly free to send an extra $2 to anyone you like. I, on the other hand will not ignore an ill advised imposition of a surcharge based on how I elect to pay my bill.
For one thing, I have a contract and have been a verizon customer for well over 10 years. While I could very easily pay my bill through my bank and avoid the fee, I view my bill on-line and pay it through their web site for convenience.
For them to tack a transaction fee on is changing the terms of service in the middle of my contract, even if they legally are able to do so, it doesn't play well with me.
Quick to tax, sloooow to give tax relief...Ilove the fact that the electric cars of the future are now starting houses on fire...serves the jerks right for being politically correct...and stupid
They’ll merely double it to $4 and hide it in their regular service fee.
The $2 fee is FOR using a credit card to pay your bill.
So your theory isn’t correct.
“So your theory isnt correct.”
It still may not be correct, but autopay with a credit card exempted you from the fee.
“I do not believe in turning over control and allowing someone to have open access to my checking account.”
I agree with you, but I have no such reservations about autopay using a credit card.
The customer is always in charge whether that is recognized or not. So are the taxpayer/voters. We just need to understand that.
Same with me. I always pay what few bills I have on time.
Just because someone does not sign up for auto pay does not mean they are slackers or slugs when paying bills. A pretty wide brush to use.
I am a Verizon customer and back in September 2009 I received my monthly bill and it was for over $800! The statement reflected my last payment was February.
I called Verizon, they made me fax copies of my payment confirmations (I pay on-line) and held the disputed amount in abeyance.
It took over a month for them to finally decide their computer had lost all my payments from March through August 2009.
If I had auto bill pay they would have removed the $800+ out of my account, and if it ever would have been resolved they would not have returned it but just gave me credit on my account.
First. I do not now about others but $800 is a nice hunk of change for me and I can't afford to just have that much removed from my account.
Second. If I had auto pay they would have had my money and would not have had any incentive to research my account to find THEIR problem.
Because I pay all my bills monthly with no auto pay I have the edge when I have a complaint or problem such as the one that happened as described above.
“...people have control over their own transactions...”
Government can also under their control, but they choose to vote it to someone else who will tax them one thousand times two dollars with nothing to show for it, with barely a whimper.
Good old Al Gore has made a fortune by being stupid, cause there are lots of people more stupid than he is....and they vote and reproduce...yikes
Too many people want somebody else’s congressman or senator gone...not their own!