How about we just scrap the ISP instead and start over with a company that can list what they are charging for? This isn't hard. Either it's a legitimate fee or it's not. I have a feeling they just don't want to disclose that they have been ripping people off for a few extra bucks every bill for the last decade.
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
372 points (96.7% liked)
Technology
60073 readers
3591 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's exactly what this is. They obviously have software that calculates the fees, so claiming they can't tell us why is bullshit when they clearly know why already.
They don't want customers to know how much of the fees are "non-mandatory," i.e. what is imposed by the ISP but not required by law.
That's what it is. They don't want people to know what extra fees they're tacking on. Of course they can list what they're charging for. Is their accounting so bad they don't know who they're charging for what? I seriously doubt it. This is as easy as a spreadsheet output.
If they’re so unsure what they’re charging people, perhaps it might be worth looking into their reported earnings and tax paid.
As a mortgage lender, welcome to the full transparency world. The only people that complain about it are the people that have a lot to hide.
When they say “too hard” I hear “will cut into our profits.”
All I hear is "we´d lose too many our costumers if we had to tell them how we´re fleecing them."
Most of them are regional monopolies. How many customers could they possibly lose?
And yet they still manage to list them perfectly fine on my bill.
It’s too hard can you pwease make it easier for us corporations 🥺 👉👈
I say boohoo to the industry that stole hundreds of billions of dollars from the government by taking money to build out a nationwide fibre network and doing fuck all with it.
The Book Of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal And Free The Net - that's from fucking 2014. Just imagine how much money we've shoveled away on subpar service while we also get fleeced for a new build out.
They just don't want people to look at their bills and see:
C-Suite 3rd Yacht Fund: $2.39
Monopoly Maintenence Fee: $5.25
Lobby/Bribe Fee: $3.16
Well, I see an opportunity for consolation right here!
Monopoly maintenance/lobbying (bribes): $8.41
I bet those business geniuses can find all kinds of ways to "reduce fees". That is the number of fees, not the total dollar amount of fees.
I just wish they'd crack down on introductory pricing and the whole "threaten cancellation to get a discount" model. Of all the other services I can think of they're the only ones (I'm including cable TV since ISPs usually do both) that explicitly give new customers a better deal. I've actually known other companies to lower your bill the longer you have their service.
I spent 30 minutes in a chat with Comcast support trying to get the introductory rate after explicitly asking at the beginning if they could do that for me as an existing customer and the rep stating "yes." 30 minutes later they told me those rates are only for new customers. I then stated that I could go down to the store and cancel my service then sign up under my wife's name to get the discount and the rep told me that'd be the only way to get the lower pricing.
Sirius/XM would like a little recognition in this regard.
I have a better solution. If it’s too much work to list it then it’s not worth charging it.
Local ISP here I actually had to search on third praty sites to get any idea what their business tier costs since their site refused to say. When they're allowed to hide things to a point where you need to go through several pages to know what upload speed and data caps they offer it's obvious they're looking to screw with people. Top tier was about $150/month for 6tb originally, then during the covid years it got bumped to 8tb because reasons, bow the standard top tier is about $130 with a 3tb cap. Make up your mind people, are you charging for the speed or the volume?
I have to itemize every invoice, for ever customer. Sometimes 100+ items long, and it’s rarely the same, customer to customer. I’m pretty sure they can figure out how to do it too.
Why am I paying all this money then? I mean, assuming we wanna believe this bullshit premise. Your computers can’t itemize a bill!?
Seriously, if you couldn't even be bothered to write it down then it couldn't have been something worth being billed for
This article has serious "not the onion" vibes!
That's some real chutzpah to tell the FCC they're charging so many bullshit fees they can't even keep track of them.
coming soon: Fee Listing fee
If Comcast hates it, it must be the best solution. In fact, I think we America should run all laws by Comcast executives
perhaps stop fucking bending us over with all your bullshit fees
If they created the fee they can list it. I’m sure accounting has a breakdown of how profitable each and every fee is.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Five lobby groups representing cable companies, fiber and DSL providers, and mobile operators have repeatedly urged the Federal Communications Commission to eliminate the requirement before new broadband labeling rules take effect.
The filing was submitted by NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, which represents Comcast, Charter, Cox, and other cable companies.
The trade groups met on Wednesday with the legal advisors to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioner Brendan Carr, according to the filing.
The FCC rules aren't in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.
The five trade groups complain that this would require ISPs "to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label."
ISPs could instead include all costs in their advertised rates to give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they would have to pay each month.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Why would it be easier for the consumer to get one line item “ALL FEES” on their bill, instead of a more granular, itemized bill that explains the reasons I’m paying for something?
It isn’t easier. It’s just more obfuscating.
"The labels must be displayed to consumers at the point of sale and include monthly price, additional charges, speeds, data caps, additional charges for data, and other information."
Its talking about point of sale not bills
Alrighty, why would I prefer everything be condensed at the point of sale instead of spelled out for me?
The point of it is that they have to show the max cost, not say it cost $59 then once you've signed up start charging $74 because of undisclosed 'hidden' costs. We don't deal with that bullshit in Australia, my ISP tells me it'll cost $99 a month for my chosen speed and unlimited data, thats what I pay no extra charges unless i select a package that gives me extra.
I imagine that would take a very, very specific law here in America. Corporations screwing over customers is our new national pastime. But honestly as long as I saw the total bill with no change from what was advertised to me that would be fine too.
Because then they don't have to come up with technobabble to disguise what the fees are, can you imagine if they actually listed "yatcht fee" the peasents would revolt.
poor babies...