Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by aib on Saturday August 10, 2019 @02:07AM
(#20660489)
What is this roaming thing and why is it so expensive? Does it connect to a different internet?
Seriously, though; we all use the same (couple of different brands of) phones to connect to the same (couple of different brands of) station hardware to get through to the same global network. A small difference in the choice of stations shouldn't make a large difference in the amount of cost reflected.
Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by joecool1029 on Saturday August 10, 2019 @03:13AM
(#20660652)
>What is this roaming thing and why is it so expensive?
Networks need to negotiate mutual roaming agreements. Verizon and others didn't give a shit for many years, billed absurdly high rates to their own customers and paid whatever the roaming network wanted.
Now you can get reciprocity... maybe Telus customers in Canada want to roam free/cheap on Verizon, and Verizon starts caring and wants to roam free on Telus. They make an agreement where there's no roaming cost. Obviously this can go wrong if either company overloads the other, but it's how modern agreements work
Domestic roaming is different. In this case, providers will work together favorably if it's a regional and a national carrier trying to extend out each other's coverage footprints (good example would be T-Mobile roaming on US Cellular because they have similar spectrum holdings, but in different markets). Now where the gouging kicks in is between direct national competitors: I remember seeing court filings from T-Mobile suing AT&T for them billing something like $17/MB for roaming access to their 3G network in underserved areas. The suit was because AT&T had to provide roaming access as part of their acquisition breakup agreement, but the agreement never stipulated the exact cost for that roaming arrangement. T-Mobile wanted the court to enforce a 'fair market value' on it.
TL;DR: Company needs to give a shit about its customers to properly negotiate international roaming arrangements, or bill them at an absurd enough rate that they won't incur a loss.
Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by thinkloop on Saturday August 10, 2019 @03:28AM
(#20660705)
Add to that that it's in no carrier's interest to have agreements and for them all to "over" bill their customers. Only when one carrier breaks the unspoken agreement (and starts taking customers) do others have to acquiesce. Thank you T-Mobile.
Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by writepub on Saturday August 10, 2019 @01:48AM
(#20660436)
There are parts of San Diego near the border, where the only network a phone receives is from a Mexican carrier, while being inside U.S. territory. Racking up roaming fees from auto-updates and background app execution is a common occurrence
Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by scarface74 on Saturday August 10, 2019 @01:41PM
(#20663450)
She contacted the legal team and they went back and forth and finally decided that no, we couldn't have our fee waived
You’re really telling me that their legal team told them it would be a breach of their contract for Verizon to issue a refund? What could the lawyers possibly be worried about would happen if they charged their customer less?
Verizon and Comcast are two companies I avoid at all costs.
Re:Verizon demands $880 from rural library for just 0.44GB o...
by dfeojm-zlib on Saturday August 10, 2019 @06:03AM
(#20661159)
What should be nearly free and ubiquitous is obscenely extorted. Welcome to underprotected vulture cannibal vampire capitali$m with a Verizon lawyer heading the FCC.
Seriously, though; we all use the same (couple of different brands of) phones to connect to the same (couple of different brands of) station hardware to get through to the same global network. A small difference in the choice of stations shouldn't make a large difference in the amount of cost reflected.
Networks need to negotiate mutual roaming agreements. Verizon and others didn't give a shit for many years, billed absurdly high rates to their own customers and paid whatever the roaming network wanted.
Now you can get reciprocity... maybe Telus customers in Canada want to roam free/cheap on Verizon, and Verizon starts caring and wants to roam free on Telus. They make an agreement where there's no roaming cost. Obviously this can go wrong if either company overloads the other, but it's how modern agreements work
Domestic roaming is different. In this case, providers will work together favorably if it's a regional and a national carrier trying to extend out each other's coverage footprints (good example would be T-Mobile roaming on US Cellular because they have similar spectrum holdings, but in different markets). Now where the gouging kicks in is between direct national competitors: I remember seeing court filings from T-Mobile suing AT&T for them billing something like $17/MB for roaming access to their 3G network in underserved areas. The suit was because AT&T had to provide roaming access as part of their acquisition breakup agreement, but the agreement never stipulated the exact cost for that roaming arrangement. T-Mobile wanted the court to enforce a 'fair market value' on it.
TL;DR: Company needs to give a shit about its customers to properly negotiate international roaming arrangements, or bill them at an absurd enough rate that they won't incur a loss.
It was really common in Michigan as well, even inside some buildings very clearly on the US mainland.
Maybe you're on an older plan (that may also be cheaper)?
You’re really telling me that their legal team told them it would be a breach of their contract for Verizon to issue a refund? What could the lawyers possibly be worried about would happen if they charged their customer less?
Verizon and Comcast are two companies I avoid at all costs.