T-Mobile CEO Responds To FTC Complaint

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
T-Mobile's CEO has responded to the FTC's allegations claiming the agency is "sensationalizing" and "exaggerating" its case against the company.

Despite the exaggeration of the FTC, this was neither a big nor important business for us, and their financial claims are incredibly overstated. Additionally, those third-party content business operators are pretty much out of business. This was an easy Un-carrier decision! Second, T-Mobile has in the past and will continue to keep our pledge to bill customers only for what they want and what they have purchased for as long as I am CEO of this company! NO EXCUSES!
Click to expand...
 
I suspected this was the result of lobbying by AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise every mobile operator would have been hit.

But it's the little one who's generating buzz and taking their customers that's getting hit instead. I've been on all three carriers, and by far TMO has been the best as a customer.

Besides any CEO who's keynotes can have an "f-bomb per minute" metric is alright by me.
 
I recently switched my 4-phone family plan to T-Mobile, from Sprint. I couldn't be happier.

I'm glad to see this type of response from T-Mobile's CEO.
 
This is a prime example of regulatory capture, whereby the agency that is supposed to be protecting us from companies like AT&T and Verizon are instead used by them as a weapon against smaller, better competitors and consumer well-being in general. A case like this may seem like small potatoes, but left unchecked, we end up in a situation where our system of democratic capitalism is an illusion. If the appointed agencies won't enforce the rules against large corporations, then our vote doesn't count and we have no democracy. If competition is suppressed through unfair regulation and rulings, then we have no capitalism. While many are calling this "crony capitalism", I would simply call it rule by aristocracy.
 
arthur_tuxedo said:
This is a prime example of regulatory capture, whereby the agency that is supposed to be protecting us from companies like AT&T and Verizon are instead used by them as a weapon against smaller, better competitors and consumer well-being in general. A case like this may seem like small potatoes, but left unchecked, we end up in a situation where our system of democratic capitalism is an illusion. If the appointed agencies won't enforce the rules against large corporations, then our vote doesn't count and we have no democracy. If competition is suppressed through unfair regulation and rulings, then we have no capitalism. While many are calling this "crony capitalism", I would simply call it rule by aristocracy.
Click to expand...

Do away with the agency,problem solved. :D
 
Notice no denial from T-Mo. Just "this was neither a big nor important business for us". So I suppose cramming your customer's bills is OK as long as you don't do it too much and just steal small amounts. Interesting perspective for their CEO. Bet he regrets those comments when he's asked about them during deposition and possible on a witness stand.
 
LoL this ceo really needs to just shut up, he's embarrassing himself.
 
PigLover said:
Notice no denial from T-Mo. Just "this was neither a big nor important business for us". So I suppose cramming your customer's bills is OK as long as you don't do it too much and just steal small amounts. Interesting perspective for their CEO. Bet he regrets those comments when he's asked about them during deposition and possible on a witness stand.
Click to expand...

Hey, it's not my fault you pay out the nose for Verizon's service. Oh well, way to read into something that is not there.
 
McFry said:
LoL this ceo really needs to just shut up, he's embarrassing himself.
Click to expand...

He all but said (in his own way) that it was a mistake and T-mo customers don't need to worry about it because of policies he's put in place.

I translate hipstceo.
 
If you think the billing part of the business can be crooked, you should see the back end repairs...you'll wish you would have been charged a small fee to have service restored :p
 
Steve said:
T-Mobile's CEO has responded to the FTC's allegations claiming the agency is "sensationalizing" and "exaggerating" its case against the company.
Click to expand...

I didn't think it was the result of the other carriers, but his response pretty much mirrors what happened at my employer, though I don't think we killed Premium SMS, just blocked the bad guys as they were found (but it's possible we killed Premium SMS).
 
arthur_tuxedo said:
This is a prime example of regulatory capture, whereby the agency that is supposed to be protecting us from companies like AT&T and Verizon are instead used by them as a weapon against smaller, better competitors and consumer well-being in general. A case like this may seem like small potatoes, but left unchecked, we end up in a situation where our system of democratic capitalism is an illusion. If the appointed agencies won't enforce the rules against large corporations, then our vote doesn't count and we have no democracy. If competition is suppressed through unfair regulation and rulings, then we have no capitalism. While many are calling this "crony capitalism", I would simply call it rule by aristocracy.
Click to expand...

While I believe that T-Mobile was not intentionally involved in the scam and that they did exactly what the CEO said, unless there's corroborating evidence, then we don't know that Verizon and AT&T were involved.

No matter who go the FTC involved (AT&T or a call from a few hundred affected customers), the bottom line is the squeaky wheel get's the oil....always.
 
PigLover said:
Notice no denial from T-Mo. Just "this was neither a big nor important business for us". So I suppose cramming your customer's bills is OK as long as you don't do it too much and just steal small amounts. Interesting perspective for their CEO. Bet he regrets those comments when he's asked about them during deposition and possible on a witness stand.
Click to expand...

Way to miss the point. What he said was that they introduced PSMS in 2009 killed it in 2013 and that all the major carriers did the same and that they all had problems with scammers. Small carriers had the problem too. I said it in another thread and I'll say it again, Carriers don't need to resort to illegal activity to screw you. As wireless customer, they say bend over you take it up the butt. I mean come on...when SMS started out it was around $5.00/month and that was virtually 100% profit (and there's no capacity issues...your SMS isn't even guaranteed to arrive). AT&T then raised rates to $10.00 and nobody flinched (and most carriers followed suit). AT&T went to $15.00 and you said, "Oh it feels so good." They raised it to $20.00 and you screamed "Yes yes yes!"

And yes, in all cases the other carriers followed suit (though not all went up to $20.00).

Carriers have long charged an activation fee and most pay it. $30 or more to sign a 2 year contract with a provider. Hey, would you like to renew your contract and get this new phone? Great we'll charge an extra 20 or so bucks/month to recoup that cost.....Oh yeah and charge you an upgrade fee.

Sprint added some random fee a year or 2 ago (and I suspect the others did as well) just because they could.

Premium SMS charges are not what you should be complaining about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top