from FenrirIII@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world on 11 Oct 17:35
https://lemmy.world/post/37211733
cross-posted from: discuss.online/post/28602691
The rule took effect in April 2024 after the FCC rejected ISPs’ complaints that listing every fee they created would be too difficult. The rule applies specifically to recurring monthly fees “that providers impose at their discretion, i.e., charges not mandated by a government.”
ISPs could comply with the rule either by listing the fees or by dropping the fees altogether and, if they choose, raising their overall prices by a corresponding amount. But the latter option wouldn’t fit with the strategy of enticing customers with a low advertised price and hitting them with the real price on their monthly bills. The broadband price label rules were created to stop ISPs from advertising misleadingly low prices.
threaded - newest
Find the place with the highest fee, roll it into the base price that you offer nationwide. Problem solved. In the place where it’s exactly as high as that, you won’t make any profit. Anywhere it’s lower than that, you will make a profit.
Let’s be real here. The problem isn’t that it’s “too complicated” to list the fees. What’s complicated about listing a few numbers? The problem is that they don’t want to list a myriad of fees.
The fact that “tell your customers what you will charge them” is a rule that had to be instantiated in the Biden legislation is in itself a joke.
You should see my power bill
I agree. You should just charge one price, and that way customers know exactly how much it’s gonna be.
absolutely right. Just like airline tickets, hotels and the like. Marketing got in the way… Look we only cost 5 euro but the 299.87 worth of fees we have to add and/or collect on behalf of others makes the price go up.
Well guess what, so has the competitors! And guess again: I don’t give a shit about that break-down, just give me the final figure. That’s what I have to pay. So that all matters doesn’t it? No need for you to tell me how you spend it, the money yours after the sale.
i wonder if these “breakdown fees” allows them more wiggle room to sneak a extra fee the customer wouldnt notice.
I look into my crystal ball and foresee new fees, no later than 4 cpu clock-cycles after the kill of the requirement.
This is so dumb, how could anyone at the FCC even humor such a request?
“Please help us, we overcomplicated billing and don’t want to explain it to anyone”
It’s easy - ISPs just bribed the people running the FCC now (because that’s become an ok thing to do), and the FCC turns around and says “yep sounds good”
Centrists and conservatives consider Brice’s to be speech.
the first term they were angling to get rid of NN, which was distraction of the 2017 tax cuts, i remember tha tpeople were tired of the NN news they dint tune in the tax cuts.
brendancarrisadummy.com
That just means the FCC will stop requiring it though. A class action can still beat them into submission. The lawyers benefit most from this but it still gets the job done.
Just use the competition that doesn’t do this.
Hahaha what competition?
That would require a separation of fiber/copper, infrastructure from internet supply, (just like the electrical grid)
Most houses have only one connection, one choice, mum’s spaghetti.
Starlink
Okay Elon
U have the choice its up to u. U have the right to let ur ideology force u into getting fucked by other telcos. Just remember that its a choice u made.
Smells like victim blaming here.
Option 1
Pressure, Vote (Left) for infrastructure that is inherently monopolistic to be state owned
Option 2
Let the only competitive option to only be accessible for billionaires, that dirties space travel and requires rockets to be continuously launched.
While defending billionaires.
Fuck of asswipe. You should know better by now. He overpromises & under-delivers. Not to mention scamming too
As someone in rural Australia its better than any wired service we got
Yea let me pay more for the base price than for everything combined to get a very shitty connection…
Makes sense if you’re a Muskrat, not so much if you’ve got one of those weird sponges in your skull
we use Sonic, we were done with cable/tiered comcast. just hope none the legacy cable buys these other ISP which are faster.
That’s not good enough.
Wait until everybody starts doing this sweet summer child
I won’t say who, but I used to work for a large telco. Seeing their charges, it was x plan with y equipment fee. I have had two other ISPs in the past 2 years, one of which was Comcast. I had x plan with no equipment fee (I just bought a cable modem, cause fuck leaving my router even slightly exposed). What fucking companies came up with these other bs fees? Or are we talking phones? Cause yeah, that’s all kinds of fee fuckery
comcast was the worst. its thier tierd service, and trying to pedal thier "rent a router’ service. sooner or later they will be allowed to slow down peoples internets, to force them to buy more expensive plans.
Even talking about phones, having so many fees that you cannot list them all is insane.
This title is something that doesn’t make sense said in a way that makes it look logical. If they can’t manage their fees those fees shouldn’t exist. But that’s not really why this requirement it’s going away, it’s because they were bribed.
“FCC will kill requirements for isps to list all fees so that they can continue to add fees”