This isn't about others having something I don't have. This is about others having to PAY a different amount for the same product from the same company at the same time to BUY something. And these 'others' aren't constrained by their means but in fact more often than not are people of more means than people who are paying more than they are.
I am all for others "having" a discount - as long as the source of that discount - their employer - actually pays for it.
I can admire your position regarding fairness among customers when it comes to the amount that customers pay. However, if the phone companies don't want to offer discounts to certain employers they don't have to.
I would argue that offering these discounts still offer tangible benefits to the carriers themselves. Not all companies have agreements with all 4 carriers, so As Sierrajin pointed out, these discounts can serve as a way for the carriers to get new customers that they otherwise may not have.
Furthermore, these discounts allow the carriers, in certain cases, easy access to a pool of potential customers and free advertising. In Sierrajin's case, when that Verizon rep is allowed on company property, he may spend part of his time servicing the corporate lines and account, but he is also a walking billboard for Big Red and may cause personal users to either switch carriers or, at the very least, think about Big Red in a more favorable light.
Also, I assume that corporate lines and accounts are a big part of all carrier revenue. I would also argue that since VZW and AT&T are substantially larger that TMO and Sprint, they have many more corporate lines and more revenue tied to corporate accounts.
It would also make sense that a higher number of corporations buy more service from the bigger carriers than the smaller ones, but even the bigger companies and corporations probably buy more service from the smaller carriers because they have a need for more lines than smaller companies.
Tmobile decided that not offering corporate discounts is more beneficial to Tmobile's bottom line. Verizon and AT&T may also decide to do the same, but offering those discounts benefits them directly and they'll keep them until that is no longer the case.
You could argue that the carriers could, as a matter of fairness, keep corporate discounts on corporate lines and cancel them on personal accounts. However, they may figure that it helps them retain customers and also have access to potential new ones.
I also don't know your personal circumstances, but not everyone that works for corporations is of higher means than those that work for charities or non-profits, and vice versa. In fact, the discrepancy between the highest and lowest wage of any corporation can be extreme and there are many corporations that employee minimum wage earners. Of course, some people that work for non profits are also earning minimum wage.
Personally, my company discount from Verizon saves me me more than $200 per year. If they took it away, it would sting. However, I have Unlimited Data so I would probably stay. However, if they also took that away, my loyalties may change. However, there are others ways that a customer can pay less, without having access to a corporate discount.
I don't know as much about TMO, but VZW offers loyalty discounts that can actually be more valuable than any corporate discount. Technically, new customers are not entitled to all loyalty discounts, but from a practical standpoint, persistence will often pay off.
One may argue that a customer, new or not, should not have to jump through hoops or threaten to cancel, to get a discount. However, many businesses have methods to try and retain "unhappy" customers.
Many customers don't even realize that corporate and loyalty discounts exist. If a new customer is persistent enough to obtain a non-corporate related promo or discount, one could argue that they are being subsidized by those that may not have the knowledge to get a lower rate. Whose fault is that? If all carriers eliminated all corporate discounts and loyalty promos/retention discounts and agreed to lower the rates of all customers by 25%, I would be ecstatic but that won't happen.
If I recall correctly, your $30 plan is technically open to everyone. However, it isn't a plan that is highly advertised, compared to other plans, and I thought one had to buy a sim through Walmart or Tmobile.com to get it. You have knowledge and information that even a new TMO customer may not have, causing them to pay more when the $30 plan may meet their needs. Does that mean that they are subsidizing you because they aren't as informed ? As with many things, knowledge is power.
Until last month, I was on a 12 month, $10 off per month, discount on my home internet. It expired and I had to decide if i wanted to try to get it extended or just take my medicine. I had the luxury of canceling completely and using my Verizon Wireless data plan to meet my needs. However, it is nice to have multiple ways to connect to the internet.
I called, told them I was concerned about the price and thinking about canceling. They agreed to extend my $10 discount and I accepted. In some ways, i wish I hadn't. I am not really a loyal or "good" customer, but one that will do whatever it takes to try to save money. There are probably those that let their discounts expire and are now subsidizing my lower rate. I am a pain in the neck and if they let me cancel, they wouldn't have to deal with me anymore. I would save more money because I wouldn't have to pay them anymore, and other, more loyal, customers would not have to subsidize me anymore. Sometimes a customer just can't win.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram