I don't know if this illegal, but at best, it's unethical.

[jdbii]

I doubt you will be able to get AT&T low cost, no-contract, unlimited data service anymore at least as a new subscriber. And we will see how long ST can continue to provide the AT&T unlimited data plan at this price. If I were you, I would buy grandma one of the remaining $90 ST AT&T SIMs and be thankful you got it at $90 instead of at $200.

Is there a difference between ST and Net10's service, or any of the other AT&T MVNOs for that matter, other than Net10's defined 1.5 GB data cap? Isn't ST just an MVNO of AT&T too? Is ST network given higher priority than other AT&T MVNOs?

 

[howie]

The companies that own the United States' telecommunication infrastructure answer to no one.

They answer to the FCC and the DOJ.

That is how it *should* work, but seems to only apply to landline telecoms and not wireless. Landline is a utility and regulated, while wireless is still considered a luxury (but should be a utility also).
In fact, the FCC's website states "The FCC does not regulate cellular providers, but does handle complaints about wireless service. You may file a complaint with the FCC"

 

[androidluvr2]

Is there a difference between ST and Net10's service, or any of the other AT&T MVNOs for that matter, other than Net10's defined 1.5 GB data cap? Isn't ST just an MVNO of AT&T too? Is ST network given higher priority than other AT&T MVNOs?

I am a Verizon customer so I haven't looked into the differences. I think you should start a new thread in the Nexus 4 forum on this topic to get more responses.

 

[howie]

*sorry double posted

 

[jdbii]

It's bs. These losers can't get a job so they screw people over for a living.

Unless ST stopped selling their inventory themselves, or if they intentionally sold off remaining inventory to third parties to get rid of it fast. I could imagine a number of situations where they would want to dump inventory. Maybe the dispute with AT&T legally prevented them from selling it to the pulbic, or if they were not making any money ST might have wanted to unburden themselves. Think of the leverage ST will have now should they return to selling micro sims. They can increase prices, and now they know how badly many people want access to AT&T infrastructure.

 

[I_AM_THE_ENTIRE_INTERNET]

vote them out of office then.

What specific laws are you referring to? What the wireless carriers have are exclusive licenses to use certain frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum to transmit signals. Cities can't build their own wireless networks because they aren't the licensees of any portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. Recently frequencies freed up by the digital TV conversion were sold at auction. If a city wanted to build their own wireless network, then they could have participated in the auctions, which of course would have required them to spend lots of money and which of course is why they didn't do it.

So a carrier has a "monopoly" on a certain frequency, but the current wireless marketplace is an oligopoly not a monopoly. And the "monopoly" a carrier has on a certain frequency is of a limited duration, subject to conditions and can be revoked.

And let's keep in mind what is going on here - the issue is wireless DATA not wireless phone calls. You can get wireless phone service at a reasonable price. The federal government even has a program to give it to low-income people for free and its paid for by the fees those of us who pay for our services are charged.

Wireless data is a luxury, not a necessity. You know what it is called when people feel entitled to luxuries at an affordable price? It's called a first world problem.

This response is getting tired. Must you compare every aspect of our lives to impoverished countries? Yes, we don't live in Somalia. Yes, we have it better than most. Who cares? We're here. They're there. We're allowed to complain and perching yourself on some sort of parental "You'd best not complain about luxuries" pedestal is annoying and unhelpful.

We get it. We're not Africa. Thanks for elaborating.

 

[rtshoff]

Again...ultimately all we want to know is...
1) How long do we existing customers have before ST (America Movil) drops/loses AT&T all together? Or will we be grandfathered in?
2) Will this situation be remedied such that ST continues providing AT&T access?
3) Where to find definitive answers to the above ?s

 

[gnr_2]

Again...ultimately all we want to know is...
1) How long do we existing customers have before ST (America Movil) drops/loses AT&T all together? Or will we be grandfathered in?
2) Will this situation be remedied such that ST continues providing AT&T access?
3) Where to find definitive answers to the above ?s

To #1: my guess is that, since you aren't in a contract, if they drop the relationship with AT&T, they'll send a notice letting you know the end date, tell you your options, then thank you for being their customer. Even if you had a contract, this is probably the same scenario.

Sent from my totally awesome Sprint Galaxy Nexus, even if I don't know all its secrets yet.

 

[androidluvr2]

Again...ultimately all we want to know is...
1) How long do we existing customers have before ST (America Movil) drops/loses AT&T all together? Or will we be grandfathered in?
2) Will this situation be remedied such that ST continues providing AT&T access?
3) Where to find definitive answers to the above ?s

I am not sure who you are referring to when you say "all we want to know is" but I am sure that none of us here knows the answers to #1 and #2 and since none of us knows the answers to #1 and #2, none of us knows the answer to #3. ST and AT&T probably don't even know the answers to #1 and #2 yet.

 

[androidluvr2]

This response is getting tired.

Your responses are indeed tiring as well as just plain wrong. I will give you this, though, your response that your farmer granny would have a spiritual experience by using a smart phone was one of the funniest things I have read in a long time.

Must you compare every aspect of our lives to impoverished countries?

No one even remotely compared every aspect of our lives to impoverished countries. No one even compared our wireless communications options to impoverished countries. The point was simply that wireless phone calls are cheap and even free in the US if you are low income. What is riling you up is that unlimited data on a fast network isn't cheap unless you acted quickly and got in on the deal. And you didn't and now you have to pay more than you would have paid had you acted faster.

 

[androidluvr2]

That is how it *should* work, but seems to only apply to landline telecoms and not wireless. Landline is a utility and regulated, while wireless is still considered a luxury (but should be a utility also).
In fact, the FCC's website states "The FCC does not regulate cellular providers, but does handle complaints about wireless service. You may file a complaint with the FCC"

I guess it just depends on what you mean by regulate. The FCC has a wireless telecommunications bureau that deals with the spectrum licenses

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau | FCC.gov

What they probably meant was that if you are mad because VZW switched you off unlimited data when you used an upgrade, they won't handle that complaint. But they are the entity that deals with the spectrum licenses.

As for the DOJ, they do get involved in the wireless marketplace. Recently, the DOJ filed suit to block the ATT/TMobile merger.

Welcome to the United States Department of Justice

 

[Jennifer Stough]

I wouldn't characterize this as a contractual dispute. What it is is a market aberration that has been eliminated.

I suspect what happened is that Google released the Nexus 4, which is a subsidized, unlocked, no-contract premium smartphone, and since T-mobile's network isn't great in many places, Nexus 4 owners flocked to ST AT&T service because they got the benefit of a subsidized high-end phone and an unlimited data contract with a carrier having a strong network at a lower monthly cost than if they had signed a contract with AT&T. And even if they signed a contract with AT&T, AT&T is no longer offering unlimited data contracts so they got something they couldn't even get by signing a contract with AT&T - unlimited data on AT&T's network - and they got it at a lower cost than a capped data AT&T contract plan.

This was a market aberration that occurred due to Google being able to sell subsidized phones because Google doesn't rely on profits from hardware sales. Rather, Google makes its profit from advertising sales and by selling a subsidized phone that runs their operating system that incorporates their search engine, which is how they make their profits on advertising sales, they generate profits. For a short time, this gave those who recognized the market aberration and acted quickly an opportunity to get all of the benefits of an AT&T contract plus unlimited data (which isn't even available from AT&T anymore) at a lower cost and without having a 2 year commitment. It was only a matter of time before AT&T realized this and eliminated this market aberration by raising the fees it charged ST.

As long as Google is going to sell subsidized GSM phones that work at the AT&T frequencies, I doubt you will be able to get AT&T low cost, no-contract, unlimited data service anymore at least as a new subscriber. And we will see how long ST can continue to provide the AT&T unlimited data plan at this price. This is Microeconomics 101.

If I were you, I would buy grandma one of the remaining $90 ST AT&T SIMs and be thankful you got it at $90 instead of at $200.

ST is not truly unlimited data. Hasn't been since they started making smart phones. After 2GB you run the threat of being throttled or discontinuation of service for excessive usage. That is with both ATT sim, T-Mobile SIM, and ST branded phones. All three of which I have used and recieved threats from ST for over usage past the point of 1.5-2 GB.

Sent from my Verizon Droid DNA

 

[xlDeMoNiClx]

The people that do this are douchebags, but sadly they have every right to do so. Once they buy them, they can do whatever they want with them. If by some mistake I found myself owning an iPhone I'd do the same thing. lol

 

[androidluvr2]

ST is not truly unlimited data. Hasn't been since they started making smart phones. After 2GB you run the threat of being throttled or discontinuation of service for excessive usage. That is with both ATT sim, T-Mobile SIM, and ST branded phones. All three of which I have used and recieved threats from ST for over usage past the point of 1.5-2 GB.

I understand about throttling, which is why I continue to pay a premium price for my Verizon unthrottled unlimited data plan. You are getting unlimited data, though if you never have to pay any overage charges no matter how much data you use. What you are not getting is unlimited data at HSPA+ or 4G LTE speeds.

Also, I don't think it is the MVNOs that are able to throttle their subscribers; it is the wireless carriers that are doing the throttling. The MVNOs don't have access to the network's infrastructure that is required to throttle.

And AT&T throttles their remaining unlimited data plan subscribers at 3GB, so really the only difference between unlimited and 3GB data plans is no overage charges on unlimited and with 3GB plans, you can get more than 3GB at HSPA+ or 4G LTE speeds, you just have to pay for it.

 

[dpham00]

Lucky You!!
Let us know what you think!

I pay just under $45 for my share of the Verizon family plan (including taxes and discount) for unlimited unthrottled 4glte. I am limited in minutes and use Google voice for texts. For me, the Unlimited unthrottled 4glte is well worth it since I have used over 60gb a month before.

With regards to pricing, the op should have researched better, the straight talk att sim issue had been going on for some time. I always do research before buying, that is how I got my Verizon Galaxy Note II for $37,albeit partially a pricing error, others have gotten it for $50. If course, I could have bought it straight from Verizon for $300...

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II

 

[dchawk81]

I understand about throttling, which is why I continue to pay a premium price for my Verizon unthrottled unlimited data plan. You are getting unlimited data, though if you never have to pay any overage charges no matter how much data you use. What you are not getting is unlimited data at HSPA+ or 4G LTE speeds.

Also, I don't think it is the MVNOs that are able to throttle their subscribers; it is the wireless carriers that are doing the throttling. The MVNOs don't have access to the network's infrastructure that is required to throttle.

And AT&T throttles their remaining unlimited data plan subscribers at 3GB, so really the only difference between unlimited and 3GB data plans is no overage charges on unlimited and with 3GB plans, you can get more than 3GB at HSPA+ or 4G LTE speeds, you just have to pay for it.

Actually, ST cut my data without warning. I had to call them to find out why. Heck at first I thought my phone ROM was messed up.

That's why I ditched them and went back to Sprint. I'm the guy who needs the unlimited data more than the fastest data.

 

[androidluvr2]

that is how I got my Verizon Galaxy Note II for $37,albeit partially a pricing error, others have gotten it for $50.

Where do you get those deals?

 

[androidluvr2]

Actually, ST cut my data without warning.

So they completely cut you off from using data entirely?

 

[dchawk81]

I pay just under $45 for my share of the Verizon family plan (including taxes and discount) for unlimited unthrottled 4glte. I am limited in minutes and use Google voice for texts. For me, the Unlimited unthrottled 4glte is well worth it since I have used over 60gb a month before.

With regards to pricing, the op should have researched better, the straight talk att sim issue had been going on for some time. I always do research before buying, that is how I got my Verizon Galaxy Note II for $37,albeit partially a pricing error, others have gotten it for $50. If course, I could have bought it straight from Verizon for $300...

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II

I disagree about OP and searching. No one actually searches "AT&T ST contract dispute" unless they had some kind of inkling and ST wasn't exactly forthcoming about this.

Heck I stay up on things as much as I can and had no idea this was occurring. In fact, I just activated an AT&T sim for my father and the rep mentioned nothing about any dispute or potential for the service to be killed off.

OP's entitled attitude is ridiculous but so are the expectations for people to just know about these things or search for them when the slightest thought there might even be any kind of problem doesn't exist in one's mind.

 

[androidluvr2]

No one actually searches "AT&T ST contract dispute" unless they had some kind of inkling and ST wasn't exactly forthcoming about this.

Go back and read my earlier posts. That is not what you had to search to find the info. All you had to search was "Straight Talk AT&T SIM." Search it now and you will see and these articles are dated at least as far back as 1/27/13.