 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Sprint PCS / July 2004Fair & Flexible
Has anyone tried the new Sprint Fair & Flexible plan? I've heard that it can end up being more expensive than the regular plan. I am a low volume user. Sharon > Has anyone tried the new Sprint Fair & Flexible plan? I've heard that > it can end up being more expensive than the regular plan. I am a low > volume user. > > Sharon If you are a low end user, it should be cheaper for you when you go over your minutes a touch. It can be more expensive than a regular plan, but in saying that, if one continually goes over their F & F minutes, they are on the wrong plan to begin with ... Bob I've heard that it can end up being more expensive than the regular plan. I am a low > volume user. > > Sharon If you are a low volume user, 300/$35f&c, then perhaps the flex plan will allow you to go over the 300 minutes and only pay an extra 11 or 12 cents per minute. The lowest flex plan is 300/$35, so you won't save any more if you have a light volume month and only use 100 minutes. For medium users (500min/$40f&c) the flex plan allows you to save a bit if your usage fluctuates more than 35%, since the flex plan for 500min is $55. If your usage doesn't wildly fluctuate, then it's probably not worth the hassle of worrying about the cumulative minutes you are using during the month. For example, if you are using a maximum of 700 minutes for $50 now(f&c), and switch to a flex plan, that same 700 minutes will cost you $72, $22 more than the old $50 plan. You would have to only use 300-400 minutes for the next couple of months to recoup the extra $22. > I've heard that it can end up being more expensive than the regular plan. I > am a low [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > than the old $50 plan. You would have to only use 300-400 minutes for the > next couple of months to recoup the extra $22. Thanks for the info. I'm buying a new cell phone and switching to Sprint, and wasn't sure which plan would be the best for me. I don't think that I will go over 300 minutes so I'll probably go with the Free and Clear. Sharon Duh ??? It makes no sense to go with the 300 minute Free and Clear. If you go over your 300 minutes, its 40 cents per min, talk 10 min = $4. Fair and Flexible costs you $2.50 for 25 min. If you go over by 50 min on F&C, costs you $20.00 vs $5.00 for F&F. A no brainer. > > I've heard that it can end up being more expensive than the regular plan. I > > am a low [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Sharon That's true if the usage stays pretty low volume. However, if I go with the 500 minutes, which I am also considering, and used almost all of those 500 minutes it would cost me $15 more on the Fair & Flexible Plan. Sharon > Duh ??? It makes no sense to go with the 300 minute Free and Clear. If > you go over your 300 minutes, its 40 cents per min, talk 10 min = $4. Fair [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] >> >>Sharon > That's true if the usage stays pretty low volume. However, if I go with > the 500 minutes, which I am also considering, and used almost all of > those 500 minutes it would cost me $15 more on the Fair & Flexible Plan. > > Sharon Lot of ifs in that paragraph. You said in your prior post you would be going with the 300 F & C plan. You also said that you are a low end user. If you are a low end user, then the F & F plan will save you money, even if you do go over 300 minutes a month a few times during the year, it's still cheaper than a 500 minute user, especially if you will be calling to other SPCS phones and adding PCS to PCS to your plan. Bob If you have never had a wireless phone before, then starting out with the flexible plan for a few months would let you gauge your usage. Based on that usage you can determine if your monthly usage is stable or varies frequently. If it is stable, then the corresponding F & C plan would be good. If is is quite variable, then the flexible would be better. It all boils down to what type of plan fits what you find your calling patterns to be. Someone who already has a wireless phone, probably knows by now what his usage volumes are and can switch to Sprint PCS and start with the Sprint PCS plan that is right for him from the beginning. > That's true if the usage stays pretty low volume. However, if I go with > the 500 minutes, which I am also considering, and used almost all of [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] >>> >>> Sharon > If you have never had a wireless phone before, then starting out > with the flexible plan for a few months would let you gauge your usage. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > what his usage volumes are and can switch to Sprint PCS and start with > the Sprint PCS plan that is right for him from the beginning. Remember, too, that SPCS now has the "Right Plan Promise." Which means that you can sign up for a plan and change it to another within 90 days with a guarantee that there will be no additional commitment. Unless, of course, the plan has a different requirement. And since the rebates on our phones require a two-year commitment, and no plan has more than a 2 year requirement, you should simply be able to swap plans.  SignatureRØß O/Siris I work for Sprint PCS I *don't* speak for them Yah, I still can't decide whether F&F is actually a useful plan offering that *many* people will benefit from, or whether it is just another stupid marketing gimmick that is of no real value. Certainly it seems to only make to a narrow range of customers... In any case, when this F&F schemed was first talked about, it was touted, at least by some, as Sprint's answer to Cingular's RollOver feature -- indeed it was first rumored that Sprint had decided to offer a rollover feature. Then it was stated that Sprint had come up with something BETTER. So who thinks that F&F is or will be a successful offering to compete with RollOver ? Does anyone think that F&F is as desireable as RollOver ? To me these two don't even address the same market: F&F as pointed out here, only makes sense for the low-volume user, whereas RollOver is a feature only offered for the higher volume plans from Cingular and indeed is an incentive to switch to a more costly plan. My own read of the market is that RollOver is much more appealing to the customer (regardless of whether is actually makes any difference in the end), and that F&F doesn't even begin to offer any market competition to RollOver, contrary to the originally rumored premise. >That's true if the usage stays pretty low volume. However, if I go with >the 500 minutes, which I am also considering, and used almost all of >those 500 minutes it would cost me $15 more on the Fair & Flexible Plan. >> Duh ??? It makes no sense to go with the 300 minute Free and Clear. If >> you go over your 300 minutes, its 40 cents per min, talk 10 min = $4. Fair >> and Flexible costs you $2.50 for 25 min. If you go over by 50 min on F&C, >> costs you $20.00 vs $5.00 for F&F. A no brainer. > So who thinks that F&F is or will be a successful offering to compete with > RollOver ? Does anyone think that F&F is as desireable as RollOver ? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > doesn't even begin to offer any market competition to RollOver, contrary > to the originally rumored premise. I think it's got potential. It may fail, and I certainly am in no position to determine that. I think it's more than just low-volume appeal. There has to be a two-pronged "attack", so to speak. If you're on a plan that rolls over month after month after month, you're on too big a plan. And if you're having to "squeeze" into the minutes available each month, then you're on too small a plan. Now, instead of having to guess how many minutes you'll need each month, here's a plan that gives you an option. Now, maybe that option isn't the right answer. But I will defend it as, at least, an attempt to answer that need, and I think it's an interesting one. SignatureRØß O/Siris I work for Sprint PCS I *don't* speak for them >> So who thinks that F&F is or will be a successful offering to compete wit= >h [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >instead of having to guess how many minutes you'll need each month,=20 >here's a plan that gives you an option. Okay, let's take your above statement as the intended market and benefit of F&F. Person A uses an annual mean of 1000 min/month, with a std dev of 500 min/month (computed annually). Person B uses a mean of 500min/month, with a std dev of 300min/month, and Person C uses a mean of 2000min/month with a std dev of 1000min/month. My contention is that F&F is not financially beneficial for any of these scenerios when compared with the standard F&C plans EVEN THOUGH these people would have to choose a F&C that has monthly minutes equal to their (mean + std dev) usage (or more, perhaps even (mean + 2*stddev). Whereas a Rollover option would allow all of these people to simply choose a monthly plan roughly equal to their mean usage. > Okay, let's take your above statement as the intended market and benefit of > F&F. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Whereas a Rollover option would allow all of these people to simply choose a > monthly plan roughly equal to their mean usage. So you mean Cingular's plans are more reasonable for most people? > So you mean Cingular's plans are more reasonable for most people? So be it ... but F&FA is not the only plan a user can choose. Further, even if I wanted too ... I could not choose a Cingular plan, as they don't currently own towers in Minnesota [until the buyout of AT&T WS is complete]. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Okay, let's take your above statement as the intended market and benefit of >> F&F. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >So you mean Cingular's plans are more reasonable for most people? This discussion was NOT about Sprint vs Cingular. It was about whether F&F is an effective competitive response to Rollover and meets the goals of offering an attractive option for those customers that need a plan that is "fair and flexible", i.e. won't gouge you if your usage pattern is highly variable from month to month. My contention is that F&F fails on these counts, that, as implemented, it only makes sense for a very small group, roughly those who mean usage is around 350min with a variance of around 50-100, and the original expectation, that F&F would be BETTER than Rollover is simply not met. > >> Okay, let's take your above statement as the intended market and benefit > >> of [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > original > expectation, that F&F would be BETTER than Rollover is simply not met. So again, if F&F fails, and Rollover is better, then you must be saying Cingular's plans are better than Sprint's especially since Rollover is available at any base rate plan, where as F&F you must start at 300 minutes. <snipped> > This discussion was NOT about Sprint vs Cingular. It was about whether F&F is > an effective competitive response to Rollover and meets the goals of offering [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > mean usage is around 350min with a variance of around 50-100, and the original > expectation, that F&F would be BETTER than Rollover is simply not met. I've noticed that you've posted a few times the comment about those who would benefit by using the F & F plan is a very small group. My question to you is ... how do you know? Do you have the statistical breakout on how many folks who subscribe to SPCS as to their monthly usage? I haven't seen any numbers announced by SPCS, save for those numbers on what the average subscription cost of $60/mo. are, and that figure includes corporate accounts as well. IMHO and without any stats or figures to back me up, the 300 min/mo. crowd is a lot larger than what you are stating. Why else would SPCS add this plan to their service? Bob >>> Whereas a Rollover option would allow all of these people to simply choose a >>> monthly plan roughly equal to their mean usage. >> >>So you mean Cingular's plans are more reasonable for most people? > >This discussion was NOT about Sprint vs Cingular. It was about whether F&F is In effect, it is, since Cingular is the only provider that offers RollOver minutes. >an effective competitive response to Rollover and meets the goals of offering >an attractive option for those customers that need a plan that is "fair and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >mean usage is around 350min with a variance of around 50-100, and the original >expectation, that F&F would be BETTER than Rollover is simply not met. Deb I think most people do not have that high a variable in monthly usage. And I think that most people starting wireless service do not know what there usage will be, so starting with the flexible plan for 2-3 months can be helpful. One does not have to wait until the end of the Advantage Agreement to change plans. >>>So who thinks that F&F is or will be a successful offering to compete wit= >> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Whereas a Rollover option would allow all of these people to simply choose a > monthly plan roughly equal to their mean usage. > I think most people do not have that high a variable in monthly > usage. And I think that most people starting wireless service do not > know what there usage will be, so starting with the flexible plan for > 2-3 months can be helpful. One does not have to wait until the end of > the Advantage Agreement to change plans. But after 3 months with SprintPCS new policies, any plan change requires a new 2 year agreement. >> I think most people do not have that high a variable in monthly >> usage. And I think that most people starting wireless service do not [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > But after 3 months with SprintPCS new policies, any plan change requires > a new 2 year agreement. I actually thought this was the case, but I've been told no - I *specifically* asked when activating my new phone, because I may do a local plan to save money, and then flip to F&C when I get ready to travel. SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. Even it it did, at the end it would total only 2 years and 3 months. Not a long time really. Especially for someone like you and me who have been with them for years already. > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > *specifically* asked when activating my new phone, because I may do a > local plan to save money, and then flip to F&C when I get ready to travel. > > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > *specifically* asked when activating my new phone, because I may do a > > local plan to save money, and then flip to F&C when I get ready to travel. Sorry Steve: As is commonly the case with the lying Sprint reps, you were lied to so they could make a sale. ============= From: Bob Smith (usirsclt@earthlink.net) Subject: Re: New pricing Plan revealed: How fair?? Original FormatNewsgroups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs Date: 2004-05-04 08:04:26 PST ... From SPCS's PR - "Sprint PCS Right Plan Promise - Within the first three months of signing a Sprint PCS Advantage Agreement, new and existing customers can change their service plan to a plan with an equal term without incurring any fees or having to extend or renew the agreement. " Bob =========================== > Sorry Steve: > > As is commonly the case with the lying Sprint reps, you were lied to so > they could make a sale. You're inferring things. Not to say you're wrong, but you can't determine either way from the information quoted. All it covers is the first three months. > ============= > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > =========================== SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. > Even it it did, at the end it would total only 2 years and 3 > months. Not a long time really. Especially for someone like you and me > who have been with them for years already. If I was halfway into my contract would it not extend it another 12 months? SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. Oh, for 6 months into a 1 year Advantage Agreement instead of 3 months into a 2 year Advantage Agreement, that would be even shorter, totaling only 1 year and 6 months, again not very long, especially for long time customers already. >> Even it it did, at the end it would total only 2 years and 3 >>months. Not a long time really. Especially for someone like you and me >>who have been with them for years already. > > If I was halfway into my contract would it not extend it another 12 months? > Oh, for 6 months into a 1 year Advantage Agreement instead of 3 > months into a 2 year Advantage Agreement, that would be even shorter, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > > If I was halfway into my contract would it not extend it another 12 months? Depends on the Plan change. Some features (7 PM Nights for instance) require 2 year contracts. > Oh, for 6 months into a 1 year Advantage Agreement instead of 3 > months into a 2 year Advantage Agreement, that would be even shorter, > totaling only 1 year and 6 months, again not very long, especially for > long time customers already. It's a matter of opinion there... and simple plan changes that don't involve taking promotions should NOT extend your contract, IMHO. SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. On the other hand, why make a change to improve your plan, if you don't intend to stay with them for a while? >> Oh, for 6 months into a 1 year Advantage Agreement instead of 3 >>months into a 2 year Advantage Agreement, that would be even shorter, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It's a matter of opinion there... and simple plan changes that don't > involve taking promotions should NOT extend your contract, IMHO. > On the other hand, why make a change to improve your plan, if you > don't intend to stay with them for a while? I do, but I don't want to be locked into a contract. I never thought I'd leave Verizon, and then I moved out here and had problems. I'm stuck with them until the end of August if I don't want to pay an ETF, which I don't because I don't have an extra $175 lying around right now. We were just offered 8pm nights and weekends and 350 minutes and unlimited PCS to PCS for $35, which gives us 8pm instead of 9pm and 50 more peak minutes than we are currently getting on my wife's plan, for exactly the same price. We didn't take it because we try to avoid being under a carrier's thumb, no matter which carrier it is. I ignored my own guidelines by signing a two-year agreement with Sprint this month. It's the first time in years that I've done that with anyone... -- JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. Just a couple of days ago I went from 400 to 500 minutes for $40 with still the 8pm. It required a 1 yr. AA, but only on the primary phone not on Add-A-Phone. I'm still debating the PCS-to-PCS, but we were not using more than the 400 as it was so??? >> On the other hand, why make a change to improve your plan, if you >>don't intend to stay with them for a while? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) > Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. > Just a couple of days ago I went from 400 to 500 minutes for $40 > with still the 8pm. It required a 1 yr. AA, but only on the primary > phone not on Add-A-Phone. I'm still debating the PCS-to-PCS, but we > were not using more than the 400 as it was so??? So making a simple plan change that doesn't require taking a promotion *does* extend your contract? (I'm still trying to get a conclusive answer on this. Although $45/1000 is a nice deal, if I'll just have to change plans again next time I travel, I'll stick with $50/700. $45/1000 is NOT a nationwide plan.) (Another note: Our phones are separate. We intentionally avoided getting a shared-minute plan.) SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. Did you get the e-mail I sent you on 11 Jul? >> Just a couple of days ago I went from 400 to 500 minutes for $40 >>with still the 8pm. It required a 1 yr. AA, but only on the primary [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > (Another note: Our phones are separate. We intentionally avoided getting > a shared-minute plan.) > Did you get the e-mail I sent you on 11 Jul? Yup - just read it. About 8:10am Pacific SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. $45/1000 is NOT a nationwide plan.) No, but $40/750 thru retentions is. > $45/1000 is NOT a nationwide plan.) > > No, but $40/750 thru retentions is. Yes, that'll go over well. I just signed up for a two-year agreement and now I'm calling Retention? And I can't use the excuse that I'm going to cancel if I ask them about a plan on a *second* line that I'm about to activate, so it wouldn't have worked before buying the phone either. :) SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. >> $45/1000 is NOT a nationwide plan.) >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I'm about to activate, so it wouldn't have worked before buying the > phone either. :) You would be surprised what you can get just for asking. I got 2500/$100 on a new account in May. > I think most people do not have that high a variable in monthly >usage. If this is true and Sprint were really sincere about eliminating the penalty for customers not being able to correctly guess their monthly as their current advertising suggests, then: 1) implementing Rollover would not hurt them at all and would help those customers (few as you suggest) that DO have highly variabe usage, 2) they should eliminate the $0.40 overage charges and simply treat the plans as "minimum usage commitments" rather than buckets of minutes. That is, if I buy into 500min at $40 (8 cents/min), and I go over 500min, I continue to be charged at 8 cents/min for the overage, not $0.40. > And I think that most people starting wireless service do not >know what there usage will be, so starting with the flexible plan for >2-3 months can be helpful. That point would be valid if F&F scales reasonably for higher usage, but it does not. A new customer who doesn't know what his usage will be, but it will be somewhere between 1000-1500 mins, is TOTALLY not served by F&F. Only customers "who don't know" in the 300-500 range would find F&F even only as a starter plan. 1) Implementing rollover for so few people would cost more than it is worth. 2) $1., 80 cents, 40 cents per minute overage fees would be fine for the lower level $35, $40, $50 plans, and lower proportionately for the higher level plans. 3) I don't think a customer new to wireless would already know that his usage would be anywhere near 1000 minutes, much less 1500 minutes. Unless someone is starting out whole hog and getting a second phone for the wife and a third for a teenager. >> I think most people do not have that high a variable in monthly >>usage. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > F&F. Only customers "who don't know" in the 300-500 range would find > F&F even only as a starter plan. > 1) Implementing rollover for so few people would cost more than it > is worth. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > minutes. Unless someone is starting out whole hog and getting a second > phone for the wife and a third for a teenager. Thats exactly why the whole pricing structure of cellular carriers is unreasonable. > > 1) Implementing rollover for so few people would cost more than it > > is worth. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Thats exactly why the whole pricing structure of cellular carriers is > unreasonable. And I haven't seen anybody holding a gun to your head to have one. If you don't like the pricing structure (which is not unreasonable), don't use one. > And I haven't seen anybody holding a gun to your head to have one. If you > don't like the pricing structure (which is not unreasonable), don't use one. Can't speak for other carriers, but Sprint and Verizon both allow you to check your balance online, or on the phone (#MIN for Verizon, *4 for Sprint) and the usage records are usually accurate to within 24 hours. I *always* keep tabs on my usage. SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. > Okay, let's take your above statement as the intended market and benefit of > F&F. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Whereas a Rollover option would allow all of these people to simply choose a > monthly plan roughly equal to their mean usage. That's an easy contention to make if you're not willing to do the math behind it. First, Fair & Flexible vs Free & Clear: Let's just take an imagined 5 months. Someone uses 600 normally, and that pretty much is the norm for 3 months. But, on two of the months, they have something, and their usage doubles. 1200 minutes twice in that time. First, Fair & Flexible. That's $75 for each of three months, and $107.50 twice. $440 over 5 months. Free & Clear we need two alternatives: cover the minutes, or cover the norm. Norm: A 700 minute plan at $50/month, for $250 total, but two months each with 600 minutes in overage. At $0.40/minute, that's $240, twice. $250+$240+$240. $730. Total: 1400 minute plan. $80/month. $400. Cheaper, eh? But that's $80 every single month, and you're using less than half of what you're paying for every month. And with F&F you don't have to worry about those minutes eventually disappearing. Cingular: The only plan that would cover that kind of usage is the 1250 minute plan. Same $400, basically. Anything lower won't cover the minutes. I can't find out what overage costs with Cingular once those rollover minutes are gone, but I'd wager it very rapidly eats up the cost "advantage" involved. The difference is not nearly so large as you allege, AND the rollover plan that would cover this level of usage doesn't allow for 7PM night hours (just to use one example). No, I think your contention is far more arguable than you claim. SignatureRØß O/Siris I work for Sprint PCS I *don't* speak for them >> My contention is that F&F is not financially beneficial for any of these >> scenerios when compared with the standard F&C plans EVEN THOUGH these [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >plan that would cover this level of usage doesn't allow for 7PM night >hours (just to use one example). Well that's interesting. I guess its a "glass half-empty, half-full" scenerio. I think your example is a little extreme, jumping from 600min to 1200min on a couple of months, but OK, let's take ALL of what you say above. You are basically saying that F&F under those conditions didn't fair so bad compared with the F&C "overbuy" nor the Cingular Rollover plans, coming in at "only" 10% higher than either ($440 vs 400 vs 400). Fair enough (...not...) but the way I see it is that under these extreme conditions you have in fact shown that F&F is in fact worse than these two other, admittedly outrageous strategies, i.e. if I norm at 600 min, I still am better off buying 1400min or 1250min/month at $80 than going with F&F. I personally don't think that makes F&F look very good. As I've said, F&F is the worse of all the options out there. Its all right here in your most telling statement: "But that's $80 every single month, and you're using less than half of what you're paying for every month. And with F&F you don't have to worry about those minutes eventually disappearing." In this statement you are giving negative spin to the "overbuying F&C" strategy saying that $80/month is too much to pay and seem to be implying that buying 1400min when you only use 600min norm is a waste. Then you seem to be refering to the RollOver option and "worrying about minutes disappearing". But with the F&F plan with norm at 600 is $75 as you say, I don't see that $75 is a whole lot less than the $80 you are complaining about. And as far as the "waste" of buying 1400min when you only norm 600min, that just points to how *unfair* F&F is, since I am STILL AHEAD of F&F cost wise even if I go to the ridiculous extreme of overbuying that many minutes. The "waste" is not some ecological/moral issue that I should feel bad about, not like buying a whole ream of paper even if I only need just one sheet. The "waste" issue in fact points out how contrived the way plans are structured and how little F&F does to help. All you've shown here is that with F&F you get 600min for $75 whereas with F&C you get 1400min for $80. I think most customers will see that as ridiculous. And the idea that F&F is doing me a favor by eliminating the "worry" of having RollOver minutes disappearing, by not giving over-bought minutes back to me in the first place is simply laughable. If Sprint is so concerned about the customer "using less than half of what you're paying for", then it should TRULY develop a competitive response to RollOver: Either give us back in some form the minutes we've over-bought (i.e. RollOver), or, if it is so enthralled with the (un)Fair and Flexible feature, then at least allow F&F to be an option that can start at ANY of the F&C plan points, i.e., let someone whose "norm" is 700min/mon, start F&F at 700min/$50 rather than 350min/$35. <snipped> > But with the F&F plan with norm at 600 is $75 as you say, I don't see that > $75 is a whole lot less than the $80 you are complaining about. And as far [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > with F&F you get 600min for $75 whereas with F&C you get 1400min > for $80. I think most customers will see that as ridiculous. Your whole discussion, which you started a while ago, is trying to compare F & F to the amount of minutes YOU normally use Daniel. This F & F plan doesn't work for high minute users. It's designed for low end users ... who might go over their 300 minutes a few times a year. By the way, you've have also mentioned in the past several times that low end minute users are a very small percentage of SPCS's customer base, and for at least two times, I've asked you to back up your statement and haven't seen a reply of how you developed that %. > And the idea that F&F is doing me a favor by eliminating the "worry" of > having RollOver minutes disappearing, by not giving over-bought minutes [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > F&C plan points, i.e., let someone whose "norm" is 700min/mon, start F&F > at 700min/$50 rather than 350min/$35. Who knows? They might be considering that. Then again, they might not, after looking at the actual use of monthly minutes for that bracket of customers and whether they normally exceed 700 AT minutes in a month's time. Bob ><snipped> > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >doesn't work for high minute users. It's designed for low end users ... who >might go over their 300 minutes a few times a year. Nope, sorry. This discussion start, at least my part, when I was reminded that it was rumored here that F&F was developed as a competitive response to RollOver. In fact it was touted as being *better* than RollOver. I have present here why I think that F&F is not better at all and not an effective competitive response to RollOver. This discussion never had anything to do with *me*. I have never said what my usage is and you have no idea about it. Yes, in my postings I have said that F&F only makes (some) sense for low minutes users. I offered up the range of 300-350 +- 50-100min. So in that I *agree* with you that F&F might help those customers. However, O/Siris countered saying that he thought F&F also make sense for higher usage customers. The example of 600min/month with 2 months at 1200min is HIS example, not mine. He shows that F&F is "only" 10% more costly than overbuying F&C. I think this very example shows exactly that F&F isn't attractive at all when a customer can instead save money (albeit 10%) by buying 1400min/month. >By the way, you've have also mentioned in the past several times that low >end minute users are a very small percentage of SPCS's customer base, and >for at least two times, I've asked you to back up your statement and haven't >seen a reply of how you developed that %. Nope again, I have *never* said that low-end min users are a very small percentage. Never said that, sorry. I never would. What I did say, is exactly as above, and in agreement with you, that F&F only might help a narrow range of customers, that is those customers whose usage is around 300-350 with variability in the 50-100min range. I mean it to say narrow in the sense of the possible spectrum of usage, not necessarily in the total distribution of the population. Now I can't tell, given your postings whether you think F&F is actually better than RollOver or even just over-buying F&C or not. That is the discussion here, not my usage. I would have liked to have seen Sprint actually offer RollOver, as was originally rumored here, as I think I would benefit from it, but alas... >> And the idea that F&F is doing me a favor by eliminating the "worry" of >> having RollOver minutes disappearing, by not giving over-bought minutes [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >looking at the actual use of monthly minutes for that bracket of customers >and whether they normally exceed 700 AT minutes in a month's time. And a lot of people will change to save 3 percent, some for 1 percent. >><snipped> >> [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] >>looking at the actual use of monthly minutes for that bracket of customers >>and whether they normally exceed 700 AT minutes in a month's time. > ><snipped> > > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > do with *me*. I have never said what my usage is and you have no idea > about it. The only one here who brought up a Rollover rumor was you, in the 7-4-04 11:16AM EDT post. You said "In any case, when this F&F schemed was first talked about, it was touted, at least by some, as Sprint's answer to Cingular's RollOver feature -- indeed it was first rumored that Sprint had decided to offer a rollover feature." You were the one who brought it up ... What's more, before you made that comment, that rumor you mention above, wasn't discussed in this newsgroup. > Yes, in my postings I have said that F&F only makes (some) sense for > low minutes users. I offered up the range of 300-350 +- 50-100min. So in [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > of the possible spectrum of usage, not necessarily in the total distribution > of the population. Yes ... you did ... in your 7-4-04 post, @ 11:16AM EDT. You said ... "Yah, I still can't decide whether F&F is actually a useful plan offering that *many* people will benefit from, or whether it is just another stupid marketing gimmick that is of no real value. Certainly it seems to only make to a narrow range of customers..." Now, how do you define a narrow range? I define it as a small percentage and questioned you on that twice ... and now a third time. > Now I can't tell, given your postings whether you think F&F is actually > better than RollOver or even just over-buying F&C or not. That is the > discussion here, not my usage. I would have liked to have seen Sprint > actually offer RollOver, as was originally rumored here, as I think I > would benefit from it, but alas... I've never discussed it, as it's never been mentioned ... or offered by SPCS. I don't speculate on things not mentioned in terms of SPCS's wireless service. I still don't see where it ... rollover, was mentioned as something SPCS might offer prior to your comment. Lots of comments about Cingular's rollover plans, but nothing on a rumor that SPCS would do something like that. Bob >The only one here who brought up a Rollover rumor was you, in the 7-4-04 >11:16AM EDT post. You said "In any case, when this F&F schemed was first [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >You were the one who brought it up ... What's more, before you made that >comment, that rumor you mention above, wasn't discussed in this newsgroup. The rumor was mentioned here many months ago, perhaps a month before F&F was formally announced. But it really doesn't matter as it is reasonable to compare F&F to RollOver and other similar options just on the face of it. >> Nope again, I have *never* said that low-end min users are a very small >> percentage. Never said that, sorry. I never would. What I did say, is exactly [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Now, how do you define a narrow range? I define it as a small percentage and >questioned you on that twice ... and now a third time. I explained what I meant be narrow range above, as narrow in the range of possible usage patterns. If that was misleading I'm sorry. In this posting of mine you quote, I am clearing *wondering* (still can't decide) how *many* people *will* benefit and saying that it only *seems* to make sense to a *narrow range*. I am definitely not asserting any hard facts in these posting. Indeed I'm sure you know it would be very difficult to figure out just exactly how many people would actually *benefit* from F&F. "Benefit" is defined as paying less (or you may even wish to include more subjective values, like "feeling freer or less encumbered") when on F&F vs not. So simply coming up with the number or percentage of customers that have a 300-500min/mon plan will not answer the question of how many people will benefit from F&F. So several issues are being mixed up here: how *many* people would *benefit* from F&F (I am wondering...), vs does F&F *benefit* only a very *narrow range* of usage patterns (which we have begun to analyze with these usage examples). While it will be difficult to determine just how many people would benefit from F&F, we can "do the math" and see what the behavior of F&F would be over a broad range of usage patterns. It is on this basis that I have stated that F&F doesn't do as well as RollOver or a number of other reasonable possibilities such as shifting F&C plans automatically, or allowing a F&F option starting from any F&C plan point, or changing F&C to mean "minimum usage commitment" with overages being charged at the same rate as the F&C within plan usage, or as someone else here, charging overages at the F&F rate. Doing the math I think shows that F&F ends up worse than all of these other possibilities. And as far as being satisfied with F&F as a "first shot" effort that comes within 10% of RollOver, well, as we've seen here, it takes 5 minutes to "do the math" and surely Sprint did more than that in developing F&F an could easily see what the performance/behavior of F&F would be compared with other possibilities. So I'm not really ready to congratulate Sprint for a fine first effort with F&F. > >The only one here who brought up a Rollover rumor was you, in the 7-4-04 > >11:16AM EDT post. You said "In any case, when this F&F schemed was first [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > customers that have a 300-500min/mon plan will not answer the question > of how many people will benefit from F&F. I believe it will. This plan was designed for the low end user ... and not for anyone who regularily uses 500 or more minutes a month. For those folks at 500 or more minutes a month, then they need to go with a higher F & C plan. Keep in mind that wireless plans change all the time, depending on what the competition is doing. Look what SPCS did to compete with Verizon & ATTW when they initiated the FCA option last year. Or in offering 7:00 PM N&W. Who knows, maybe SPCS will market other higher minute F & F plans, once they see the subscription numbers and usage on that new plan. Until they do though, it's all conjecture. > So several issues are being mixed up here: how *many* people would > *benefit* from F&F (I am wondering...), vs does F&F *benefit* only a very [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > here, charging overages at the F&F rate. Doing the math I think shows that > F&F ends up worse than all of these other possibilities. As you mentioned Rollover is another issue, another way to market plans for subscribers. Seems like it's cumbersome for both the customer and the company to keep track of, considering there is a 12 month limitation to use those minutes. What's more, if there is a high number of rollover minutes, then the customer is wasting his money on a higher plan, and should drop down to the next bucket of minutes. > And as far as being satisfied with F&F as a "first shot" effort that comes > within 10% of RollOver, well, as we've seen here, it takes 5 minutes to > "do the math" and surely Sprint did more than that in developing F&F an > could easily see what the performance/behavior of F&F would be compared > with other possibilities. So I'm not really ready to congratulate Sprint for a > fine first effort with F&F. I am, as it's start towards ending expensive extra minutes used on a low end plan. Bob >I believe it will. This plan was designed for the low end user ... and not >for anyone who regularily uses 500 or more minutes a month. For those folks >at 500 or more minutes a month, then they need to go with a higher F & C >plan. Actually, for Sprint customers, anyone who consistently uses over 350 minutes a month, since at that 350 minutes it is $40.00 per month, the same as the 500 minute Free and Clear plan. Every minute over 350 at that point makes the plan more expensive than the 500 minute plan. >As you mentioned Rollover is another issue, another way to market plans for >subscribers. Seems like it's cumbersome for both the customer and the >company to keep track of, considering there is a 12 month limitation to use >those minutes. What's more, if there is a high number of rollover minutes, But, as minutes drop off, new ones are bucketed. >then the customer is wasting his money on a higher plan, and should drop >down to the next bucket of minutes. True. In my case, I'll probably go with the Nation 450 plan. That will cover me with the ability to bucket about 100-250 minutes at least for most of my months. Unless I'm out of the office at a client's, I don't use the phone much during "anytime minutes", averaging about 100-250 minutes per month. For the months that I do go to extremes (about 3-4 months a year I hit the 700 - 800 mark), I'll still be paying my $40.00 per month and using the bucketed minutes. >I am, as it's start towards ending expensive extra minutes used on a low end >plan. Not really, unless you never go over 350 minutes a month. Deb > Actually, for Sprint customers, anyone who consistently uses over 350 > minutes a month, since at that 350 minutes it is $40.00 per month, the > same as the 500 minute Free and Clear plan. Every minute over 350 at > that point makes the plan more expensive than the 500 minute plan. Consistent is the key word here. This plan was not designed for people who consistently use more than 350 minutes per month. Rather, it was not designed for people that consistantly use their minutes at all. It is meant for people that are very inconsistant in their usage and would likely have frequent overages or a huge number of unused minutes on a fixed minute plan. Anybody else, need not apply. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Actually, for Sprint customers, anyone who consistently uses over 350 >> minutes a month, since at that 350 minutes it is $40.00 per month, the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >likely have frequent overages or a huge number of unused minutes on a >fixed minute plan. Anybody else, need not apply. Exactly. However, there are those in here that claim it is a good plan for just about anyone. -- Deb > >> Actually, for Sprint customers, anyone who consistently uses over 350 > >> minutes a month, since at that 350 minutes it is $40.00 per month, the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Exactly. However, there are those in here that claim it is a good > plan for just about anyone. Really? I don't recall anyone who said it was workable plan for everyone. Bob > Exactly. However, there are those in here that claim it is a good > plan for just about anyone. Who? I have not noticed this. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Exactly. However, there are those in here that claim it is a good >> plan for just about anyone. > >Who? I have not noticed this. Read O/Siris' post of the 12th. -- Deb >>Who? I have not noticed this. > > Read O/Siris' post of the 12th. Rob has never claimed that this plan is good for almost anybody. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >>>Who? I have not noticed this. >> >> Read O/Siris' post of the 12th. > >Rob has never claimed that this plan is good for almost anybody. No, he did not use those exact words....however, the tone of his post, and his actual statement, indicated that users were better off with F&F, even if that actually cost a bit more than a F&CA plan, since it did not "waste minutes". -- Deb > >>>Who? I have not noticed this. > >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > F&F, even if that actually cost a bit more than a F&CA plan, since it > did not "waste minutes". He said nothing of the sort, in any tone ... Bob >> >Rob has never claimed that this plan is good for almost anybody. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >He said nothing of the sort, in any tone ... Reread the post, in its entire context.....discussing high usage customers, a partial quote: ---- Total: 1400 minute plan. $80/month. $400. Cheaper, eh? But that's $80 every single month, and you're using less than half of what you're paying for every month. And with F&F you don't have to worry about those minutes eventually disappearing. ----- The tone of the post implies that he recommends F&F over any other plan that could be cheaper, but would wind up "wasting minutes". -- Deb > Reread the post, in its entire context.....discussing high usage > customers, a partial quote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > -- What you post as a quote indicates to me the description of a single customer's usage. Do you disagree? - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> -- > >What you post as a quote indicates to me the description of a single >customer's usage. Do you disagree? Yes, I disagree. Taken in context to the entire conversation, including the post he was responding to, it read to me as a defense and recommendation for F&F over other plans, even if the plan was actually cheaper that F&F would replace. Others apparently interpreted it differently. I merely voiced my own. -- Deb > >> >Rob has never claimed that this plan is good for almost anybody. > >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > The tone of the post implies that he recommends F&F over any other > plan that could be cheaper, but would wind up "wasting minutes". I re-read that post, and what you conveniently left out, is that he was doing a comparison of SPCS plans to Cingular's rollover plan, and a comparison of F&F and F&C, not F&CA as you said. In addition, his numbers and comparisons only work with those conditions and in a five month period, not for a whole year. Bob >I re-read that post, and what you conveniently left out, is that he was >doing a comparison of SPCS plans to Cingular's rollover plan, and a >comparison of F&F and F&C, not F&CA as you said. In addition, his numbers >and comparisons only work with those conditions and in a five month period, >not for a whole year. He compared three plans, and concluded that the F&F plan was "better", even though it cost more. Apparently your mileage varied. -- Deb > He compared three plans, and concluded that the F&F plan was "better", > even though it cost more. No, I did *not*. I said they were comparable. SignatureRX_ O/Siris -+- **A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice.** -Thomas Paine. The Rights of Man. 1792- >> He compared three plans, and concluded that the F&F plan was "better", >> even though it cost more. > >No, I did *not*. I said they were comparable. Ok. Last time. I posted *my* interpretation of your comments. If I misunderstood, then so be it. The wonders of usenet, misunderstandings happen. -- Deb > Ok. Last time. I posted *my* interpretation of your comments. If I > misunderstood, then so be it. > > The wonders of usenet, misunderstandings happen. Is that an apology? It seems like you owe him one to me. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Ok. Last time. I posted *my* interpretation of your comments. If I >> misunderstood, then so be it. >> >> The wonders of usenet, misunderstandings happen. > >Is that an apology? It seems like you owe him one to me. If I offended him, tyes, I apologize for any offense I may have given. That I interpreted his post, based on my reading, differently than the general concensus, or even how he may have intended when he wrote it, I don't see that an apology is warranted. Misunderstandings are common in this type of forum, where the each post is essentially an observation of, or response to, another post, ultimately resuting in a conversation conducted in one sided bursts of dialog. If an apology was required for every instance of a different interpretation of a post than the poster intended, I suspect the servers would be flooded very quickly. -- Deb >He compared three plans, and concluded that the F&F plan was "better", >even though it cost more. > >Apparently your mileage varied. as we all know - "BETTER" is a very hard thing to define. Better for me is different than better for you. -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net > No, he did not use those exact words....however, the tone of his post, > and his actual statement, indicated that users were better off with > F&F, even if that actually cost a bit more than a F&CA plan, since it > did not "waste minutes". Deb, no offense intended, but you clearly have NOT read enough of his posts. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> F&F, even if that actually cost a bit more than a F&CA plan, since it >> did not "waste minutes". > >Deb, no offense intended, but you clearly have NOT read enough of his >posts. <shrug> I read what I read on the 12th....his post in response to another poster's contention that the F&F plan was not a viable option for users over 500 minutes per month. O/Siris disputed the claim, with the "math" to prove it, and <unless I misread his conclusion> recommended that the F&F plan was more beneficial to users even though the other two plans he quoted were actually cheaper but "wasted minutes". -- Deb > <shrug> I read what I read on the 12th....his post in response to > another poster's contention that the F&F plan was not a viable option [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the other two plans he quoted were actually cheaper but "wasted > minutes". As it turns out, F&F is not a good plan for anybody who uses their minutes in a consistant manner [from month to month]. It seems to be a good plan ONLY for those people that use minutes with a very large standard deviation over a period of time. Perhaps a plan with teenagers on them would be a case where F&F would be favorable. However, the quote you supplied was clearly referring to one customer and not all customers in general. You "appear" to be a USENET regular by your use of "<shrug>" and the manner which you conduct yourself, so I have a hard time believing you are so naive as to believe he was making such a general comment. - -- Thomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >customers in general. You "appear" to be a USENET regular by your use >of "<shrug>" and the manner which you conduct yourself, so I have a hard I've been a usenet regular since about 1995 (or '96, when did Agent first come out?)...and a bbs sysop and user for longer than that.... >time believing you are so naive as to believe he was making such a >general comment. Again, apparently my interpretation was different than that of others. -- Deb > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Rob has never claimed that this plan is good for almost anybody. Thanks, Tom. I hate being miquoted. Thanks for the backup. I said it was an interesting plan. Signature-~- RØß O/Siris -*- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792 -*- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ I do not think that the flexible plan is similar to rollover except that they are both phone plans, but they are not really similar. >>The only one here who brought up a Rollover rumor was you, in the 7-4-04 >>11:16AM EDT post. You said "In any case, when this F&F schemed was first [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > with other possibilities. So I'm not really ready to congratulate Sprint for a > fine first effort with F&F. > I offered up the range of 300-350 +- 50-100min. So in > that I *agree* with you that F&F might help those customers. However, > O/Siris countered saying that he thought F&F also make sense for higher > usage customers. No, that ignores something I've said from my very first post in this thread: I don't know that works, or that it should. Only that it was an interesting attempt to change the terms of the discussion. And I think coming within 10% of Rollover as a first response is clearly a good first shot. Maybe F&F needs to get tweaked. Maybe quite a bit. I still stand by my original assertion, though: I think it's a great first effort. SignatureRØß O/Siris ~+~ "A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice." Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792 > Maybe F&F needs to get tweaked. Maybe quite a bit. I still stand by > my original assertion, though: I think it's a great first effort. Certainly an interesting deal and worth looking at in certain situations, but I still just think SPCS should offer rollover under a different name. :) SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. I do not think that rollover is a good option. However having free and clear with the overages billed at free and flexible rates instead of by each minute would be interesting. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Certainly an interesting deal and worth looking at in certain situations, > but I still just think SPCS should offer rollover under a different name. :) RØß Vargas wrote: > No, that ignores something I've said from my very first post in this > thread: I don't know that works, or that it should. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Maybe F&F needs to get tweaked. Maybe quite a bit. I still stand by > my original assertion, though: I think it's a great first effort. I think that clearly, Sprint realizes that F&F in its current incarnation isn't the answer for consistently high-volume users. If they did think so, then the F&C plans would be off the table by now. Why have them if F&F is supposedly good for everyone? F&F, IMO anyway, is clearly for cases where usage patterns aren't stable or predictable. It doesn't make sense for those of us who do have stable calling patterns and know that our usages don't fluctuate from one month to next, but for someone whose patterns do change wildly, then there is a small but real savings in using F&F compared to choosing a high volume plan and sticking with it... and a HUGE savings over choosing a low-minute plan and just sucking up the overage charges on high-use months. Signaturee-mail address fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my address in order to reply. >F&F, IMO anyway, is clearly for cases where usage patterns aren't stable >or predictable. It doesn't make sense for those of us who do have [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >choosing a low-minute plan and just sucking up the overage charges on >high-use months. Not necessarily. Comparing F&F to F&C(500), if no more than 300 minutes are used in any month within a year, the F&F plan will cost 60.00 less annually. Use greater than 300 but less than 325 for 12 months, the savings drops to 30.00 Use 326 - 350 minutes for 12 months, and the plans are equal in cost. Use 376 - 400 minutes for 12 months, the F&F costs 60.00 more annually. Use 500 minutes per month for 12 months, F&F costs 180.00 more annually than F&C(500) Use 600 minutes per month for 6 months out of 12, and the two plans again break even, drop that to 5 months, and even with overage at .40 per minute, F&C(500) is cheaper. Use 550 minutes for 12 months, and even with overages, the plans break even. Unless you consistently exceed by more than 50 - 100 minutes (which means you are on the wrong plan anyway), on the F&C(500) plan, you will pay less than F&F. Bump the plan to F&C(700) and the differences are greater yet. Use between even at a consistent use of 500 minutes per month for 12 months, on the F&C(700) plan you will save 60.00 annually over 12 months. Bounce around between 501 and 700 minutes for the 12 months and you will pay 270.00 more per year for the F&F plan. Use 750 minutes per month for 12 months, and even with the 50 minute per month overages, you are still saving 60.00 per year annually by staying on the F&C plan. Unless you really spike over plan minutes by more than 100 per minutes a month for more than one or two months in the annual cycle, it is cheaper for F&C. If you consistently use more than 600 minutes per month, F&C(1100) is cheaper than F&C. 600 minutes per month for 12 months is again, a break even between the two plans. I have been able to find very few advantages to the F&F plan, primarily when the user will spike considerably over included plan minutes in two or three months of the year. Even a low grade, steady 50 minutes or less over plan minutes is cheaper on F&C. Deb >And the idea that F&F is doing me a favor by eliminating the "worry" of >having RollOver minutes disappearing, by not giving over-bought minutes >back to me in the first place is simply laughable. Correct. As part of the equation, you must factor in that unused minutes do rollover and stay for 12 months before dropping off. So, unless you are consistently going over your plan minutes, you are always banking minutes for most months. As the "old" minutes drop off, you are banking "new" minutes for the current period. For most of us, we have a pretty good idea of what our "norm" is. Get on a plan that covers that norm, and unless you go over that norm several months in a row, you will always have enough minutes banked to cover that overage, and so will not pay overage charges those months. >feature, then at least allow F&F to be an option that can start at ANY of the >F&C plan points, i.e., let someone whose "norm" is 700min/mon, start F&F >at 700min/$50 rather than 350min/$35. I have not been able to find any savings with the F&F plan for any user that uses more than 300 minutes a month, and does not go over 350 minutes more than once or twice a year. On the contrary, F&F gets fairly expensive for most users compared to other plans. Deb I've been out of town for a week, so am coming in to this late, but...your math and conclusions appears to be off a bit. In my figures, I am also factoring in $5.00 per month unlimited pcs to pcs calling (since the plan with Cingular includes that, and we would use that in our house), and the $5.00 per month I pay to get "free roaming", again included in Cingular's plan. Also, in the Jacksonville, FL area, the 600 minutes (with no additional options) would cost 65.00 per month vs the 75.00 it would cost in Michigan., so my figures start at 65.00 plust the $10.00 per month for the options I would need to match the Cingular offer. >That's an easy contention to make if you're not willing to do the >math behind it. First, Fair & Flexible vs Free & Clear: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Total: 1400 minute plan. $80/month. $400. Cheaper, eh? Actually, factoring in the $10.00 extra to get the pcs to pcs and "free roaming", it will cost 10.00 more for the 5 month period, under a two month at 1200 minutes scenario. However, each month over 2 that the use is more than 600 minutes and including the 2 months you stipulate at 1200, and the window closes rapidly and again, the plan is ultimately cheaper than F&F. If with Sprint, and the choice is one of the two plans, yes, it would make sense, under your scenario, to use the 1400 minute plan, since it actually costs less, even with the unused minutes, if you are a user who will consistenly use more than 600 minutes in a given month. >But that's $80 every single month, and you're using less than half of >what you're paying for every month. And with F&F you don't have to >worry about those minutes eventually disappearing. No, with F&F, the customer does not have to worry about the minutes disappearing, but, each month more than 600 minutes are used, the costs are greater than they would with the Free and Clear plan. Is the point to not "waste" minutes or money? There is a difference in the two. >Cingular: The only plan that would cover that kind of usage is the >1250 minute plan. Same $400, basically. Anything lower won't cover >the minutes. I can't find out what overage costs with Cingular once Incorrect, the 850 plan would cover it quite nicely. The over |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message