Quote:
Originally Posted by nerys
I am entitled to what I paid for. What I paid for was a $42 a month service that I can use any TECH compatible phone with.
Sprint is taking that away without cause.
The fact that you consider this to be me having entitlement issues is  ing and scary.
MPAT - while it is interesting that you feel that way about sero customers (how are we different than any other customer?)
besides that animosity you have you are 100% correct
So let me ask all you guys this.
Lets say your paying for your nice expensive $69.99 plan and 3 years from now the "normal" price for this service some how becomes $99.99
sprint decides to FORCE people to goto the $99.99 plan by making all NEW PHONES that are cool and desirable unavailable to anyone on the $69.99 plan "just because" not because they are tech incompatible.
Will you then proclaim that those $69 accounts are whiners and have entitlement issues? how would it be ANY different.
Sprint made an offer and then wants to renig on that offer and so takes actions that are without cause to FORCE people to change.
again if sprint was DROPPING all 1x and 3g service and switching wholesale to 4g and decided this new network costs more.
OK thats fine. I could understand that. Sprint does not "owe me" access to the new network.
That is not the case here. They are doing this for ONE REASON. to force people to give up their grandfathered accounts without cause.
you can scream moan and proclaim and decree all you want we are whiners and have entitlement issues but it does not change this is WRONG.
Period |
Is there any reason every sentence has to be like its own paragraph when you write?
No, you never signed a contract that said ANY tech compatible phone must be allowed on SERO, and even if the contract DID say that, which it doesn't, you are most likely out of contract, so Sprint could cancel your service effective immediately if they want. They owe you NOTHING. Two parties signed a contract. Each lived up to their end of the contract IN FULL. Past that, both you and Sprint can terminate involvement at any time.
You just love making scenarios don't you. If the people signed a 3 year contract for 69.99 with sprint, and both parties fulfilled that contract, then at the end of the contract, Sprint is within their rights to offer a nicer, newer phone at the increased rate of 99.99. The customer then has to make a choice, to either keep their 70 dollar plan and the old phone, or upgrade to a newer and better phone for 100 dollars a month. How is this hard to understand? We don't live in some communist regime where the government dictates to companies what they can sell and for how much. If you don't like the company you are involved with, CHOOSE a different company.
You do understand how contracts work right? Ever sign up with a cable company where for a year they offer you service at like 30 dollars a month, and then at the end of that contract if you want to continue service its like 60 dollars a month if you want to sign up again because you are no longer a new subscriber? Its pretty common.