In my opinion, it isn’t fair to the customer. Here’s something I just sent in email:
AT&T is expecting their customers who aren’t appropriately covered by the AT&T cell towers to pay to augment their network, $150 up front, plus $20 per month ($240 a year.) The product will then use your home broadband connection, which you also pay for (and AT&T is now taking advantage of,) to provide better service for your mobile phone, as well as the phones of anyone in your general area.
To me, if it is necessary for a customer to use one of these devices because AT&T’s coverage is spotty in their home, then AT&T should lease it to the customer for a nominal monthly fee, similar to a cable box.
Comments
Hey Matthew,
In my opinion, it isn’t fair to the customer. Here’s something I just sent in email:
AT&T is expecting their customers who aren’t appropriately covered by the AT&T cell towers to pay to augment their network, $150 up front, plus $20 per month ($240 a year.) The product will then use your home broadband connection, which you also pay for (and AT&T is now taking advantage of,) to provide better service for your mobile phone, as well as the phones of anyone in your general area.
To me, if it is necessary for a customer to use one of these devices because AT&T’s coverage is spotty in their home, then AT&T should lease it to the customer for a nominal monthly fee, similar to a cable box.
posted by: Andru Edwards · 9/23/09