[HN Gopher] T-Mobile switches users to pricier plans
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       T-Mobile switches users to pricier plans
        
       Author : mfiguiere
       Score  : 130 points
       Date   : 2023-10-12 18:06 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | Iulioh wrote:
       | Well, at least they give thw opportunity to keep the old one ,
       | even with a minor hassle.
       | 
       | As an Italian the big carriers are infamous for unilaterally
       | adding to the bill without any recourse
        
       | laweijfmvo wrote:
       | > "We are not raising the price of any of our plans; we are
       | moving you to a newer plan with more benefits at a different
       | cost."
       | 
       | This shouldn't be legal?
        
         | tyingq wrote:
         | I'm not sure they can even show "more benefits".
        
       | josh_carterPDX wrote:
       | It is amazing to me that the government continues to allow these
       | mergers when time and time again it shows that the consumer end
       | up paying more, not less.
        
         | yukkuri wrote:
         | It's because government is run by people from/with close ties
         | to the businesses and take massive bribes that we quaintly call
         | "campaign contributions" from them.
         | 
         | Any excuse to allow the mergers will be found because of that.
         | 
         | In a word, it's plutocracy.
        
           | r053bud wrote:
           | Exactly this. Our leaders are directly compensated for
           | supporting monopolies.
        
           | josh_carterPDX wrote:
           | Absolutely. Didn't mean for my reply to make it seem like I
           | was too naive to understand WHY it happens. Just amazed that
           | it keeps happening and has happened for decades.
        
         | HumblyTossed wrote:
         | Because when the company is talking to regulators, the
         | conversation isn't about the benefits to the consumer, the
         | conversation is how to word it so the consumer doesn't realize
         | they're being fucked.
        
       | swatcoder wrote:
       | Almost 25 years ago, Fucked Company did such a beautiful job of
       | aggregating countless parallel stories as the dot-com bubble
       | started to burst. It made it so easy to see what was going on in
       | aggregate.
       | 
       | There's an opportunity for the same sort of thing now, but
       | tracking all the desperate scrambling for revenue as the "we'll
       | make money after the next 10x users, promise" loses its ground as
       | a business model.
        
         | Scoundreller wrote:
         | And when they started getting filtered out, they created a
         | "luckedcompany" clone with a slightly different logo and string
         | replaced any "fuck" into" luck" before presenting to the user.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | I had thought lucked company was for positive announcements?
        
         | jbm wrote:
         | Even the memes from then still apply.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | LOL @ priced out renters!
         | 
         | It's a new paradigm, and everybody who doesn't buy, now, will
         | be priced out forever. Anybody who does buy will be rewarded
         | with a lifetime of riches, as their property will continue its
         | 20-30% yearly price appreciation.
         | 
         | Renters, and anybody born in a future generation, will not be
         | able to afford a $10,000,000 starter home in 15 years. They
         | will live in tent cities, and Hondas.
         | 
         | This asset bubble is different than all of the previous and
         | other asset bubbles - it will never slow down, or pop. The
         | gains are permanent.
        
         | rootsudo wrote:
         | Yep, and they have spin off boards from FC but they are all a
         | shell of itself. It's interesting how it goes around again.
        
       | crazygringo wrote:
       | How is this even remotely legal?
       | 
       | I'm genuinely asking. They must have consulted with lawyers and
       | believe it _is_ legal.
       | 
       | But even if their TOS say they reserve the right to change
       | anyone's plan at any time... that seems like one of those clauses
       | that judges always strike down.
       | 
       | This is just flat-out providing a different service than you
       | contracted for. This is like if I order a $200 SSD from Amazon
       | and instead they ship me a $300 SSD and charge me $300, and there
       | are no returns if I don't cancel the order before it's fulfilled.
       | 
       | I don't understand how this is legal. So I genuinely want to
       | know:
       | 
       | 1) Is this actually legal? If so, why haven't laws been passed
       | against this kind of corporate bait-and-switch behavior?
       | 
       | 2) Is it illegal but just doesn't get enforced? If so, why not?
       | 
       | 3) It is illegal, and there will probably be a class action suit,
       | but T-Mobile has calculated they'll still make more profit
       | including a settlement? In which case, why aren't settlements
       | more punitive?
        
         | runako wrote:
         | > I don't understand how this is legal.
         | 
         | It's presumably laid out in the contract that their users sign.
         | IANAL but I understand contract law gives wide latitude for
         | parties to make agreements to do things which are generally
         | legal.
         | 
         | One could imagine a legal regime that prohibited price or
         | service changes in otherwise-legal contracts. Of course, that
         | also might not be ideal. For example: a vendor used by the
         | provider suddenly changes the capabilities of a piece of
         | equipment such that the original service sold by the provider
         | can no longer be provided at any price. What everybody wants in
         | that scenario is for you to be seamlessly moved to the closest
         | reasonable alternative, not for your service to automatically
         | terminate. Similarly, most people will gripe about a $10/mo
         | change in price, but against the likely alternative of
         | automatic cancellation, the increased fee is what _most_ people
         | will prefer.
         | 
         | And again, 100% of them will have agreed to this exception-
         | handling clause when they signed up.
         | 
         | > This is like if I order a $200 SSD from Amazon and instead
         | they ship me a $300 SSD and charge me $300, and there are no
         | returns if I don't cancel the order before it's fulfilled.
         | 
         | There is a material difference in changing prices (say) 5 years
         | after a contract was signed and ordering a specific item at a
         | specific price a week or two earlier. IANAL but I believe the
         | ordering of goods via the Internet is in fact covered by
         | different laws in a way that services are not. Which again,
         | makes some sense given that service contracts frequently have a
         | term of "forever," during which time everything about the world
         | can change. (Pretty sure my current phone contract was signed
         | over 10 years ago. I'm glad they changed my plan to let me use
         | LTE, for example.)
        
           | crazygringo wrote:
           | But contact law also strikes down contact provisions _all the
           | time_.
           | 
           | Generally speaking, contracts between two parties who know
           | what they're doing, with lawyers, are pretty iron-clad.
           | 
           | But TOS with consumers are not. Unreasonable/abusive TOS
           | clauses are struck down quite frequently. Things like
           | consumer protection laws supersede anything in a TOS.
           | 
           | And consumer protection laws are precisely the kind of thing
           | meant to stop companies from playing bait-and-switch with
           | consumers like this.
        
             | runako wrote:
             | Absolutely agree re: abusive TOS clauses. My question is
             | this: if you were on a panel evaluating whether it's more
             | abusive to a) migrate customers to a plan that's $10 more
             | or b) end their service because the vendor no longer offers
             | that service, which would you vote for?
             | 
             | Note that consumer panels will have less ability to force a
             | vendor to set prices or provide specific services, so there
             | will not be the third option of c) force the vendor to
             | continue providing the service at the contracted price.
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | That's why in Europe abusive and surprising (to an
               | informed party) terms and condiations are invalid. Quite
               | aome legal disputes around those so.
        
               | runako wrote:
               | Curious -- how do services raise prices? Is the
               | presumption that a carrier has to give notice, then the
               | user has to opt in or their service automatically
               | terminates?
               | 
               | > in Europe abusive and surprising (to an informed party)
               | terms and condiations
               | 
               | It can't be surprising to any informed party that prices
               | change. Especially right now, it cannot be argued in good
               | faith that a price increase was surprising to anyone.
               | 
               | Does the user have to opt in each time the service
               | changes (for ex if 2G service gets dropped)? Who decides
               | what requires a user approval?
        
             | dawnerd wrote:
             | A lot of these older plans were marketed as no contract
             | plans. That was tmobiles whole thing for a while. No more
             | contracts. Obviously there still is via terms and such but
             | it's a pretty gray area I'm sure lawyers would be willing
             | to argue in court. They also claimed prices would never go
             | up (on your plan).
        
               | cmeacham98 wrote:
               | "No contract" in the telco world means no minimum length
               | clauses (as opposed to something like a "12 month
               | contract" plan, where you legally agree to stay on the
               | plan for at least one year), it doesn't literally mean
               | there isn't a contract.
        
               | arcticbull wrote:
               | Right but in the same way I can end the contract and walk
               | away at any time, I would imagine it's totally kosher for
               | T-Mobile to do the same. It's not like either party is
               | locked in.
        
             | pazimzadeh wrote:
             | Can you share cases where TOS with consumers was struck
             | down? Thanks very much.
        
         | paulpan wrote:
         | Older plans (pre-2022) should be under the "Un-Contract":
         | https://www.t-mobile.com/news/press/uncontract-carrier-freed...
         | 
         | Notably "By contrast, the Un-contract is all give, no take. You
         | can keep your existing Simple Choice plan and we won't raise
         | your rates. As part of this commitment, customers on existing
         | Simple Choice promotional plans - like the Un-carrier's ultra-
         | popular 4 lines for $100 with up to 10 GB of 4G LTE data - can
         | keep them for as long as they're T-Mobile customers."
         | 
         | Seems like a shut-and-close case for a class action lawsuit.
         | Whoever made the decision to push ahead with this seems to have
         | missed some internal due diligence - or there's some tiny legal
         | footnotes I'm missing.
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | T-Mobile forces customers into arbitration unless you've
           | opted out. Probably straightforward to arbitrate based on
           | terms, but I recommend filing an FCC complaint. Regulators
           | light a fire.
           | 
           | https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
           | 
           | Go to Phone > Billing (or go directly from here)
           | https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-
           | us/articles/3600012...
           | 
           | Phone Issues: Advertised Rate
           | 
           | Text box content:                   T-Mobile is forcing me to
           | upgrade my mobile plan even though I signed up with
           | their  advertised Price-Lock
           | https://www.t-mobile.com/support/account/price-          lock
           | There is no option to opt-out as of $today's_date. This is a
           | violation of          my contract, and they are relying on
           | the fact that most consumers do not have          enough
           | knowledge/time to call in and argue with customer
           | representatives for          hours.
           | https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-will-
           | migrate-          customers-higher-cost-plans
           | T-Mobile is also forcing customers who want to opt out and
           | keep to their          current contracted plan to listen to
           | an unsolicited sales pitch -- this may          violate
           | telephone advertisement and spamming laws.              While
           | the company claims that customers can opt out, multiple
           | customers have.             reported that phone reps refuse
           | to allow opt-out when they call, which is in          general
           | disingenuous behaviors. I believe that the FCC should force
           | T-Mobile          to provide this option through email or an
           | online menu.
           | 
           | FTC complaint can be made here: https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _T-Mobile forces customers into arbitration unless you
             | 've opted out. Probably straightforward to arbitrate based
             | on terms, but I recommend filing an FCC complaint.
             | Regulators light a fire_
             | 
             | File an arbitration claim [1]. Complain to the FCC, and
             | copy the FTC [2] as well as your state consumer affairs
             | regulator [3]. (Ideally, send letters via mail.)
             | 
             | [1] https://apps.adr.org/SimpleFile/faces/SimpleFile.jsf
             | 
             | [2] https://www.ftc.gov/media/71268
             | 
             | [3] https://www.usa.gov/state-consumer
        
         | bxparks wrote:
         | I will guess that a class action is off the table because they
         | imposed a mandatory binding arbitration clause (yup,
         | https://www.t-mobile.com/responsibility/legal/terms-and-
         | cond...). And forced binding arbitration is legal because the
         | Supreme Court seems to be owned by corporations and
         | billionaires.
         | 
         | I suppose we could file complaints with the FTC and the FCC,
         | but I suspect it will not help. After all, they probably got
         | thousands of complaints about Comcast, but that didn't prevent
         | Comcast from taking over the media world.
         | 
         | T-Mobile used to be one of the better ones. But it was probably
         | inevitable that they would succumb to the enshittification
         | process that is devouring the corporate world.
        
         | kotaKat wrote:
         | Aren't the contracts now technically month-for-month, with the
         | "contract" being the device payment agreement?
         | 
         | As they themselves weasel out of it: they're not "raising
         | prices", they're "moving you to a newer plan with more benefits
         | at a different cost".
        
         | 8note wrote:
         | T-Mobile also just changes plan details on the fly.
         | 
         | Eg, one day my account stopped being able to log in to Canada
         | to use the Canadian data on my account.
         | 
         | Only changing plans fixed it
        
         | theogravity wrote:
         | They promise not to increase the rate on your _current_ plan
         | and get around this by just changing the plan you 're on vs
         | increasing the rate of your current plan.
         | 
         | https://www.t-mobile.com/support/account/price-lock
         | 
         | > Price Lock is our guarantee that we won't raise the price of
         | your qualifying rate plan for new accounts. You can rest
         | assured that T-Mobile won't raise the price of your regular
         | monthly rate plan price for current unlimited talk, text, and
         | data on our network on Go5G Plus, Go5G Next, Go5G, Base
         | Essentials, Essential Savings, Essentials, Magenta, MAX, 55+,
         | Military, First Responder, Unlimited and Lite Home Internet,
         | and Business Unlimited plans as long as you're a T-Mobile
         | customer and keep your plan. And customers don't have to do
         | anything to get in on this - everyone who activates after April
         | 28, 2022, with an eligible plan gets Price Lock.
        
       | meepmorp wrote:
       | What a great way to convince me to never consider T-Mobile!
        
         | heroprotagonist wrote:
         | I hope you like the only competitor network.
         | 
         | This partial monopoly is why they can do this. All of those
         | 'virtual operators' are given deprioritized service but somehow
         | still count as competition when their business is evaluated.
         | Yet another instance of regulatory capture at work.
        
           | jabroni_salad wrote:
           | AT&T is ruthless but Verizon lets a bunch of mvno operators
           | on qci 8.
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pri.
           | ..
        
       | sn_master wrote:
       | RoboForm auto-upgraded my "perpetual" license that I bought over
       | 10 years ago and now it's in "read-only" mode (doesn't allow
       | auto-fill or adding new passwords) unless I pay them a MONTHLY
       | subscription AND it synced all my passwords to their server
       | without my consent.
        
       | toomuchtodo wrote:
       | Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37852456
        
       | slaw wrote:
       | Before T-Mobile merge with Sprint, there were $25/month postpaid
       | plans from both T-Mobile and Sprint.
        
       | rescbr wrote:
       | In my country, as you can't just switch customer's plans at will,
       | the telcos structured them as limited-time offers that have no
       | commitment or penalties on top of a regulated base pricing which
       | is like 2-4x the going rate.
       | 
       | After a year the offer ends and you can keep your current plan at
       | the expensive base rate or you can move to a new plan/offer to
       | get the discounted market rate.
       | 
       | That way they can justify increasing rates over inflation and
       | changing contracts at will.
        
       | altairprime wrote:
       | T-Mobile won't be prepared to process opt-outs until October
       | 17th, so calling before then is unlikely to be an effective use
       | of time. Consider waiting five days. Otherwise, the unprepared
       | call center support representative will not know the magic code
       | to bind your account with.
        
       | theogravity wrote:
       | Opt-out instructions:
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/174uelk/megathread...
       | 
       | Edit:
       | 
       | I called T-Mobile and they said they can't use the code until the
       | 17th, and they'd send out a text message informing of the
       | upcoming changes with the ability to opt out. Sounds really
       | shady.
        
         | post_break wrote:
         | They lied to you. I opted out yesterday.
        
           | theogravity wrote:
           | How did you ask them to do it?
        
             | post_break wrote:
             | I called and asked them to apply SOC code: grnoptout
             | 
             | They may play dumb so you may have to escalate.
        
               | theogravity wrote:
               | Glad you managed to get it added on. I think I'll just
               | switch to Google Fi if I have to start playing mind
               | games.
        
           | justin66 wrote:
           | Of course, the person you talked to may have lied to _you_
           | and humored you to get you off the phone.
        
             | post_break wrote:
             | No I see it on my account. https://i.imgur.com/wWzlMfP.jpg
        
       | MandieD wrote:
       | I continue to be amazed at how much abuse my fellow Americans
       | take from their telcos.
       | 
       | I pay 13 EUR/4 wks (yes, German mobile operators are a bit
       | slippery, too) for 3 GB + unlimited domestic talk and text. If I
       | wanted to waste more time on my mobile, 20 GB would run around
       | 30/4 wks.
       | 
       | Of course, this is with a paid-for handset. I've never had a
       | contract over here.
       | 
       | What is the most economical, yet reliable way to receive (and
       | occasionally send) SMSes on a US number while abroad, preferably
       | with a way to transfer an existing US cell number in?
        
         | tiltowait wrote:
         | It's especially surprising when you consider that cheaper plans
         | exist, probably using the same network you're on, and that
         | changing carriers can be extremely simple.
         | 
         | I switched from T-Mobile 3 months ago (when they announced
         | changes to the autopay discount) to Mint. My bill went from
         | $60/mo to $180/yr (breaks down to $15/mo, and I think claiming
         | something is $15/mo when it's actually $180/yr should be
         | illegal, but that's an argument for another day). It's "only" a
         | 5GB plan in comparison to whatever I had before, but my highest
         | month so far has been 1.06GB.
         | 
         | Transferring took 15 minutes. It's the same network.
         | 
         | Sure, many people don't switch out of ignorance, but I know
         | people for whom the reason is simply laziness (because I told
         | them about the cheaper plans).
        
           | arjvik wrote:
           | I switched to Mint for a year and had serious issues with
           | deprioritization. I would get "E" service in the middle of a
           | busy city, forcing me to repeatedly reboot my phone. Perhaps
           | it was just a Pixel 7 issue?
        
         | dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
         | Google Voice, which is free.
        
       | tmobileiscrack wrote:
       | Maybe every T-Mobile customer should switch to Mint Mobile or
       | other low cost carriers en masse. They will lower their prices
       | right after the mass exodus.
       | 
       | However they are counting on the misleading practice that most
       | people are busy and won't ask questions.
       | 
       | Lot's of nonsense gets pushed like this.
        
         | commoner wrote:
         | T-Mobile acquired Mint Mobile in March 2023.
         | 
         | https://www.npr.org/2023/03/15/1163743380/t-mobile-buys-mint...
         | 
         | Even before the acquisition, Mint Mobile was just a T-Mobile
         | MVNO. While Mint Mobile has less expensive plans than T-Mobile,
         | and switching would reduce T-Mobile's profit margin, the
         | quality of Mint Mobile's service is also lower:
         | 
         | > Mint runs on T-Mobile networks so will get the same coverage
         | except it does not get domestic roaming (on AT&T, Verizon, US
         | Cellular, and other small regional carriers such as ACS/GCI in
         | Alaska) that T-Mobile post-paid or pre-paid does. Mint is
         | "deprioritized" (on QCI 7) meaning it will get slower speeds
         | than most T-Mobile plans (that are on QCI 6). How much slower
         | depends on the exact second how many people are on the same
         | tower & band compared to the capacity of the tower/band, but
         | with speeds usually between 20-90% of T-Mobile Magenta/Pre-Paid
         | customers at the same time & location.
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/mintmobile/comments/wm1ynh/mint_mob...
         | 
         | The U.S. wireless carrier industry is in desperate need of more
         | competition. Price increases (such as this one and T-Mobile's
         | earlier removal of the autopay discount for credit card
         | purchases) are exactly what happen when corporate consolidation
         | (T-Mobile merging with Sprint) reduces the number of high-end
         | carriers from 4 to 3.
        
       | nikolay wrote:
       | I am tired of T-Mobile! Constantly getting breached and
       | increasing prices while offering less! And being arrogant to call
       | themselves "uncarrier." Yeah, you're not a carrier, but a scam!
        
       | thumbsup-_- wrote:
       | They also send their previous customer's accounts in debt
       | collection even if they have paid in full when closing the
       | account. Happened with me. Got a debt collector's letter a few
       | years later. I had the proof of payment but still ended up paying
       | again to prevent damage to my credit. Later on found on reddit
       | that they have done this with many people, some of whom didn't
       | have means to pay again, so ended up taking a credit hit.
        
         | elashri wrote:
         | I have a genuine question in that case. I am no longer a
         | customer so will I be able to take them to small claim court
         | and provide a proof of payment and collect my money again?
         | 
         | Or will the mandatory arbitration will still hold?
        
         | schemescape wrote:
         | Given the history of data breaches, my first thought is that
         | this could have been a scam. For anyone else in this position
         | (esp. if you're fairly certain it's _not_ a scam), here is some
         | info on what you can do:
         | https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/fake-abusive-debt-collecto...
         | 
         | Edit: namely, this part:
         | 
         | > your debt collection rights, including your right to get
         | information about the original creditor if you ask for it
         | within 30 days of getting validation information from the
         | collector
        
       | adwi wrote:
       | Final straw for me.
       | 
       | Just called and canceled after 15+ years--shockingly, they were
       | loath to actually provide the unlock code to port my number out.
       | Switched to an MVNO on the same network that's >50% cheaper.
        
         | post_break wrote:
         | 13 years here, what MVNO did you pick? I'm looking at visible
         | and US cellular.
        
           | LeifCarrotson wrote:
           | 9 years (and 2-3 lines) here, moving to Mint. Should have
           | done this a long time ago...
        
             | ajcoll5 wrote:
             | I've got bad news for you.
             | 
             | https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-to-
             | acquire-m...
        
               | oluwie wrote:
               | I've been using Mint mobile for over a year and never had
               | a problem with them, even during "peak" times. I expect
               | the $30 a month I pay for unlimited everything is about
               | to drastically change.
        
             | theogravity wrote:
             | Be aware of data prioritization with MVNOs.
             | 
             | Mint uses the T-Mobile network but is one tier below
             | T-mobile subscribers:
             | 
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pr
             | i...
             | 
             | Lower QCI values are better.
             | 
             | > QCI 6 is applied to all of T-Mobile's postpaid and
             | prepaid plans (except for Essentials) and Google Fi which
             | also has QCI 6 as well. This means if you want the absolute
             | best from T-Mobile, you want to get a plan directly from
             | them. Even their cheap $10 prepaid 1GB Connect plan has
             | priority data.
             | 
             | QCI 7 is applied to T-Mobile's Essentials plan as well as
             | all MVNOs (besides Google Fi) such as Mint, Metro By
             | T-Mobile, US Mobile GSM LTE, and Tello.
        
           | 1-6 wrote:
           | I went to Verizon (but they're not an MVNO), T-Mobile is
           | cheap but Verizon is one of those legacy carriers that won't
           | pull quick tricks on you. From time to time, Verizon will try
           | to compete with T-Mobile and offer low priced tiers. Once you
           | get into those, you can grandfather in and wait while the
           | dust settles so you can decide who to move to for the next-
           | generation network.
           | 
           | AT&T and Verizon had really sweet deals at the beggining of
           | the year to pull alway some of TMO's customers but now that
           | TMO raised their prices, ATT and VZW also unsweetened their
           | plans.
           | 
           | TL;DR - T-Mobile grandfathers but you'll have to call T-Force
           | every time to fight for it. AT&T & Verizon don't hassle their
           | customers.
        
             | post_break wrote:
             | Verizon literally started charging a fee for people on
             | grandfathered unlimited data plans. They pull tricks all
             | the time.
        
               | 1-6 wrote:
               | Some of these price increases sound reasonable ($2-$3):
               | https://tmo.report/2023/07/exclusive-verizon-is-once-
               | again-i....
               | 
               | It's better than promising free for life and then pulling
               | the plug altogether on the service.
        
           | DavidPeiffer wrote:
           | No idea where you're located, but my family has been on US
           | Cellular for about 30 years. In Iowa, they've consistently
           | had the best service available in rural areas.
        
       | post_break wrote:
       | How to opt out, call customer service, ask them to apply SOC
       | code: grnoptout to your account. If they don't know what that
       | means ask for a manager to apply the SOC code.
        
       | jihadjihad wrote:
       | Slightly OT: Has anybody had any luck with an MVNO, like Visible
       | or Mint Mobile? I want to ditch Verizon because $98/mo for spouse
       | and me to use 2GB between us both is just the height of insanity
       | in 2023.
        
         | ZekeSulastin wrote:
         | I've used Visible for a couple of years now and they're fine -
         | I'm currently on their lower tier plan and it works well
         | enough. I do route my phone's traffic through a Wireguard
         | endpoint on my home network, though, which stops the usual
         | video throttling.
         | 
         | Try it for a month before porting if you can - in the end it is
         | still an inexpensive mvno and customer service is one of the
         | places they cut costs.
        
         | delecti wrote:
         | I've been happily using Ting Mobile for about 8 years, and my
         | bill is always under $45 for two lines, 2GB, 1000 SMS, and 100
         | minutes (it's lower when we use less). It seems that the plan
         | I'm on isn't available for new customers, but it looks like the
         | new plans might actually be even cheaper.
        
         | xmddmx wrote:
         | Was happy with Ting mobile for years, spending about $30/month
         | total for 2 lines. Had to leave Ting as they don't support
         | eSIMs and recently moved to Consumer Cellular, which I'm quite
         | happy with - about 4GB of data for 2 phones for $35/month
         | total.
        
         | pwg wrote:
         | Happy with Tello: https://tello.com/
        
         | oluwie wrote:
         | Been using Mint Mobile for a year and love it. Have had
         | absolutely 0 issues with them even during peak times. Switched
         | from a T-Mobile paying $70 a month for unlimited everything to
         | $30 a month with Mint for pretty much the same service.
         | 
         | Damn you Ryan Reynolds for selling out.
        
       | hammock wrote:
       | Verizon just did this to us
        
       | HumblyTossed wrote:
       | I'm on a grandfathered ATT plan. I'll bet you ATT is going to try
       | this soon if TMo gets away with it.
       | 
       | Does anyone use the prepaid plans from Mint or Visible, etc? What
       | are the downsides?
        
         | wlesieutre wrote:
         | Mint users will be deprioritized if the network is congested,
         | hasn't been a problem for me but in some areas or during large
         | events it could be
        
       | theogravity wrote:
       | If you're on T-Mobile, you might want to consider Google Fi.
       | According to this data prioritization guide, Google Fi gets the
       | same quality of service as standard-tier T-Mobile plans (lower
       | QCI values are better, and both are on QCI 6):
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pri...
       | 
       | > QCI 6 is applied to all of T-Mobile's postpaid and prepaid
       | plans (except for Essentials) and Google Fi which also has QCI 6
       | as well. This means if you want the absolute best from T-Mobile,
       | you want to get a plan directly from them. Even their cheap $10
       | prepaid 1GB Connect plan has priority data.
       | 
       | Google Fi also gives you unlimited 5G / LTE data when roaming
       | outside the US as well. For their unlimited plus plan, it looks
       | to be on par with the T-Mobile magenta plan in terms of price.
       | 
       | https://fi.google.com/about/plans
        
         | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
         | Trusting something as important as my phone number to an
         | organization as fickle as Google seems insane.
        
           | otachack wrote:
           | Agreed. Ten bucks says they'll sell off Fi within the next 10
           | years. See Google Domains sell off to Squarespace as a recent
           | example.
        
             | hipsterstal1n wrote:
             | And there is no telling who'll buy it... probably a company
             | like Comcast / Xfinity which is already universally hated.
        
           | theogravity wrote:
           | Good point. Customer service is non-existent with Google as
           | well.
        
       | genpfault wrote:
       | Whew, nothing about the Connect[1] plans!
       | 
       | [1]: https://prepaid.t-mobile.com/prepaid-plans/connect
        
       | kornhole wrote:
       | One of the best things I did to make myself somewhat immune to
       | this stuff: 1. Decouple my phone number from my carrier by
       | transferring my number to a low cost VOIP provider such as
       | voip.ms, jmp.chat.. 2. Switch to a prepaid plan and pay for a
       | whole year for a good deal. Pay as you go plans are also a good
       | option.
       | 
       | I pay less than $20 a month for a few phone numbers and 5GB data
       | per month. It is also a more private solution since the carrier
       | does not know who I am. I can switch providers with relatively
       | low friction.
        
       | aceazzameen wrote:
       | If I have to go through the trouble to opt-out of this, then I
       | might as well go through the trouble of contacting and joining
       | another carrier (Mint, Google Fi, Pulse, whatever). This nonsense
       | helped me realize I'm already paying too much with T-Mobile.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-10-12 21:01 UTC)