We posted last month that Verizon wants the FCC's help in forcing cable companies to accept cancellations from competitors, as opposed to directly from the customer. That way, if you wanted to leave your cable company to get your video services from Verizon, you would just call Verizon, sign up, and then Verizon would take care of terminating your cable account. Currently, you would have to call Verizon to sign up and call your cable company to cancel.
Now Comcast wants the FCC to investigate, among other things, the customer retention policies of phone companies. Why? Because the same way you can get television from a phone company (like Verizon or AT&T) you can get phone service from a cable company (like Comcast). Comcast is worried that certain retention policies may be anti-competitive.
From what I've dealt with when I want to cancel a non-contract service, the retention department wouldn't appear to be anti-competitive. They usually try to figure out why I'm canceling and then usually offer me something for free to try and change my mind. Canceling a TV subscription will probably get you an offer for a free month of HBO. Canceling a mobile phone account and you'll probably be offered a free month of wireless web access. Are those really anti-competitive? Are retention offers like that really any different than being offered cable internet for only $19.99 per month...for the first three months? When you look at it, retention offers and introductory ones are pretty much the same thing - a special deal to make you pick them over someone else. The only difference is that one is used before you're their customer and the other one is used when it looks like you might not be for much longer.
So, what would be an anti-competitive retention policy? If they made you fax in a notarized letter stating that you want to terminate your service, that might be. Or if you have to call one department to request a cancellation. Then another to get a confirmation code and then call the first one back with the confirmation code so that they can cancel your service. Basically, anything that would make canceling seem like such an ordeal that you decide not to would, to me, seem like anti-competitive behavior.
Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, but in the same way that the FCC is meeting to define just what constitutes "reasonable network management," it would be nice if e could have a clear definition regarding what retention practices are and are not anti-competitive.
Now Comcast wants the FCC to investigate, among other things, the customer retention policies of phone companies. Why? Because the same way you can get television from a phone company (like Verizon or AT&T) you can get phone service from a cable company (like Comcast). Comcast is worried that certain retention policies may be anti-competitive.
From what I've dealt with when I want to cancel a non-contract service, the retention department wouldn't appear to be anti-competitive. They usually try to figure out why I'm canceling and then usually offer me something for free to try and change my mind. Canceling a TV subscription will probably get you an offer for a free month of HBO. Canceling a mobile phone account and you'll probably be offered a free month of wireless web access. Are those really anti-competitive? Are retention offers like that really any different than being offered cable internet for only $19.99 per month...for the first three months? When you look at it, retention offers and introductory ones are pretty much the same thing - a special deal to make you pick them over someone else. The only difference is that one is used before you're their customer and the other one is used when it looks like you might not be for much longer.
So, what would be an anti-competitive retention policy? If they made you fax in a notarized letter stating that you want to terminate your service, that might be. Or if you have to call one department to request a cancellation. Then another to get a confirmation code and then call the first one back with the confirmation code so that they can cancel your service. Basically, anything that would make canceling seem like such an ordeal that you decide not to would, to me, seem like anti-competitive behavior.
Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, but in the same way that the FCC is meeting to define just what constitutes "reasonable network management," it would be nice if e could have a clear definition regarding what retention practices are and are not anti-competitive.
"It is important that we do everything we can to maximize consumer choice and reduce rates." FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a statement on Friday. "In today's competitive telecommunications market we must make sure that there is a level playing field for all companies to compete."Quote from Reuters.
Leave a comment