When I moved in 2007 my biggest concern was how strong my cell signal was. Every house we looked at I had my phone out checking signal strength. I wasn't going to go back to landline.
Luckily, I had a decent line of sight on WA and when I upgraded to HD I had to have the dish moved to be able to get EA, but it was doable.
Such as?Many people will make a decision on a new home location based on if broadband is available there or not. At least if you have broadband you can get a device connected to it that allows you to use your cell phones.
And then there are extenuating circumstances,some people don't have a choice of where they get to live.Whether it be due to work finances or whatever.I still maintain,if said sat company can no longer provide service,then the customer shouldn't be forced to pay for something they no longer receive.An example,say I mow your yard for set fee,you move,you still have to pay me because I no longer get to mow your yard.Simply unfair.
I agree with this also. While I understand that a contract is a contract, it's not like the OP tried to use his moving as an excuse to try and get out of his contract. He made a good faith attempt to continue service at the new location and was told by Dish (or an agent of) that it can't be done. This should be a valid reason to be let out of the contract, provided all reasonable attempts have been made...And then there are extenuating circumstances,some people don't have a choice of where they get to live.Whether it be due to work finances or whatever.I still maintain,if said sat company can no longer provide service,then the customer shouldn't be forced to pay for something they no longer receive.An example,say I mow your yard for set fee,you move,you still have to pay me because I no longer get to mow your yard.Simply unfair.
I think sprint is the only provider that has this currently and is a very neat idea!!Such as?
I know, right? S0 many people in this thread saying that.For all of those of you who say this person signed a contract and should stick with it... Bullsh!t.
Meh, I was hoping for something more universally available. Tied to the provider and only works in certain areas, not all with broadband access. I just checked my in-laws address and it doesn't work there, even though I know they have broadband internet with Suddenlink.I think sprint is the only provider that has this currently and is a very neat idea!!
http://now.sprint.com/airave/?ECID=vanity:airaveaccesspoint
Many people will make a decision on a new home location based on if broadband is available there or not. At least if you have broadband you can get a device connected to it that allows you to use your cell phones.
Such as?
I think sprint is the only provider that has this currently and is a very neat idea!!
http://now.sprint.com/airave/?ECID=vanity:airaveaccesspoint
AT&T had the first one, I have it. Microcell. Works exactly as advertised. For customers who have been with them awhile you can get one for free if your address does not have good coverage. (Actually the cost plus $50 off your bill) Better than the Sprint one, you can have up to 15 devices, and will allow a Tablet even if you do not have phone service on it as long as you have AT&T data on it, and it's 4G not 3G. I also think more simultaneous calls can be made with it. It has allowed me to drop our landline service. Times when/if the internet is down or we lose power we do have a bar or so of service.
http://www.att.com/standalone/3gmicrocell/?fbid=KWu6WBvolQ9
Can you take it with you and use it at both your locations?AT&T had the first one, I have it. Microcell.
And then there are extenuating circumstances,some people don't have a choice of where they get to live.Whether it be due to work finances or whatever.I still maintain,if said sat company can no longer provide service,then the customer shouldn't be forced to pay for something they no longer receive.An example,say I mow your yard for set fee,you move,you still have to pay me because I no longer get to mow your yard.Simply unfair.
That all holds true if you are willing to pay the up front subsity for the install as an up front cost rather than free.
.....Not to mention the fact,that no one forces these companies to subsidize new customers in the first place.
........
This may be a reminder of why all the carriers should start looking at keeping their subscribers with incentives and less incentives to getting new subscribers. The cost of keeping someone is much less.