I’m very excited to announce that on July 1st, we will be launching a new equipment program for our residential Fusion Broadband+Phone service. The new equipment is a super-fast ASDL2+ modem/router with four Fast Ethernet ports, high-powered WiFi “N” and an easy-to-use web interface. Built-in Firewall protection for your home network is also included.
Our new Fusion equipment will also streamline our support systems, and allow us to upgrade firmware, manage configuration and roll out new features. For example, in future this capability will be used to offer IPv6 to customers.
The new equipment will be owned by Sonic.net and rented to customers as part of the Fusion home service, for $6.50 per month. This assures you’ll always have working equipment – we can remotely troubleshoot it, and replace it for you at no charge if the equipment fails.
Existing customers are of course welcome to continue to use the equipment that they already own, or you will be able to upgrade (starting next week) to new rental equipment if you find the features compelling.
Outer Sunset, eh? Seems like low population density (at least compared to many other neighborhoods), but I’m sure there’s a good reason for it. I recommend the Mission as your next deployment. 😉
Thank you for your info on the update. Not being at all techy, I don’t understand most of what you say. My phone/internet costs have definitely gone down with Sonic vs my old AT&T, but even with two phone lines, I have not noticed any increase in speeds with Fusion.
If, after my son leaves for college, I might want to drop one of my phone lines. Will my speeds decrease?
I do not want to change to your new service.
I’m sure you tried to fight crossing over to the dark side for as long as possible, Dane. But once my current ADSL2+ modem is obsolete I’ll probably be moving on and leaving sonic behind. It makes just about as much sense to pay rent on a toaster as it does to pay rent on a modem.
@Todd,
We are not forcing you to rent equipment. You signed up before that was the offering. If and when the modem you own breaks, you could just go buy a new one.
What sort of testing/certification is done on the firewall software? Does it go through any sort of periodic testing/review for bugs? Is it open-source so that it can be reviewed? I run my modem in bridged mode since I have my own firewall, but I’d consider using the new modem’s firewall.
DMZ option on the firewall sounds like a good idea. Is one of the four Ethernet ports dedicated to connect to the DMZ computer/network? Looks like the LAN Subports feature is able to dedicate a port for this purpose.
Man, I want to support Sonic, and definitely would like to stay away from the big companies. I’m moving to SF and researching options. I cannot understand nor justify paying $6.50 extra per month for some mandatory equipment charge for using adsl2 on top of being forced to have a phone line (don’t want it). It’s just a little too much. I despise Verizon and AT&T, but I also need to save money.
It’s also a bit disingenuous to pitch this change as an exciting benefit to customers, when actually what was available was just fine (hence, you allowing previous customers to keep that equipment), and without being up front about the fact that the actual price goes from $39.99 to $46.49. I’m certain you won’t include that new price in the advertisements and splashes on the homepage, but instead it’ll be kept as a fine print type of charge. Am I wrong? Why not have it be an opt-in, optional, deluxe feature?
Sorry, but this is just lame.
Won’t be signing up.
While I’m not thrilled about moving to a renting the equipement model, I do see some advantages. Whatever I decide, again I am impressed by Sonic’s forthright answers and honesty. I understand needing to adapt to competition and I’m willing to pay the additional cost because Sonic has given me stellar service from day one. And that is the most important thing to me.
@Ivan,
I think that the fundamental issue is that with capitalism, you end up with shrouding – the true cost of things is hidden. This is true in nearly every mainstream buying transaction – so much so that it feels a bit odd to simply pay the stated price for something, for example at a flea market, when you pay $5 for an object – and that’s truly the total transaction cost.
Read more here:
http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/25/11864178-fair-and-square-pricing-thatll-never-work-jc-penney-we-like-being-shafted
The study cited is just fascinating reading, you can find it here:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=728545
(Click “Download this paper” for a PDF copy of the study.)
The study makes the astounding point that in some ways consumers prefer services where some costs are shrouded, as the consumer who cares can then take action to avoid the costs, while those unaware prop up the lower rate for the savvy shopper. Think, for example of coupon users, or those who mail in a rebate, or take advantage of an intro price – they are getting something for less because everyone else is NOT getting the same deal (generally through inaction of lack of awareness of the offer), and their deal is propped up by the unaware spending of others.
And so it is in the market around Internet access, telephone service and television – there is a constant shell game underway, with the unaware consumer supporting financially the new offers to win over the value shopper with introductory pricing, etc.
In our case I’d point out that this recent change is the opposite: existing customers continue to pay the monthly rate that does not include equipment rental, while new users will pay more. This is a conscious decision on our part, we are managing the supply (staff availability) and demand (customers and their support calls) curve as we make gradual changes to the product. We must maintain adequate staffing availability to serve well the customers we have today, else we will lose what has been most hard won: their loyalty. Thus, a slightly higher rate having a dampening effect on new signups is not an entirely bad thing.
@Robert,
My team has engaged in extensive testing of the equipment – and this particular model of modem is in use by millions of DSL end-users today on other carrier’s networks. We’re optimistic that it’ll be a solid performer. I’m also very pleased that we’re able to manage and upgrade it going forward, allowing us to push out new features or bug fixes through firmware updates without much impact on support or the customer.
@dane
An insufficient response all the way around. Perhaps you can find and then cite the study that says that individuals are perfectly capable of discerning their own wants and priorities. But instead you tell those self-same individuals that they don’t actually know what they like or what they want, and that consumers are best told by the companies what actually suits their needs sufficiently. It’s pure arrogance. The issue is that you raised the prices, but you present it as if you’re doing us a favor. You’re forcing new clients to rent equipment that isn’t a necessary component to utilizing your service, and you refuse to acknowledge that it sucks.
Sorry, just because other companies force you to rent equipment you don’t need, doesn’t justify it in your case. I can understand and even get on board with incentivizing the use of multiple products, but when you say that I MUST get phone service (with all of the attendant taxes and fees) AND now that I MUST rent equipment from you in addition, and you announce it without any meaningful acknowledgement of how much that aligns with the worst and most disingenuous components of large, depersonalized commerce, then you’re really seeming to be tone-deaf and naive. You shrug this off as a fundamental component of capitalism and in doing so you conveniently absolve your company of any culpability in contributing to the worst part capitalism: the de-personalization and ignorance of the individual.
I am not opposed to raising prices for an improvement in service, I’m just opposed to being told that it’s a joyful thing and that I don’t know any better. I can go to Comcast for that.
@Ivan,
While you might prefer that I be less forthcoming about the realities of commerce in America, this is how I feel.
I should clarify also that the reason I announced this before it was in place was to allow those who do not want to be on the new rate to order prior to it being in effect. You are welcome to take the current offer today – or to not buy the offering tomorrow. Whatever suits you. Your indignation at the fact that we might change our offer for new customers is misplaced.
Why not simply sell the Sonic.net customized version of the Pace 4111N like you have in the past? It would be a much more palatable option to me.
Here is a question for the other techies out there. How complicated will it be to connect some other ipv6 compatible modem once Sonic’s IPv6 service is in place?
David – the new equipment we’re using would require us to bump up the unit cost significantly from previous offerings. By stretching the cost of the device out over many months, we hope to get an excellent CPE out there, reduce the initial pocketbook pain involved with a new circuit, and not lose our shirts. It’s a balancing act, to be sure.
@dane,
Please don’t condescend to tell me the “realities” of commerce. Firstly, how you “feel” and the “realities” are two very different things, and you have a perfect example of a consumer (me) providing an example of an actual reality (not derived from a focus group), and instead of listening, and recognizing the opportunity to connect and clarify, you’re resorting to pompous platitudes. Stop it. I am eager to support Sonic because I want a smaller, more personal alternative to the other options that are out there.
As for the advanced announcement, you posted that entry on the 28th of June, that’s 2 business days to take action, hardly a benevolent gesture of goodwill.
And as to your last point, my indignation is of course not at your raising prices (if you’d read my last post, you know that; in fact, here’s a quote: “I am not opposed to raising prices for an improvement in service…”), but actually my derision is directed at being told that I like it, and that it’s better for me, and that I don’t actually know what I like, and that I don’t understand American commerce, and that you were thinking ahead by announcing it ‘in advance.’ But of course, you don’t have the decency and goodwill to level with us by saying, for example, “this amounts to an increase in price,” or “it is actually not necessary equipment, but we are trying to raise revenue,” or “we recognize that raising prices in this economy is a tough pill to swallow and we’re really sorry.”
Of course that’s the least you could do. What would be truly revolutionary would be for you to avoid following the unfortunate practices of your really crappy competitors who use bulk survey analysis to make decisions but refuse to listen to individuals who are frustrated.
BTW, I actually did try to sign up today, and was told that somebody would call me. It’s 4:15, and still no call…
$99 at Best Buy.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Pace—Home-Portal-802.11n-Router/4845848.p?id=1218548311950&skuId=4845848
Granted, without the Sonic firmware.
This is an ATT version – configured for use on their network, but also notably managed by their ACS instance. This allows them to configure, push firmware and engage in diagnostics. (ATT also offers it for sale to their customers on their own website, for a penny more.)
@Ivan,
Clearly, we disagree on a number of point. That’s okay, and I do very much appreciate your feedback and concerns both about the change, and my communications.
Getting Internet and phone with Sonic.net was cheaper than getting only Internet with Comcast and AT&T. They’ve already got a loop of copper coming into your house, why not apply 5 volts to it and throw in phone service while their at it? If Sonic didn’t provide telephone service everyone would be complaining about it. It’s much simpler for a CLEC like Sonic to have a single unified product rather than trying to run around the whole Bay Area supporting multiple combinations of a la carte services.
There is a lot of stuff you get for free with Sonic…like shell access, no data caps, web hosting, voicemail, full-name caller id. If you had to get all the same services from AT&T, Sonic would look like a bargain.
There are also things you can’t buy from AT&T or Comcast, like fighting for customer’s privacy rights. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203476804576613284007315072.html
I have an iffy AT&T landline through which i get Sonic’s phone+DSL service, and i have been very happy with Sonic’s service. I’ll be happy to pay an additional seven bucks a month for an improved DSL connection.
Dane, does the new modem offer any benefits for those of us on 10K+ foot loops?
@Chuck,
It has a good analog front-end chip, a good Broadcom implementation and a twisted pair line cord, so it’s “as good as possible”, but I wouldn’t expect performance to be significantly better than any current device you may be using.
I should have mentioned we currently have the ZTE box Sonic.net supplied when we first hooked up with you. I’m not thrilled with that box’s feature set, or ADSL speeds on our loop, but it has been fairly reliable.
wow. it’s really sucks finding out about the new mandate equipment rental after the clock ticked pass midnight into 7/1. Thanks so much Dane for the 2days notice. But for now, I’ll stay with ATT. Not providing customer with a choice is NOT an American way of doing business. I wholeheartedly agree with Ivan that you and your company are very arrogant and do not care about your customers or prospective customer input. First, you control your customers by making decision for them on what they should get (additional landline + modem rental). I hate companies who treat people like dummies, incapable of making their own decisions. Sonic.net is not being honest in implementing a price increase. If your company really cares about how each individual feels, you should conduct a poll survey. My 2cents.
@dane
Not sure what we disagree on, as you’ve yet to respond directly to a single point. So far you’ve set me up as somebody who’s indignant to change, who doesn’t know what I actually want and who doesn’t understand american commerce. I suppose I disagree with you on all of that. But that I still don’t know how you justify the move.
That said, I signed up yesterday, just before the cutoff. I dislike the kind of tactics you’ve displayed thus far, as I think they’re insulting and disingenuous, but I nonetheless appreciate the forum to let you know. And in the grand scheme, this option is better than the alternatives.
@Ivan,
Sorry to have given offense. I found the study, which I linked to, to be a fascinating read. It makes some points about shrouding that are really, really interesting – and in particular, the point that savvy consumers benefit (for example by signing up a day before a change), at the expense of those less informed. And, it attacks the premise that a business can prosper while swimming upstream against the shrouding trend, via consumer education for example – as educated consumers simply become the minority who work around the shrouded practice while continuing to purchase from the companies who use these methods.
We see this ourselves with customers who want to switch to Sonic.net for a simple and fair single price point (Fusion for $39.95), but they say they keep calling ATT or Comcst once yearly and threatening to cancel, and getting a retention rate. This retention rate is supported at those firms by the consumers who are NOT paying an intro or retention rate, which is actually higher than the “single, fair price” the consumer would pay if they were to switch to Sonic.net.
Just interesting stuff, in any case. Glad to hear you got in on the offering when configured as you wanted!
*sigh* I had been a long-term sonic subscriber (referring several friends and members of my family) until I moved out of range a couple of years ago. Now that Fusion is in my area, I was contemplating switching back, but with the extra charges I may have to rethink it. This is especially annoying as I check the Sonic.net website regularly to see whats happening, but I missed the 2 day warning window. It would have been nice if it was a 14 day window so I could have put my order in.
Is there a write up of the functionality available in the new equipment? I am a fairly heavy user of port forwarding.
@mike, the new modem/router/firewall include four Ethernet ports and high power 802.11N WiFi. The configuration is quite flexible, and there’s of course support for port forwarding. There’s even a “DMZPlus” feature, which is useful if you want all ports forwarded to a specific host on your LAN. That devices comes out of firewalling, and becomes the default destination for all incoming traffic. It’s a nice bit of hardware – and it’s also tightly integrated into our support team’s tools, so they can engage in some diagnostics (for example, it will flag our team and you via the interface if it detects that there is a missing filter in the premise), plus we can deploy new firmware to fix bugs or add features.
What if consumers just want a standalone modem like the ZTE series? The all-in-one configuration might be nice but I already have my own wireless router.
I’ve been a customer for a year and after hearing this *mandatory* modem rental for new customers, I don’t think my friends would go to Sonic. It would be better if consumers have more choices such as being able to purchase the modem or their own modem instead of paying a monthly rental fee. Why limit the options?
For now I will stay with my old Sonic equipment. But since your customer service is so outstanding, there is no way I would change my provider away from you.
Thanks!
@David,
In the interests of a single streamlined product, which offers the fastest speed, unlimited use and good policies – we have made many decisions which may not be ideal for every potential customer. The sacrifice of flexibility in the product results in a “one size fits many” outcome which helps us achieve operational efficiency that greatly benefits customers with lowest possible cost alongside best unlimited performance and quality customer care.
For example, customer support can be delivered more quickly if the modems are all tied into our central management. We can upgrade firmware, roll out new features, etc. A unified modem solution enables this for all customers.
All of the decisions we are making as we move the Fusion product down our road map are intended to deliver more, for less, through simplification. There will sometimes be unpopular decisions (some people hate the automatic credit/debit card payment, and others don’t want a phone line) or losses of some “wouldn’t it be nice if they would offer an option X?” potentials.
But, as a benefit of this simplification, we will end up with a product that will amaze you, and be an astounding value.
As to the technical side though – you can certainly put your own router behind the Sonic.net supplied unit. If you want to avoid going through network address translation (NAT) twice, you can enable LAN Subports, where our router obtains it’s own IP via DHCP, but also one or up to all of the Ethernet ports can be configured to bridge – they also obtain an IP directly. This lets you deploy a different router “bridged” to our network if that’s your preference.
Talk about stirring up a hornets nest. I for one depend on the high quality service sonic offers, and fusion is one of the best values in the industry. While I may not choose to upgrade to the new equipment, I feel sonic will continue to deliver the value and reliability we have all come to enjoy.
Improved service and support is a good thing. We shouldn’t complain about it.
Right on Jim! As I am a happy 11 + years and counting current customer of Sonic.net, I agree: “Improved service and support is a good thing. We shouldn’t complain about it”.
Thank you Dane & your crew for increasing value year after year.
I think there’s one very simple question that hasn’t been addressed: Why don’t customers have the option to buy the new modem from Sonic instead of renting it? $6.50 a month is a great deal if the modem lasts for, say, only a year before failing, but I would feel that I’m being taken advantage of if I it lasts for four years and I end up paying, in effect, $312 for a $100 modem. Why not give me the option to buy the modem and assume the risk of equipment failure?
@Jay, equipment rental supports the cost of our pool of modem inventory including future replacements if needed, the hosted back-end support portal and management system (which we pay an annual per-customer fee for), the diagnostic and loop optimization system (which we pay a monthly per-customer fee for) and support overhead including shipping to/from of replacement equipment. The rental of equipment as part of broadband service has become typical in the industry, and we have made a decision to do the same with our offerings. As described more fully in a few of my other responses, Fusion is a somewhat inflexible product, with no options to opt out of it’s various features, including phone service, the fax and hosting items that are included – or equipment.
Dane, I understand that it costs Sonic money to provide us with Fusion services and that you need to be profitable. It’s possible that you’d have to charge a premium, well above the $100 price of an off-the-shelf unit, in order to support your plans for growth and other goals, but that is justified since Sonic’s firmware, custom settings, etc., add value to the hardware. I’m not saying you should do this for free, but I do think it would be wise to offer your customers a choice between renting and purchasing, if only to differentiate Sonic from your competitors who deny consumers that option.
I’ll quote myself here: “As described more fully in a few of my other responses, Fusion is a somewhat inflexible product, with no options to opt out of it’s various features, including phone service, the fax and hosting items that are included – or equipment.”
The lack of flexibility is the point, it’s a key simplification component that helps us build toward a more disruptive product for all customers.
“The rental and the equipment supports the advance replacement of failed equipment, ongoing upgrades and overall integration of the equipment into the service. This facilitates more features and customer tools, plus ongoing upgrades (which might be software or hardware) when needed.” -Dane
So you’re introducing this new router because the failure rate of past devices outpaced what customers paid for them?
—–
“The new equipment runs quite cool, and has been reliable in our testing. One thing to bear in mind with equipment renting is that if it’s unreliable, we will bear the cost of dealing the the issues, so we also really want to make sure it works consistently.” -Dane
“It has a good analog front-end chip, a good Broadcom implementation and a twisted pair line cord, so it’s “as good as possible— -Dane
“My team has engaged in extensive testing of the equipment – and this particular model of modem is in use by millions of DSL end-users today on other carrier’s networks. We’re optimistic that it’ll be a solid performer.” -Dane
And now you’ll offset that imbalance by charging a rental fee for a device that is expected to be far more reliable?
—–
“it has become the industry norm to rent equipment alongside service, and to remain on a level competitive playing field, we must adapt. Both UVerse and Xfinity have equipment rental, at $6/mo and $7/mo respectively.” -Dane
The $6.50 fee fits rather neatly between what ATT and Comcast charge. Competition is about offering a better deal. Why not charge $3 or $4 instead?
—–
“We are not forcing you to rent equipment. You signed up before that was the offering. If and when the modem you own breaks, you could just go buy a new one.” -Dane
So if my old (unreliable) equipment fails, I would have to pay full price for a replacement out of pocket or join the ranks of equipment renters. How long do you figure that Chinese-made ZTE you shipped to me a few weeks ago will last?
—–
“equipment rental supports the cost of our pool of modem inventory including future replacements if needed, the hosted back-end support portal and management system (which we pay an annual per-customer fee for), the diagnostic and loop optimization system (which we pay a monthly per-customer fee for) and support overhead including shipping to/from of replacement equipment.” -Dane
“This is a conscious decision on our part, we are managing the supply (staff availability) and demand (customers and their support calls) curve as we make gradual changes to the product. We must maintain adequate staffing availability to serve well the customers we have today, else we will lose what has been most hard won: their loyalty.” -Dane
Seems like you’re lacking adequate funding for operating costs and support staff. Shouldn’t that expense fall under the Fusion monthly rate rather than equipment fees?
—–
As some have already stated, the issue is not so much about raising the price of Fusion service, but rather adopting deceptive practices of the very competitors Sonic claims to set itself apart from. We can all understand that it’s hard for a small fish to keep swimming in such a big ocean, but the fish has to be honest with its customers. I would have understood and accepted a higher base rate for Fusion service. I can’t, however, justify the “equipment rental fee” *asterisk in the fine-print. It downright contradicts the “NOT an intro price” and “no contracts” selling points. It also undermines Sonic’s image for new and existing customers alike.
And that ‘2-day notice for prospective customers’ is, quite frankly, a joke.
I’d like access to the user manual for this modem, so I could look into what features its software provides.
I’m hoping there’s no need to install software on a Windows or Mac computer in order to control this, that it is purely a web interface, since I run FreeBSD at home.
How well does this router support the relatively large number of connections made by typical BitTorrent clients, or has this been tested?
Yes, to manage your modem/router, simply access it at http://gateway.sonic.net/
Very well – but we’d welcome any testing or feedback, and if bugs are found we can push new firmware out to resolve.
A user manual is not available at this time, but a quick setup guide is included with the system, and an overview of some of the basic connections settings can be found here: https://wiki.sonic.net/wiki/Pace_4111N
Dear Sonic.net,
I love your Fusion service and the value proposition it offered. I am one of the few who actively promote your Fusion offering to everyone I know and come across. I don’t gain anything from that activity beside the satisfaction that people will get a better deal from you.
In the few short weeks I have promoted your offering, you have gained an additional 10 new customers because they believe in the value proposition I have pointed out in your Fusion offering (without the rental requirement).
However, since finding out about this new modem rental requirement today, I have opted to stop promoting your Fusion product. It is very much like one of the previous commentator has said – it is very cable company like. I have three new potential customers that I have convinced to switch from AT&T this week. However, I now have to point out to them to pause and factor in the extra $78/year that you are looking to get from them.
Thank you for offering the Fusion the way it was. I am a happy customer of that. Please consider continue offering Fusion without equipment rental.
I’ve probably referred and outright set up about 6 friends to sonic since I switched over and I’m also switching from enthusiastic advocate to actively warning people away.
And please stop with the “everyone else does it”. In a child it’s a teachable moment, in an adult it’s pathetic and just plain unacceptable when it comes from a corporation.
“http://gateway.sonic.net/” ?
Wait, so this new setup comes with mandatory “cloud” management interface?
Cisco just forced this on their customers. Did someone miss the backlash?
Nobody wants to “cloud manage” devices that are located in their own house. It’s a security hole, and an information leak.
All in all, thumbs down.
Yeah, so far Dane et al. have cited the recent tactics of really, really shi*ty companies as justification for making the moves they make, with a subtext that it’s a necessity in order to stay competitive.
But, in the same breath, they brag about being different, about being disruptive, about being better. I suppose we are supposed to take it on faith that endorsing (by copying) the worst current practices of the absolute worst companies possible doesn’t signal anything to worry about. But it sure would be nice if they could be straight up and vocalize the reasons, or better yet, if they could think bigger, and less like scared sycophants.
Anybody looks good when compared to the worst possible example, but that doesn’t make you actually good. Beating the last place team doesn’t make you a contender; kicking a toddler’s ass doesn’t make you tough.
Ingenuity, quality, creativity, and goodness are not relative terms.
I have to say this is the worst thing I have seen in a long time. I live in a U-Verse exclusive building now and as such cannot have Sonic.net service, but I was incredibly eager to get the service once I moved.
Now, I will actively suggest people look elsewhere. There are several things wrong with this move:
1) Whining “but everybody else does it, mom!” as an excuse for adding a hidden below-the-line fee is completely despicable. First off, U-Verse doesn’t charge for equipment rental unless you have one of the top-speed tiers or also have TV or Phone service. You can get U-Verse Internet Only (up to 12Mb/s) and have customer-owned equipment. I know, because I have it. Second, I thought the whole POINT of your operation was to disrupt and to not be like everyone else. If you’re just going to become another scummy telco, that’s a very disappointing turn of events.
2) Your fee is not disclosed in a way that is honest and forthcoming. $39.95* is in approximately 42-point type, and the $6.50 “equipment fee” is in 8-point type. Just call it $46.50* (*plus [expletive-removed] fees we try to pretend are taxes but are actually just another way of us increasing the rate, like the USF surcharge, but hey, everybody else does it so apparently that makes it OK) and be done with it. The practice of burying sneaky fees in is despicable. The arguments of “if we do it this way, savvy customers are better off” is irrelevant. You are required to pay it, there’s no way out of it, so you cannot justify hiding it (or even itemizing it IMO). There’s no way to NOT pay you $6.50 a month in additional profit, I mean, equipment charges.
3) Oh, it turns out there’s ALSO an $8.72 (that’s awfully specific) shipping fee for the modem, that is only disclosed if you click through to the equipment page. That’s not even listed on the page with your initial fee disclosure. For pete’s sake, you can’t argue that you mandate rentals to try to spread shipping costs out (rolleyes) in one post then also charge for shipping the damn modem. There’s also a $75 installation fee that isn’t disclosed unless you click around, and a $35 “pay us this fee for the privilege of paying us money every month” fee that, to your credit, is disclosed.
Come on, guys. You have a great deal. Probably the best deal. Advertising it in this confusing, opaque way does not do you any favors. You don’t need every customer; it is probably substantially cheaper to you to only service customers who are capable of figuring out that your advertised fee (assuming you actually advertised the actual fee) is cheaper than a cable company’s “$39.95 a month”.
What exactly is wrong with saying “Fusion DSL and Voice service, including equipment, is $50.00 a month plus government-required taxes only. Click here to calculate your exact bill based on your ZIP code”? You could even compare that to the advertised prices from major providers to illustrate their confusing, opaque, and unpredictable pricing… or you could ‘compete’ with them by doing exactly what they’re doing.
Hopefully you guys change your mind.
[…] them to charge an additional modem rental fee. Sonic.net has now joined the trend, the company announcing on their blog that as of this month, they’ve started giving their “Fusion” broadband users a […]