AT&T Sued For Allegedly Inflating DirecTV Now Subscriber Numbers (engadget.com) 19
A lawsuit seeking class action status says AT&T is inflating AT&T TV Now -- previously known as DirecTV Now -- subscriber numbers by creating fake users. From a report: It's accusing the company's management of carrying out the scheme in an effort to make the service look good in the eyes of investors even though it was struggling with serious technical and financial problems. The management did so, according to the lawsuit, by encouraging employees to add DirecTV Now subscription fees to subscribers' accounts without their knowledge or consent. One of the methods employees allegedly used is tacking on up to three accounts to a single customer's phone number -- including those who just signed up for a free trial -- and running their credit card three times. In some cases, customers were reportedly charged for a subscription even though they made it clear that they didn't want it. Sales employees allegedly made and used fake email accounts in both instances.
WtF (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly what I was thinking.
It shows us that Wells Fargo wasn't punished hard enough that this happened.
Probably should just nationalize these companies and then sell off the stock to new holders in and auction.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of those subscriber names looked suspicious (Score:2)
John Barnett
John Bigboote
John Camp
John Careful Walker
John Chief Crier
John Cooper
John Coyote
John Edwards
John Fat Eating
John Fish
John Fledgling
John Gomez
John Grim
John Guardian
John Icicle Boy
John Jones
John Joseph
John Kim Chi
John Lee
John Littlejohn
John Many Jars
John Milton
John Mud Head
John Nephew
John Nolan
John O'Connor
John Omar
John Parrot
John Rajeesh
John Ready to Fly
John Repeat Dance
John Roberts
John Scott
John Shaw
John Smallberries
John Starbird
John Take Cover
John Thorny St
Re: (Score:2)
Smallberries nearly killed me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow...congrats on finding a way to turn a Buckaroo Banzai joke into a way to show off your Trump Derangement Syndrome, must have had to bust your ass to find a way to plug those two things together, kudos.
Hey, I like Buckaroo Banzai, but it wasn't too hard to think of these names given the *long* list of "Johns". And prove me wrong about him lying and inflating numbers for decades (and even now) ... oh, wait, you can't. It's not Derangement Syndrome just the cold, hard, truth -- truth that his supporters constantly deny with their TDS.
But, hey, to each their own. Though, sorry you have such a hardon for this guy.
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the best:
John Careful Walker
John Chief Crier
John Fat Eating
John Guardian
John Icicle Boy
John Littlejohn
John Many Jars
John Mud Head
John Ready to Fly
John Repeat Dance
John Take Cover
John Thorny Stick
John Two Horns
Wells Fargo 2.0 (Score:5, Interesting)
This fits our family's personal experience with AT&T. They kept tacking on funny fees and services, like "phone insurance", whaddever the hell that is. When you bring it up with the representative, they say, "Oh, it was probably just a typo on the operator's part". Hell of a lot of typos. Further, it would take 2 or 3 months before the fee finally disappeared from our bill.
My experience is that oligopolies know they can screw you over because their 1 or 2 other competitors also screw you over. It's like choosing between getting f$cked in the mouth or the anus by a wild boar.
The other telecom had lousy connections, so we had to choose between lousy customer service (ghost fees) or lousy connections. And we're in a well populated area.
Capitalism fails to work properly when there's insufficient choice to be able to bail on assholes.
Re: (Score:1)
"Last mile" problem [Re:Wells Fargo 2.0] (Score:1)
The "last mile problem" requires regulation because it's expensive and materially wasteful for each competitor to lay down duplicate connective wiring to each house.
My solution would be that the "last mile" of wiring be a public utility, managed mostly by state and local governments.
However, any content provider can provide content to the neighborhood "switch-box", roughly every few miles apart, and hook customers in and out of their service with the flip of one switch/dial. Content providers then don't hav
Re: (Score:2)
It's like choosing between getting f$cked in the mouth or the anus by a wild boar.>
I'd pick mouth because then I could at least bite back. But we digress...
AT&T has been lying and steeling for years (Score:2)
This corporation has a solid tradition of false advertising, unsubstantiated charges, anti trust violations, poor service, ridiculous fees, selling out their customers to any bidder, damaging customer credit, and generally ripping off everyone in any way possible. The are monopolistic, fascist, mediocre, greedy, and have absolutely no incentive to change. We get what we pay for, so perhaps we should stop paying them.
Open and shut - fraud (Score:2)
This sounds like pure and simple fraud. I wonder how AT&T's lawyers will try to spin this though.
The only problem I've had with *Now is (Score:2)
That's the sort of thing that should turn off investors. Not that I would ever buy a piece of AT&T, it's a doomed dinosaur that has become so big that it can't properly function. A dysfunctional mess of unintegrated and unrelated or even conflicting operations.
My DirectTV experience (Score:2)
Called them, signed up for a year because that's how long my rental term was. Tech comes out, hands a bunch papers for me to sign which I do.
End of term, I call to cancel, only to find out I'm under contract for yet another year. The CSR nearly INSTANTLY produced a scan of my signature agreeing to a 2 year term (which means this is a common occurence...). So, legally, I'm stuck. Yes, I had no time to read what was thrust at me, but ultimately, it's my fault that I didn't.
I resolved then and there to a)