Att - Dear AT&T : $84 for a 6-meg 150GB cap plus usage charges DSL internet service is bad business
To Mr. Randall Stephenson CEO of AT&T :
I am writing to you this email with an issue. I do not like what AT&T is doing.
I have been an AT&T subscriber of internet DSL service since 2008 when I moved to Pacifica California. For the most part, your DSL service has been reliable with very little issue with only two techs coming out to service my area twice the most recent was last week in the 7 years I have been a customer. For the most part, I have been pretty happy with the service until the last 6 months of this year.
The reason for this letter is that I am having a hard time accepting your company’s justification of paying $84.00 for slow, sub par internet service while my neighbors across the street from me fiber to the cabinet U-verse is available to them with no data caps whatsoever or you do not enforce them.
Why is that? Why in a city of over 40,000 people only 7.1 miles from downtown San Francisco is AT&T doing this AND NOT expanding or upgrading their hardware to newer technologies? I would love to have U-Verse/FTTC/VDSL internet instead of legacy broadband. This is not acceptable.
I am a cord cutter that has recently moved to streaming only TV services. Are you not aware of Amazon Prime TV, Netflix, HBO Now, Showtime, HULU and sling TV streaming services that depend on an internet connection to work? Or are you that interested in robbing people of their hard earned money while providing mediocre service? Or are you hoping to drive me to another duopoly provider?
My bill was once $30 per month, then $47, then it hit $71 and now last month of August 2015 and now September $84.00 for sub-par DSL is not justifiable. It is extortion.
If your company is not interested in expanding services to this area then sell the last mile wireline to Sonic, Frontier Communications or CenturyLink.
I have decided to head towards Comcast broadband. You can no longer justify this.
AT&T DSL subscribers : if you have another choice, go with the other provider.
Reason of review: Bad quality.