Saturday, April 06, 2013

Followup on Verizon Wireless' "Share Everything" - Maximize The Value

Back on March 23rd, I posted a rather candid article detailing my analysis of Verizon Wireless' "Share Everything" offering.  Verizon Wireless' "Share Everything" is a Terrible Plan.

In that article, I gave statements that were true on their face. However, a call to Verizon Wireless Customer Service revealed, as always with them, hidden ways to work around the shortcomings of their plans. I'm going to tackle each statement, then I'm going to share information with you in case it's of value. Frankly, I don't think I should be doing their job for them; this is something they should openly advertise as a value, but whatever.
  1. Under Verizon's ideal situation, I'd be forced into the following scenario.  The idea that they would force all of your lines into the "Share Everything".  This actually is true only online.  If you call (and in theory, in store, though I wouldn't trust this), you can isolate lines from "Share Everything".  The actual rule is, if you don't have any sort of share plan (family or Share Everything), you can have one and only one, but you don't have to include all lines as long as you specify which ones are excluded.  If you already have a family share plan, you have to do a lateral change to a Share Everything plan (since in a family plan all devices are already included).  If you've never had a shared plan but you have multiple lines, you can wrap some into Share Everything and leave some out.

    SO take this scenario.  A father has a smart phone with unlimited data, kids and wife have basic phones and maybe one tablet.  It's a LOT cheaper for the father to exclude his smartphone, because the Basic Phone plan's data tiers are substantially cheaper than the Smartphone one (which he'd be forced into if he wrapped his phone into the plan).

    Here's another scenario.  Frequent commuter has a smartphone with unlimited data, wants a tablet and a hotspot as he doesn't do much calling but he uses a lot of data.  He/she can wrap the two data devices in a Data Only Share Everything plan which is substantially cheaper than the smartphone one.

    Verizon REALLY needs to advertise this.
  2. Data Only plans prohibit you from having a device capable of doing voice and/or text. Did you know that Verizon has a hidden share plan called "Data Only for Smartphones - Share Everything"? Did you know that said plan allows you to have smartphones AND data devices on the same share plan but at the Data Only prices (the ones I said were a way better deal)? If you're a heavy data user but a light voice/text user this is the plan for you. You cannot add it online. You must add it through Customer Service.

    Scenario: Family has a share plan but with one smartphone and two tablets. Smartphone is rarely used for voice or text. This plan would allow them to enjoy data only prices but keep the smartphone.

    There is one downside to this plan. IF you do voice/text it's pay-per-use. The voice minute price is a ripoff at $.50 cents/minute. No, that's not a typo: if you do an hour's worth of calls, you will add $30 to your bill. Considering that same call literally costs Verizon less than $.10 to complete for you, it's clear that this plan is not for everyone. But choice is never a bad thing.

So, I ended up changing four of my lines over to a Data Only for Smartphones Share Everything plan. Three of the lines are still suspended (and it took some doing to get this just right). One line was swapped to a 5510L Jetpack, so it gets 10GB of data all to itself. My main line keeps unlimited data and 450 minutes, which for me is more than enough. Over time I'll close the suspended lines, but I'm considering a tablet now that everything is the way I want it.

All told, my bill went down $10/month. I kept unlimited. Basically got hotspot for free, and tripled the available data over it. So in Verizon's eyes I'm just a cheapskate right? Wrong. The fact that I was able to make these changes opens my consideration for adding devices I wouldn't have bought before. I'm thinking about getting a new phone, thinking about getting a tablet. Now that data isn't an issue, I'm open to both.

Verizon should really consider advertising these alternate options. At least broadcast the fact that you don't have to wrap everything in Share Everything (unless you're a new customer of course) if you don't already have a share plan. They could stand to make a LOT of money and get more customers transitioned off unlimited over time.

Analyzing Wrestlemania 29: Cena vs. The Rock


Normally I wouldn't touch this topic with a lengthy pole, but I wanted to put thoughts to the web, and see if I am able to be proven wrong by WWE.  As a side note, being unpredictable is what gets people talking about your product.  If you do things that are easily seen a mile away, your product becomes stale - and that's why we're even at this point.



Surely, you remember back when the marketing genius at WWE decided to label Wrestlemania 28's gala as "Once in a Lifetime", right?  The big battle between John Cena and the Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.  It was supposed to rival the likes of Rock vs. Hogan in terms of energy and the meeting of two different eras.  Prepended with a bunch of childish promos on both sides and teases aplenty, it ended up fizzling out for two reasons.  One, the ending was predictable.  Nobody in their right mind thought Cena was going to go Super on the Rock after he'd been gone so long.  Two, it was well known that Rock was going to leave again, albeit briefly, and to have him leave on a loss seemed illogical.  Well, the predictable became record, as the Rock beat Cena in what was arguably a dull, lifeless match that was outshined by others on the card.  Unlike with Rock/Hogan where the winner was simply too difficult to pin down, Cena/Rock was just not that great, and I blame Cena mostly for that.  Rock looked fantastic, even though it's clear his cardio isn't what it used to be.



Then the unthinkable happened.  Rock later beat CM Punk for the WWE title.  Not only that, he beat him with a People's Elbow.  The least impactful move in the guy's arsenal.  A move he has NEVER pinned anyone else with without a Rock Bottom attached.  



Now, the game has changed.  That outcome was not easily predictable.  It seemed totally unlikely that WWE would put its signature title on someone who was part time over CM Punk who'd had not only an extended run as champion, but also a tremendous repeated showing against Cena at PPVs, where Cena/Punk has often been the most electric of matches, especially with them pulling out forbidden moves in their 2/25 RAW showdown (Piledriver, anyone?).  I had no issue with this, where I had a problem is when Cena won the Royal Rumble, guaranteeing him a title shot, after eliminating Ryback.  Ryback is easily the most notable talent in current WWE, and he's now just bouncing from feud-to-feud, showing off his power rather than contending against CM Punk, the guy who beat him with illicit help from Brad Maddox at Hell in a Cell earlier.  To me, it would make more sense and be less predictable to have Ryback face the Rock (truly, a match we haven't seen that just MIGHT have been exciting) or CM Punk (now that Maddox is not a ref to help him cheat).  But I digress.



We're stuck with "Twice in a Lifetime".  The marketing guy who came up with "Once" should be fired.  C'est la vie.  Let's look at what WWE's options are.
  1. Cena beats Rock, clean pin.  Since this would only happen after a move that the WWE Universe hates, this would only increase the hatred of Cena.  And maybe that's what WWE wants.  The scary thing is that this outcome would inevitably lead to "Thrice in a Lifetime", which may cost them viewers.
  2. Rock beats Cena, clean pin.  Rock would get major cheers, but what would this accomplish?  Same outcome as the first contest, leaves Cena in a wasted space.  Unless they're sending him back to midcard, which I can't see happening, or Del Rio drops to Swagger and Cena goes against him, which to me accomplishes nothing.
  3. Cena taps Rock.  Can you imagine the reaction on this?  It would mean Cena has made pretty much every single main eventer in WWE tap out, something Chris Benoit, Ric Flair and Daniel Bryan together have not accomplished.  The only main eventer left not having tapped to Cena would then be the Undertaker.  If Taker loses to Punk, he's guaranteed to retire, which means Cena would reign as the submission specialist.  GUARANTEED WWE would lose major viewers.
  4. Cena cheats to win.  This would result in Cena getting cheers.  It wouldn't be a heel turn though, because he'd simply position that he was doing "whatever it took" to win.  I simply don't see this happening, as much as I'd like to.  I also don't see what it accomplishes UNLESS he does full heel.
  5. Rock cheats to win.  Don't see it happening because the Rock doesn't need to cheat to beat Cena.  He's already proven that.
  6. Shield interference.  This has been speculated.  If it happens it would be exciting if only the fact that it gets the Shield more exposure with one of the top tier players.  I don't see it happening, because Orton makes more sense.  He's more comfortable in factions (see Evolution, Legacy) than Cena (see CTC, Nexus).
  7. No contest/DQ/Double Countout.  Possible.  But then they'd end up repeating Cena/Punk, and I don't see it happening. 
Rock is scheduled to go back to filming here soon, and while is planned to be engaged with WWE at leat part time going forward, he's never going to be doing weeklys or house shows.  As such, I don't see him holding the title past Wrestlemania.  To me, I think #3 is happening.  I don't want that, but it's what I see.  If WWE goes that route, they WILL lose viewers.