Lets See If That Does It.

Michael,
It's good to know that the plan descriptions on the Sprint web site are accurate, thanks. However that displaces the only difference I could discern between the normal data plan and the premium data plan. Premium data does not refer to 4G and it does not refer to unlimited usage caps. I'm going to assume it does not refer to reduced latency or packet loss. So I'm at a loss as to how this offering is value added.

Maybe this discrepancy is grammar based. I've been assuming that premium in your usage is an adjective describing the data available to my device. However, since I can detect no additional value an adjective would convey, it sounds like Sprint means to use this term as a noun.

premium [ˈpriːmɪəm]
n
(Business / Commerce) an amount paid in addition to a standard rate, price, wage, etc.; bonus
adj.
Of superior quality or value: premium gasoline.

If this is the case I'd suggest rephrasing your publications and paperwork to refer to the "data premium" instead. That indicates an extra fee on top of the usual rate for unlimited data. Although the user's device is apparently the metric you're using to charge the premium so maybe "device premium" or "smartphone premium" would be more appropriate. These devices are even value added from standard feature phones, so you could use "premium device premium" if you wanted! These are all good.

I'm also curious whether sprint has taken into account all the features users can take advantage of with advanced handsets. The cameras and processors are listed as reasons that users will use more 3G bandwidth than their feature phone counterparts. However if using a larger portion of the 3G back-haul system is a rationale for a device premium, shouldn't specs that potentially lower traditional data consumption be justification for discount? I'm referring to the WiFi and WiMax radios in these devices that can ease the burden of over-taxed infrastructure by making use of high bandwidth and non-Sprint systems.

Look, I know all these semantic arguments aren't really going convince you to drop the new fee Sprint is assessing. And I'm actually fine with paying what I pay for service. (I wouldn't complain if it was less, but who would?) But I find it insulting that Sprint thinks they can raise their prices and not admit it in their advertisements. If you need more money to roll out 4G nationwide, that's fine. If you've realized that demand is increasing for smart phones and decided to charge more in response, that's fine too. But I do have a problem with selling the same service for more money while pretending that it also has more value.

There's nothing that we'll resolve over the phone that we can't resolve via written word. I know you don't make the policies or write the advertising copy. I just wanted to share some thoughts with you as a fairly well informed customer. (If it's confusing to me, my mom isn't even going to try.) This poorly clarified fee makes it harder for me to recommend Sprint for its billing transparency, though I will continue to do so based on your service and products.

If you still want to speak with me that's fine, though I feel I've articulated myself fairly well and won't have much to add. Please just mark me down in the "customer would prefer less marketing and more substance" column and send it up the ladder. There must be more consumers that feel the same way, I just wanted to mention that I agree.

Thanks for your time,

Jeadly