Free and Unlimited Calls.

[Rickiev]

I been reading alot of people complaint regarding magicjack and alot of people are asking to much for a product that charges $20 a year for free phone calls, NOT UNLIMITED!

Its a simple product and allows you to make free phone calls on the internet. Why abuse the service that other magicjack members are using too.

Keep it simple.

[BuffaloChuck]

R, yes, "free" isn't spelled the same as "unlimited".

Of course, I can't find the ads you've seen that said, "Free but limited calling" either.

I suspect that MJ should have built into it an understanding that new users would go wild with the device at first, but that after their new shiny toy gets a little dust on it, users would return to their 'normal use' of a telephone.

Whatever that is. I'd be loathe to consider that any one person is a 'normal' user, however. That must be one very special person.

(And AZ, don't take bows - you're too darned smart to fit THAT bill! LOL)

[az2008]

R, yes, "free" isn't spelled the same as "unlimited".

Of course, I can't find the ads you've seen that said, "Free but limited calling" either.

I posted a YouTube link here: http://www.phoneservicesupport.com/post24575.html#24575

In the ad they say "Call everyone. Talk as long as you want. For just $19.95 a year."

I won't defend MJ. I think Dan's business practices create the reputation problems that now exist (despite the product being an incredible value which most of us care more about than all the drama that goes with it.).

But, legally speaking, that advertisement leaves some wiggle room. It doesn't say *how often* you can call anyone (and talk as long as you want).

And then, the ToS is really what counts. Dan would just say it doesn't matter what he "implies." Ultimately you have to agree to the ToS which mentions that there can be excessive use.

Mark

[BuffaloChuck]

I wonder how I'd have reacted to a "FREE BUT NOT UNLIMITED CALLS" ad. Would I have 'clicked off' at that moment?

I know if I'd researched the product and found the limitations later, I'd be more steamed about 'wasting research time' when it could have been made more clear.

A "Free*" note would have been great. I'd have see the asterisk, knowing immediately there was a proviso - somewhere!

I have a hard time wanting to reward Dan or champion this good product, however, for those bad business practices, although this site certainly makes it a much easier product to use.

[kumar]

Yeah... I have yet to see someone who has gotten cut off because of overusing. If you have a job and free nights and weekends on your cellphone, I do not think it should be a problem. Skype also has an acceptable use thing, so I wouldn't truly call it mis-advertised.

Kumar

[az2008]

Yeah... I have yet to see someone who has gotten cut off because of overusing.

I think you left the forum for awhile. There was a spat of terminated users late Oct., early Nov. Some reported it here. Some on dslr. One person (a telemarketer) filed a complaint at "ripoffreports.com"

The suddenness made me wonder if the seize-up of the credit market was affecting MJ. Maybe they couldn't get funding to upgrade/expand their network. But then, after that spat, we haven't heard of any more terminations.

Skype also has an acceptable use thing, so I wouldn't truly call it mis-advertised.

The difference is, Skype publishes what the number of minutes are which exceeding is unacceptable use.

All the MJ users who were terminated got really good deals compared to the money spent. Just not as good as they hoped for. For $1.70 a month, it's hard to get too upset about things. But, MJ wouldn't create such passionately angry people if they published clear guidelines (number of calls per day/month, minutes per day/month, etc.).

Mark

[kumar]

Yeah I was gone for a few months and had WAY to many pages to catch up to. I am sorry about that.... I didn't know but now I do!

I agree that it would be nice if MJ published it more, but they aren't really doing anything wrong. Its just fine print stuff that some people have to be careful with....But, I do not want to turn this into a huge debate... all I am trying to prove is that they arent doing anything bad. Finally, your right they ARE getting a good deal for under 2 bucks a month.

~Kumar

[BuffaloChuck]

Yes, it's a great price until someone gets no service, and then paying a penny for nothing isn't a good deal.

[cpusrvc]

I'm going to disagree that MJ has the right terminate service because of high usage. Regardless of their Terms of Service, their ads promise "one year of Free Local and Long Distance calls." It's real clear. You are entitled to calls for one year. There is no other rational way to interpret their statement. No reasonable person would expect to receive only part of a year of service due to any kind of termination or even intentional interruption of service they way it's promoted. If they do it to many people, I think they will be ripe for a class action law suit.

My personal complaint is inconsistent service. Sometimes unanswered calls don't go to voicemail. Sometimes I can't connect when I call someone who has MJ, especially from my cell phone. Others say they also have problems getting thru. It's just inconsistent. In my experience, it isn't reliable enough to become someone's primary service.

IMHO, of course!

[kumar]

OK.. so who wants take em to court first?

Kumar

[az2008]

Regardless of their Terms of Service, their ads promise "one year of Free Local and Long Distance calls." It's real clear. You are entitled to calls for one year.

But, the ToS is real clear too. It says you must agree to all the terms, and if you don't, you have 30 days to return it. And, that MJ may terminate service for excessive use.

Dan leaves enough wiggle room to say "free calls" doesn't mean someone can stay on the phone 24 hours, 7 days a week. It's meant to be interpreted as average use of the average customer. (For 99% of MJ users, it is "free calls."). And, that it was the responsibility of the purchaser to decline the ToS (with 30 days to decide, and a money back guarantee) if they felt "excessive use" contradicted their understanding of "free calls."

I agree that Dan's marketing creates a lot of customers who feel lied to. And, that the limits should be better defined. Filing BBB (and "ripoffreport.com) complaints is justified, and perhaps Dan deserves that. But, talk of a class-action lawsuit is ridiculous.

And, to me, even declining the ToS would be dumb. People who might exceed the limits would be better off to buy 1-2 more units and spread their usage across them. That would be cheaper than paying $0.15 per minute at other services.

Mark

[Sherwin Williams]

The Canadian magicJack distributor claims "unlimited calling".



- Sherwin

[az2008]

The Canadian magicJack distributor claims "unlimited calling".

Thanks. I added this to the wiki's criticism->business practices. I already had an infomercial on YouTube.

I was reluctant to hold this one against MJ. But, the web site claims they are in an agreement to manage the reseller agreement in Canada. That's a little more than being just an authorized reseller.

Not quite the same as being MJ. But, more than a reseller. So, it seemed worth mentioning.

Mark