"The NAD ruled that since Verizon's advertising didn't promise a 'perpetual guarantee' or messaging suggesting the price would never change, the future $5 per month per line increase was not a material term requiring more prominent disclosure than what Verizon already provided."
"According to the NAD ruling, the three-year price and future increase aligns with reasonable consumer expectations that wireless rates may adjust over the long term, unlike short-term teaser offers that lead to dramatic price hikes after only a few months."
The BBB National Programs' National Advertising Division ruled that Verizon's disclosure of a future price increase for its wireless service was adequate. T-Mobile challenged Verizon's advertising, questioning whether it sufficiently disclosed that the $25 per line pricing is a promotional rate that increases to $30 after 36 months. The NAD found that the future price increase aligns with consumer expectations for long-term wireless rates. Verizon's advertising did not imply a perpetual price guarantee, so the increase did not require more prominent disclosure.
Read at Telecompetitor
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]