Upcoming Changes to our Old Rewards Program

[J_PM]

Hey Community,

We have an important announcement to share with our subscribers who are currently enrolled in our old Rewards program.

We’re making changes to our rewards program and are sharing how these changes impact some of our subscribers. Starting in May, we’ll be retiring our old Rewards program and moving all subscribers to our Public Points™ program. 

We launched the Public Points™ program in January 2022 to provide our subscribers with more ways to earn and spend rewards, with greater flexibility. As part of our commitment to continuously evolve our products and services, it's time to retire our old Rewards program and shift our focus on enhancing our Points program.

To show our appreciation for your continued loyalty, subscribers on our old Rewards program will receive a special thank you. We'll send you a text message when it has been added to your account by March 31st. 

We’re excited to continue providing you, our valued subscribers, more opportunities to earn and spend rewards with Public Points™ moving forward.

To learn more about your move to Public Points, check out our FAQ here.

The Public Mobile Team

[Wolfcore]

Will we go through all this again if/when points get discontinued?

I'm sure we will, but it won't be the same. PM doesn't seem to be promoting the points system in the same way they did the old one, by saying that you can keep certain things forever, for example. But also, once trust is broken, anybody that values loyalty, will already be gone. The people that remain will be those that are willing to accept being lied to, and won't fight back.

So yeah, due to numerous factors, next time won't be nearly the same as this. That's if PM is even still around at that point.

[kb_mv]

---

@jimbobs2023 wrote:

---

---

I'm not sure that this is correct.  There is much debate as to whether a passive acceptance of TOS is a legitimate acceptance or not.  In the case of the PM agreement, it is not just passive, it is non-existent. For example, being on Autopay, I'm never asked if I accept or don't accept the TOS for the next 30 days.

---

@jimbobs2023 There is much debate among who? Lawyers? I doubt it. Has anyone actually gotten a real legal opinion or found a lawyer or firm to take their case based either on your theory or as some have stated they can do, a class action law suit? If you check all the providers I bet you will find the same/similar terms of service all vetted by their lawyers I would guess.

[jimbobs2023]

---

@kb_mv wrote:

---

@IanP wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Would not the credit card on file and history give some validation to it being open ended.

---

@IanP No. When you renew each 30 day period you are agreeing to the TOS in effect at that time and you are free to not renew whenever you like. 

 

---

I'm not sure that this is correct.  There is much debate as to whether a passive acceptance of TOS is a legitimate acceptance or not.  In the case of the PM agreement, it is not just passive, it is non-existent. For example, being on Autopay, I'm never asked if I accept or don't accept the TOS for the next 30 days.

[kb_mv]

---

@IanP wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Would not the credit card on file and history give some validation to it being open ended.

---

@IanP No. When you renew each 30 day period you are agreeing to the TOS in effect at that time and you are free to not renew whenever you like. 

 

[IanP]

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Would not the credit card on file and history give some validation to it being open ended.

[hTideGnow]

HI @IanP 

No, PM is prepaid carrier.  If there is a "contract", it will be just 30 days so PM can change the contract with 30 days notice

[RetiredGuy1]

Yeah, I was being kind

[RetiredGuy1]

@ShawnC13- on the Community home page: 

Find answers, ask questions, and share ideas (bold emphasis mine)

So my answer to your question would be yes, I hope so. Cheers.

[IanP]

I am no lawyer or professional contract examiner.

But:

Is this a contract or service agreement we have with PM? I would argue that it is a contract not for 30 days but open-ended as we have a credit card firmly in place to keep the agreement valid, and rewards were inferred as part of the agreement. 

I am probably missing the point but food for thought.

[Wolfcore]

It's only debatable if every single person that turns in a point, wins a prize. If not, then it objectively brings less value to the subscriber base as a whole. With the old system, all of our rewards are guaranteed and automatic. 

They're moving to this new system to benefit them, not the subscriber. For those who actually believe what they're saying, that they're doing this for your benefit, I've got a bridge to sell you. 

[RetiredGuy1]

@Wolfcore , agreed and I would add another nuance regarding the contests:

In general there are three types of rewards you can redeem your points for:

• Lower Your Bill (15 points): Get a $15 account credit that you can use on your next renewal or to purchase add-ons
• Extra Add-On (price varies): redeem points for any in-market add-on that will be added to your account instantly
• Jackpot (1-2 point per entry): Enter one of our contests for a chance to win cool prizes, from gift cards, to phones, to more. Each contest is different and new ones launch all the time. Winners will be contacted after the contest closes.

—————————-

So, one of those things isn’t like the other two. A customer has direct control and reaps a guaranteed benefit by “lowering their bill” with their points. Similarly, direct control and guaranteed benefit over purchasing add-ons (face-value or discounted). However, unless one has the ability to “fix” a contest, they’ve given up direct control and a guaranteed benefit. So the addition of adding contests into the mix is debatable from a “better value” perspective.

[ShawnC13]

@Wolfcore we all know that rewards systems still benefit the company that runs them.  The Legacy rewards benefitted PM by having us gain them customers.  Once it wasn't beneficial to PM (legacy rewards discounting plan prices to much) they had all new customers go on the points system.  Once the subscriber level of the points system reached a target that is when PM decided to end the Legacy rewards as they felt they had enough of a user base to cover any loss of subscribers from upset customers.

This is just my thoughts and opinions on how this all rolled out.  Will we go through all this again if/when points get discontinued?

[Wolfcore]

I explained it in that message, but yeah, essentially you were talking about "best value", and then said:

"the former also applies to ALL customers and the latter to only some"

So what I was referring to, is that this sentence here basically eliminates half of the equation of what we were talking about. If something only refers to some people, and the other refers to all people, then one would objectively be of better value than the other (at least given this particular case).

I wasn't saying anything negative towards you, if that's how you took it.

[RetiredGuy1]

Hmm. I was simply taking the text-book definition of “best value” and applying it to the situation. I don’t believe I stumbled onto anything but may have asserted the advantage of bill discounts over add-on discounts as a concept and then reinforced that concept by stating that it would benefit all LEGACY rewards customers instead of just those who would choose to use points towards discounted add-ons. At any rate, we’re in agreement mate! 👍

[Wolfcore]

Fair enough, but PM specifically states that they'd be giving us the best possible value, so that's what we're trying to figure out. 

Also, if we wanna get technical, the way that raffles inherently work (almost always), is that more is taken in, than is given out. So as a whole, the subscriber base would actually be losing even more value. The vast majority of participants would be spending points on nothing, and only a few would be rewarded. Whereas with the old system, every single person is guaranteed to be automatically rewarded.

Edit: Don't know why I wrote "raffle", maybe I just associate that with "giveaways" in my head, but yeah. Even giveaways in general (with no entry fee required), rarely ever reward the entire group of people, so the point is there.

[Wolfcore]

Maybe "question" wasn't the right word. It's more like the solution to your thought process. You were theorizing, and you actually stumbled upon the answer without knowing it.

[ShawnC13]

I didn't say they would bring more benefit to the  consumer, but being able to enter them  with points is something you couldn't do with Legacy rewards.  Remember I am just bringing all information out.  Doesn't mean I am supporting or agree with the move to points from Legacy Rewards

[Wolfcore]

A lot to break down here:

I don't believe in "last comment wins" theory.
I never claimed this. In fact, I even asked you twice for an answer. You refused, that's not my fault.

I didn't reply to it because you have restated your belief again and again already.
But my question is about your belief, not mine? What does my belief have to do with yours?

On the point about " In the interest of equal opportunity," I think this is exactly why PM is making it a one rewards system, so every subscriber will now enjoy the "best possible values" of the rewards

Did PM state "in the interest of equal opportunity", or was that just @RetiredGuy1? Regardless, that doesn't make sense any way you spin it:

- New subscribers are already on this new system, so nothing is being enhanced for them.
- Old subscribers are already on a better system, so they're actually losing value.
- If you wanted to give everybody the best possible value, you'd move the people from the new system, to the old system. That's the only way that everybody as a whole, would benefit more.
- The FAQ mentions multiple times about this change being in regards to "you" (legacy reward customers).
- Since when does PM care about equal opportunity? They literally have plans that are locked, and only available to new subscribers.

Like I understand what you're doing, I get it. Whether you're being told to or not, you feel the need to defend PM. They are paying you for your services after all. But what I find annoying is when Oracles claim to not work for PM, or claim to not be taking sides, or get mad when people call them shills, etc. Look how far you're reaching in order to defend them, of course people are going to call you out for that. The only Oracle I've seen that has said anything that can be considered completely anti-pm, has been computergeek541 (and Shawn, but not as overt). Just be honest and straight, people respect that more. Ending every message saying "but I hate that they're getting rid of the old rewards system too", doesn't justify the rest.

[HALIMACS]

“best possible (emphasis added) value”

• Doesn’t mean, better than before.
• Doesn’t mean, the best value.
• Doesn’t mean, better value

Don’t forget the word possible is inserted  between the words, best and value.

I suspect that word was purposefully inserted to effectively diminish the intent of the whole phrase. 

If someone were to say the best possible outcome of treatment of an illness is that one may live an extra 6 months, if those 6 months are spent in agony, it’s not necessarily the best or better treatment.  It’s all that can be offered in the circumstances

Public Mobile might have been best advised to leave that phrase out entirely – just my opinion, if I may share it.

[RetiredGuy1]

@Wolfcore 

What question?

[RetiredGuy1]

Yes, of course you’re right. Given the context of the discussion, it was implied.

[softech]

@Wolfcore 

I don't believe in "last comment wins" theory.  I didn't reply to it because you have restated your belief again and again already.  

On the point about " In the interest of equal opportunity," I think this is exactly why PM is making it a one rewards system, so every subscriber will now enjoy the "best possible values" of the rewards

But, I am with you on one thing, I don't like the new rewards system and I am losing $7 per account as well.

[Wolfcore]

You believe that giveaways (which, according to nearly every giveaway system I've ever seen in my entire life, can only reward a fraction of the people that participate), and discounted add-ons that we all know very few people buy in general, are more rewarding to these legacy customers than every single one of them receiving nearly $7 automatically off their monthly bill each month? 

[Wolfcore]

You unironically solved your own question with your final sentence, and don't even know it.

It's also the point I'm trying to make, and why I assume Softech didn't answer me. We all know what the definition of value is, and we all know that addons will only apply to a small portion of the subscriber base. If you're trying to provide the best possible value for your customers, you're referring to the majority of them, of course. Therefore, discounted addon's are not superior to receiving $7+ off of your monthly bill each month.

To play devil's advocate though, and to be fair, I'm also making assumptions, because I don't know what these new "addons" will be (assuming there are even any). For example, maybe there's an "addon" that let's you exchange 1 point for $5 off your monthly bill. In this case, yeah, one could argue that this may be a better value.

But I have to base things off of the information we have, and use occam's razor, because it makes the most sense. If they were going to tip things more in our favour, and give us MORE (best possible) value, they would have come out by now, and stopped the damage to their subscriber base, and their reputation. They most definitely wouldn't want to be paying these CCTS fees either. It would also be pretty crazy for a company to go from paying the best rewards in the business, to increasing those even further, without any real competition to those rewards. It just wouldn't make sense, sorry.

So what makes the most sense, is that they're just lying in their statement about providing us the best possible value. They've done it before, so there's history to back it up.  

[ShawnC13]

---

@RetiredGuy1 wrote:

Online dictionaries define “best value” as a term that is used to describe the most advantageous offer possible in a given situation. It can be applied to both tangible and intangible things, and is often determined by taking into consideration multiple factors such as quality, price, and convenience.
———

I agree that, in that context, its easy to understand how a reduced bill could be considered as more “advantageous” than a reduced add-on. In the interest of equal opportunity, the former also applies to ALL customers and the latter to only some.

---

@RetiredGuy1  this statement isn't true without some additional wording like ALL LEGACY rewards customers.  Again I don't like the decision, and hte way PM is playing it with  the points is that they can be used for entering giveaways as well which wasn't possible with legacy rewards (YES I WILL MISS LEGACY REWARDS)

[RetiredGuy1]

Online dictionaries define “best value” as a term that is used to describe the most advantageous offer possible in a given situation. It can be applied to both tangible and intangible things, and is often determined by taking into consideration multiple factors such as quality, price, and convenience.
———

I agree that, in that context, its easy to understand how a reduced bill could be considered as more “advantageous” than a reduced add-on. In the interest of equal opportunity, the former also applies to ALL customers and the latter to only some.

[Wolfcore]

I was looking for your point of view though, that's why I'm asking. You consider cheaper addons to be the best possible value for customers?

[Public_Cust_17]

@Wolfcore  / @softech   value verb. - to calculate or reckon the monetary value of; give a specified material or financial value to; assess; appraise: 

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/value

[softech]

@Wolfcore  From your big number of replies, I certainly understand your point from a customer point of view 🙂

[Wolfcore]

"Best possible value" in this context, would refer to giving us something that we'd want more, above all else. It also implies that they weren't giving us the best value before, and this move is the way that will allow them to accomplish this. It's pretty straightforward if you ask me.

Do you believe that the vast majority of customers would prefer cheaper addons, instead of $7+ off their bill each month? Nobody would honestly believe that.