Cell phone company…do I have ANY rights?!?
Okay so I have a tmobile sidekick and my contract ends in september 2010.
1) A few months ago, thousands of sidekick users lost all their contacts, pictures, text messaging capabilities. I didn’t lose my contacts list but lost everything else. When that got fixed finally about 4 weeks later I never recieved any compensation. I read in the paper that Tmobile was compensating angry customers, however I never recieved a dime.
2) About 4 months ago NONE of my callers were able to reach my voice mail box, I called customer service multiple times and they threw me in the loop asking me to press buttons and rest my phone etc etc. I just got this fixed last night, now FINALLY people will be able to leave me voice messages.
3) on thanksgiving my phone gave out for no reason, the backlight just stopped working and i wasn’t able to see who was calling, texting me etc etc. Tmobile sent me a free refurbished phone because I had a warranty.
4) About 8pm this evening, I was going to make a call. My device informed me that I had no network and gave me a different warning when I made a phone call, send a text, go online or sign into my ymess/aol servers. My phone calls didn’t go through and obviously everything else didn’t either and discovered that all my contacts, pictures, previous calls, my Faves list, ring tones..basically anything that I added to the phone was completely wiped out.
I ended up calling customer service, who was able to fix the problem in about 5 minutes…no problem I didn’t sweat it.
5) At about 10 pm I went to make a call only to discover the same thing had happened again only this time my contacts list was normal. My faves and all my phone usage capabilities all dissapeared yet again.
To shorten this up, I called customer care and they tried to help me fix the issue again but this time it can’t be fixed. She offered to send me a refurbished phone…which is what I have now and is acting up on me! I said no, I want a new phone, I don’t want to go through this again. (I was actually really polite despite how frustrated I was, I know yelling and throwing a tantrum won’t get me anywhere). She said the only other option is to do a trade in and cause i’m not allowed one yet I would have to buy a new phone on my own. I didn’t want to do that and said I might just go ahead and cancel, if I’m going to buy a whole new phone I’m gonna go for a different company. So she sent me to another rep (she mentioned that he had better ability to bend the rules a bit)…well he wanted me to buy a new device of equivilant year as my phone for 60 bucks. When I first signed onto this stupid company, I didn’t pay nearly as much for the phone!! I haggled and got a deal for my first phone.
He said there was nothing else he could do. I’m so frustrated. I just don’t want to go through this again, to cancel it’s gonna cost me 200 bucks. I feel like they’re not providing me good cell phone service and that I either should get a new phone OR I shouldn’t have to pay for the cancellation fee.
Do I have any rights here? I’m at a loss, and I’m not sure what to do.
Advice please?
call back..speak to a manager..explain the situation..see what they can do..if they still wont do anything ask for the corporate address/fax #/email to file a formal complaint in writing..make sure to get the managers name and user ID or extension or whatever he will give you..all big corporations have a department to handle escalated complaints like this
also advise you will be forwarding your written complaint to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), Federal Trade Commission (FTC) , the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and the state comptrollers office for whatever state you are in.
it is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL that you mention ALL of the above governing boards!!
Alot of times companies and/or management will have policies and procedures in place that as soon as a customer mentions any sort of reporting action, its like a magic word and suddenly other options become available. When you speak to this manager and if it gets to this point, dont be an assh0le but be firm. Your tone of voice is everything and he has to know that you mean business and you will follow through with your threats if necessary.
This isnt a guarantee that this will get you immediate results from the company, but if it doesnt make sure you really do follow through and send out those complaints in writing. If your complaint is sent to one of those commissions and it is forwarded to tmobile BY THAT COMMISSION then that takes things to a whole new level and most companies take that very seriously.
Just remember..get names/departments/locations/operator ID’s/extensions/phone numbers of whoever you talk to. These are anonymous call centers you are dealing with and may have multiple locations. Make everything in writing! Its taken much more serious.
Start with a manager and go from there. You are right about not losing your temper. This is important. You catch more flies with honey. Good luck!! Hope this helps!
spiritually speaking, how would?
how would you summarize this:
—————————————————————————————————–
WASHINGTON, Oct 21 (Reuters) – Democrats in the U.S. Congress moved on Wednesday to repeal the health insurance industry’s exemption from antitrust laws, cranking up the pressure in a growing battle over President Barack Obama’s hhealth carereform plans.
The moves were the latest chapter in an escalating feud between the industry and backers of sweeping hhealth carereform that would tighten regulations and create a government-run public insurance option to compete with private insurers.
The fight intensified after an industry lobbying group issued a report saying the hhealth carereform plan under consideration in Congress would raise insurance premiums, which sparked protests from Democrats and the White House.
"It’s time to level the playing field for American hhealth careconsumers and make the insurance industry play by the same rules that other industries live by," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said.
Proposals in the Senate and House of Representatives would repeal or refine the antitrust exemption granted the industry in 1945. Supporters said the exemption limited competition in an industry where one or two companies often dominate a state insurance market.
"It’s a different universe today than it was in 1945, and this exemption is antiquated, out-of-date, and doesn’t belong," Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said.
Senate Democratic leaders said they would offer their proposal to repeal the exemption as an amendment to a sweeping bill to overhaul the U.S. hhealth caresystem when it hits the Senate floor in the next few weeks.
The House of Representatives Judiciary Committee passed a plan to limit the exemption and make health and medical malpractice insurance companies subject to laws on price-fixing and market allocation.
House Democratic leaders said it would be folded into a hhealth carereform bill that is nearly ready for floor debate.
The trade group representing the industry, America’s Health Insurance Plans, said in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers that the proposals "attempt to remedy a problem that does not exist."
"We believe that health insurers have not been engaging in anti-competitive conduct," Chief Executive Karen Ignagni said.
Obama has made his top domestic priority a hhealth careoverhaul that reins in costs, regulates the insurance market and expands coverage, and the insurance industry has stepped up its opposition to the emerging legislation.
Opinion polls show the public is divided on his hhealth careplans, including the public insurance option backed by Obama and liberals as a way to increase competition but derided by critics as a big-government takeover.
A USA Today/Gallup poll released on Wednesday found 50 percent backed a public option and 46 percent opposed it, but a CNN poll found 61 percent supported an insurance option administered by the government and 38 percent opposed.
HOUSE CLOSE TO DECISION
Democratic House leaders, who have been meeting for weeks to merge three hhealth carebills into one, are close to making final decisions on a plan that could include the most liberal version of a government-run public insurance option.
Democrats were conducting a head count to gauge whether a bill that includes the strong version of a public option preferred by House liberals had the 218 votes needed to pass.
"We will have a bill passed well before Thanksgiving," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters on Wednesday. House Democrats planned a Thursday morning meeting on hhealth care
The inclusion of the strongest possible government-run public insurance option in the House bill could force a confrontation with the Senate, where the public option has less support and is less certain to be included in a final bill.
Senate Democratic leaders are merging two bills, but only one of the proposals includes the government-run plan. The negotiators discussed the public option and other items in a 90-minute meeting on Wednesday night with no decisions made.
"It’s got to marinate and percolate a little bit. The yeast has got to rise still," Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said after the meeting.
Pelosi said on Tuesday that preliminary Congressional Budget Office estimates indicated all three versions of a public option would reduce the budget deficit over 10 years and at least two of the three would come in below $900 billion.
On a related measure, Senate Democratic leaders dropped a proposal to scrap the current Medicare payment system for doctors after the bill failed to gain enough votes to clear a procedural hurdle.
Republicans and a number of Democrats opposed a proposal to boost doctors’ payments under Medicare, the health program for the elderly, by $250 billion over 10 years. Opponents were concerned the measure would add to a reco
dee da dee didn’t work. tried that, i tried "this is stupid" i tried "i don’t care" but none of those work!
heck, i even tried Chuck Norris! that didn’t work for some strange reason!
i tried asking questions these questions so many places but no help.
Why are you posting this on R&S? Ask someone on Government and Politics.
When was the first economic Price floor and ceiling put into effect?
i want to know 2 things (but essentially 5 questions 
)
1. when was the first price ceiling/floor put into effect?
1.1 what did it effect? (i.e. option, stock’s …)
1.2 was it first put into effect as a rule of certain trading house’s, then latter adopted as state or federal laws?
2 who was responsible for the rule/law?
2.1 was there book’s that initiated the idea, or was it mathematicians ?
13 minutes ago – 4 days left to answer.
(im interested in the america trading sector EG 1850+) hence the Reference to the stock’s and options
if you cant anser in detail and seriously don’t anser please
In Babylon. You’d think people would learn something after 4000 years of failure.
help with option trading?
I was wondering if it was a smart decision to buy options for the next month the day before the current months expiration or after the months expiration. Basically I am asking if options trade a certain way b4 expiration
Here is an example of what i am asking say I wish to buy Feb calls and it is jan 14th the day before the january calls expire should I buy my Feb calls before the the Jan calls or after, do stocks follow some sort of general trading trend of expiration day.
P.S. I am intelligently aware of option trading I understand the risk and I have traded them before successfully. I was wondering if there was a general strategy for buying options close to a existing option expiration. I know the stock will do well, but I don’t want to buy just to see a dip on expiration day, therefore i ask if there is such a rule for this specific scenario.
thanks uncle D thats more of the answer I was looking for!
Here’s a different approach. Try selling out-of-the-money options just before expiration to gain incremental income. You’ll recall the beauty of options decay: at the very end of their life, options waste away the fastest. By selling out-of-the-money options a few days ahead of expiration you can maximize this decay effect to your advantage. You won’t make a killing, but you can construct some high win percentages on a monthly basis. For more info see http://www.safe-options-trading-income.com/options-trading-techniques.html
I’m still wating Republicans, why is reforming health care communism?
Maybe, in YOUR opinion, its a little too much regulation. But if you call it communism, your basically admitting you don’t know what Communism means.
Communism is
a form of socialism that abolishes private ownership. THERE IS NO PRIVATE OWNERSHIP BEING ABOLISHED HERE! THERE ISN’T EVEN A PUBLIC OPTION! INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE ALL STILL PRIVATE!
Have you even read the bill or do you just like repeating insults? Much like a 5 year old perhaps?
The problem is your republicans just don’t want to help the common man, and Communism is just a euphemism for "I hate poor people."
I’m sorry, but I read the communist manifest and this is nothing like it. Its just tougher regulation on companies, shit I mean are you going to call rules on cheating the stock market Marxism too? Like Insider trading? Ignorance…
Stop this bullshit nonsense. You just produce hate.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:communism&ei=KRg2S4PiNZDAngezlvH-CA&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved=0CAkQkAE
So, its not then.
It is not, but do not expect those that claim it is to understand it. Mind you the attitude of those who say that reminds me of the past, when those who said the world was round were deemed blasphemers in order to shut them up. Now we just all those who want to make the world better Communists.
I do not understand why so many Americans have fallen for lies about healthcare in the USA, abroad and also the planned reforms [1]. I mean, if the healthcare system in the USA is so good, why have no other nations taken it up? Could it be due to the following facts?
FACT – the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet [2].
FACT – the US has higher death rates for kids under five than western European countries with universal health coverage [3].
Or if the US healthcare system is run so well, why not run the fire service like the healthcare system? [4]
Maybe that is because in the USA, insurance companies push up costs, buy politicians and refuse to pay claims that people pay for [5]. (Look up Wendell Potter on YouTube to hear more if the link below is too long.)
Obama wants to make insurance cheaper, stop insurance companies from refusing health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and make sure they pay out when they are meant to [6], a system similar to that which works in Taiwan [7]. He debated this before he was elected [8].
Is it right that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and so many other industrialised nations with universal healthcare?
If you think my arguments are wrong, e-mail me with proof. But if you can not, let Obama try to help America. If he fails, vote him out in 2012.
How Would the Healthcare Bill be Helpful?
If the Healthcare Bill Becomes Law, Will Any Private Company Write Policies?
If your answer is "Yes, private companies would still write health insurance policies", then please tell me, "Why would they?"
Once the rules change so that companies writing new policies have to write them for all applicants including those with pre-existing illness and disability, is that really insurance?
Isn’t that just harnessing up the shareholders of the corporation to pay the ongoing costs of the applicant with an existing illness of disability?
Why would the shareholders to that? What would be in their heads? What would their business model be?
Maybe something like "Oh yes, we get to pay the costs of this applicant’s illness or disability, and look how much money we will be able to give to help that applicant. Then we can fail to breakeven, and become bankrupt and see our shares go to zero value, oh that would be fun, how wonderful!"
When I got my MBA, I never saw a company with a business model like that. AIG may have had that, but they weren’t doing it on purpose.
Keep in mind that after the rules change, the old policies can stay in place. The old "book" of existing contracts can become the entire insurance business of the corporation. As long as they don’t write new policies, they don’t have to take all comers and insure people with pre-existing illness or pre-existing disability. They don’t have to go into the charitable payment for sick people business, which doesn’t seem a very smart business model for a profit seeking corporation.
Ceasing writing new health insurance won’t put these companies out of business, but continuing to do so surely will.
So, they will apply their talents to other forms of risk-related trading. The Cap and Trade Bill, if it is enacted into law will create a vast market for pollution permissions. These will be actively bought and sold by firms that have experience in forward projection of financial values — like health insurance companies. It’s an Enron style business. Then there’s also fire insurance, liability, flood, inability to work insurance, long-term care, all sorts of elements in the risk projection business that could be smoothly integrated into their business models to replace writing new health insurance policies, and would be.
So the public option would become the only option for persons seeking health insurance who don’t already have a policy.
How would that work? That’s the Bad Business Model company, and it would work by massive draws on the Federal Treasury until the moment when Congress realizes that it made a huge mistake, and that the Federal government is bankrupt because of operating a business that is well and truly not sensible.
When would that happen? It would only take about two years for the Congress to figure this out.
What would they do?
They would have to close down the public option companies.
So what then?
Then nobody can get health insurance from any source.
You mean the private corporations would not get back into that business?
Right, I don’t think they would. Once burned, twice shy.
So with no health insurance, would healthcare costs be lower for the average American family?
They might be, as long as nobody in that family got sick. But the number of bankrupt families due to unexpected health problems would go up dramatically.
Would this be better than what we have right now?
No, it would not be better.
Is there a good reason to enact the Healthcare Bill?
No, there’s no good reason to do that.
It would help by improving the healthcare of Americans.
FACT – Insurance companies in the USA admit to pushing up prices, buying politicians and not paying out claims when they should [1]
FACT – PER PERSON the USA spends more on healthcare than any other nation on the planet [2]
FACT – Obama debated his plans before the election for healthcare [3]
FACT – the chance of a child under five of dying in the USA is greater than industrialised nations with universal health coverage [4]
FACT – Obama was elected by the American people to bring in change [5]
FACT – Obama wants to stop insurance companies from screwing American [6]
FACT – The reforms Obama wants work in the Netherlands and Switzerland [7]
Let me know if my facts are wrong, but please provide proof.
Is the Healthcare Bill Sensible at All?
If the Healthcare Bill Becomes Law, Will Any Private Company Write Policies?
If your answer is "Yes, private companies would still write health insurance policies", then please tell me, "Why would they?"
Once the rules change so that companies writing new policies have to write them for all applicants including those with pre-existing illness and disability, is that really insurance?
Isn’t that just harnessing up the shareholders of the corporation to pay the ongoing costs of the applicant with an existing illness of disability?
Why would the shareholders to that? What would be in their heads? What would their business model be?
Maybe something like "Oh yes, we get to pay the costs of this applicant’s illness or disability, and look how much money we will be able to give to help that applicant. Then we can fail to breakeven, and become bankrupt and see our shares go to zero value, oh that would be fun, how wonderful!"
When I got my MBA, I never saw a company with a business model like that. AIG may have had that, but they weren’t doing it on purpose.
Keep in mind that after the rules change, the old policies can stay in place. The old "book" of existing contracts can become the entire insurance business of the corporation. As long as they don’t write new policies, they don’t have to take all comers and insure people with pre-existing illness or pre-existing disability. They don’t have to go into the charitable payment for sick people business, which doesn’t seem a very smart business model for a profit seeking corporation.
Ceasing writing new health insurance won’t put these companies out of business, but continuing to do so surely will.
So, they will apply their talents to other forms of risk-related trading. The Cap and Trade Bill, if it is enacted into law will create a vast market for pollution permissions. These will be actively bought and sold by firms that have experience in forward projection of financial values — like health insurance companies. It’s an Enron style business. Then there’s also fire insurance, liability, flood, inability to work insurance, long-term care, all sorts of elements in the risk projection business that could be smoothly integrated into their business models to replace writing new health insurance policies, and would be.
So the public option would become the only option for persons seeking health insurance who don’t already have a policy.
How would that work? That’s the Bad Business Model company, and it would work by massive draws on the Federal Treasury until the moment when Congress realizes that it made a huge mistake, and that the Federal government is bankrupt because of operating a business that is well and truly not sensible.
When would that happen? It would only take about two years for the Congress to figure this out.
What would they do?
They would have to close down the public option companies.
So what then?
Then nobody can get health insurance from any source.
You mean the private corporations would not get back into that business?
Right, I don’t think they would. Once burned, twice shy.
So with no health insurance, would healthcare costs be lower for the average American family?
They might be, as long as nobody in that family got sick. But the number of bankrupt families due to unexpected health problems would go up dramatically.
Would this be better than what we have right now?
No, it would not be better.
Is there a good reason to enact the Healthcare Bill?
No, there’s no good reason to do that.
Anybody who has done any research on the subject knows this is just a way to get to complete government run health care. It’s not up for debate, it’s a fact. Even liberal parties are saying that the conservatives are right that it will create a government run system. The difference is they are happy it will.
I bet you people can’t wait until pregnant women are giving birth in hospital bathrooms or dieing of colon cancer before they can get examined. Just like Britain or Canada.
Check you facts. Research what goes on in other countries with government health care.
This isn’t about helping people, it’s about government control.
………..
Quote from Josh:
""Once the rules change so that companies writing new policies have to write them for all applicants including those with pre-existing illness and disability, is that really insurance?"
Yes, of course. That’s the whole idea of insurance, shared risk, and it’s the way health insurance used to work. The insurance companies are actually *in favor* of this provision."
———
Are you serious Josh? Do you even think about why this is a bad thing? The whole point (and fairness) of insurance is that you pay IN CASE you get sick. Not WHEN you get sick. Why should an insurance company pay for your coverage when you haven’t been paying into the pot until that point? Getting sick and then going to a company and saying, "Pay for my expenses." is not insurance.
If you don’t buy insurance ahead of time, it’s nobody fault but your own if you get sick without coverage. No insurance company can survive when people only come to them after they have gotten sick. And it certainly is NOT shared risk! It’s called a handout!
…………….
Wow to the person below me who actually believes all this will "lower the deficit". Good luck with that. If this passes, just saying now that I told you so. Our debt is going to crush us, and this will add to it.
If the Healthacre Bill Becomes Law, Will Any Private Company Write Policies?
If your answer is "Yes, private companies would still write health insurance policies", then please tell me, "Why would they?"
Once the rules change so that companies writing new policies have to write them for all applicants including those with pre-existing illness and disability, is that really insurance?
Isn’t that just harnessing up the shareholders of the corporation to pay the ongoing costs of the applicant with an existing illness of disability?
Why would the shareholders to that? What would be in their heads? What would their business model be?
Maybe something like "Oh yes, we get to pay the costs of this applicant’s illness or disability, and look how much money we will be able to give to help that applicant. Then we can fail to breakeven, and become bankrupt and see our shares go to zero value, oh that would be fun, how wonderful!"
When I got my MBA, I never saw a company with a business model like that. AIG may have had that, but they weren’t doing it on purpose.
Keep in mind that after the rules change, the old policies can stay in place. The old "book" of existing contracts can become the entire insurance business of the corporation. As long as they don’t write new policies, they don’t have to take all comers and insure people with pre-existing illness or pre-existing disability. They don’t have to go into the charitable payment for sick people business, which doesn’t seem a very smart business model for a profit seeking corporation.
Ceasing writing new health insurance won’t put these companies out of business, but continuing to do so surely will.
So, they will apply their talents to other forms of risk-related trading. The Cap and Trade Bill, if it is enacted into law will create a vast market for pollution permissions. These will be actively bought and sold by firms that have experience in forward projection of financial values — like health insurance companies. It’s an Enron style business. Then there’s also fire insurance, liability, flood, inability to work insurance, long-term care, all sorts of elements in the risk projection business that could be smoothly integrated into their business models to replace writing new health insurance policies, and would be.
So the public option would become the only option for persons seeking health insurance who don’t already have a policy.
How would that work? That’s the Bad Business Model company, and it would work by massive draws on the Federal Treasury until the moment when Congress realizes that it made a huge mistake, and that the Federal government is bankrupt because of operating a business that is well and truly not sensible.
When would that happen? It would only take about two years for the Congress to figure this out.
What would they do?
They would have to close down the public option companies.
So what then?
Then nobody can get health insurance from any source.
You mean the private corporations would not get back into that business?
Right, I don’t think they would. Once burned, twice shy.
So with no health insurance, would healthcare costs be lower for the average American family?
They might be, as long as nobody in that family got sick. But the number of bankrupt families due to unexpected health problems would go up dramatically.
Would this be better than what we have right now?
No, it would not be better.
Is there a good reason to enact the Healthcare Bill?
No, there’s no good reason to do that.
TO ACERMILL:
NO PRIVATE CORPORATION IS IN THE "RISK SPREADING BUSINESS".
THAT IS A SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL BUT INCIDENTAL BYPRODUCT OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE BUSINESS WHICH IS LIKE ALL OTHER BUSINESSES DONE FOR PROFIT (NOT FOR RISK SPREADING).
YOUR EXCELLENT AND WELL-INFORMED RESPONSE IS NOT DISPOSATIVE OF THE ISSUE I RAISED. WHY WOULD IT NOT BE MORE PROFITABLE TO SIMPLY KEEP THEIR CURRENT BOOK, AND MOVE INTO OTHER SECTORS OF THE INSURANCE OR RISK FINANCE BUSINESS?
I SAY THAT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY HARD PUT TO PAY THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS. IF THOSE GET RAISED UP (AS YOU ADMIT THEY WILL) THE CUSTOMERS WILL LEAVE. POLICIES THAT ARE REALLY HARD TO SELL ARE NOT A BASIS FOR THE MOST PROFITABLE BUSINESS THOSE COMPANIES COULD BE IN. LIKE WATER THEY WILL FIND THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE WHICH I THINK WOULD BE CESSATION OF NEW POLICY WRITING AND RE-SHAPING THEIR BUSINESS MODEL TO SERVE OTHER MORE PROFITABLE SECTORS.
AS TO THE LENGTH ISSUE — SORRY ABOUT THAT — IT’S NOT TWITTABLE
Yes, because they’ll be able to make money easier.
That’s exactly the way it’s worked in Europe. Most of the smaller health insurance companies will go out of business.
The people who pay the most for health insurance – the sickest people, will go to the government plans, which will be "affordable" because they’re taxpayer subsidized. The health insurance companies left will be able to choose the healthiest people, and therefore lower rates for those healthiest people.
Those with private insurance will have a higher standard of care, with almost no wait. Those with public insurance will stand in line – just like in Europe.
I promise, even if the health bill makes it "illegal" to sell a new policy – which I doubt that will pass – there will be SOME product on the market to take advantage of the massive adverse selection advantage created by the government program.
Just like has happened in Europe. In Canada, if you choose the public option, THEN it’s illegal for you to also buy private insurance.
All you need to do, is look what has happened in the countries that HAVE public health insurance.
The kicker is, the main goal of the ‘reform’ bill, is to lower costs – it won’t do that. And of course, they wouldn’t touch tort reform with a 10 foot pole – but that would ALSO have a significant effect. So clearly, either our politicians are completely stupid, or that isn’t the real goal of the ‘reform’. I choose to believe the latter.
Anybody interested in joining a fantasy football money league on Yahoo?
$25 Entry Fee 100% Payout $150-First Place $75-Second Place $25-Third Place If you have any questions feel free to e-mail or call me. markmartinfan69@yahoo.com 845-337-4632
League ID#: 548986
League Name: $$Show Me The Money$$
Password: goodluck
Draft Type: Live Draft
Draft Time: Wed Sep 2 7:00pm EDT [ Add to My Calendar ]
Max Teams: 10
Scoring Type: Head-to-Head
Start Scoring on: Week 1
Can’t Cut List Provider: Yahoo! Sports
Max Moves: No maximum
Max Acquisitions per Week: No maximum
Max Trades: No maximum
Trade Reject Time: 2
Trade End Date: November 20, 2009
Trade Review: League Votes
Waiver Time: 2 days
Waiver Type: Continual rolling list
Weekly Waivers None
Post Draft Players: Follow Waiver Rules
Playoffs: Week 15 and 16 (4 teams)
Divisions: No
Playoff Seeding Options: Division winners awarded top playoff seeds
Roster Positions: QB, WR, WR, WR, RB, RB, TE, K, DEF, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN
Fractional Points: No
Negative Points: Yes
Offense League Value Yahoo! Default Value
Passing Yards 25 yards per point
Passing Touchdowns 4
Interceptions -1
Rushing Yards 10 yards per point
Rushing Touchdowns 6
Reception Yards 10 yards per point
Reception Touchdowns 6
Return Touchdowns 6
2-Point Conversions 2
Fumbles Lost -2
Offensive Fumble Return TD 6
Kickers League Value Yahoo! Default Value
Field Goals 0-19 Yards 3
Field Goals 20-29 Yards 3
Field Goals 30-39 Yards 3
Field Goals 40-49 Yards 4
Field Goals 50+ Yards 5
Point After Attempt Made 1
Defense/Special Teams League Value Yahoo! Default Value
Sack 1
Interception 2
Fumble Recovery 2
Touchdown 6
Safety 2
Block Kick 2
Points Allowed 0 points 10
Points Allowed 1-6 points 7
Points Allowed 7-13 points 4
Points Allowed 14-20 points 1
Points Allowed 21-27 points 0
Points Allowed 28-34 points -1
Points Allowed 35+ points -4
Theres no law against it. and i doubt nayone is going to wanna pay $25 to get ina league wen they can get into one for free
World War One:Essay?
Should i dedicate a paragraph to the assassination as currently the assassination is part of the introduction. Also would the essay comply with the characteristics and requirements for a Historic Essay. If not how can i imporve it???
Just to tell you one thing: Gavrilo Princip wasn’t a member of Black Hand, but he belonged to the movement of Young Bosnia (Mlada Bosna in Serbian).