Cingular "Fast Forward" Caution!

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:32:31
-0800, Scott en Aztlán <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:50:23 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Bull****. Those are more than covered by the "activation fee" that you
>>>pay when you add a new line. The fact that I signed up last year with
>>>no contract whatsoever is proof of this.
>>
>>I don't agree.
>
>Why not? Any logical reason, or do you just enjoy arguing?

Lots of experience in Customer Service and Billing. And you?

>>>>Cingular wants to minimize churn.
>>>
>>>Gee, maybe they could try doing that by offering better service at a
>>>better price?
>>
>>I think it is; otherwise I would be with some other carrier.
>
>Then they don't need to lock you in with a contract, do they?

The contract reflects the deal I'm being given. Without a minimum contact,
the price would probably be higher because costs would be higher.

>>>BTW, what's so special about the cellular industry that they feel
>>>their "churn" problems are so much worse than, say, the pay TV
>>>industry's? ...
>>
>>What's special is the ease of switching carriers. It's much harder to switch
>>TV services.
>
>Hardly. ...

We'll just have to agree to disagree -- I don't care to argue about it.

>>Sounds to me like cutting off your nose to spite your face, since that's
>>standard industry practice.
>
>That doesn't mean it's not asinine.

I think that speaks for itself.

>>You're not the kind of customer cellular carriers
>>want, so they choose not to give you what you want -- that's how a free market
>>works.
>
>I pay Cingualr $114/month in service charges - just what sort of
>customers does Cingular want if not people like me?

People willing to accept term contracts.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

---

› See More: Cingular "Fast Forward" Caution!

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:44:01
-0800, Scott en Aztlán <[email protected]> wrote:

>I've presented FACTS to back up my position. ...

Actually you haven't.

>Then I guess this conversation is over.

Works for me.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Scott en Aztlán <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Then I guess this conversation is over.

All discussions with John Navas are over before they even begin. He's always
right, because he's John Navas and he said so. You're supposed to accept
that, and if you don't, you're a fool, because John Navas said so.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
[email protected]. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on 24 Dec 2004 18:28:50 GMT, Howard
<[email protected].> wrote:

>Scott en Aztlán <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Then I guess this conversation is over.
>
>All discussions with John Navas are over before they even begin. He's always
>right, because he's John Navas and he said so. You're supposed to accept
>that, and if you don't, you're a fool, because John Navas said so.

FYI, your post specifically violates the newsgroup charter, which I think
speaks for itself.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> FYI, your post specifically violates the newsgroup charter, which I
> think speaks for itself.

Not surprising. I'm quite sure questioning John Navas is specifically
listed as a violation.

I also don't care. You also have no idea which group I posted this to, and
which one is the crossposted one. As usual, you have no clue, but think
you do.

But I'm the one who is wrong, because you're John Navas. Forgive me, O
King.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
[email protected]. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on 24 Dec 2004 21:27:23 GMT, Howard
<[email protected].> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> FYI, your post specifically violates the newsgroup charter, which I
>> think speaks for itself.

>But I'm the one who is wrong, ...

Agreed.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news[email protected]:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on 24 Dec 2004 21:27:23 GMT,
> Howard
><[email protected].> wrote:
>
>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> FYI, your post specifically violates the newsgroup charter, which I
>>> think speaks for itself.
>
>>But I'm the one who is wrong, ...
>
> Agreed.

John Navas, ladies and gentleman. Unable to hold a conversation on his
own, relies on misquoting others.

I really don't need to tell people what you are, you do so much a better
job of it than I ever could. Thank you.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
[email protected]. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on 25 Dec 2004 20:10:37 GMT, Howard
<[email protected].> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>news[email protected]:
>
>> In <[email protected]> on 24 Dec 2004 21:27:23 GMT,
>> Howard
>><[email protected].> wrote:
>>
>>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> FYI, your post specifically violates the newsgroup charter, which I
>>>> think speaks for itself.
>>
>>>But I'm the one who is wrong, ...
>>
>> Agreed.
>
>John Navas, ladies and gentleman. Unable to hold a conversation on his
>own, relies on misquoting others.

I see your sense of humor is as poor as your manners. Oh well. Have a nice
day.