Verizon Worsens America's Choice Calling Plan--No more roaming, even at extra cost, No more National Single Rate Plan.

[email protected] wrote:
> Jim Seymour wrote:
>> In article
>> <[email protected]>,
>> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>> "Quick" <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> message news:1116954161.859746@sj-nntpcache-5...
>>>> So what's your point?
>>>>
>>>> Was this a public service for those who can't read?
>>>>
>> [snip]
>>> It was
>>> news to yours truly, and I'm sure quite a few others,
>>> who don't participate on the Verizon newsgroup.
>>
>> It was timely, for me, being as I'm on the verge of
>> choosing a new plan and phones. I'll *probably* stick
>> with SPCS, but VZ would probably be my 2nd choice. Or
>> would have been.
>>
>> I wonder what VZ hopes to gain by shrinking their
>> coverage?
> [snip]
>
> The accuracy of this post is in question, and I might
> consider looking at the plans in detail yourself, especially
> if there is a specific region of interest. I switched from
> "more bars" ATT/Cingular to Verizon and have had no
> problems in my areas of travel.

Actually it was mostly misinformation (and 4 months after
the fact). If interested you should read Bill Radio's detailed
correction posted here on alt.cellular.verizon. (I guess if you
don't have an agenda you don't make a point to cross post
the known universe).

-Quick

---

› See More: Verizon Worsens America's Choice Calling Plan--No more roaming, even at extra cost, No more National Single Rate Plan.

In article <[email protected]>,
Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Jim Seymour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I wonder what VZ hopes to gain by shrinking their coverage?
>
> According to the Verizon CSR, they were having a problem with complaints
> about roaming charges. This stemmed from two issues.
>
> First, many people do not understand what the roaming indicators on their
> phone means. The little flashing or non-flashing triangle, or the solid or
> flashing :"Extended Network" message (complicating this is the fact that the
> flashing versus non-flashing is counter-intuitive, flashing should be used
> when you are being charged roaming, and solid should be used when you are on
> the Extended Network, but it's the opposite way around).

Exactly! This happened to me last year on the Miss. River... The
regular 'help' gave me the wrong info, only after bring it up, by
chance, with a 'data' specialist did she correctly inform me about the
solid triangle. She offer to credit back all roaming charges and would
call me in 45 days to make sure it was done... she did call me, which
was impressive service.

I'd love to switch to a GSM based service, but in my home area VZ is
really very good coverage... my biggest grip is with their position on
'bluetooth', they will not make it fully functional... so you hopefully
will use "Get it Now"... there is a Class Action suit for this... great
another 30% off coupon at goods I don't want and are 150% overvalued.

jay
Wed May 25, 2005
mailto:[email protected]


>
> Second, many people never update their PRL. As Verizon has reduced its
> extended network coverage, the phone will still indicate that you are not
> roaming, if you have an old PRL that included the area you're in as part of
> the extended network.
>
> So the solution to eliminating complaints about roaming charges is obviously
> to eliminate all roaming. Not having your phone work at all is obviously
> better than paying for roaming!
>
> The non-roaming AC does have a larger extended network than the old roaming
> AC, but there are still areas where the choice is roaming or no service.
>
> The solution is to carry a second phone from a prepaid provider, that allows
> roaming, when traveling. An old TDMA/AMPS phone on Beyond Wireless
> (http://gobeyondwireless.com) will work, and has no minimums, and no
> expiration (other than making one call every 60 days).
>
>

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> The accuracy of this post is in question,

You are certainly welcome to call Verizon and check the accuracy. I called
them three times, just to be sure I got the same answer each time.

> and I might consider looking
> at the plans in detail yourself, especially if there is a specific
> region of interest. I switched from "more bars" ATT/Cingular to
> Verizon and have had no problems in my areas of travel.

In most areas of travel you will have no problem. But if you ever go off the
beaten path, you most certainly will encounter "No Service" where in fact
service does exist. This can be dealt with by carrying a second, prepaid
phone, that does allow roaming.

You are also correct that Verizon has "more bars" in most areas. Only in
areas where Verizon was not the A or B carrier, and is 1900 Mhz-only, is
their coverage markedly worse than Cingular.

"Go Fig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:250520050921353634%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Jim Seymour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > I wonder what VZ hopes to gain by shrinking their coverage?
> >
> > According to the Verizon CSR, they were having a problem with complaints
> > about roaming charges. This stemmed from two issues.
> >
> > First, many people do not understand what the roaming indicators on
their
> > phone means. The little flashing or non-flashing triangle, or the solid
or
> > flashing :"Extended Network" message (complicating this is the fact that
the
> > flashing versus non-flashing is counter-intuitive, flashing should be
used
> > when you are being charged roaming, and solid should be used when you
are on
> > the Extended Network, but it's the opposite way around).
>
> Exactly! This happened to me last year on the Miss. River... The
> regular 'help' gave me the wrong info, only after bring it up, by
> chance, with a 'data' specialist did she correctly inform me about the
> solid triangle.

When I was in Alaska, I couldn't convince my sister-in-law that the flashing
meant that she was on the extended network. She called customer service, and
they gave her the wrong answer, telling her that Verizon had no service in
Alaska (and adding that Alaska is our 50th state!). I told her to call back
and ask again, since with Verizon, you really should go for two out of
three, or three out of five, to have a good chance of getting the correct
information.

I dont know, I am a cingular customer, but I have seen this complaint
once before. The other person had the same result as you.

Chip
>
>
> Did Verizon ever fix their delayed (HOME NETWORK) billing problems? That's
> why I dumped them for Cingular. I got tired of being over-billed *months
> later* for calls that I made, when I never left my home area. The way it
> would work is (roughly) . . .
>
> Month 1, make many calls on the Verizon network in my home calling area
> (get 'billed' for some of them on my month 1 bill . . . but nowhere near my
> included minutes, so no overage charges)
>
> Month 2 and 3, basically same as Month 1
>
> Month 4, make many more calls on the Verizon network in my home area
> (then get billed OVERAGE CHARGES from a bunch of Month 1 calls that were
> billed as month 4, but would have been nowhere near my included anytime
> minutes total if they'd have been billed as Month 1)
>
> I called verizon several times on this issue. They claimed it was their
> mistake, and that they wouldn't fix it. So I fixed it for them. I'm a
> Cingular customer now. -Dave
>
>

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> So the solution to eliminating complaints about roaming charges is obviously
> to eliminate all roaming. Not having your phone work at all is obviously
> better than paying for roaming!

Yeahbut they also got rid of National Single-Rate, where you wouldn't
HAVE roaming complaints because you always roam without roaming charges
in the US.

Is North America's Choice still available?

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
> > So the solution to eliminating complaints about roaming charges is
obviously
> > to eliminate all roaming. Not having your phone work at all is obviously
> > better than paying for roaming!
>
> Yeahbut they also got rid of National Single-Rate, where you wouldn't
> HAVE roaming complaints because you always roam without roaming charges
> in the US.

I think that the only people signing up for NSR were people that were doing
a great deal of off-network roaming, otherwise it would have been cheaper to
use AC and pay for occasional roaming. So Verizon was probably losing money
on NSR from too many customers to keep offering it.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 00:48:44 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
>"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> Yeahbut they also got rid of National Single-Rate, where you wouldn't
>> HAVE roaming complaints because you always roam without roaming charges
>> in the US.
>
>I think that the only people signing up for NSR were people that were doing
>a great deal of off-network roaming, otherwise it would have been cheaper to
>use AC and pay for occasional roaming. So Verizon was probably losing money
>on NSR from too many customers to keep offering it.

My mother lived in a rural area, and had NSR. NSR is/was practically
a must for people in those areas, where the towers are few and far
between. You can be on a Verizon tower, drive 100 ft down the road,
and be on some other company's tower incurring roaming charges.

Great NSR story about my small rural hometown... I bought my mother a
Verizon cell phone with NSR. At that time, everything was analog (and
probably still is). NSR was not cheap, but she could afford it, and I
wanted to make things simple for her (i.e. not having to worry about
roaming). Lots of folks bought Verizion phones in that area, as the
other option was a regional provider with rather poor plans. The
nearest Verizon tower was about 20 air miles away. Reception was not
great, but usable most of the time (an external antenna helped
immensely). As I recall, one band (A or B, I'm not sure) picked up
the distant Verizon tower most of the time, but sometimes picked up a
non-Verizon tower. the other band picked up a tower from another cell
provider. I was sure glad we chose NSR! Surprisingly, many people
did not buy the NSR plan.

Some small company came in and built a cell tower a few miles outside
of town. The town was thrilled, as this closer tower would allow the
folks to ditch their antennas and bag phones. Then, the new tower was
turned on. I don't know the technical details, but somehow the
Verizon phones always connected to the new tower, and would no longer
pick up the distant Verizon tower. But this tower company did not
feel compelled to enter a roaming agreement with Verizion. So the
Verizon users who didn't have NSR started incurring roaming charges
for every call (both bands were roaming towers). The issue dragged
on for months, and it may still may not be resolved. There were
hearings and town meetings, but apparently no agency had the authority
to compell Verizon and this tower company to make an agreement. My
mother has since passed on, and my sister still has the phone with
NSR, but lives in a larger town that has better Verizion coverage.
She still benefits from NSR when she travels out away from town.

Joe Huber
[email protected]

*******"The original America's Choice calling plan from Verizon was a
great plan. It included a lot of off-network roaming, at no extra
charge in areas where Verizon did not have a network."*******

Exactly what was the catastrophic change here? Nothing. There are a few
carriers that have been dropped and some added. The major removal was
SprintPCS in many areas. However, these areas are generally covered by
Verizon native, Alltel, or another partner. The main reason for
Sprint's inclusion was generally network capacity, an area where
Verizon now does very well.

*******"Where Verizon didn't have a roaming agreement, your phone
could still be used, but at extra cost."*******

This is true in most cases, but not all. There were some providers that
you could not roam on, even at 69 cents a minute. It is true that there
are now more areas where potential roaming is not available than
before.

*******"Verizon has been worsening America's Choice almost from its
inception. They began by abandoning roaming agreements, so that there
was a lot less included roaming, and a lot more extra-cost roaming.
When this was disclosed by people who were analyzing their PRLs
(preferred roaming lists), they forced these people to take this
information off the web."*******

There has been, in reality, very little degradation in coverage since
the advent of AC. In fact, a much larger geographic area was included
in AC, even before the additions introduced for AC2. Have some small
areas been dropped. Absolutely. And for those who travel those areas
regularly, that's unfortunate. But much more territory has been
added. And yes, there has been quite a bit of discussion regarding
Verizon's reputed heavy handed ways to stop discussion of the PRLs on
the web. To whatever extent individuals were intimidated for sharing
information regarding coverage, that was truly appalling.

*******"Now they have changed the plan again, and new subscribers
will have no roaming at all, even at an extra charge. This means that
you can only use the phone in areas where Verizon has service (except
for 911 calls). If you're out of Verizon's coverage area, your phone is
a paperweight except for 911 access."*******

No roaming? Of course, that's just not true. Much of Verizon's
coverage on AC is provided by Alltel, US Cellular, SprintPCS and many
other providers. There's just no extra charge for that
roaming-it's included. (In fact the OP makes that point himself in
a later post.)

*******"Driving from the San Francisco Bay Area to Yosemite? Your
phone will stop working completely on the outskirts of Oakdale, where
Golden State Cellular is the carrier, and you'll have no coverage
inside the park. Driving up the California Coast to Mendocino? No
coverage. Alaska? No coverage. The list goes on and on."*******

This one is really out there, at least in regards to the Yosemite trip.
Golden State Cellular, the regional carrier, inside and around
Yosemite, is on every Verizon PRL. It's been included for years. Over
the past few years I've spent several frustrating afternoons on the
phone in Upper Pines campground. Frustrating only because the excellent
service I received on my Verizon phone from Golden State Cellular
"allowed" me to do business when I really should have been
relaxing!

*******"To complete the service reduction, Verizon no longer offers
the National Single Rate plan. According to their sales people, they
have NO plans that offer off-network roaming (though their web site
states that their Digital Choice plan (local plan), and their InPulse
prepaid plan, allow roaming at 69¢ per minute)."*******

Actually, at this time, VZW still offers the National Access calling
plan at the same exact cost and coverage as Single Rate. It just adds
the ability to use the minutes for data in addition to voice. There are
rumors that National Access plans may disappear, but they haven't
yet.

*******"Verizon's web site is intentionally misleading. It states,
for America's Choice, "Domestic Roaming (No roaming charges) (Coverage
not available in all areas)," without stating that what they really
mean is that you cannot actually roam onto any other carrier's
network."*******

Excuse me? How is it misleading to print a coverage map that shows
unavailable areas that are clearly marked as such? Does "Coverage Not
Available" mean nothing to you? We may not like it, but it's about
as clear as you can get. And, quite obviously, the assertion that "you
cannot actually roam onto any other carrier's network" is patently
absurd.

*******"Previous America's Choice subscribers will still be able to
roam off Verizon, though there will be less and less included roaming,
as Verizon abandons roaming agreements."*******

Could you give us your sources for the planned abandonment of roaming
agreements?

Verizon, like every other carrier, is not perfect for anyone, is
excellent for many, acceptable for some, lousy for others and useless
to a few. Due to my traveling, I carry VZW SRN and AC1, Cingular (Blue
TDMA One Rate) and SprintPCS Free and Clear America. Each has enough
advantages for me to keep them. But, AC2 is a terrific plan for a lot
of users.

Groundless accusations against a carrier are as useless as undisguised
cheerleading.

"617 Phones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> It is true that there are now more areas where potential roaming is not
available than before.

This is the change. It is catastrophic to some users, a non-issue to others.
Many users will not realize how catastrophic it is until they travel to an
area with no Verizon or Extended network.

> There has been, in reality, very little degradation in coverage since
the advent of AC.

Verizon doesn't publish the changes, you have to decoder PRLs. But in my
travels, I have noticed several coverage reductions.


> In fact, a much larger geographic area was included in AC, even before the
additions introduced for AC2. Have some small areas been dropped.
Absolutely. And for those who travel those areas regularly, that's
unfortunate. But much more territory has been added.

This is a great rationalization, until you're in an area with no coverage
and no roaming. You might be surprised how close to an urban area such areas
are.

> No roaming? Of course, that's just not true.

Of course you are well aware that it is true. There is no roaming if you are
out of AC2 coverage area, but there is still service available, be it AMPS,
or CDMA.

>This one is really out there, at least in regards to the Yosemite trip.
Golden State Cellular, the regional carrier, inside and around
Yosemite, is on every Verizon PRL. It's been included for years.

Inside the valley I can only get AMPS, even with an external antenna. Ditto
for up at Badger Pass. Is AMPS roaming on Golden State available on AC2? It
may be, but I was paying roaming charges on Golden State for AMPS.

> Could you give us your sources for the planned abandonment of roaming
agreements?

They have been terminating agreements for AC for years.

> But, AC2 is a terrific plan for a lot of users.

It is indeed. And off-network roaming, even at $1 per minute, would make it
even better. Note that the only reason they got rid of paid roaming was
because of complaints by customers that they were unaware they were roaming.
They could enable roaming upon agreement with customers that the customer
would not dispute roaming charges, and that the customer was responsible for
PRL updates and understanding the meaning of the roaming indicators.

> Groundless accusations against a carrier are as useless as undisguised
cheerleading.

Verizon has long been my favorite carrier, and the top recommendation on all
my web sites. I did not make any accusations. I simply stated the facts.

"Joseph Huber" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

<snip>

>My mother has since passed on, and my sister still has the phone with
> NSR, but lives in a larger town that has better Verizion coverage.
> She still benefits from NSR when she travels out away from town.

Hmm, I see a new item for people to put in their wills. To Michael, I
bequeath my Verizon phone with National Single Rate. To Julie I bequeath my
America's Choice 1 phone, with 8 p.m. off-peak start time, and off-network
roaming.

Is there anything in the contract that requires termination of service upon
death, or can a phone and a plan be transferred to another person?

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
> This is the change. It is catastrophic to some users, a
> non-issue to others. Many users will not realize how
> catastrophic it is until they travel to an area with no
> Verizon or Extended network.

Very good point! I didn't think of that. I've spent the last
10 years of my life in areas solidly covered by (GTE) VZW
and there is *almost* no chance I will go somewhere else
in the foreseeable future... BUT if the plane goes down in
the Black Mountains I'M GOING TO BE SCREWED.
I'm glad you pointed that out. Now I have something
additional to fixate on. (and here I thought I had covered
the bases by actually checking if there would be coverage
where I would be when making my carrier choice...)

-Quick

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> "Joseph Huber" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> <snip>
>
> >My mother has since passed on, and my sister still has the phone with
> > NSR, but lives in a larger town that has better Verizion coverage.
> > She still benefits from NSR when she travels out away from town.
>
> Hmm, I see a new item for people to put in their wills. To Michael, I
> bequeath my Verizon phone with National Single Rate. To Julie I bequeath my
> America's Choice 1 phone, with 8 p.m. off-peak start time, and off-network
> roaming.
>
> Is there anything in the contract that requires termination of service upon
> death, or can a phone and a plan be transferred to another person?

Technically, most of these folks don't have contracts. They are
typically 2 year contracts and once expired, can be modified at will
by either party. Each party "accepts" the changes when they either
pay the bill, or cash the check. I had my first phone for something
like 5 years and they never modified the plan at all, despite having
not offered it in years.

I suspect as long as the bill kept being paid, they wouldn't care
much whose name was on the check. They might even allow you to
change the name on the account.

"Quick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1117124231.142354@sj-nntpcache-3...

<snip>

> where I would be when making my carrier choice...)

Sarcasm does not become you.

Go on vacation in some areas of Northern California and you'll have no
coverage without roaming. Often only on AMPS. Ditto for popular tourist
areas in Alaska.

Verizon, by their own admission, implemented the no-roaming policy for their
own benefit, not yours.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 14:59:40 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Is there anything in the contract that requires termination of service upon
>death, or can a phone and a plan be transferred to another person?

I really don't know what the contract stipulates regarding this. If
Verizion wants to terminate the account, and loose a customer, then
let them terminate it. I, as the estate administrator, pay the bill
on time, and Verizon takes our money. Don't ask, don't tell...

Joe Huber
[email protected]