Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48
  1. #1
    John Navas
    Guest
    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Fri, 7 Oct 2005 22:20:25 +0000 (UTC),
    [email protected] (Caerus) wrote:

    >Really, do he work for SBC?


    I have absolutely no relationship to SBC other than as a normal paying
    customer of Cingular.

    >When ever somebody SLAMS Cingular or
    >SBC he comes to the defense.


    Hardly. I do believe in personal resonsibility, and that not everything about
    big companies is bad. And I post quite a bit of helpful information. How
    about you?

    >Something fishy here...


    Your inappropriate personal attack perhaps?

    >http://tinyurl.com/9yxnd


    For comparison purposes, your record:
    <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_uauthors=fazer89%40borg.ucsf.edu>

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



    See More: Does John Navas work for SBC?




  2. #2
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?


    "Caerus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > Really, do he work for SBC?


    No- even the most unskilled of the SBC bunch seems to have a better
    understanding of things and sometimes know when to admit lack of knowledge.
    Navas would flunk even that simple test.


    >When ever somebody SLAMS Cingular or
    > SBC he comes to the defense.


    Over-inflated self-importance is all it is.

    >
    > Something fishy here...


    The only smeel I detect is the familiar one that will accompany any of his
    posts.

    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/9yxnd
    >
    >






  3. #3
    J Robertson
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    Caerus wrote:
    > Really, do he work for SBC? When ever somebody SLAMS Cingular or
    > SBC he comes to the defense.
    >
    > Something fishy here...
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/9yxnd
    >
    >

    Glad to see that I am not the only one who finds John Navas' insults and
    denigrations more of a liability than is offset by the assets of his
    sometimes limited helpful comments.

    John does not seam to understand that unless Cingular gets straight talk
    feedback, they will not improve. The reason, I care is that I still have
    a phone with them and the HSDPA service should be the best out there, if
    they get it operational and can support it.



  4. #4
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

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

    In <3l77f.2425$Yn4.270@trnddc03> on Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:46:07 GMT, J Robertson
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John does not seam to understand that unless Cingular gets straight talk
    >feedback, they will not improve. ...


    Nothing said here will have any impact at all on Cingular.

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



  5. #5
    Isaiah Beard
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    John Navas wrote:

    >>John does not seam to understand that unless Cingular gets straight talk
    >>feedback, they will not improve. ...


    > Nothing said here will have any impact at all on Cingular.


    Of course it will! Every person that sees the negative feedback, the
    issues, the coverage problems, the migration headaches, and decides to
    either stay with their current carrier or sign up elsewhere, is a loss
    to Cingular. Cingular may not view usenet as any feedback indicator,
    but they would be foolish to see their net adds continue to slide and
    not take action.

    The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    than they can keep up.

    T-Mobile figures: http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA634327.html
    Sprint figures: http://www.sprint.com/investors/earnings/qe/3q05.pdf
    Verizon figures: http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=687



    --
    E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
    Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.



  6. #6
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    Isaiah Beard wrote:

    > The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    > Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    > mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    > soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    > Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    > than they can keep up.


    Verizon's rate of additions has been higher than Cingular's for a very
    long time.

    Not only do the number of CDMA subscribers exceed the number of GSM
    subscribers (in the U.S.), but the CDMA carriers are adding new uses at
    a faster rate, both in absolute numbers and percentage-wise.

    Not that it matters, but Verizon will likely pass the combined
    Cingular/AT&T market share number sometime in 2006.

    When tiny T-Mobile beats you in net gains, you know you're in trouble!



  7. #7
    Philip J. Koenig
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0400,
    in article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Isaiah Beard) writes...
    > John Navas wrote:
    >
    > >>John does not seam to understand that unless Cingular gets straight talk
    > >>feedback, they will not improve. ...

    >
    > > Nothing said here will have any impact at all on Cingular.

    >
    > Of course it will! Every person that sees the negative feedback, the
    > issues, the coverage problems, the migration headaches, and decides to
    > either stay with their current carrier or sign up elsewhere, is a loss
    > to Cingular. Cingular may not view usenet as any feedback indicator,
    > but they would be foolish to see their net adds continue to slide and
    > not take action.
    >
    > The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    > Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    > mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    > soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    > Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    > than they can keep up.
    >
    > T-Mobile figures: http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA634327.html
    > Sprint figures: http://www.sprint.com/investors/earnings/qe/3q05.pdf
    > Verizon figures: http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=687



    I must say, if my customer service experience with Cingular is
    any indication, those numbers make sense. (and agree with
    independent surveys as well)


    --
    * Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which *
    * differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are *
    * even incapable of forming such opinions. -- Albert Einstein *
    * *
    * To send email, remove numbers and spaces: pjkusenet64 @ ekahuna27 . com *
    * Simple answers are for simple minds. Try a new way of looking at things. *



  8. #8
    Rahul Dhesi
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    Philip J. Koenig <See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> writes:

    >I must say, if my customer service experience with Cingular is
    >any indication, those numbers make sense. (and agree with
    >independent surveys as well)


    So are you denying that John Navas works for you?
    --
    Rahul




  9. #9
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

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

    In <[email protected]> on Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0400,
    Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John Navas wrote:
    >
    >>>John does not seam to understand that unless Cingular gets straight talk
    >>>feedback, they will not improve. ...

    >
    >> Nothing said here will have any impact at all on Cingular.

    >
    >Of course it will! Every person that sees the negative feedback, the
    >issues, the coverage problems, the migration headaches, and decides to
    >either stay with their current carrier or sign up elsewhere, is a loss
    >to Cingular. Cingular may not view usenet as any feedback indicator,
    >but they would be foolish to see their net adds continue to slide and
    >not take action.


    With all due respect, the numbers here (probably less than 0.01%) are too way
    too small to matter.

    >The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    >Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    >mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    >soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    >Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    >than they can keep up.


    I personally think Cingular did pretty well considering the difficulties of
    the ATTWS integration and migration.

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



  10. #10
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

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

    In <[email protected]> on Sat, 29 Oct 2005 23:19:21 GMT,
    SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Not that it matters,


    It doesn't.

    >but Verizon will likely pass the combined
    >Cingular/AT&T market share number sometime in 2006.


    Pushed back your forecast, have you?

    >When tiny T-Mobile beats you in net gains, you know you're in trouble!


    On the contrary: T-Mobile, the weakest of the US carriers, has been buying
    market share, and hasn't had to face the challenges Cingular faces.

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



  11. #11
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

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

    In <[email protected]> on Sun, 30 Oct 2005 04:03:16 +0000 (UTC),
    [email protected] (Rahul Dhesi) wrote:

    >Philip J. Koenig <See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> writes:
    >
    >>I must say, if my customer service experience with Cingular is
    >>any indication, those numbers make sense. (and agree with
    >>independent surveys as well)

    >
    >So are you denying that John Navas works for you?


    I used to think better of you. Oh well.

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



  12. #12
    Philip J. Koenig
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 04:03:16 +0000 (UTC),
    in article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Rahul Dhesi) writes...
    > Philip J. Koenig <See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> writes:
    >
    > >I must say, if my customer service experience with Cingular is
    > >any indication, those numbers make sense. (and agree with
    > >independent surveys as well)

    >
    > So are you denying that John Navas works for you?



    Must have missed the question. Working against me seems more
    like it. :-)



    --
    * Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which *
    * differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are *
    * even incapable of forming such opinions. -- Albert Einstein *
    * *
    * To send email, remove numbers and spaces: pjkusenet64 @ ekahuna27 . com *
    * Simple answers are for simple minds. Try a new way of looking at things. *



  13. #13
    Rahul Dhesi
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

    Philip J. Koenig <See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> writes:

    >> So are you denying that John Navas works for you?


    >Must have missed the question. Working against me seems more
    >like it. :-)


    Aha! Evaded the question entirely!!
    --
    Rahul




  14. #14
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?


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

    >
    > With all due respect, the numbers here (probably less than 0.01%) are too
    > way
    > too small to matter.


    On the contrary- many of the customer staisfaction surveys everybody
    references are done with similar samples. That makes the number very
    relevent.

    >
    >>The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    >>Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    >>mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    >>soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    >>Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    >>than they can keep up.

    >
    > I personally think Cingular did pretty well considering the difficulties
    > of
    > the ATTWS integration and migration.
    >

    And yet Sprint and Nextel were able to merge different technologies and
    marketing strategies with much more success and fewer hurdles for existing
    customers to take advantage of the other network's services. Cingular
    created many unnecessary headaches for their subscribers and the numbers are
    starting to show it..





  15. #15
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Does John Navas work for SBC?

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

    In <[email protected]> on Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:07:46 -0700,
    "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >
    >> With all due respect, the numbers here (probably less than 0.01%) are too
    >> way
    >> too small to matter.

    >
    >On the contrary- many of the customer staisfaction surveys everybody
    >references are done with similar samples. That makes the number very
    >relevent.


    With all due respect, that doesn't follow -- totally different things -- a CS
    survey is a random sample of a universe, whereas this is just a tiny part of
    that universe. It would only follow if this tiny part has any meaningful
    impart on such a CS survey, which is doesn't because it's way too small.

    >>>The numbers bear themselves out. The latest figures are in, and
    >>>Cingular couldn't even break a million net gains this quarter (0.867
    >>>mil), while Sprint (1.3 mil), T-Mobile (0.972 mil), and Verizon (1.9mil)
    >>>soundly surpassed Cingular in net adds. It's a sad testament to
    >>>Cingualr when the #2, #3 AND #4 carriers below it are gaining faster
    >>>than they can keep up.

    >>
    >> I personally think Cingular did pretty well considering the difficulties
    >> of the ATTWS integration and migration.
    >>

    >And yet Sprint and Nextel were able to merge different technologies and
    >marketing strategies with much more success and fewer hurdles for existing
    >customers to take advantage of the other network's services.


    Sprint and Nextel haven't even started -- they are still operating as they
    were before the merger, essentially as two different divisions of a
    conglomerate; i.e., all the tough stuff (e.g., migration of Nextel to CDMA,
    migration of Nextel spectrum) is yet to be done.

    >Cingular
    >created many unnecessary headaches for their subscribers and the numbers are
    >starting to show it..


    I respectfully disagree (on both counts).

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



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast