Adios! Cingular . . .

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

In <ERHGf.10631$In4.3769@trnddc06> on Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:55:48 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Losing 100 $30/month customers, but being able to increase the prices by
>> $10 for 900 other $30/month customers results in more revenue, but less
>> customers. It's a no-brainer. Cingular appears to not really care that
>> much about raw subscriber numbers, they want high-ARPU subscribers.
>
>Your sentiments typify what has caused so many American businesses to lose
>their positions of prominence, and allow third-world competitors to dominate
>our markets.

Not really. The most successful American businesses are those that earn good
margins. Giving away the store isn't a good business strategy.

>Cingular is in the service business, and they and their parent, the former
>SBC Communications, have a well-earned reputation for arm-twisting their
>customers.

Cingular is actually jointly owned by the new at&t (former SBC and AT&T) and
BellSouth, and operates independently.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

---

› See More: Adios! Cingular . . .

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

In <s9xGf.10571$In4.3724@trnddc06> on Thu, 09 Feb 2006 01:46:00 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Pete M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Just becareful with SprintPCS/Nextel. I was with Sprint for 5-years before
>> I switching from Sprint to Cingular. I get almost no Droped calls and no
>> rude customer service yet.
>
>No carrier is perfect. But my needs are simple, and I was quite happy with
>ATTWS. Cingular ruined everything. I believe that their slowly reducing
>the TDMA service is no accident. ...

Indeed -- obsolete D-AMPS ("TDMA") is going away in favor of more advanced
GSM, but that's something that would have happened even if ATTWS had remained
independent.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 08 Feb 2006 19:53:52
> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Jeremy wrote:
>>
>>If you look at Cingular's very poor 4th quarter 2005 results, you'll see
>>that many people are voting with their wallets.
>
> The results were actually quite good.

Good compared to who? You seem to avoid this question frequently (among
others). Which cellular carriers have posted worse 4Q results?

> Under the circumstances Cingular is
> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>

Under what circumstances?

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

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:30:18
-0700, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 08 Feb 2006 19:53:52
>> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Jeremy wrote:
>>>
>>>If you look at Cingular's very poor 4th quarter 2005 results, you'll see
>>>that many people are voting with their wallets.
>>
>> The results were actually quite good.
>
>Good compared to who? ...

Good compared to both past results and expectations.

>> Under the circumstances Cingular is
>> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>
>Under what circumstances?

Merger, infrastructure migration, technology migration (D-AMPS to GSM/HSDPA),
and network integration (orange and blue).

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 9 Feb 2006
> 09:30:18
> -0700, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 08 Feb 2006
>>> 19:53:52
>>> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jeremy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>If you look at Cingular's very poor 4th quarter 2005 results, you'll see
>>>>that many people are voting with their wallets.
>>>
>>> The results were actually quite good.
>>
>>Good compared to who? ...
>
> Good compared to both past results and expectations.


All that says is that they are not as bad as they were. Meeting internal
expectations does not make for good financial reuslts. The fact is that all
other major carriers will report much stronger quarterly results with fewer
subscribers. Being towards the bottom of the pile means that results were
not good, they were mediocre at best.

>
>>> Under the circumstances Cingular is
>>> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>>
>>Under what circumstances?
>
> Merger, infrastructure migration, technology migration (D-AMPS to
> GSM/HSDPA),
> and network integration (orange and blue).

And SprintNextel will show stronger results with many of the same challenges
and a few others not mentioned here.

>

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

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 9 Feb 2006 10:13:55 -0700,
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 9 Feb 2006
>> 09:30:18
>> -0700, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...

>>>> The results were actually quite good.
>>>
>>>Good compared to who? ...
>>
>> Good compared to both past results and expectations.
>
>All that says is that they are not as bad as they were. Meeting internal
>expectations does not make for good financial reuslts. The fact is that all
>other major carriers will report much stronger quarterly results with fewer
>subscribers. Being towards the bottom of the pile means that results were
>not good, they were mediocre at best.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

>>>> Under the circumstances Cingular is
>>>> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>>>
>>>Under what circumstances?
>>
>> Merger, infrastructure migration, technology migration (D-AMPS to
>> GSM/HSDPA),
>> and network integration (orange and blue).
>
>And SprintNextel will show stronger results with many of the same challenges
>and a few others not mentioned here.

Time will tell. I personally think there's a very bumpy road ahead.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

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

> We'll just have to agree to disagree.

When you say that, it ALWAYS means that you have recognized that you were
wrong.

>
>>>>> Under the circumstances Cingular is
>>>>> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>>>>
>>>>Under what circumstances?
>>>
>>> Merger, infrastructure migration, technology migration (D-AMPS to
>>> GSM/HSDPA),
>>> and network integration (orange and blue).
>>
>>And SprintNextel will show stronger results with many of the same
>>challenges
>>and a few others not mentioned here.
>
> Time will tell. I personally think there's a very bumpy road ahead.
>

Really? Based on what? A single billing platform has been selected and
migration will start some time in the next year, rebanding is underway, rate
plans and promotions have been consolidated and offered across networks,
customers are allowed to switch networks at no cost, their high-speed data
implementation will surpass that of both Cingular and Verizon by the end of
2Q (although I believe it is already more robust than the Cingular
offering), the spin-off local company will be operating on its own in the
next few months (lining the coffers of the company) and backoffice functions
are already integrating and showing huge cost savings to the company. It
would appear that they are two years ahead of where Cingular is in the
merger process and are less than six months into the process based on the
facts and not a personal opinion.

If you are talking about the impending migration of iDen customers to the
CDMA network, it can't possibly be any worse than either the TDMA/GSM or
ATT/Cingular migration. In fact, it should be much smoother.

Once again you impose your uninformed personal opinion where the facts
directly contradict you. You are half as smart as you would have others
believe you are and possess a quarter of the intelligence you think you do.

BTW- I'm still waiting to hear your list of Nextel phones released in the
last three years that don't use SIM's- you seem to have conveniently ignored
that thread since the question was asked.

"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:7u-dnRS4JMJfG3beRVn->
> It would appear that they are two years ahead of where Cingular is in the
> merger process and are less than six months into the process based on the
> facts and not a personal opinion.
>

Cingular could have offered ATTWS customers the option of switching to GSM
and keeping their old rates, rather than lose many of us to other carriers.
I would have gladly paid for new GSM phones if I did not have to accept
terms that were not nearly as good as I had with ATTWS.

Everything I've read indicates that it costs many times over to replace a
lost customer. I don't understand the logic in Cingular's current strategy
of trying to coerce TDMA customers into switching into higher plans. They
will lose us and they will get bad P.R. in the bargain. I read not long ago
that THE number one FCC complaint that Cingular receives is their tactic of
trying to force its customers into accepting higher-priced plans.

I've received numerous solicitations from Cingular in the mail, and they all
require activation fees on my three lines. I have a problem with being
treated as though I came in off the street, rather than be treated as an
existing customer (and, apparently, many others have the same problem.)

While my experience with Sprint PCS is, obviously, quite limited, I am
impressed by the way they seemed to go out of their way to earn my
business--and the call quality is excellent. There MAY be problems for
people that roam a lot, but I use my phone primarily for local use, and
everything is so much clearer and louder than the TDMA service was. I'm
happy, and all I really wanted was to be treated like a valued customer of
ten years, not like a total stranger.

Had Cingular given us old ATTWS customers a better deal, they and we would
all have been much happier, and they could have probably deactivated the
entire Blue network by now, with no hard feelings.

Per Jeremy:
>
>A time will come when these wireless carriers will all be virtually
>identical, and the only means of differentiating themselves will be by the
>level of service that they offer. I predict that Cingular will be in big
>trouble when that day comes.

To me - as somebody who knows nothing except what I see as a consumer - the
biggest single factor would be some sort of forced unbundling of the physical
telephone from the service. I've got a half-dozen perfectly good unlocked
Nokia GSM phones. I need another "free" phone like I need a hole in the head.
What I *do* need OTOH is the freedom to move from carrier-to-carrier on
something besides an annual basis.

Once people can move that freely, I'd think there would be much greater pressure
on all providers to maximize their service/dollar by combining networks.
--
PeteCresswell

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "(PeteCresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> After being on tMobile awhile, I started to regret it because their coverage
>> was
>> clearly not as good as Cingular's (based on my recollections of my Cinguar
>> TDMA
>> service). Now, however, tMobile's coverage in the areas I frequent has
>> clearly
>> improved and it sounds like it's head-and-shoulders above what I would have
>> had
>> if I stayed with Cingular's TDMA.
>
> The issue here is the switch from TDMA to GSM. If you were caught up in
> that you were going to suffer--no matter what you did.
>
> TMobile's coverage is inferior to Cingular's on a national level. If
> you want to ensure good coverage wherever you go, and you want GSM, go
> Cingular.
>
> Verizon arguably has better coverage with their tri-band phones, but
> they also have some questionable business practices.


This type of attitude / statement is what has brought this country to
hell in a hand bag. Just give up and pay and shut up.

Aint NO Freaking way I will ever concede to there screwups,

NEVER

> You can't win. Just pay some money and move on with your life.
>

The MOMENT YOU PORT , You canceled that number with the previous provider.

PERIOD, and not the type your old lady has either.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <GSHGf.10632$In4.2318@trnddc06>,
> "Jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> When you ported and your numbers activated on the Sprint phones, that
>>> was done automatically. No need to call Cingular.
>>>
>> Then why do my two "unported" phones still work on Cingular?
>
> Those weren't ported, so those weren't cancelled. The number you did
> port was cancelled at Cingular the moment the porting center did the
> port.
>

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 08 Feb 2006 19:53:52
> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jeremy wrote:
>
>>> Some may think this to be rather juvenile, but that is the only recourse
>>> that the customer has. If enough of us vote with our pocketbooks, the
>>> fatcats would be less contemptuous of us.
>> If you look at Cingular's very poor 4th quarter 2005 results, you'll see
>> that many people are voting with their wallets.
>
> The results were actually quite good. Under the circumstances Cingular is
> doing a remarkably good job of retaining and migrating customers.
>
>>> So, "ADIOS!" to Cingular, and I do hope that their senior management one day
>>> realizes the error of some of their ways.
>> In the view of senior management, it isn't good business to offer sweet
>> deals to AT&T subscribers converting to Cingular GSM. Some subscribers
>> will leave, but most will simply pay the higher prices. Losing 100
>> $30/month customers, but being able to increase the prices by $10 for
>> 900 other $30/month customers results in more revenue, but less
>> customers. It's a no-brainer. Cingular appears to not really care that
>> much about raw subscriber numbers,
>
> Nonsense.
>
>> they want high-ARPU subscribers.
>
> Of course.
>

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

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:15:27 -0700,
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> We'll just have to agree to disagree.
>
>When you say that, it ALWAYS means that you have recognized that you were
>wrong.

In your dreams, Scott.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

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

In <pSMGf.30601$%i3.5513@trnddc02> on Thu, 09 Feb 2006 19:37:57 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:7u-dnRS4JMJfG3beRVn->
>> It would appear that they are two years ahead of where Cingular is in the
>> merger process and are less than six months into the process based on the
>> facts and not a personal opinion.
>
>Cingular could have offered ATTWS customers the option of switching to GSM
>and keeping their old rates,

As I've explained before, repeating the same mistake wouldn't make sense.

>rather than lose many of us to other carriers.

SEC filings make it clear that migration has actually gone well.

>I would have gladly paid for new GSM phones if I did not have to accept
>terms that were not nearly as good as I had with ATTWS.

Why should Cingular continue to lose money on you?

>Everything I've read indicates that it costs many times over to replace a
>lost customer.

True, but the difference is that the customer is profitable.

>I don't understand the logic in Cingular's current strategy
>of trying to coerce TDMA customers into switching into higher plans.

There's no "coercion" -- you're being offered the same plans as everyone else,
and you were free to switch if you didn't want them (as you did).

>They
>will lose us and they will get bad P.R. in the bargain.

See my comment above.

>I read not long ago
>that THE number one FCC complaint that Cingular receives is their tactic of
>trying to force its customers into accepting higher-priced plans.

Citation?

>I've received numerous solicitations from Cingular in the mail, and they all
>require activation fees on my three lines. I have a problem with being
>treated as though I came in off the street, rather than be treated as an
>existing customer (and, apparently, many others have the same problem.)
>
>While my experience with Sprint PCS is, obviously, quite limited, I am
>impressed by the way they seemed to go out of their way to earn my
>business--and the call quality is excellent. There MAY be problems for
>people that roam a lot, but I use my phone primarily for local use, and
>everything is so much clearer and louder than the TDMA service was. I'm
>happy, and all I really wanted was to be treated like a valued customer of
>ten years, not like a total stranger.

In other words, it's OK if Sprint treats you like a new customer, activation
fees and all, but not Cingular, even though you weren't a Cingular customer.
No offense, but I think that's a bit childish.

>Had Cingular given us old ATTWS customers a better deal, they and we would
>all have been much happier, and they could have probably deactivated the
>entire Blue network by now, with no hard feelings.

Your own feelings notwithstanding, it's actually going well.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Nope.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>