Adios! Cingular . . .

"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
> 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.

And now you have employed your other strategy- ignoring the meat of a post
and commenting on a side comment. This is something else that ALWAYS proves
you have been proven wrong.

Why didn't you comment on the rest of the post? Was it right? Were you
worng? Here- I'll repost it to give you the time to ability to put your two
cents in:

>>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.

---

› See More: Adios! Cingular . . .

Jeremy wrote:

> I believe that I represent the ideal type of customer--the kind that can be
> relied upon to cover the overhead.

Here's the reality. you're the nightmare customer. You actually care
about the cost of service, you probably don't use any of the profit
centers of SMS, ringtones, web browsing, or photo sending--all you use
the phone for is actual conversations. You drag down their ARPU number.
They don't care if you leave, especially because if they did what it
would take to get you to stay, you'd post about it on Usenet, and others
would be demanding the same terms. Sprint had a huge problem with the
publicizing of all their retention deals, with everyone demanding the
same terms as what they heard someone else received.

When you buy a car, I'll bet you don't finance through the dealer, you
don't buy an extended warranty, you don't opt for fabric guard, paint
sealant, rust proofing, glass etching, Lo-Jack, the gold package, or
electronic ash trays. You probably go into the dealer with a spreadsheet
showing MSRP, invoice, and actual dealer cost, subtracting out the
add-ons between dealer cost and invoice. The dealer sells to you because
he has an essentially unlimited supply of they type of vehicle you are
buying, and it helps his cash flow to sell to someone for a small amount
over cost.

You probably pay your credit cards in full each month too.

Per SMS:
>Here's the reality. you're the nightmare customer. You actually care
>about the cost of service, you probably don't use any of the profit
>centers of SMS, ringtones, web browsing, or photo sending--all you use
>the phone for is actual conversations. You drag down their ARPU number.
>They don't care if you leave, especially because if they did what it
>would take to get you to stay, you'd post about it on Usenet, and others
>would be demanding the same terms. Sprint had a huge problem with the
>publicizing of all their retention deals, with everyone demanding the
>same terms as what they heard someone else received.
>
>When you buy a car, I'll bet you don't finance through the dealer, you
>don't buy an extended warranty, you don't opt for fabric guard, paint
>sealant, rust proofing, glass etching, Lo-Jack, the gold package, or
>electronic ash trays. You probably go into the dealer with a spreadsheet
>showing MSRP, invoice, and actual dealer cost, subtracting out the
>add-ons between dealer cost and invoice. The dealer sells to you because
>he has an essentially unlimited supply of they type of vehicle you are
>buying, and it helps his cash flow to sell to someone for a small amount
>over cost.
>
>You probably pay your credit cards in full each month too.

Nice post. You've described me to a "T"....

I'll never forget my disbelief/consternation when I found out that some people
actually keep balances on their credit cards from month-to-month.


But it still seems to me like there must be a niche out there for somebody to
make a buck just by selling cell phone service to people like me. (us?)
--
PeteCresswell

(PeteCresswell) wrote:

<snip>

>> You probably pay your credit cards in full each month too.
>
> Nice post. You've described me to a "T"....

Well I was describing myself too!

> I'll never forget my disbelief/consternation when I found out that some people
> actually keep balances on their credit cards from month-to-month.

It is amazing. And of course the same people are probably paying the
highest interest rates!

> But it still seems to me like there must be a niche out there for somebody to
> make a buck just by selling cell phone service to people like me. (us?)

Actually, some prepaid plans look really good. If T-Mobile actually has
good coverage in your area, you can get essentially 1000 minutes per
year for $100. For people that don't have endless gabfests, or use their
phone for business, this is often enough, and until you get up to about
3000 minutes a year, it's cheaper than post-paid. My mom in Florida
dumped Cingular to go to T-Mobile prepaid (her over-riding concern was
not entering her phone numbers again, so I walked her through unlocking
her Cingular handset so she could use it on T-Mobile).

Unfortunately, where I live (SF Bay Area), it's a really bad idea to
shop solely on price. T-Mobile coverage is very poor, Sprint is
marginal, Cingular is adequate as long as you don't go outside the urban
and suburban core, but Verizon has coverage that is far better (at least
as long as AMPS remains on).

In any case, part of the reason for Cingular's poor metrics in 2005 may
be all the former AT&T customers that they are alienating.

Per SMS:
>If T-Mobile actually has
>good coverage in your area, you can get essentially 1000 minutes per
>year for $100.

That's what I have for my wife/daughter. Minimal hassle - not like other plans
where you have to remember to refresh it every so many months.... just once per
year.

Only two reasons I didn't go with it myself:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) I had heard it said that prepaid accounts don't get the same network coverage
as monthly accounts.

2) The person in the store didn't seem confident that my number (which I've had
for about 10 years and probably 1,000+ customers/friends/relatives know) could
be preserved under a prepaid account.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another plus that I see in prepaids is that so far they seem to have escaped the
feeding frenzy of government taxing agencies - or at least I don't see all the
taxes.... kind of like food in Germany the last time I was there (not exactly
recently, mind you...) in that you aren't confronted with that list of
nasty-sounding ingredients on the container.
--
PeteCresswell

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 15:39:16
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Jeremy wrote:
>
>> I believe that I represent the ideal type of customer--the kind that can be
>> relied upon to cover the overhead.
>
>Here's the reality. you're the nightmare customer.

Not a nightmare, just unprofitable.

>You actually care
>about the cost of service, you probably don't use any of the profit
>centers of SMS, ringtones, web browsing, or photo sending--all you use
>the phone for is actual conversations. You drag down their ARPU number.

True, but the real issue is the bargain rate given away by ATTWS, not those
other things.

>They don't care if you leave, especially because if they did what it
>would take to get you to stay, you'd post about it on Usenet, and others
>would be demanding the same terms.

Actually they do care, which is why they have a "retention" group with the
power to sweeten standard offerings, within reason; e.g., with a large pool of
Rollover minutes.

>Sprint had a huge problem with the
>publicizing of all their retention deals, with everyone demanding the
>same terms as what they heard someone else received.

Not really.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 20:06:02
-0500, "(PeteCresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote:

>But it still seems to me like there must be a niche out there for somebody to
>make a buck just by selling cell phone service to people like me. (us?)

There are basic rate plans from all carriers.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:56:23
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Unfortunately, where I live (SF Bay Area), it's a really bad idea to
>shop solely on price. T-Mobile coverage is very poor, Sprint is
>marginal, Cingular is adequate as long as you don't go outside the urban
>and suburban core, but Verizon has coverage that is far better (at least
>as long as AMPS remains on).

Coverage varies over the SF Bay Area -- there is no one best carrier in all
areas, so while Verizon is pretty good on the Peninsula, it's not very good in
the Tri-Valley part of the East Bay. Overall T-Mobile is actually pretty
good. The worst overall coverage is Sprint.

>In any case, part of the reason for Cingular's poor metrics in 2005 may
>be all the former AT&T customers that they are alienating.

Cingular actually did pretty well, as reflected in its recent 4th quarter
financials.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 09:05:01
-0500, "(PeteCresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Per SMS:
>>If T-Mobile actually has
>>good coverage in your area, you can get essentially 1000 minutes per
>>year for $100.
>
>That's what I have for my wife/daughter. Minimal hassle - not like other plans
>where you have to remember to refresh it every so many months.... just once per
>year.
>
>Only two reasons I didn't go with it myself:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>1) I had heard it said that prepaid accounts don't get the same network coverage
>as monthly accounts.

Coverage is the same.

>2) The person in the store didn't seem confident that my number (which I've had
>for about 10 years and probably 1,000+ customers/friends/relatives know) could
>be preserved under a prepaid account.

It can.

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Another plus that I see in prepaids is that so far they seem to have escaped the
>feeding frenzy of government taxing agencies - or at least I don't see all the
>taxes.... kind of like food in Germany the last time I was there (not exactly
>recently, mind you...) in that you aren't confronted with that list of
>nasty-sounding ingredients on the container.

Taxes are the same.

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

>>Only two reasons I didn't go with it myself:
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>1) I had heard it said that prepaid accounts don't get the same network coverage
>>as monthly accounts.
>
>Coverage is the same.
>
NO. Network coverage is not the same with Cingular. Just go to
Cingular's website and you can see it.

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 16:04:47
GMT, Harry <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Only two reasons I didn't go with it myself:
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>1) I had heard it said that prepaid accounts don't get the same network coverage
>>>as monthly accounts.
>>
>>Coverage is the same.
>>
>NO. Network coverage is not the same with Cingular. Just go to
>Cingular's website and you can see it.

I didn't know there was any difference -- thanks for pointing that out.

Cingular Nation GSM:
http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cel...pt=nationalMap

GoPhone Pick Your Plan:
http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cel...apt=gophoneMap

While not identical, these two are quite similar.

However, there's a much bigger difference with GoPhone Pay As You Go:
http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cel...apt=prepaidMap

--
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 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:56:23
> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Unfortunately, where I live (SF Bay Area), it's a really bad idea to
>>shop solely on price. T-Mobile coverage is very poor, Sprint is
>>marginal, Cingular is adequate as long as you don't go outside the urban
>>and suburban core, but Verizon has coverage that is far better (at least
>>as long as AMPS remains on).
>
> Coverage varies over the SF Bay Area -- there is no one best carrier in
> all
> areas, so while Verizon is pretty good on the Peninsula, it's not very
> good in
> the Tri-Valley part of the East Bay. Overall T-Mobile is actually pretty
> good. The worst overall coverage is Sprint.
>
>>In any case, part of the reason for Cingular's poor metrics in 2005 may
>>be all the former AT&T customers that they are alienating.
>
> Cingular actually did pretty well, as reflected in its recent 4th quarter
> financials.
>
> --

4th quarter financials were crap, and they will end up being no better than
the third or fourth most profitable carrier (out of a group of 4). Sorry,
sunshine- their finanacials are a nightmare and the impending migration of
even more former ATTW customers is not going to help.

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

>
>>Sprint had a huge problem with the
>>publicizing of all their retention deals, with everyone demanding the
>>same terms as what they heard someone else received.
>
> Not really.

Where's the proof, Novice? Sprint did have a quite public and well known
problem with this. Please cite any FACTS claiming otherwise. If you can't,
please shut your hole and go away- I tire of reading your incompetent
opinions and factless claims.

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006
> 16:04:47
> GMT, Harry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> Only two reasons I didn't go with it myself:
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 1) I had heard it said that prepaid accounts don't get the same
>>>> network coverage
>>>> as monthly accounts.
>>>
>>> Coverage is the same.
>>>
>> NO. Network coverage is not the same with Cingular. Just go to
>> Cingular's website and you can see it.
>
> I didn't know there was any difference -- thanks for pointing that
> out.
>

You have no idea how admitting one little mistake actually *adds* to
your credibility. Just a thought, but if you would only do this more
often I think the S/N ratio in here would go way up.


--
Mike

Per John Navas:
>There are basic rate plans from all carriers.

But they're all bundled with hardware - to the user is locked into a period long
enough to pay off same.
--
PeteCresswell