Cingular Pink-Slips Customers Who Travel Too Much

"Paula Thomson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> why dont they just try to run an honest business...
>

They and their parent, the former SBC Communications, now trading under the
name AT&T, have a reputation for arm-twisting their customers.

They are in loosely-regulated businesses, and I read just the other day that
AT&T is selling off unprofitable telephone lines (translation: regulated
POTS) in some areas.

Best thing to do if you are unhappy is to take your business elsewhere. If
enough people do that, Cingular won't be so smug.

---

› See More: Cingular Pink-Slips Customers Who Travel Too Much

Somewhere around 22 Mar 2006 17:19:13 -0800, while reading
alt.cellular.cingular, I think I thought I saw this post from "GomJabbar"
<[email protected]>:

>
>Today I called 611 again and spoke with a customer service
>representative to verify if I would be paying roaming charges in the
>above scenerio. The customer service rep could not answer! She said I
>could wait until I got my bill, then I would know for sure how Cingular
>would treat the call. Yeah right.

I have one suggestion - if you get an answer like that, ask them if they
really think that is a good idea, or if there might be some way to find out
before you get obligated to pay. It's a reasonable request, and if asked in
a reasonable manner, most would agree. If they don't, thank them and end
the call. Then call back to talk to someone who has a clue.

My experience (personal experience, not what I read) is that there is a
small percentage of people that are either new, don't care, or on drugs at
many helpdesks, Cingular included. If you get one, it doesn't really mean
the whole company sucks, unless it happens repetedly. This technique has
worked for me, but of course, it will not work for anyone whose agenda is to
simply dis the company rather than solve a problem (not referring
specifically to you here, just in general).

By the way, if it's important, I often call back even when I get an answer
to verify the answer.

--
Marty - public.forums (at) gmail (dot) com
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...
well, I have others." - Groucho Marx

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

In <gDwUf.15830$gD4.14148@trnddc05> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:36:28 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Paula Thomson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> why dont they just try to run an honest business...
>
>They and their parent, the former SBC Communications, now trading under the
>name AT&T, have a reputation for arm-twisting their customers.

Nonsense.

>Best thing to do if you are unhappy is to take your business elsewhere. ...

True.

--
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 Thu, 23 Mar 2006
06:27:06 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:

>> Why would you think that the Gulf of Mexico is included in USA coverage?
>
>Unlike airplanes, you can use a cellphone on a boat. Lot of Gulf Coast
>oil rigs use cellular.

You didn't answer my question.

--
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 <yAwUf.15829$gD4.8190@trnddc05> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:33:34 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Transfer over to Sprint. You can set your phone not to roam off the Sprint
>PCS Network, anytime you want.

Depends on the phone.

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

Marty wrote:
> Somewhere around 22 Mar 2006 17:19:13 -0800, while reading
> alt.cellular.cingular, I think I thought I saw this post from "GomJabbar"
> <[email protected]>:
>
>> Today I called 611 again and spoke with a customer service
>> representative to verify if I would be paying roaming charges in the
>> above scenerio. The customer service rep could not answer! She said I
>> could wait until I got my bill, then I would know for sure how Cingular
>> would treat the call. Yeah right.
>
> I have one suggestion - if you get an answer like that, ask them if they
> really think that is a good idea, or if there might be some way to find out
> before you get obligated to pay. It's a reasonable request, and if asked in
> a reasonable manner, most would agree. If they don't, thank them and end
> the call. Then call back to talk to someone who has a clue.

I don't think any of the CSRs at any of the carriers have a clue about
something like that. The Gulf of Mexico is a grey area. Depending on
your location, you might pick up an analog signal from the U.S., if
you're close to land maybe a CDMA digital signal from the U.S., and if
you're really close, maybe a GSM or TDMA signal.

I think the problem here is that Cingular automatically assumes that any
800 Mhz or 1900 Mhz GSM network that the phone picks up is included
roaming, so it just displays "Cingular Extend." They should use an MNC
which distinguishes between included roaming and not-included roaming,
if indeed they charge for it. You'd have a good case for disputing any
roaming charges, since the phone didn't display "roaming." Actually they
should make the phone display the current roaming charge!

From what I heard, the main reason that Verizon dropped all
out-of-extended-network roaming was because often customers had old PRLs
that were displaying the wrong thing, especially as Verizon was cutting
back significantly on included roaming. On a CDMA phone, the user must
download a new PRL for the phone to correctly display the network
status. So now, if you want to use your CDMA Verizon phone on a network
with whom Verizon has no roaming agreement, you can't do it, your phone
simply will have "No Service." Verizon is able to use this policy to
force smaller companies into roaming agreements, since without one, the
smaller company can no longer get any roaming revenue at all from
Verizon's customers.

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

In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:08:54
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>... The Gulf of Mexico is a grey area. Depending on
>your location, you might pick up an analog signal from the U.S., if
>you're close to land maybe a CDMA digital signal from the U.S., and if
>you're really close, maybe a GSM or TDMA signal.

Coastal GSM signals are actually comparable in range to CDMA -- here in
Northern California, I consistently pick up Cingular GSM farther out to sea
that Verizon phones on the same boat.

>I think the problem here is that Cingular automatically assumes that any
> 800 Mhz or 1900 Mhz GSM network that the phone picks up is included
>roaming, so it just displays "Cingular Extend." They should use an MNC
>which distinguishes between included roaming and not-included roaming,
>if indeed they charge for it.

Cingular SIMs are in fact programmed that way.

>You'd have a good case for disputing any
>roaming charges, since the phone didn't display "roaming." Actually they
>should make the phone display the current roaming charge!

The problem is International Roaming. If it's turned off, then there
shouldn't be a charge for roaming; if it's turn on, then the phone will roam
on foreign networks. If you don't need or want International Roaming, call
Customer Care and make sure that it's turned off.

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

John Navas wrote:
>> I think the problem here is that Cingular automatically assumes that any
>> 800 Mhz or 1900 Mhz GSM network that the phone picks up is included
>> roaming, so it just displays "Cingular Extend." They should use an MNC
>> which distinguishes between included roaming and not-included roaming,
>> if indeed they charge for it.

> Cingular SIMs are in fact programmed that way.

>> You'd have a good case for disputing any
>> roaming charges, since the phone didn't display "roaming." Actually they
>> should make the phone display the current roaming charge!

> The problem is International Roaming. If it's turned off, then there
> shouldn't be a charge for roaming; if it's turn on, then the phone will roam
> on foreign networks. If you don't need or want International Roaming, call
> Customer Care and make sure that it's turned off.

Petrocom is not an international service. It is part of the U. S. of A.
It is a service for use by the oilfield workers, so they can call home
(or elsewhere). And they get charged out the ying-yang for the
privilege of using it. "Cingular Extend" on the display of the phone
gives the unwitting user no indication that he will be billed for
roaming. Of course after the bill comes in, then he will know.

GomJabbar wrote:
> And they get charged out the ying-yang for the
> privilege of using it.

*THAT* is an understatement!

http://www.petrocom.com/gsmedge.asp

Per Month
$ 30 pay as you go

$ 200 200 minutes

$ 400 500 minutes

$ 700 1,000 minutes

$1,300 2,000 minutes

$1,800 3,000 minutes

Iopsy wrote:
> Apparently market share is no longer Cingular's main objective. This article
> seems to say that Cingular is shedding customers who roam too much. What's
> your take?
>
> http://www.wxyztv.com/wxyz/ys_invest...556035,00.html

Also see
"http://www.cm-life.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/03/22/4420eba3cd5b0"

"Cingular discontinues area service
Lack of towers causes company to end contracts"

It's not like these customers were traveling outside the area where they
lived when they signed up for service. Cingular should also be refunding
any money that they paid for handsets, when their service is discontinued.