Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switchesto Verizon

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 07 Apr 2006 11:11:32
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Rico wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I personally am hoping the store near me
>> isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.
>
>Not sure where you are, but in the Bay Area they are closing six out of
>122 stores, in Hayward, Alameda, Newark, San Jose, Richmond and Marin. I
>think what helped keep the total down is that so many of their Bay Area
>stores have closed already. Near my house, we've lost four out of six
>stores in the past ten years or so. Unless Radio Shack finds a way to
>get Verizon back, the 480 stores is just the beginning.

How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel) are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

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

---

› See More: Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switchesto Verizon

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

>
> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.

And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Fri, 07 Apr 2006
> 16:18:48
> GMT, [email protected] (Rico) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Javier
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>SMS wrote:
>
>>>What do people buy at The Shack these days?
>>
>>Batterys, or at least the last time I was there that was what the bulk of
>>the 'crowd' in the store was there for. Again no claim of this being an
>>accurate survey of the typical client at the shack. I still use them for
>>the occasional part etc especially on weekends when some of the bigger
>>parts houses are closed (locally). I personally am hoping the store near
>>me
>>isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.
>
> Cables, especially odd combinations (e.g., 15' male stereo mini jack to
> male
> RCA plugs) that aren't readily available locally someplace else. And yes,
> the
> occasional cellular accessory -- couple of friends got great deals on
> Bluetooth headsets in Radio Shack sales.
>
> --


Interesting- you claim that they are the biggest distributor in the nation,
but cellphones don't make your list. Backing away from your false claim?

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

>
> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
> Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model
> for
> its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel)
> are
> reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
> cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.
>

Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 7 Apr 2006 18:26:38
-0600, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
>> Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model
>> for
>> its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel)
>> are
>> reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
>> cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.
>
>Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
>Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
Phones & Radio Communications page.

--
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:2%[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Fri, 7 Apr 2006
> 18:26:38
> -0600, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the
>>> solution.
>>> Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business
>>> model
>>> for
>>> its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and
>>> Sprint-Nextel)
>>> are
>>> reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
>>> cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.
>>
>>Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
>>Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.
>
> Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
> Phones & Radio Communications page.
>

And their new TV ad features a Sprint phone. I wonder which one they spent
more money on- the webpage or the commercial?

Scott wrote:
> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
>
> And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve. As all of the reports have stated,
wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
Verizon.

I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. Year after year,
Consumer Reports lists Verizon as the top carrier in almost every
metropolitan area. The surveys' impact is not limited to CR subscribers,
as it is widely quoted by the media around the country. Since most
wireless subscribers are already less than thrilled with their service,
when their contract is up, they tend to do more research when selecting
a carrier the second time.

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:08:53
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
>>
>> And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.
>
>Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
>of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve.

So you say, but there doesn't seem to be anything to support you.

>As all of the reports have stated,
>wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
>Verizon.

Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here) have
stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling Verizon
back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from those
problems.

>I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
>Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
>Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. ...

Nonsense.

--
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, 7 Apr 2006 19:06:07
-0600, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:2%[email protected]...
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Fri, 7 Apr 2006
>> 18:26:38
>> -0600, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the
>>>> solution.
>>>> Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business
>>>> model
>>>> for
>>>> its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and
>>>> Sprint-Nextel)
>>>> are
>>>> reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
>>>> cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.
>>>
>>>Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
>>>Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.
>>
>> Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
>> Phones & Radio Communications page.
>
>And their new TV ad features a Sprint phone. I wonder which one they spent
>more money on- the webpage or the commercial?

Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the
problem:

<http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/special_packages/sprint/13614132.htm>:

RADIOSHACK BLUES TIED TO SPRINT NEXTEL
CEO blames profit shortfall on lag in wireless sales

The chief executive of RadioShack Corp. was singing the Sprint Nextel
Corp. blues Thursday.

The Texas-based electronics retailer said fourth-quarter profits
would fall short because Sprint and Nextel wireless sales failed to
boom toward the end of the year.

RadioShack was counting heavily on extra Sprint sales as the company
shifted away from Verizon Wireless. A new contract with Cingular
Wireless did not begin until January, David Edmondson, RadioShack’s
president and chief executive officer, said during a call with Wall
Street analysts.

"That was our contingency plan -- to drive the Sprint piece harder --
and that’s the part that did not materialize," Edmondson said.

[MORE]

--
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]...

>
> Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't
> lived up
> to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix
> the
> problem:
>
> <http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/special_packages/sprint/13614132.htm>:
>
>

You mean Radio Shack said in early January that the 4th quarter of 2005 (the
first with Nextel products available) was disappointing. Not surprising,
given the fact that they were still selling Verizon at that time. Your
article is horribly out-of-date and does not come remotely close to
representing the current business environment. It certainly has no bearing
on the sudden interest in advertising Sprint products almost 4 months after
the period mentioned in the article had passed. To say the advertising is a
reaction to poor 4Q sales is extremely short-sighted and exposes fundamental
flaws and gaps in your knowledge and understanding of business and
advertising- further proof that Google is not the best place to learn an
industry.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:08:53
> -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Scott wrote:
>>> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the
>>>> solution.
>>>
>>> And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.
>>
>>Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
>>of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve.
>
> So you say, but there doesn't seem to be anything to support you.

Just following your lead- you have only opined on the subject.

>
>>As all of the reports have stated,
>>wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
>>Verizon.
>
> Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here)
> have
> stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling
> Verizon
> back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from
> those
> problems.

And yet they actively advertise Sprint products. I guess your opinion of
the RS plan is wrong.

>
>>I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
>>Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
>>Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. ...
>
> Nonsense.
>
> --

Proof?

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 7 Apr 2006 20:16:29 -0600,
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

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

>> Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here)
>> have
>> stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling
>> Verizon
>> back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from
>> those
>> problems.
>
>And yet they actively advertise Sprint products. I guess your opinion of
>the RS plan is wrong.

The RS plan is to fix disappointing sales of Sprint-Nextel products, as shown
in my earlier post.

--
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, 7 Apr 2006 20:14:49
-0600, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't
>> lived up
>> to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix
>> the
>> problem:
>>
>> <http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/special_packages/sprint/13614132.htm>:
>
>You mean Radio Shack said in early January that the 4th quarter of 2005 (the
>first with Nextel products available) was disappointing. Not surprising,
>given the fact that they were still selling Verizon at that time.
>[SNIP]

Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

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

In article <[email protected]>, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

>Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
>to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the
>problem:

So what are we witnessing here?

1. A Verizon problem?
2. A Sprint-Nextel problem?
3. A Radio Shack problem?

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| [email protected] Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 08 Apr 2006 02:32:04 GMT,
[email protected] (Malcolm Hoar) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
>>to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the
>>problem:
>
>So what are we witnessing here?
>
>1. A Verizon problem?
>2. A Sprint-Nextel problem?
>3. A Radio Shack problem?

3.

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