Amazon, Number Porting and Rebates: SprintPCS=Yes, T-Mobile=Yes,Verizon=Yes, Ciingular=No

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

> I'm not sure which would be worse no signal or dropping calls. I have
> both cingular (personal) and verizon (work) phones and I would love to
> only have Cingular. VERIZON STINKS ... dropped calls all of the time and
> mediocre coverage in my area.

You'll get much better reception if you remove the aluminum foil you to use
to line your hat and cover your windows ;-)

Fightin' Joe

---

› See More: Amazon, Number Porting and Rebates: SprintPCS=Yes, T-Mobile=Yes,Verizon=Yes, Ciingular=No

Ann wrote:
> I'm not sure which would be worse no signal or dropping calls.

It's a personal preference I guess. In my area, San Francisco Bay Area,
the situation is the opposite of where you are in terms of coverage.

More coverage, especially in fringe areas, can translate to more dropped
calls. For example, last Saturday I received a call from a relative who
was in the east bay, in the hills above Berkeley. If she had been on
Cingular, she would not have been able to call at all, but with Verizon
there was sufficient coverage to initiate the call. However as they
hiked further into the park (Tilden Park), the call dropped as they
walked outside the range of the nearest analog tower.

If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon and
Sprint coverage significantly.

SMS wrote:
>
> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will
> likely do in 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as
> it will worsen Verizon and Sprint coverage significantly.

Then why would they do that? There is no mandate to
turn off AMPS. Carriers will only do so if it's cost effective.

-Quick

SMS wrote:
> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
> 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon and
> Sprint coverage significantly.

Let me think about this aloud.

Verizon has lots of analog towers out there. Verizon uses them for rural
analog coverage and Sprint use them for rural analog roaming. It would
seem Verizon would eventually convert those locations over to CDMA,
therefore both Verizon users and roaming Sprint users would still have
digital coverage.

---------------------------------------------------

AT&T initially deployed a lot of analog towers in rural areas. I don't
know the current status in some of the outback western states, but just
about all other ares converted to TDMA and eventually to GSM.

Since Cingualr acquired those towers...is Cingular going to simply
retire them or convert them to GSM (a necessity as Cingular only sells
GSM phones now).

Quick wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will
>> likely do in 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as
>> it will worsen Verizon and Sprint coverage significantly.
>
> Then why would they do that? There is no mandate to
> turn off AMPS. Carriers will only do so if it's cost effective.

Verizon has been drastically cutting the number of tri-mode phones that
they offer. The digital-only phones cost them a lot less, and once very
few people have tri-mode phones any more, they can claim that there is
no need for them to continue with the AMPS network. In urban areas, AMPS
takes up a lot of bandwidth that cut be used more profitably. If they
would at least keep AMPS turned on on the towers that are on the edge of
urban areas it would be sufficient, but I think that they'll just want
to turn the whole system off except in rural areas.

I wonder about Verizon's coverage claims, and if they would hold up if
they had used digital-only phones. I also wonder what phones Telephia
used in their testing--I'd wager that they didn't use tri-mode phones,
but that Verizon really can't complain since they are trying to get rid
of tri-mode phones. OTOH, dropped calls wouldn't be affected per se,
since there is no transfer between CDMA and AMPS anyway.

Isaiah Beard wrote:

>> There's no "incontrovertible evidence" (as yet at least).
>
>
> It's on the website. All you have to do is read the fine print.

Or call Cingular, as I did.

When both Cingular and Amazon state that there is no rebate if you buy
at Amazon, then port your number, is as incontrovertible as it's likely
to get. What you _can_ do is to keep your old service until the rebate
arrives, then do a number port, but this means paying for two carriers,
and carrying two phones, for a couple of months.

It's typical Navas to make statements like that when he has no
corroboration.

SMS wrote:
> Quick wrote:
>> SMS wrote:
>>> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will
>>> likely do in 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular
>>> as it will worsen Verizon and Sprint coverage
>>> significantly.
>>
>> Then why would they do that? There is no mandate to
>> turn off AMPS. Carriers will only do so if it's cost
>> effective.
>
> Verizon has been drastically cutting the number of
> tri-mode phones that they offer. The digital-only phones
> cost them a lot less, and once very few people have
> tri-mode phones any more, they can claim that there is no
> need for them to continue with the AMPS network.

It's not a matter of having to "claim" justification, or them
"wanting" to turn it off or not. When the regulations allow
they can do so at will. It's simply a matter of cost
effectiveness. If they are losing money running AMPS
on a particular tower they will most likely turn it off. I have
no doubt that they will factor lost customers, publicity,
effect of changed coverage maps, cost of supporting
multiple technologies, etc. into the "is it cost effective" calculation.

-Quick

On Mon, 22 May 2006 01:21:27 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:

>As many people know, Amazon.com usually offers the lowest prices on new
>handsets when you are activating on a new carrier, because they have
>very large rebates. However if you want to port your old number to your
>new carrier AND get the Amazon rebate, you can only do it on SprintPCS,
>T-Mobile, and Verizon. On Cingular, you can get the Amazon rebate, but
>you can't port your number, or you can port your number and not get the
>rebate.
>
>See:
>"http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/508597/103-9775802-2636641"
>
>"Cingular and Amazon.com have not yet established a method for customers
>to transfer their current number to a new Cingular account.
>Unfortunately, in order to port your previous number, Cingular will
>cancel the account that Amazon.com activated and will activate a new
>account with the ported number. This process makes you ineligible for
>the Amazon.com rebates. We hope to offer a porting option in the coming
>months, so please check back."
>
>I just noticed this today, as I'm helping a relative in San Francisco
>that's switching from Cingular to Verizon next week, and I went
>searching for information on number portability and Amazon. Fortunately,
>she's going from Cingular to Verizon, and not the other way around.
>
>I wanted to alert people to be aware of this issue with Amazon and
>Cingular. The difference in cost between buying at Verizon versus
>Amazon, for the phone she is getting, is $150 ($-100 at Amazon, $+50 at
>Verizon).

As I pointed out in a later post, and was taken to task because your
post supposedly was about porting Cingular to Cingular (obviously it
was not) I did exactly what you were trying to help your relative
with.

I bought a new phone at Amazon.com for $150
I called Cingular and ported my Verizon number to the new phone. I
knew Amazon couldn't do it.
I received the $150 rebate from Amazon.
I did not have to pay Cingular to activate the new phone (although it
took a second call)
Net cost $0.

SMS wrote:

> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
> 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon and
> Sprint coverage significantly.

Sprint's all digital, and Verizon's native coverage has been 100% digital for
a while. Would only affect roaming, and the roaming carriers that provide
AMPS won't stop just because FCC says they are no longer *required* to
provide AMPS.

Back in June 04, I was living where I'm living now and was in the process of
dropping Verizon. Out at my house, at the edge of VZW coverage, I can get an
analog carrier, but make an analog call there? Ha. No way - all I ever got
was fast busies.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Quick wrote:
> It's not a matter of having to "claim" justification, or them
> "wanting" to turn it off or not. When the regulations allow
> they can do so at will. It's simply a matter of cost
> effectiveness.

I'd think they would retro fit the site for digital. Easy to picture
building out more sites for more coverage, but to retire a site?

Sites locations aren't placed just on a whim, they carefully research
the potential profits. Excluding a few unique niche markets.

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
>> 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon
>> and Sprint coverage significantly.
>
> Sprint's all digital, and Verizon's native coverage has been 100%
> digital for a while.

At least in my area, Verizon still operates one of the AMPS networks.
When I'm up in the hills and mountains of the Bay Area, there often is
_only_ AMPS coverage, no GSM, CDMA, or TDMA.

SMS wrote:
> Steve Sobol wrote:
>> SMS wrote:
>>
>>> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
>>> 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon
>>> and Sprint coverage significantly.
>>
>> Sprint's all digital, and Verizon's native coverage has been 100%
>> digital for a while.
>
> At least in my area, Verizon still operates one of the AMPS networks.
> When I'm up in the hills and mountains of the Bay Area, there often is
> _only_ AMPS coverage, no GSM, CDMA, or TDMA.

Yes, Verizon still operates AMPS in the Victor Valley too, but they don't
maintain it (that was my point, that they weren't maintaining too much
capacity even back when I quit them; I suspect they only still had it bcause
they have the CalTrans call box contract and it helps ensure those call boxes
can complete calls).


--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

DecaturTxCowboy wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>> If the carriers turn off AMPS urban areas, as they will likely do in
>> 2008, it will be a big boost for Cingular as it will worsen Verizon
>> and Sprint coverage significantly.
>
> Let me think about this aloud.
>
> Verizon has lots of analog towers out there. Verizon uses them for rural
> analog coverage and Sprint use them for rural analog roaming. It would
> seem Verizon would eventually convert those locations over to CDMA,
> therefore both Verizon users and roaming Sprint users would still have
> digital coverage.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> AT&T initially deployed a lot of analog towers in rural areas. I don't
> know the current status in some of the outback western states, but just
> about all other ares converted to TDMA and eventually to GSM.
>
> Since Cingualr acquired those towers...is Cingular going to simply
> retire them or convert them to GSM (a necessity as Cingular only sells
> GSM phones now).

The problem is that the range of a CDMA tower (practically speaking
around 62km) is less than the range of an AMPS tower (depends on the
height, but typically around 80km), and the range of a GSM tower (35km)
is _much_ less than an AMPS tower. So it isn't just converting towers,
it's adding a lot more towers. While 80km versus 62km doesn't seem like
much, moving towers around isn't practical, so if you're looking at a
linear highway in a flat area, you're still doubling the number of
towers for CDMA, and tripling the number for GSM. CDMA does have a big
advantage in this regard.

Australia choose CDMA for the boonies, and GSM for European
compatibility in urban areas. The U.S. will probably end up with CDMA in
rural areas, and GSM and CDMA in urban areas. GSM was well-suited for
densely populated European countries, but is less practical in countries
where there are large unpopulated areas that still need coverage.

Steve Sobol wrote:

> Yes, Verizon still operates AMPS in the Victor Valley too, but they
> don't maintain it (that was my point, that they weren't maintaining too
> much capacity even back when I quit them; I suspect they only still had
> it bcause they have the CalTrans call box contract and it helps ensure
> those call boxes can complete calls).

The keep AMPS because they have to. They've all gone to minimum
capacity. I doubt if it costs them much to keep the network going.

I read something on the CalTrans web site about the conversion plan for
the call boxes from AMPS to Digital, as well as the reduction in the
number of call boxes due to non-use. GM chose CDMA for On-Star, due to
the greater range of CDMA).

DecaturTxCowboy wrote:
> Quick wrote:
>> It's not a matter of having to "claim" justification, or them
>> "wanting" to turn it off or not. When the regulations allow
>> they can do so at will. It's simply a matter of cost
>> effectiveness.
>
> I'd think they would retro fit the site for digital.

Probably very few sites that aren't already digital+analog. The problem
is that you need a lot more digital sites to cover the same area.