Results 1 to 15 of 27
- 11-28-2006, 02:48 AM #1John WolfeGuest
I'm thinking of giving a relative a Go Phone for Christmas to see if they'd
like cell service. Anyone have thoughts about the Go Phones and the two
plans Cingular has. I'm a complete newbie to the world of cell phones. Any
help appreciated.
John
› See More: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
- 11-28-2006, 08:54 AM #2SMSGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
John Wolfe wrote:
> I'm thinking of giving a relative a Go Phone for Christmas to see if they'd
> like cell service. Anyone have thoughts about the Go Phones and the two
> plans Cingular has. I'm a complete newbie to the world of cell phones. Any
> help appreciated.
Compare the prepaid offerings prior to making a decision. Go look at
"http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_compare.htm"
For GSM, 7-11's "Speak Out" service is usually a better deal, and it
uses the Cingular network. The cost is 20¢ per minute, versus 25¢ per
minute on GoPhone, but the bigger advantage is that you only have to buy
more time once a year. GoPhone can be as low as 10¢ per minute, but only
if you sign up for the plan where you pay $1 for each day the phone is
used. You can only purchase 7-11's service at a 7-11 store, but you can
buy more time from your phone.
The best prepaid deal remains PagePlus which uses Verizon's network. The
cost per minute is as low as 10¢, there is no daily fee, and the
coverage is far better than what you'll get with other prepaid carriers
(if you travel outside of urban and suburban areas then this may matter,
inside metro areas the other providers are fine). PagePlus allows
roaming off of Verizon's network, at extra cost. Make sure the phone
will be used primarily in an area with Verizon coverage.
T-Mobile's advantage is that you can buy time once a year once you buy
$100 worth of time. The downside is that the coverage is very limited,
as you cannot roam onto Cingular's huge 800 MHz GSM network.
Be careful not to get a "hybrid" prepaid plan (see
"http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_hybrid_compare.htm") which often costs
more than regular postpaid service.
- 11-28-2006, 11:43 AM #3Guest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> Be careful not to get a "hybrid" prepaid plan (see
> "http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_hybrid_compare.htm") which often costs
> more than regular postpaid service.
Those led me astray on the Cingular site.
I would like to get a phone for someone who would use it rarely. They
probably would never place a call, but I would like to be able to call them
when they are out of town ;-)
--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
- 11-28-2006, 12:31 PM #4SMSGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
[email protected] wrote:
> SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Be careful not to get a "hybrid" prepaid plan (see
>> "http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_hybrid_compare.htm") which often costs
>> more than regular postpaid service.
>
> Those led me astray on the Cingular site.
>
> I would like to get a phone for someone who would use it rarely. They
> probably would never place a call, but I would like to be able to call them
> when they are out of town ;-)
You can look at "http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_compare.htm" and see
the lowest cost plans per month are SpeakOut (primary network is
Cingular) and PagePlus (primary network is Verizon), at $2.08 and $2.50
respectively. The advantages of PagePlus are lower cost per-minute, and
better coverage, but if the phone is used very rarely, then the cost per
minute isn't an issue.
The complication is T-Mobile, once you buy $100 worth of time, you are
"gold" status or some such thing, then all minutes you buy in the future
are good for a year so the cost per month goes way down because you can
buy just $10 per year in air time, and it's good for a year. So after
about four years of service, T-Mobile becomes cheaper per month,
presuming that you never have to do anything to keep your "gold" status.
The problem with T-Mobile is that the coverage on their prepaid service
is very poor.
- 11-28-2006, 02:38 PM #5John NavasGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:31:25 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>The complication is T-Mobile, once you buy $100 worth of time, you are
>"gold" status or some such thing, then all minutes you buy in the future
>are good for a year so the cost per month goes way down because you can
>buy just $10 per year in air time, and it's good for a year. So after
>about four years of service, T-Mobile becomes cheaper per month,
>presuming that you never have to do anything to keep your "gold" status.
>The problem with T-Mobile is that the coverage on their prepaid service
>is very poor.
Generalizations like that are false, misleading and unhelpful. The only
thing that matters is coverage in the areas where you'll actually use
your phone. T-Mobile can be quite good depending on where you use your
phone. No one carrier is best in all areas.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 11-28-2006, 11:10 PM #6Paul Hovnanian P.E.Guest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
John Navas wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:31:25 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
> >The complication is T-Mobile, once you buy $100 worth of time, you are
> >"gold" status or some such thing, then all minutes you buy in the future
> >are good for a year so the cost per month goes way down because you can
> >buy just $10 per year in air time, and it's good for a year. So after
> >about four years of service, T-Mobile becomes cheaper per month,
> >presuming that you never have to do anything to keep your "gold" status.
> >The problem with T-Mobile is that the coverage on their prepaid service
> >is very poor.
>
> Generalizations like that are false, misleading and unhelpful. The only
> thing that matters is coverage in the areas where you'll actually use
> your phone. T-Mobile can be quite good depending on where you use your
> phone. No one carrier is best in all areas.
But SMS has a point. Coverage isn't just based on where your provider
has towers. It depends on what kind of plan you have. Not just rates,
but coverage (as in when the phone shows 'No Service') change based on
the plan you select. And if you can't predict the future and find
yourself over that magic line at some point, too bad.
Back when I had a prepaid plan from AT&T days, my phone used to work in
British Columbia. Even though the roaming rates were exorbitant,
sometimes its still worthwhile making a call. When I switched the
account to a GSM phone, it no longer works at all. That's actually a
pretty weird revenue model if you ask me. My T-Mobile prepaid SIM
(bought in The Netherlands) works there, even though it costs a bundle
per minute.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a pleasant Terran revolution.
- 11-29-2006, 10:31 AM #7John NavasGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:27:05 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>It goes beyond that. You often don't know where you might want to use
>your phone in the future. Having coverage in urban areas is great, but
>for a lot of people the reason that they get a cell phone is so they
>have a means of communication when they are off the beaten path. I've
>been in many places where people ask me what carrier I have, because
>they have no coverage with their own carrier. This is usually in areas
>not very far from the urban core, especially in the San Francisco Bay
>Area, where Verizon coverage is excellent, even in the greenbelt, but
>where Cingular coverage is not good once you leave the 'burbs.
In fact Cingular has very good coverage all over the San Francisco Bay
Area, arguably the best of any carrier, better than Verizon, although
all carriers of course have places (holes) where some other carrier is
better.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 11-29-2006, 11:12 AM #8Todd AllcockGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
At 29 Nov 2006 11:27:05 -0800 SMS wrote:
> Good points. Look at some of the popular vacation areas where you'd get
absolutely no coverage with a prepaid service such as T-Mobile, Virgin,
or any other prepaid carrier that doesn't allow roaming.
To be fair to T-Mobile, they've opened up vast roaming areas on rural
carriers in the past year. You can even roam in Canada and Mexico on TMo
prepaid- a rarity in American prepaid service. Domestic coverage with T-
Mo prepaid isn't quite as good as for contract/monthly customers, but
it's getting closer.
T-Mo also has an excellent, and accurate (if anything, overly cautious!),
prepaid coverage map with street-level detail, so there should be few
surprises.
I'm not knocking Page Plus in any way, but a certain number of potential
users are simply going to be more comfortable with getting service from a
major carrier than from a reseller who's life depends on how good a deal
they can cut with a physical carrier at the next renewal. We've seen a
lot of good MVNOs go belly up (remember JusTalk with free 800# service
and no experation dates?) or change (raise) their rate structure with
little or no notice (STI mobile tacking on daily fees?)
Note that I'm not trying to scare anyone off of PagePlus- their monthly
rates are good enough, and refills low enough that even if something
happened to them in the future you wouldn't be stuck with a high balance
you couldn't use, but I certainly wouldn't carry a higher balance on any
prepaid carrier than I have to.
> This is not because there is no wireless coverage, it's because the
plan doesn't allow you to use the available networks.
That's even true of monthly plan users however (or you wouldn't need a
PRL in your phone!). It almost makes me miss the good old analog days
where anyone could roam anywhere, albeit at a high price (anyone remember
$3/day + $1.25/min?)
>
> It goes beyond that. You often don't know where you might want to use
your phone in the future.
Then you're obviously suggesting T-Mobile, because you might end up in
Toronto or Cozumel... ;-)
> Anyway, the bottom line is that for low cost prepaid, with the best
coverage, PagePlus is the optimal choice. You can find a lower cost per
month, but a higher per-minute cost, with Speak Out, but paying the extra
50 cents per month for PagePlus is well worth it, especially if you're
going to actually make more than five minutes of calls per month.
Again, there is no blanket solution right for everyone. Heck, even
Verizon and Cingular do not work at my house, and they're the two largest
carriers in the country. Every phone doesn't work somewhere, so I'd
recommend a service that works where you live, work, and play most of the
time, rather than pick t e wrong option because carrier XYZ doesn't work
in Vail, where you might vacation the winter after next.
Having said that, PagePlus, Speakout and T-Mobile would certainly make my
short list if I were hunting for a new prepaid carrier...
- 11-29-2006, 12:05 PM #9John NavasGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:12:48 -0700, Todd Allcock
<[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>At 29 Nov 2006 11:27:05 -0800 SMS wrote:
>
>> Good points. Look at some of the popular vacation areas where you'd get
>absolutely no coverage with a prepaid service such as T-Mobile, Virgin,
>or any other prepaid carrier that doesn't allow roaming.
>To be fair to T-Mobile, they've opened up vast roaming areas on rural
>carriers in the past year. You can even roam in Canada and Mexico on TMo
>prepaid- a rarity in American prepaid service. Domestic coverage with T-
>Mo prepaid isn't quite as good as for contract/monthly customers, but
>it's getting closer.
>
>T-Mo also has an excellent, and accurate (if anything, overly cautious!),
>prepaid coverage map with street-level detail, so there should be few
>surprises.
>
>I'm not knocking Page Plus in any way, but a certain number of potential
>users are simply going to be more comfortable with getting service from a
>major carrier than from a reseller who's life depends on how good a deal
>they can cut with a physical carrier at the next renewal. We've seen a
>lot of good MVNOs go belly up (remember JusTalk with free 800# service
>and no experation dates?) or change (raise) their rate structure with
>little or no notice (STI mobile tacking on daily fees?)
>[SNIP]
FYI, it's not worth arguing about in any detail. Steven just has a hard
on for GSM, trolling here to try to put it down whenever he can, facts
and truth be damned. It all dates back to when his wife couldn't get
GSM coverage in her workplace. He's been waging a silly (and tedious)
one man war against GSM ever since. Best not to feed the trolls.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 11-29-2006, 01:25 PM #10SMSGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 29 Nov 2006 11:27:05 -0800 SMS wrote:
>
>> Good points. Look at some of the popular vacation areas where you'd get
> absolutely no coverage with a prepaid service such as T-Mobile, Virgin,
> or any other prepaid carrier that doesn't allow roaming.
> To be fair to T-Mobile, they've opened up vast roaming areas on rural
> carriers in the past year. You can even roam in Canada and Mexico on TMo
> prepaid- a rarity in American prepaid service. Domestic coverage with T-
> Mo prepaid isn't quite as good as for contract/monthly customers, but
> it's getting closer.
They claim that there is no 800 MHz roaming with their prepaid plan. If
this is actually true, then it really limits the coverage in a lot of area.
> T-Mo also has an excellent, and accurate (if anything, overly cautious!),
> prepaid coverage map with street-level detail, so there should be few
> surprises.
Yes, they really go out of their way to be forthright about their coverage.
> I'm not knocking Page Plus in any way, but a certain number of potential
> users are simply going to be more comfortable with getting service from a
> major carrier than from a reseller who's life depends on how good a deal
> they can cut with a physical carrier at the next renewal. We've seen a
> lot of good MVNOs go belly up (remember JusTalk with free 800# service
> and no experation dates?) or change (raise) their rate structure with
> little or no notice (STI mobile tacking on daily fees?)
>
> Note that I'm not trying to scare anyone off of PagePlus- their monthly
> rates are good enough, and refills low enough that even if something
> happened to them in the future you wouldn't be stuck with a high balance
> you couldn't use, but I certainly wouldn't carry a higher balance on any
> prepaid carrier than I have to.
That's basically how I feel. If something happened to them, it's not
like I'm losing hundreds of dollars. I have my daughter on PagePlus, and
it's worked out well. The only down side is that her friends are
constantly borrowing her phone in places where their own phones don't
have coverage. It's only about 14 cents per minute, so it's not a big deal.
> That's even true of monthly plan users however (or you wouldn't need a
> PRL in your phone!). It almost makes me miss the good old analog days
> where anyone could roam anywhere, albeit at a high price (anyone remember
> $3/day + $1.25/min?)
Yeah, and it's why I won't give up my old Americas Choice plan on
Verizon, since they worsened coverage on their newer plans. I can't wait
to see the 2007 Consumer Reports issue on wireless. I think that Verizon
may no longer be top-rated in every metropolitan area, not because the
other carriers got better, but because they got worse. Fewer and fewer
AMPS capable phones, and more and more customers on plans that have
decreased coverage.
> Then you're obviously suggesting T-Mobile, because you might end up in
> Toronto or Cozumel... ;-)
Yeah, well I'd buy a prepaid SIM card for my old 900/1800/1900 phone if
I was outside the U.S. for any length of time.
- 11-29-2006, 01:27 PM #11SMSGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
> But SMS has a point. Coverage isn't just based on where your provider
> has towers. It depends on what kind of plan you have. Not just rates,
> but coverage (as in when the phone shows 'No Service') change based on
> the plan you select. And if you can't predict the future and find
> yourself over that magic line at some point, too bad.
Good points. Look at some of the popular vacation areas where you'd get
absolutely no coverage with a prepaid service such as T-Mobile, Virgin,
or any other prepaid carrier that doesn't allow roaming. This is not
because there is no wireless coverage, it's because the plan doesn't
allow you to use the available networks.
It goes beyond that. You often don't know where you might want to use
your phone in the future. Having coverage in urban areas is great, but
for a lot of people the reason that they get a cell phone is so they
have a means of communication when they are off the beaten path. I've
been in many places where people ask me what carrier I have, because
they have no coverage with their own carrier. This is usually in areas
not very far from the urban core, especially in the San Francisco Bay
Area, where Verizon coverage is excellent, even in the greenbelt, but
where Cingular coverage is not good once you leave the 'burbs.
Anyway, the bottom line is that for low cost prepaid, with the best
coverage, PagePlus is the optimal choice. You can find a lower cost per
month, but a higher per-minute cost, with Speak Out, but paying the
extra 50 cents per month for PagePlus is well worth it, especially if
you're going to actually make more than five minutes of calls per month.
- 11-29-2006, 02:31 PM #12Todd AllcockGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
At 29 Nov 2006 11:25:19 -0800 SMS wrote:
> They claim that there is no 800 MHz roaming with their prepaid plan. If
this is actually true, then it really limits the coverage in a lot of area.
The "no 850 roaming" blurb on the site seems to be a legacy quote. The
current map shows 850 coverage in some areas, and many on HoFo have
reported roaming on 850.
> Yes, they really go out of their way to be forthright about their
coverage.
Agreed. They brought out the detailed maps a year or two ago when they
had a "if we don't cover where you live, we'll let you out of your
contract" ad campaign. That campaign is long gone, but the maps remain!
;-)
> That's basically how I feel. If something happened to them, it's not
like I'm losing hundreds of dollars. I have my daughter on PagePlus, and
it's worked out well. The only down side is that her friends are
constantly borrowing her phone in places where their own phones don't
have coverage. It's only about 14 cents per minute, so it's not a big deal.
I may have to get a PagePlus phone as my backup when Cingular kills TDMA
and my Beyond Wireless phones go dead, but to be honest, I've rarely
needed them since T-Mo added a lot more roaming- I do the Denver to Omaha
and Denver to Kansas City drive a few times a year along I-80 and I-70,
and this year T-Mo has covered me the whole way (as opposed to a few
years ago where there were several hundred miles of dead space!) I still
lose T-Mo on I-70 west of Denver in the mountains so TDMA/analog makes a
nice backup (as would PagePlus, of course.) The great thing about Beyond
Wireless as opposed to a "real" Cingular/AT&T prepaid TDMA phone is that
Beyond lets you roam on Verizon or Alltel, albeit at 4x your regular
minute rate.
> Yeah, and it's why I won't give up my old Americas Choice plan on
Verizon, since they worsened coverage on their newer plans. I can't wait
to see the 2007 Consumer Reports issue on wireless. I think that Verizon
may no longer be top-rated in every metropolitan area
Sure they will- first, they bought that perception true or not with their
"can you hear me now" ad campaign, and secondly, anytime I go anywhere
where coverage is sketchy, it's always the person (like your daughter!)
with Verizon who's able to make a call while the rest of us are staring
at our missing bars! ;-)
> not because the other carriers got better, but because they got worse.
Fewer and fewer AMPS capable phones, and more and more customers on plans
that have decreased coverage.
I think your experience in the Bay Area may be atypical, however. In
many areas digital coverage mirrors analog completely, or at least close
enough. Verizon's mother didn't raise any stupid children, as the saying
goes- they waited until their digital system was fully mature before
phasing out analog plans and phones (yet keeping a few analog capable
phones around for the small percentage of customers who still need/want
them)...
....unlike some Orange-colored carriers who shall remain nameless! ;-)
Seriously, though, the fact that Cingular and T-Mo are doing just fine
prove the point that analog backup is either not as necessary as it was a
few years ago, or that most customers don't find it important enough to
be a deal breaker. My guess (and experience) is the answer is a little
of column A and a little of column B.
- 11-29-2006, 03:15 PM #13Todd AllcockGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
At 29 Nov 2006 18:05:50 +0000 John Navas wrote:
> FYI, it's not worth arguing about in any detail.
Who's arguing- Steven and I were having a discussion, and I appreciate
his input and point-of-view, as I do yours.
> Steven just has a hard
> on for GSM,
As an aside, are you sure you're using that phrase correctly? When I was
a teen, the expression "had a hard-on for" meant you were _attracted_ to
something/someone enough to have an erection, i.e. Loni Anderson, Pam
Anderson, hell, any large-breasted Anderson (except maybe comedian Louie
Anderson...) Using my high-school definition, you should Be arguing
Steven has anything BUT a hard-on for GSM!
> trolling here to try to put it down whenever he can, facts
> and truth be damned.
Many say the same about you, as you well know. I prefer to believe that
both of you, like most of us including myself, have your objectivity
clouded by your experiences.
> It all dates back to when his wife couldn't get
> GSM coverage in her workplace.
GSM coverage, or Cingular coverage. There's a difference, you know.
Steven has always struck me as a "technology doesn't matter as long as it
works" type, although he seems to believe, IIRC, that CDMA is a superior
technolgy, all else being equal. I'm not sure I'd disagree, frankly,
although I personally am a GSM user, more because that's what the carrier
I choose to use uses, not because I'm religiouly devoted to it, or any,
wireless technology.
> He's been waging a silly (and tedious)
> one man war against GSM ever since. Best not to feed the trolls.
Again, I disagree with your assessment. Steven has been fighting a war
in defense of analog fallback and it's necessity even in this day and age
because _he_ relies on it, and you think it's an anachronism and
completely unnecessary because _you_ don't. IMHO, you're both wrong, but
he's probably less wrong than you are on that point. Personally, I like
having analog roaming, but I'm not willing to spend any significant money
for it- I'll take my $45/month, 600 anytime minutes, 500 SMS, and
unlimited data plan w/T-Mo without analog over a more expensive less
featured plan with analog. That's an economic decision I've made, but I
won't pretend analog is unnecessary justbecause I'm unwilling to pay for
it.
For me, my current use of Beyond Wireless TDMA service (with analog
fallback) fills the gaps in T-Mo coverage (although honestly I've only
had to use it for a total of maybe two-dozen minutes all year, and only a
few of those were on analog.)
After Cingular shuts down TDMA/analog I'll revisit the issue and
determine if a bargain-basement CDMA MVNO is necessary for backup or if I
can manage with T-Mo as my only carrier (which is possible given their
ever-increasing roaming coverage.)
I'm with T-Mobile because after weighing the factors important to ME-
value, coverage, customer service, equipment choices, reliability, e-mail
and data capabilities, etc. T-Mo is hands-down the winner. I don't
presume, however, that that means they're the right choice for everyone
else!
- 11-29-2006, 05:25 PM #14SMSGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
Todd Allcock wrote:
> Sure they will- first, they bought that perception true or not with their
> "can you hear me now" ad campaign, and secondly, anytime I go anywhere
> where coverage is sketchy, it's always the person (like your daughter!)
> with Verizon who's able to make a call while the rest of us are staring
> at our missing bars! ;-)
They couldn't just buy that perception, there has to be something to
back it up. Cingular tried to buy the same sort of perception with their
"fewest dropped calls" ad campaign, but it flopped because there was
nothing to back it up, and they admitted as much by refusing to disclose
the data behind their ads.
> I think your experience in the Bay Area may be atypical, however. In
> many areas digital coverage mirrors analog completely, or at least close
> enough. Verizon's mother didn't raise any stupid children, as the saying
> goes- they waited until their digital system was fully mature before
> phasing out analog plans and phones (yet keeping a few analog capable
> phones around for the small percentage of customers who still need/want
> them)...
I'm not sure how atypical the Bay Area is. Verizon topped the survey
results in every metro area. It's true that in the Bay Area you have the
topography, the mountains and hills, and the greenbelt which give
Verizon a big advantage, especially if you have an analog capable phone.
I spend a lot of time up in the Santa Cruz mountains, where you're SOL
without an AMPS capable phone on a lot of the roads.
As to the reason that Verizon phased out the plans that allow analog
roaming, it was because of customers disputing roaming charges, at least
according to Verizon CSRs.
> Seriously, though, the fact that Cingular and T-Mo are doing just fine
> prove the point that analog backup is either not as necessary as it was a
> few years ago, or that most customers don't find it important enough to
> be a deal breaker.
LOL, I'd say that 95% of customers have no idea of what analog even is.
And they don't know that it's unimportant until they are out in the
boonies with no coverage, and even then they assume that no one else has
coverage either. The people that realize what they've lost are the ones
that get a new phone without AMPS, and suddenly don't have coverage in
places that they had coverage before.
- 11-29-2006, 05:44 PM #15John NavasGuest
Re: Seeking thought on prepaid Go Phones
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:25:07 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>> Sure they will- first, they bought that perception true or not with their
>> "can you hear me now" ad campaign, and secondly, anytime I go anywhere
>> where coverage is sketchy, it's always the person (like your daughter!)
>> with Verizon who's able to make a call while the rest of us are staring
>> at our missing bars! ;-)
>
>They couldn't just buy that perception, there has to be something to
>back it up. Cingular tried to buy the same sort of perception with their
>"fewest dropped calls" ad campaign, but it flopped because there was
>nothing to back it up, and they admitted as much by refusing to disclose
>the data behind their ads.
It fact it's been successful, and is still featured on
http://cingular.com
>> I think your experience in the Bay Area may be atypical, however. In
>> many areas digital coverage mirrors analog completely, or at least close
>> enough. Verizon's mother didn't raise any stupid children, as the saying
>> goes- they waited until their digital system was fully mature before
>> phasing out analog plans and phones (yet keeping a few analog capable
>> phones around for the small percentage of customers who still need/want
>> them)...
>
>I'm not sure how atypical the Bay Area is. Verizon topped the survey
>results in every metro area. It's true that in the Bay Area you have the
>topography, the mountains and hills, and the greenbelt which give
>Verizon a big advantage, especially if you have an analog capable phone.
Cingular actually has coverage there as good or better.
>I spend a lot of time up in the Santa Cruz mountains, where you're SOL
>without an AMPS capable phone on a lot of the roads.
You're SOL even with AMPS in many of those areas.
>As to the reason that Verizon phased out the plans that allow analog
>roaming, it was because of customers disputing roaming charges, at least
>according to Verizon CSRs.
Actually according to you, no one else.
>> Seriously, though, the fact that Cingular and T-Mo are doing just fine
>> prove the point that analog backup is either not as necessary as it was a
>> few years ago, or that most customers don't find it important enough to
>> be a deal breaker.
>
>LOL, I'd say that 95% of customers have no idea of what analog even is.
>And they don't know that it's unimportant until they are out in the
>boonies with no coverage, and even then they assume that no one else has
>coverage either. The people that realize what they've lost are the ones
>that get a new phone without AMPS, and suddenly don't have coverage in
>places that they had coverage before.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Similar Threads
- Motorola
- ATT
- General Service Provider Forum
- alt.cellular.cingular
Aws gpu
in Chit Chat