Verizon Wireless getting its butt kicked by ATT

02-02-2008, 12:52 PM

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400

"Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
million."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...d-official-wir
eless-service-provider/

"The Democratic National Convention Committee on Friday named AT&T as the
official wireless service provider for the party's convention in August."

02-02-2008, 01:46 PM

Guess that just goes to prove that bigger isn't always better

"Lenny" <lenny@nothing.com> wrote in message
news:20080202195258.A20054E4B7@outpost.zedz.net...
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400
>
> "Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
> of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
> It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
> while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
> million."
>
> http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...d-official-wir
> eless-service-provider/
>
> "The Democratic National Convention Committee on Friday named AT&T as the
> official wireless service provider for the party's convention in August."
>
>
>

02-02-2008, 02:50 PM

On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 13:30:48 -0800, Scott in SoCal
<scottenaztlan@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I switched from Verizon Wireless to Cingular (now AT&T) 5 years ago,
>and haven't regretted it for a moment. Looks like lots of other people
>are doing the same. Verizon sucks, and the word is getting out...

Funny, I did the opposite and never looked back. Stinkular/at&t still
sucks.

02-02-2008, 02:58 PM

I won't disagree, they do indeed suck. But they also have the best network,
and at the end of the day, it's a phone

"Scott in SoCal" <scottenaztlan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news

4o9q3128ugb2tb32s28ni3ko83d1ka24o@4ax.com...
>I switched from Verizon Wireless to Cingular (now AT&T) 5 years ago,
> and haven't regretted it for a moment. Looks like lots of other people
> are doing the same. Verizon sucks, and the word is getting out...

02-02-2008, 03:29 PM

On 2008-02-02, Lenny <lenny@nothing.com> wrote:
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400
>
> "Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
> of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
> It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
> while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
> million."

To be fair, 1.7 million out of the 4.4 million weren't "new customers", they
were customers AT&T bought when they acquired Dobson Communications. See

http://preview.tinyurl.com/24hjhg

Dennis Ferguson

02-02-2008, 05:26 PM

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
2C0231.17385002022008@nntp1.usenetserver.com:

> I'm using PagePlus Cellular.
>
>

Prepay? Don't you pay your bills?

02-02-2008, 05:48 PM

Larry wrote:
>
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
> 2C0231.17385002022008@nntp1.usenetserver.com:
>
> > I'm using PagePlus Cellular.
>
> Prepay? Don't you pay your bills?

For many people who only need to make occasional calls, prepaid
can be a much better deal than the ridiculous minimum plans that
the postpaid carriers offer. Not everyone spends their life on
their cell phone.

Bill

02-02-2008, 06:12 PM

Lenny wrote:
> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400
>
> "Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
> of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
> It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
> while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
> million."

Actually Verizon continues to widen its lead over AT&T in the
all-important post-paid, retail segment. AT&T adds a lot of users to its
network, but most of them are the low profit wholesale MVNO customers,
or prepaid customers on their own network.

At the end of 2007, AT&T wireless had 55 million retail post paid
customers, while Verizon had 61 million, and continues to add new retail
customers at a faster rate than AT&T. Actually it's surprising that the
iPhone hasn't at least allowed AT&T to narrow the gap, but without it
the gap would be even wider.

02-02-2008, 06:18 PM

Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> On 2008-02-02, Lenny <lenny@nothing.com> wrote:
>> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400
>>
>> "Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
>> of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
>> It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
>> while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
>> million."
>
> To be fair, 1.7 million out of the 4.4 million weren't "new customers", they
> were customers AT&T bought when they acquired Dobson Communications. See
>
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/24hjhg

It's not unfair to count them as total customers, though it's rather
misleading to claim that they added 4.4 million customers in the
quarter. Of course next quarter they'll be saying that the net additions
are down because the previous quarter included acquisition customers.
Whatever makes the best press release!

They added 2.7 million on their own, of which 1.2 million were postpaid
retail.

They added 1.7 million more by the acquisition, but it didn't say how
many of those were retail postpaid, and how many were prepaid or MVNO.

02-02-2008, 06:51 PM

> It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
> while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
> million."

Great! More users on a ****ty network. If I were stuck on Cingular I'd be
pissed. That many more dropped calls due to a bunch of pre-pay nitwits
clogging up the limited tower traffic.

> "The Democratic National Convention Committee on Friday named AT&T as the
> official wireless service provider for the party's convention in August."

Losers carrying losers, and this makes them look good? Puh-leeze.

02-02-2008, 07:23 PM

On 2 Feb 2008 19:52:55 -0000, lenny@nothing.com (Lenny) wrote in
<20080202195258.A20054E4B7@outpost.zedz.net>:

>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...VPVzgD8UF4I400
>
>"Verizon's wireless arm, which is a joint venture with Vodafone Group PLC
>of Britain, continued to lag behind AT&T Inc. in attracting new customers.
>It added 2 million subscribers in the quarter for a total of 65.7 million,
>while AT&T last week reported extending its lead by 4.4 million to 70.1
>million."
>
>http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...d-official-wir
>eless-service-provider/
>
>"The Democratic National Convention Committee on Friday named AT&T as the
>official wireless service provider for the party's convention in August."

Stand by for the inevitable spin by Verizon apologist and resident
anti-AT&T troll Steven Scharf, whose forecasts of doom for AT&T look
ever more absurd.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>

02-02-2008, 07:36 PM

Bill wrote:
> Larry wrote:
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
>> 2C0231.17385002022008@nntp1.usenetserver.com:
>>
>>> I'm using PagePlus Cellular.
>> Prepay? Don't you pay your bills?
>
> For many people who only need to make occasional calls, prepaid
> can be a much better deal than the ridiculous minimum plans that
> the postpaid carriers offer. Not everyone spends their life on
> their cell phone.
>
> Bill

That is for damn sure. I use my cell maybe 10-15 minutes per month. With
a prepay, it costs me maybe 8 bucks a month. (Don't need it real often,
but when I need it, I need it.) Cheapest 'real' plan I could get would
be 30 or so per month. Only downside is I have over a hundred bucks in
time sitting on it, because I use it so little.

aem sends....

02-02-2008, 07:37 PM

"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:8b9aq313oi8ai40r508u3psikcv4vhql5b@4ax.com...
>
> Stand by for the inevitable spin by Verizon apologist and resident
> anti-AT&T troll Steven Scharf, whose forecasts of doom for AT&T look
> ever more absurd.

John, have YOU looked in the proverbial mirror?

Other than the Apple fanboy(s), (and maybe Larry and Skype / Alltel)
I haven't seen a more rabid supporter of a company - than YOU.
Well past the point of absurdity.

Pot calling the kettle black??

02-02-2008, 10:41 PM

On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 18:37:43 -0800, "Ness-Net"
<no.richard@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote in
<lomdnZpoldFltTjanZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:8b9aq313oi8ai40r508u3psikcv4vhql5b@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> Stand by for the inevitable spin by Verizon apologist and resident
>> anti-AT&T troll Steven Scharf, whose forecasts of doom for AT&T look
>> ever more absurd.
>
>John, have YOU looked in the proverbial mirror?
>
>Other than the Apple fanboy(s), (and maybe Larry and Skype / Alltel)
>I haven't seen a more rabid supporter of a company - than YOU.
>Well past the point of absurdity.

What company? What support? Specifically.

>Pot calling the kettle black??

Hardly.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>

02-02-2008, 11:21 PM

Pegleg <Pegleg@usnavyret.mil> wrote in
news

fkaq3hlog3igc2f9de71salituu3nsuba@4ax.com:

> And the significance of that is?
>
>

During the convention local ATT users will have poor service??....(c;