Is Cingular ripping me off?

Our commission structure does not provide anything extra to us for
customers paying for local calls.

I don't believe ANY of our current residential rate plans charge
anything for local calls. I don't believe any of them charge for long
distance within the US.

The original statement was that he had kept his old plan, and that it
was acting differently. This is not a result of a pushy,
commission-driven sales rep. This is a result of an unanticipated side
effect from putting a GSM phone on a plan designed for TDMA.

-Jim.

Steve Vai <haha@****you.com> wrote
> what cingular rep would purposely not tell the customer they will have
> to pay for local calls on their cell phone, and purposely not tell
> them about other plans that offer this for free? maybe one on
> commission?
>
> u didn't happen to sign that little piece of paper that says 2 year
> contract by chance?

[posted via phonescoop.com]

---

› See More: Is Cingular ripping me off?

In article <[email protected]>,
Steve Vai <haha@****you.com> wrote:

> what cingular rep would purposely not tell the customer they will have
> to pay for local calls on their cell phone, and purposely not tell
> them about other plans that offer this for free? maybe one on
> commission?

Not a Cingular rep per se, but a contract sales organization not really
related to Cingular.

My local Cingular corporate rep is great. I can't imagine ever dealing
with cell phones at the retail level. What a nightmare.

In article <[email protected]>,
News Reader <[email protected]> wrote:

> > u didn't happen to sign that little piece of paper that says 2 year
> > contract by chance?
>
> I hope you didn't make a photocopy of that contract. It is a felony to
> copy items without the prior written consent of the author.

what in the **** are you smoking?

The day it's a felony to have a copy of a contract I sign, is the day
monkeys fly out of my ass.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> News Reader <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>>u didn't happen to sign that little piece of paper that says 2 year
>>>contract by chance?
>>
>>I hope you didn't make a photocopy of that contract. It is a felony to
>>copy items without the prior written consent of the author.
>
>
> what in the **** are you smoking?
>
> The day it's a felony to have a copy of a contract I sign, is the day
> monkeys fly out of my ass.
>

No, it's not a felony to have a copy of a contract you signed. It's
illegal to make a [photo]copy of the contract without the copyright
holder's permission. Ever made a photocopy of any page of any book?
That's right. That's a crime. Ever copied a CD, tape, recorded of
radio or TV? Technically, that's a crime too. You are automatically
given a copy of a contract you sign (carbon copy), but technically it is
illegal to make a copy of that (without the prior written consent of the
copyright holder, most notably in this case Cingular Wireless).

America's great, isn't it?

NR

"News Reader" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > News Reader <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>u didn't happen to sign that little piece of paper that says 2 year
> >>>contract by chance?
> >>
> >>I hope you didn't make a photocopy of that contract. It is a felony
to
> >>copy items without the prior written consent of the author.
> >
> >
> > what in the **** are you smoking?
> >
> > The day it's a felony to have a copy of a contract I sign, is the
day
> > monkeys fly out of my ass.
> >
>
> No, it's not a felony to have a copy of a contract you signed. It's
> illegal to make a [photo]copy of the contract without the copyright
> holder's permission. Ever made a photocopy of any page of any book?
> That's right. That's a crime. Ever copied a CD, tape, recorded of
> radio or TV? Technically, that's a crime too. You are automatically
> given a copy of a contract you sign (carbon copy), but technically it
is
> illegal to make a copy of that (without the prior written consent of
the
> copyright holder, most notably in this case Cingular Wireless).
>
> America's great, isn't it?
>
> NR
>

You've apparently never heard of "fair use".

There is two billing system Cingular uses. I know for a fact that the
one I use will automatically put a GSM plan on a GSM phone.
When I change the esn to imei it will switch the plans then.
Unless the change is done in the regeister program and not the billing
program.

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:40:58 -0000, jssmyth@(your-planet-here)link.net
(Jim Smith) wrote:

>Our commission structure does not provide anything extra to us for
>customers paying for local calls.
>
>I don't believe ANY of our current residential rate plans charge
>anything for local calls. I don't believe any of them charge for long
>distance within the US.
>
>The original statement was that he had kept his old plan, and that it
>was acting differently. This is not a result of a pushy,
>commission-driven sales rep. This is a result of an unanticipated side
>effect from putting a GSM phone on a plan designed for TDMA.
>
>-Jim.
>
>Steve Vai <haha@****you.com> wrote
>> what cingular rep would purposely not tell the customer they will have
>> to pay for local calls on their cell phone, and purposely not tell
>> them about other plans that offer this for free? maybe one on
>> commission?
>>
>> u didn't happen to sign that little piece of paper that says 2 year
>> contract by chance?
>
>[posted via phonescoop.com]

jssmyth@(your-planet-here)link.net (Jim Smith) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> The original statement was that he had kept his old plan, and that it
> was acting differently. This is not a result of a pushy,
> commission-driven sales rep. This is a result of an unanticipated side
> effect from putting a GSM phone on a plan designed for TDMA.

You have to ignore the rantings of Mr. Vai. For whatever reason,
where Cingular is concerned, he has a bigger axe to grind than
Paul Bunyan carried.

On 20 Oct 2003 00:28:47 -0700, [email protected] (Todd Allcock)
wrote:

>jssmyth@(your-planet-here)link.net (Jim Smith) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> The original statement was that he had kept his old plan, and that it
>> was acting differently. This is not a result of a pushy,
>> commission-driven sales rep. This is a result of an unanticipated side
>> effect from putting a GSM phone on a plan designed for TDMA.
>
>You have to ignore the rantings of Mr. Vai. For whatever reason,
>where Cingular is concerned, he has a bigger axe to grind than
>Paul Bunyan carried.

hey, people ask questions i answer...