Results 1 to 9 of 9
- 11-06-2003, 03:01 PM #1Alan GlaeskeGuest
Lately there has been a really annoying radio ad for VZW. I'm not going
to get into the annoying part. The ad claims that Verizon Wireless
spends one billion dollars every ninety days for its network. My
question: how much of that investment is actually physical (I would be
willing to bet that that includes number pooling equipment, switches,
E911, and other intangible assets). I suppose it depends on what
Verizon Communications defines as Verizon Wireless Network.
Any ideas?
AD
› See More: VZW Radio Ad
- 11-06-2003, 04:31 PM #2CKGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
"(I would be willing to bet that that includes number pooling equipment,
switches,
E911, and other intangible assets)."
You don't consider switches tangible assets? E911 is not a worthy service?
At least Verizon has the resources to improve their network. While many are
cutting back Verizon will be spending over $4.5 billion on wireless
improvements this next year.
"Alan Glaeske" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Lately there has been a really annoying radio ad for VZW. I'm not going
> to get into the annoying part. The ad claims that Verizon Wireless
> spends one billion dollars every ninety days for its network. My
> question: how much of that investment is actually physical (I would be
> willing to bet that that includes number pooling equipment, switches,
> E911, and other intangible assets). I suppose it depends on what
> Verizon Communications defines as Verizon Wireless Network.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> AD
>
- 11-06-2003, 05:26 PM #3Larry W4CSCGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
Sure doesn't include new TOWERS in SC.....(c;
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 15:01:45 -0600, Alan Glaeske <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Lately there has been a really annoying radio ad for VZW. I'm not going
>to get into the annoying part. The ad claims that Verizon Wireless
>spends one billion dollars every ninety days for its network. My
>question: how much of that investment is actually physical (I would be
>willing to bet that that includes number pooling equipment, switches,
>E911, and other intangible assets). I suppose it depends on what
>Verizon Communications defines as Verizon Wireless Network.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>AD
>
Larry W4CSC
"Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
- 11-06-2003, 08:27 PM #4Malcolm JonesGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
While many are
> cutting back Verizon will be spending over $4.5 billion on wireless
> improvements this next year.
Who is cutting back? I hope you aren't implying that Cingular is? Last I
heard they spent a chunk of change in Georgia alone to upgrade their GSM
network.
- 11-07-2003, 01:32 AM #5The Ghost of General LeeGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:26:45 GMT, [email protected] (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
>Sure doesn't include new TOWERS in SC.....(c;
You damn sure got that right, Larry. When it comes to our new tower,
we're like the Energizer bunny. We keep waiting and waiting and
waiting and waiting...
- 11-07-2003, 08:56 AM #6Larry W4CSCGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:32:26 -0500, The Ghost of General Lee
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:26:45 GMT, [email protected] (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
>
>>Sure doesn't include new TOWERS in SC.....(c;
>
>You damn sure got that right, Larry. When it comes to our new tower,
>we're like the Energizer bunny. We keep waiting and waiting and
>waiting and waiting...
>
Nothing will change until the FCC imposes proof-of-performance testing
on them. They have no incentive to cover the entire area until
staring at stiff fines and penalties and loss of license....THAT would
get their attention. Cellular doesn't own the airwaves....WE do.
Larry W4CSC
"Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
- 11-07-2003, 11:36 AM #7QuickGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
"Larry W4CSC" <[email protected]> wrote
> On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:32:26 -0500, The Ghost of General Lee
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:26:45 GMT, [email protected] (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
> >
> >>Sure doesn't include new TOWERS in SC.....(c;
> >
> >You damn sure got that right, Larry. When it comes to our new tower,
> >we're like the Energizer bunny. We keep waiting and waiting and
> >waiting and waiting...
> >
> Nothing will change until the FCC imposes proof-of-performance testing
> on them. They have no incentive to cover the entire area until
> staring at stiff fines and penalties and loss of license....THAT would
> get their attention. Cellular doesn't own the airwaves....WE do.
So whats wrong with the free market? Their incentive to cover an entire
area would be to retain the customers in (or who use) that area, wouldn't
it? Or do you believe that they are maintaining their business by duping
people with false/misleading advertisement. If so, doesn't that only work
in the short term? For example, Cingular, here in the bay area.
-Quick
- 11-07-2003, 04:54 PM #8Larry W4CSCGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:36:24 -0800, "Quick" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>So whats wrong with the free market? Their incentive to cover an entire
>area would be to retain the customers in (or who use) that area, wouldn't
>it? Or do you believe that they are maintaining their business by duping
>people with false/misleading advertisement. If so, doesn't that only work
>in the short term? For example, Cingular, here in the bay area.
>
As any cellular customer can tell you, it simply doesn't work! We've
had this free-for-all, go your own way for years. Look at the mess we
have. No, no....take off those company glasses and look...(c;
Cellular is a mess of INCOMPATIBLE, PROPRIETARY phones, modulation
schemes and company-specific firmware designed to prevent churning.
"It's YOUR phone, but you can't use it on another system. You're
stuck with us." The idea of cellular wasn't that way. FCC specified
AMPS and everyone that wanted a license was forced to use it. Your
phone would work on ANY system it could find, just like you IMTS phone
would. That's what I'm getting at.....
Larry W4CSC
"Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
- 11-07-2003, 05:25 PM #9Dan PendragonGuest
Re: VZW Radio Ad
In article <1068226519.367318@sj-nntpcache-5>,
"Quick" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Larry W4CSC" <[email protected]> wrote
> > On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:32:26 -0500, The Ghost of General Lee
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:26:45 GMT, [email protected] (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
> > >
> > >>Sure doesn't include new TOWERS in SC.....(c;
> > >
> > >You damn sure got that right, Larry. When it comes to our new tower,
> > >we're like the Energizer bunny. We keep waiting and waiting and
> > >waiting and waiting...
> > >
> > Nothing will change until the FCC imposes proof-of-performance testing
> > on them. They have no incentive to cover the entire area until
> > staring at stiff fines and penalties and loss of license....THAT would
> > get their attention. Cellular doesn't own the airwaves....WE do.
>
> So whats wrong with the free market? Their incentive to cover an entire
> area would be to retain the customers in (or who use) that area, wouldn't
> it? Or do you believe that they are maintaining their business by duping
> people with false/misleading advertisement. If so, doesn't that only work
> in the short term? For example, Cingular, here in the bay area.
EXACTLY - They only care about the short term, so they can cash in the
100,000's of shares of their stock options.
Similar Threads
- alt.cellular.verizon
- RingTones
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular.verizon
Lifeline cell phone service
in Chit Chat