Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Alan Glaeske
    Guest
    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




  2. #2
    CK
    Guest

    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
    >






  3. #3
    Larry W4CSC
    Guest

    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!"




  4. #4
    Malcolm Jones
    Guest

    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.





  5. #5
    The Ghost of General Lee
    Guest

    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...




  6. #6
    Larry W4CSC
    Guest

    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!"




  7. #7
    Quick
    Guest

    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





  8. #8
    Larry W4CSC
    Guest

    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!"




  9. #9
    Dan Pendragon
    Guest

    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