SprintPCS no longer low priced leader ??

> For me, I don't believe it will pan out as any big
> deal.

Exactly what I would expect an insulting shill apologist for SprintPCS to say
about WLNP. No problem, time will prove different.

All the cell phone industry experts say SprintPCS is one of the leading
candidates to be a loser from WLNP. Reuters, CBS Market Watch, Dow Jones News
Service, etc.

---

› See More: SprintPCS no longer low priced leader ??

Sprint stock falling from 60 to 4 1/2 isnt a big deal by you, I know.

> WLNP is going to mess with all but the one or two > strongest carriers.

Given Sprint's track record with customer service and billing issues, it's
not illogical to think that they might lose a large chunk of the market, but
it will be very interesting to see how this all plays out in the next 6-12
months.
============================
And SprintPCS is currently a money losing operation, which is why it does not
fall into the "strong" carrier Yours is an honest evaluation, lets see if
Veldsmith insults you now too with foul language.

"DSL GURU" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sprint stock falling from 60 to 4 1/2 isnt a big deal by you, I know.

No, it is not, I don't own it. I did own Cisco and it dropped out from
under me. I bought it again at the bottom and it is going up very nicely.
It remained a solid company and investment in spite of its poor stock
performance. Sprint PCS is no Cisco, but the sky is not falling either Mr.
Troll.

Tom Veldhouse

"DSL GURU" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > WLNP is going to mess with all but the one or two > strongest carriers.
>
> Given Sprint's track record with customer service and billing issues, it's
> not illogical to think that they might lose a large chunk of the market,
but
> it will be very interesting to see how this all plays out in the next 6-12
> months.
> ============================
> And SprintPCS is currently a money losing operation, which is why it does
not
> fall into the "strong" carrier Yours is an honest evaluation, lets see if
> Veldsmith insults you now too with foul language.

Only you Steven/Phillip .... Mr. Troll, deserve foul language here. Your
short sighted attempt at ridiculing Sprint PCS is never ending. Sprint PCS
certainly is not perfect, not even close, but you my friend aren't near the
level of Sprint PCS when it comes to ethics. I have seen you criticize
Sprint because you feel they are deceitful. Yet, you change your name,
pretend to be another person while using a new name, and have conversations
with yourself to support your view. You literally will lie to make your
point (i.e. calling Executive services to get out of your contract because
of a strange glitch in the new website ... which you NEVER did). As far as
it goes, you are what you call so many other people, a ****ing hypocrite.
The profanity is simply an attempt to drive it through your granite skull
that you are worse than what you constantly complain about!

Let me guess, you will either snip out my above text and only reply to the
parts you like, ignore the parts you don't like, or you won't reply at all.
Either way, you are a hypocrite.

Tom Veldhouse

"DSL GURU" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > For me, I don't believe it will pan out as any big
> > deal.
>
> Exactly what I would expect an insulting shill apologist for SprintPCS to
say
> about WLNP. No problem, time will prove different.
>

It is my opinion, and you have said nothing to change it.

> All the cell phone industry experts say SprintPCS is one of the leading
> candidates to be a loser from WLNP. Reuters, CBS Market Watch, Dow Jones
News
> Service, etc.

Reuters does not do financial analysis! Still, these are nothing but
opinions one way or another, and as of yet, nothing has panned out. Like I
said, I don't think WLNP is going to turn into anything big.

Tom Veldhouse

DSL GURU <[email protected]> wrote:
>> WLNP is going to mess with all but the one or two > strongest carriers.
>
> Given Sprint's track record with customer service and billing issues, it's
> not illogical to think that they might lose a large chunk of the market, but
> it will be very interesting to see how this all plays out in the next 6-12
> months.
> ============================
> And SprintPCS is currently a money losing operation, which is why it does not
> fall into the "strong" carrier Yours is an honest evaluation, lets see if
> Veldsmith insults you now too with foul language.

Mine is an objective evaluation, sir.

I do enjoy using Sprint and don't have problems with them*, but that doesn't
mean I can't be objective. I've never argued that SPCS customer service does
not have problems, contrary to what some people think. CS/billing are the
two areas where most improvement is needed.

What will be most interesting, however, is to see who moves where. All the
pundits have made their guesses, but we'll see....



*Except for their contract extension issues. But y'all have read my opinions
on that already, so I won't re-post them.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:


>
> Reuters does not do financial analysis! Still, these are nothing but
> opinions one way or another, and as of yet, nothing has panned out. Like
> I said, I don't think WLNP is going to turn into anything big.
>
> Tom Veldhouse


I tried to educate him on this, Tom. He lives in a fantasy world where the
news columnists know more than true industry analysts that he doesn't have
the guts to admit exist. And he refuses to answer questions, so he will
never learn a thing.

DSL GURU wrote:

> SPCS has never put being "The Value Leader" as a primary=20
> focus. Let everyone else fight for having the lowest=20
> price. That fight doesn't really have a winner (not even=20
> the customer, if it breaks the company).
> ===============================
> Some companies value market share, which sometimes can more effect their
> ultimate survival than quarterly profits. Thats why SprintPCS' current
> loses are so troubling. They're also losing market share.


Troubling to you. Look and see who had the highest percentage increase
today ofg the wireless carriers. Obviously, Wall Street doesn't agree.

DSL GURU wrote:

> The fact that they survived the recent economy with little damage and
> expensive upgrades says a lot about its future success IMHO.
> ====================
>
> Anyone who bought SprintPCS stock at (or above) its price of $60 a share
> in June of 2000, would likely disagree, seeing its stock languish
> currently below $5 a share.


What about the people who bought Nextel at $140? You act like this is the
only stock to fall like that- the Nextel fall was even greater. Explain
that.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
DSL [email protected] says...
> And SprintPCS is currently a money losing operation, which is why it does=
not
> fall into the "strong" carrier Yours is an honest evaluation, lets see if
> Veldsmith insults you now too with foul language.
>=20

Less and less so, year over year. In fact, if you take out=20
the debt we took on building out our network, we've been=20
MAKING money. And we've made great strides on that debt,=20
too. Almost three years ahead of schedule on it so far.

A long way to go, and none of it guaranteed, but Chicken=20
Milton is wrong, as usual.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

In article <[email protected]>, Steven J=20
[email protected] says...
> What will be most interesting, however, is to see who moves where. All th=
e
> pundits have made their guesses, but we'll see....
>=20

And it's probably going to take a while. I was taking=20
Business Services calls most of the day. Out of 40+ calls,=20
2 port requests. Too early to see any results, and they'd=20
be only a snapshot at absolute best anyway.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
Thomas T. [email protected] says...
> This isn't Sweden or England. Keep in mind that changing carriers also
> requires buying a new phone [in nearly every case]. That is definitely N=
OT
> true in Sweden or England.
>=20

Plus, he ignored places, like Hong Kong, where LNP barely=20
registered at all.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

I predict that Sprint will get back in and lower prices in soon .
That;s the main way they can compete with Verizon .
On 24 Nov 2003 07:56:32 GMT, [email protected] (DSL GURU) wrote:

>AT&T, Cingular, and TMobile now all have plans where a family can have 2 phones
>sharing 500 or more anytime minutes for $49.99/month, and $10/month or less for
>each additonal phone.
>
>The lowest price SprintPCS plan is a pre-WLNP plan at $35 for 300 minutes, and
>if they let you use Share a Phone with it, you'd be paying $55/month for 300
>minutes or $65 for 500 minutes, ($45 for 500 minutes plus $20 for 2nd phone and
>$20 more for each additional phone), clearly more expensive than their
>competition.
>
>How can SprintPCS expect to be attracting customers when unlike former times,
>they are not the value leader?

DSL GURU wrote:


> I respectfully disagree. based on what happen in Sweden, England etc when
> they went to number portability, churn rates increased by 50%, and some
> carriers were "winners" and some were "losers"; basically it is assumed
> that carriers with high current churn rates (SprintPCS) are most likely to
> be losers, while carriers with low current churn rates (Verizon, Nextel)
> are likely to be winners. If any carrier pulls a rabbit out the hat in
> turns of plans, that could change. So far we've only seen what I consider
> relatively small rabbits: 7 PM nights from SprintPCS, new phone every year
> from AT&T, phone price drops of $100 from Verizon.
>
> I fully expect after a while when some carriers see their customer case
> shrinking, new plans will be offered that will be "wonderful" from a
> consumers viewpoint by today's standards. And then other carriers may have
> to bite the bullet to match them.
>
> Thats what happened in the competition between DirecTv and Dish.
> Originally it was $398 for a Receiver and $200 for installation. Now
> Installation is free, and so i are upto 3 receivers.
>
> The logic is its market share that counts, and a customer you lose money
> on to gain, will be a good cash flow in the future.


Well ,I guess that yesterday's ports (measured in tens of thousands, and not
millions) shoots your 'informed opnion' all to crap. Once again, the troll
is proven wrong. This whole thing may go the way of Y2K- a lot of hype
about nothing.