sanyo 8100 bleeding screen

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> If you're
> so unhappy, then leave Sprint (again)

I haven't left Sprint, but KC will be happy to know you are inviting
paying customers to leave.

---

› See More: sanyo 8100 bleeding screen

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> why you were so happy to leave Sprint for AT&T
> only to be crawling back before your two week trial was up

You are getting like Vargas. That is such a lie. I HAVE NEVER BEEN A
CUSTOMER OF AT&T.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> You apparently can write anyone and get your
> ETF waived.

I have it in writing that I can leave SprintPCS and have no ETF, as they
had illegally altered my contract end date, sliding it forward to the
end of a billing period, as we both know your defective billing software
will do.

So its not simply a matter of writing anyone, its a matter of CAUSE.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > why you were so happy to leave Sprint for AT&T
> > only to be crawling back before your two week trial was up
>
> You are getting like Vargas. That is such a lie. I HAVE NEVER BEEN A
> CUSTOMER OF AT&T.

Once again, you spew lies Phillippe. The below comes from one of your alter
ego Ids on the attws newsgroup -

"Path:
newsspool2.news.atl.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!stamper.new
s.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!5ab7a9fb!not-for
-mail
From: Jonathan <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.cellular.attws
Subject: Re: TYPICAL Goodbye present from AT&T Worthless
Organization: Break Up Microsoft
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.3b1 (PPC Mac OS X)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Lines: 8
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 15:03:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.32.48.64
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1071587006 66.32.48.64 (Tue, 16
Dec 2003 07:03:26 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:03:26 PST
Xref: news.earthlink.net alt.cellular.attws:42212
X-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:04:33 PST
(newsspool2.news.atl.earthlink.net)

In article <[email protected]>,
"wirelessjuan" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Actually we have had several customers question their 1st months bill and
> apparently they do bill a month in advance now. It would have been nice
if
> they would have communicated this to their Dealers.

I just got a first bill 2 weeks ago, and it did not bill in advance."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------

Oh, and before you change anything above, here's the google link as well ...
http://tinyurl.com/2xg69

So, what were you saying Phillipe?

Bob

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > In case you didn't read what you quoted from me, I said cracked
> > screens, not defective screens (I take it you havn't looked them up on
> > websters.com?).
>
>
> busted screens = customer abuse is the SprintPCS policy.
>
> But if someone bought their phone from Costco, and the phone didnt have
> a big dent in it from obvious abuse Costco will cover you.
>
> I had a Qualcomm phone that overnight, sitting on a dresser got a
> bleeding screen. SprintPCS refused to do anything, luckily I had bought
> it at a major Department store, that swapped me out for a more expensive
> phone for FREE, as they (unlike SprintPCS) stood behind what they sold.

Wow, Phil- this is at least the fourth phone you've talked about onthis
group that had problems- a little above the norm. Maybe that's why you have
such a hard time with SPrint- you abuse your phones.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Busted screen, bleeding screen = customer abuse : SprintPCS;
>

Now you're fabricating- nobody ever said that about a bleeding screen.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > If you're
> > so unhappy, then leave Sprint (again)
>
> I haven't left Sprint, but KC will be happy to know you are inviting
> paying customers to leave.

They would probably be real happy to get rid of lying, loudmouth customers
that waste the resources of the company. If we took a quarter of your posts
at face value (which we don't), you would be using 20 a week of Sprint time
to do all of the complaining and verification you claim to do.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > why you were so happy to leave Sprint for AT&T
> > only to be crawling back before your two week trial was up
>
> You are getting like Vargas. That is such a lie. I HAVE NEVER BEEN A
> CUSTOMER OF AT&T.

A quote from the AT&T Wireless group, written by Robert M.:

"I was considering AT&TWS in Decemvber of 03. They so totally screwed
things up we ended up in discussions with their lawyers."

A POTENTIAL customer would have no reason to talk to AT&T lawyers. Only a
CURRENT customer would get the time of day from them. So, either you lied
there, of lied here. Either way- no credibility.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> > >
> > > SprintPCS rule of thumb is :
> > >
> > > Bad Screen = customer Abuse
> > >
> >
> > Hogwash. As usual.
>
> I guess you didnt see the October 2003 post from "Tech Geek" (another
> SprintPCS employee) that said otherwise within this thread. Or maybe
> you "accidently" failed to quote it.
>
> ==============
>
> From: TechGeek ([email protected])
> Subject: Re: Repairs for Sanyo 4900 near NY/NJ/CT
> Original FormatNewsgroups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs
> Date: 2003-10-15 09:00:09 PST
>
> as YOU KNOW, the screens did not crack on
> their own, 100% case it was "abuse" that cracked them

For the third time, go to Websters.com and look up "defective" and
then look up "crack". They do not mean the same thing.

"Defective" is one of MANY possibilities that could cause the screen
to malfunction on it's own.

A "crack" is a physical breakage in the screen itself.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> Busted screen, bleeding screen = customer abuse : SprintPCS;
>

Since you're so sure of this, then PROVE IT.

And don't go stretching my quote stating cracked screens are caused by
abuse, I want PROOF of what you say.

You say that all defective screens are caused by customer abuce.

Fine, PROVE IT.

As for your "department" stores, Costco, BJs, and Sams stand behind
your membership fee, and as for the other department store you
mentioned a few months back, I called them and they said that it was
only a 14 day return policy on all cel phones, no exceptions.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> >
> > Busted screen, bleeding screen = customer abuse : SprintPCS;
> >
>
> Since you're so sure of this, then PROVE IT.


You already did with your posts of last year already reposted in this
thread.



> I called them and they said that it was
> only a 14 day return policy on all cel phones, no exceptions.

There is a difference between a return policy and a satisfaction
guaranteed policy. Again as I previously posted, when I had a bleeding
screen on a Qualcomm phone that was bleeding in the morning after not
having been bleeding the night before when they only thing it did was
sit on a dresser for 10 hours, SprintPCS refused to do anything on a 6
week old phone. A Mays department store where I cought it swapped it out
for a Samsung 3500.

And there is no such thing as no exceptions. They just say that to cut
down on returns. Sorry you are a timid consumer.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> > From: TechGeek ([email protected])
> > Subject: Re: Repairs for Sanyo 4900 near NY/NJ/CT
> > Original FormatNewsgroups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs
> > Date: 2003-10-15 09:00:09 PST
> >
> > as YOU KNOW, the screens did not crack on
> > their own, 100% case it was "abuse" that cracked them

Here you go. Sorry you now want to disavow what you siad.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


>
> And there is no such thing as no exceptions.
According to you there are- you post exceptions every day.

>They just say that to cut
> down on returns.

No proof- more lies.

>Sorry you are a timid consumer.

Even if he were, it would be better than being the lying, whining,
deceiptful, amoral, uninformed customer that you appear to be.

O/Siris wrote:

> If the screen looks like it's been impacted, it won't be covered...
> By *Sanyo*, and he'd get charged for the replacement phone once it
> arrived in the warehouse in that condition.

I haven't read exactly what the insurance covers, but if its like
many "extended" warranties, it only extends the manufactures'
product warranty for any manufacturing defect.

It really isn't worth it as a) if a product is going to fail, its
typically within the first few days of operation (known as the
"bathtub failure curve") or b) a known issue that surfaces
repeatedly with a particular product or manufacturing run (in this
case - one of Phillie's secret failure phones - one could push to
get it replaced).

Even if a product was warranted under some sort of replacement
program, how would you differentiate between an accident or abuse?

If it falls out of my pocket and I run over it with my tractor,
it can have the same appearance as if I went into rage mode over
a dropped call and ran over it with my car.

In article <[email protected]>,
JRW <no_addy@no_.com> wrote:

> O/Siris wrote:
>
> > If the screen looks like it's been impacted, it won't be covered...
> > By *Sanyo*, and he'd get charged for the replacement phone once it
> > arrived in the warehouse in that condition.
>
> I haven't read exactly what the insurance covers, but if its like
> many "extended" warranties, it only extends the manufactures'
> product warranty for any manufacturing defect.
>
> It really isn't worth it as a) if a product is going to fail, its
> typically within the first few days of operation (known as the
> "bathtub failure curve") or b) a known issue that surfaces
> repeatedly with a particular product or manufacturing run (in this
> case - one of Phillie's secret failure phones - one could push to
> get it replaced).
>
> Even if a product was warranted under some sort of replacement
> program, how would you differentiate between an accident or abuse?
>
> If it falls out of my pocket and I run over it with my tractor,
> it can have the same appearance as if I went into rage mode over
> a dropped call and ran over it with my car.

Certainly if a phone shows signs of physical damage, ie Scratched
screen, dented corners, busted antenna, water damage, then its physical
abuse. But Screens go bad on their own, (temperature issues do to phone
heating from a long call for instance) and SprintPCS will still just
refuse to help you and cry "Customer Abuse".

Thats where buying it from a store with a satisfaction guarenteed policy
is helpful