Major SprintPCS price Increase !!

"tolken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> You are taking O/siris's post completely out of context, you are twisting his words.
> I take the post you are ranting about to mean you need to meet the 18 month requirement AND have vision added at the time you
> get the phone. I don't see where he say's you HAVE to keep vision for 2 yrs.

If I understand O/Siris correctly, he is saying that one needs to keep a
Vision plan active for a full 18 months in order to qualify for the NEXT
handset upgrade rebate. If true, this would be a major change in Sprint's
rebate program, and a big cost increase for those of us who use Vision
a la carte.

--

John Richards

---

› See More: Major SprintPCS price Increase !!

"John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> "tolken" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > You are taking O/siris's post completely out of context, you are
twisting his words.
> > I take the post you are ranting about to mean you need to meet the 18
month requirement AND have vision added at the time you
> > get the phone. I don't see where he say's you HAVE to keep vision for 2
yrs.
>
> If I understand O/Siris correctly, he is saying that one needs to keep a
> Vision plan active for a full 18 months in order to qualify for the NEXT
> handset upgrade rebate. If true, this would be a major change in Sprint's
> rebate program, and a big cost increase for those of us who use Vision
> a la carte.
>
> --
>
> John Richards

John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If you
don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
subscribe to Vision.

Bob

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

> If I understand O/Siris correctly, he is saying that one needs to keep a
> Vision plan active for a full 18 months in order to qualify for the NEXT
> handset upgrade rebate. If true, this would be a major change in Sprint's
> rebate program, and a big cost increase for those of us who use Vision
> a la carte.

And even worse, in typical fashion he calls me a LIAR for saying the
exact same thing.

Bob Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If you
> don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
> subscribe to Vision.

**Forcing** Vision subscriptions in order to have the customer qualify for
a handset rebate is a lousy policy, though. Either offer the rebate or don't.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If
you
> > don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
> > subscribe to Vision.
>
> **Forcing** Vision subscriptions in order to have the customer qualify for
> a handset rebate is a lousy policy, though. Either offer the rebate or
don't.
>
> --

I agree with the policy being , but what this may be signaling is the end of
subsidized phones as we know it. Other than AT&T, nobody saw a mass
defection of subscribers due to portability. The networks are more mature
now, and we approaching a day where the differences in coverage will only be
evident in rural areas. Postpaid service in the US has almost reached the
saturation point, and we will see the carriers all pushing prepaid as the
first choice (Verizon seems to be already doing this). If coverage and
price become equal, the need to subsidize equipment is not there.

In article <rmarkoff-AE43B8.09024001052004
@news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> So for a rebate in the future you have to subscribe to Vision for 18=20
> months?
>=20
> In that case its a MAJOR PRICE INCREASE for htose that might want a=20
> rebate but don't use Vision.
>=20

Don't use Vision? Don't get a Vision phone. There *is* that choice.

No price increase.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> And I really wish O/siris would just kill file this guy or ignore him,=20
> you two are getting very monotonous, I mean think about rob, do you=20
> think anyone really believes this joke ?
>=20

I won't filter him. That's as irresponsible, I believe, as feeding=20
into his dishonesty as I admit I've been doing of late. I won't let=20
his dishonesty go unchallenged, but I'm done feeding into his=20
pathetic attempts at The Word According to Phill.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]=20
says...
> **Forcing** Vision subscriptions in order to have the customer qualify fo=
r
> a handset rebate is a lousy policy, though. Either offer the rebate or do=
n't.=20
>=20

Then don't get a Vision phone. That choice still exists. Although=20
I'd concede we need more.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <rmarkoff-C6A2F9.17433802052004
@news01.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
>=20
> And even worse, in typical fashion he calls me a LIAR for saying the=20
> exact same thing.
>=20

As usual, liar, that isn't what I'm calling you a liar for.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprīntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <rmarkoff-C6A2F9.17433802052004
> @news01.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > And even worse, in typical fashion he calls me a LIAR for saying the
> > exact same thing.
> >
>
> As usual, liar, that isn't what I'm calling you a liar for.

Your usual MIDNIGHT run of INSULTS?

Delete the discussion, and post your insults.

Everyone but you (even Bob Smith) agrees its a price increase if folks
NOW have to have Vision for 18 month to be eligible for a rebate.

$15 times 18 months equals $270, they they weren't required to spend
until now.

Your childishly calling me a LIAR doesn't chanhge the fact:

IT IS A PRICE INCREASE

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <[email protected]> wrote:

> Don't use Vision? Don't get a Vision phone. There *is* that choice.

But 75% of SprintPCS customers have a Vision phone.....
>
> No price increase.

For the majority IT IS A PRICE INCREASE.

If you are willing to settle for the older model Nokia candybar phone,
and dont want a flip phone.

ANOTHER CHOICE SprintPCS is forcing on its customers,

CHOOSE ANOTHER CARRIER when you need a new phone and dont want to pay
full retail.

"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If
you
> > don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
> > subscribe to Vision.
>
> **Forcing** Vision subscriptions in order to have the customer qualify for
> a handset rebate is a lousy policy, though. Either offer the rebate or
don't.

As I haven't seen this new rebate form, it's my understand that it only
applies to the purchase of a new Vision capable phone.

So, if one doesn't have Vision on their account, they don't qualify for the
rebate. Plain and simple for yours truly. For yours truly, I do have Vision
on my acct, I like using it. And for yours truly, I qualify for the rebate.
My daughter's phone, which has the $5 add-a-phone Vision expense qualifies
for the rebate as well.

For those that don't like or have Vision on the account, then they still may
qualify, if they get a non-vision phone, like the Nokia 3588i or whatever
will be offered in the future.

What's more, no one knows what's going to be offered in the future, as
things change, in terms of plans, options, phones and rebates ... Especially
with EV-DV will be offered in 2006.

Bob

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> O/Siris <0siris@sprīntpcs.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <rmarkoff-C6A2F9.17433802052004
> > @news01.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > >
> > > And even worse, in typical fashion he calls me a LIAR for saying the
> > > exact same thing.
> > >
> >
> > As usual, liar, that isn't what I'm calling you a liar for.
>
> Your usual MIDNIGHT run of INSULTS?
>
> Delete the discussion, and post your insults.
>
> Everyone but you (even Bob Smith) agrees its a price increase if folks
> NOW have to have Vision for 18 month to be eligible for a rebate.

Nope. Another misstatement (LIE) from Phillipe. I never said this was a
price increase ...
>
> $15 times 18 months equals $270, they they weren't required to spend
> until now.
>
> Your childishly calling me a LIAR doesn't chanhge the fact:
>
> IT IS A PRICE INCREASE

No, it isn't. It's a rebate for those that have Vision on their account.
There is no change in the cost of Vision. What's more, you keep spouting
this $270 figure. If the user doesn't want Vision, then they've saved the
$270 by not taking Vision, which is money not spent. A sum far more than
what the rebate offers.

Last, but certainly not least, the rebate still applies if they get a
non-vision phone.

Bob

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>> "tolken" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> > You are taking O/siris's post completely out of context, you are
> twisting his words.
>> > I take the post you are ranting about to mean you need to meet the 18
> month requirement AND have vision added at the time you
>> > get the phone. I don't see where he say's you HAVE to keep vision for 2
> yrs.
>>
>> If I understand O/Siris correctly, he is saying that one needs to keep a
>> Vision plan active for a full 18 months in order to qualify for the NEXT
>> handset upgrade rebate. If true, this would be a major change in Sprint's
>> rebate program, and a big cost increase for those of us who use Vision
>> a la carte.
>>
>> --
>>
>> John Richards
>
> John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If you
> don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
> subscribe to Vision.

Again, you're ignoring or glossing over this major change in rebate policy.
Vision is not an all or nothing proposition. To suddenly change the rules by
saying that part time Vision users now get *no rebate at all* is patently unfair.

--

John Richards

"John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > message news:[email protected]...
> >> "tolken" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> > You are taking O/siris's post completely out of context, you are
> > twisting his words.
> >> > I take the post you are ranting about to mean you need to meet the 18
> > month requirement AND have vision added at the time you
> >> > get the phone. I don't see where he say's you HAVE to keep vision for
2
> > yrs.
> >>
> >> If I understand O/Siris correctly, he is saying that one needs to keep
a
> >> Vision plan active for a full 18 months in order to qualify for the
NEXT
> >> handset upgrade rebate. If true, this would be a major change in
Sprint's
> >> rebate program, and a big cost increase for those of us who use Vision
> >> a la carte.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> John Richards
> >
> > John, the rebate has been set up with some rules, as most rebates do. If
you
> > don't want to subscribe to Vision, that's fine. No one is making you
> > subscribe to Vision.
>
> Again, you're ignoring or glossing over this major change in rebate
policy.
> Vision is not an all or nothing proposition. To suddenly change the rules
by
> saying that part time Vision users now get *no rebate at all* is patently
unfair.
>
> --
>
> John Richards

The current rebate does not mention the need to have Vision to qualify for a
rebate now. The one I haven't seen, others say there is a need to subscribe
to Vision for a FUTURE rebate. IOW, the next rebate you might take.

Last, but not least, is the information I posted within the past hour, that
was included on the new pricing plan PR. In that verbiage, there was no
mention of Vision with regards to a rebate.

Bob