Retention and Sprint's new plan

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> With the latest plans from Verizon, if you get signal, you coverage and you
> don't pay additional for it [in the United States]. Things may change if you
> mess with the phoen NAM or other such settings to force it over to a
> competitors network, but most people will not ever have the need ;-)
>
The reason I occasionally force roaming on my Sprint phone is that in
fringe coverage areas (like my house), the phone stays on Sprint until
the signal is almost non-existent. This causes poor reception and
frequent dropped calls. Forcing it to go to the stronger carrier
manually solves that problem.

---

› See More: Retention and Sprint's new plan

Sprint also doesn't enforce the old 50 percent roaming rule anymore if
roaming is included in your plan. Sprint is certainly not for everyone,
however, it is not nearly as bad as many folks claim that it is. I know a
lot of quite technically savvy folks that like Sprint for a number of good
reasons and they have tried all of the cellular service providers. YMMV.

Jar-Jar

George wrote:

> I know a few people who tried Sprint and gave up for that reason. Lets
> just say Sprint has much less than optimum signal in my local nad nearby
> markets (to be fair tmobile is similar). They bought the phones and
> Sprint canceled their roaming as you described.
>
> If you go to the local mall the person in the Sprint both is sitting
> there daydreaming and the three people at the VZW booth are always busy.

AT&T has also been extremely strict about excessive roaming.

Sprint is tempting, due to their low SERO pricing, early off-peak start
time, etc., but in much of California you'd end up roaming so much that
it wouldn't work if Sprint is serious about preventing too much roaming.

> Sprint is tempting, due to their low SERO pricing, early off-peak start
> time, etc., but in much of California you'd end up roaming so much that it
> wouldn't work if Sprint is serious about preventing too much roaming.


If you are located in Southern California, then Sprint's network is as good
as Verizon's network. I don't have experience in NoCal, but have heard that
the Verizon network is much better. Nevertheless, if you get the Sprint
unlimited plan for $99, they will not terminate you for excessive roaming.
The all you can eat plan includes all the roaming that you want. It also
included all of their services and Telenav navigation. It really isn't a bad
deal.

Jar-Jar

SMS wrote:
> George wrote:
>
>> I know a few people who tried Sprint and gave up for that reason. Lets
>> just say Sprint has much less than optimum signal in my local nad
>> nearby markets (to be fair tmobile is similar). They bought the phones
>> and Sprint canceled their roaming as you described.
>>
>> If you go to the local mall the person in the Sprint both is sitting
>> there daydreaming and the three people at the VZW booth are always busy.
>
> AT&T has also been extremely strict about excessive roaming.
>
> Sprint is tempting, due to their low SERO pricing, early off-peak start
> time, etc., but in much of California you'd end up roaming so much that
> it wouldn't work if Sprint is serious about preventing too much roaming.

I know someone who did that last year and they cut him off because of
the huge amount of roaming. I don't know where people are who proclaim
Sprint is great but it likely isn't the NE where I am.

The other consideration is free M2M. I think at least 95% of the people
I call have VZW so my billable minute usage has gone way down.

"Jar-Jar Binks" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
news:[email protected]:

> Sprint also doesn't enforce the old 50 percent roaming rule anymore if
> roaming is included in your plan.


You might want to check your sources on that, because I don't think that is
a true statement.

>
> You might want to check your sources on that, because I don't think that
> is
> a true statement.
>

That is a true statement and for the new $99 everything plan. I confirmed
this with the retentions department this morning.

>
> You might want to check your sources on that, because I don't think that
> is
> a true statement.
>

That is a true statement and for the new $99 everything plan. I confirmed
this with the retentions department this morning.

"Jar-Jar Binks" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Sprint is tempting, due to their low SERO pricing, early off-peak start
>> time, etc., but in much of California you'd end up roaming so much that it
>> wouldn't work if Sprint is serious about preventing too much roaming.
>
>
>If you are located in Southern California, then Sprint's network is as good
>as Verizon's network. I don't have experience in NoCal, but have heard that
>the Verizon network is much better.

I'd say they're comparable but not identical. My Verizon phone often
dropped calls on I-80 outside Davis, and Sprint doesn't. On the other
hand, Verizon might have been better on parts of 99. I spend more
time on 80 than on 99, so Sprint wins in this particular comparison.

I don't spend much time in the boonies, so I don't know how they
compare in more rural areas.

"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> SMS wrote:
>> George wrote:

> I know someone who did that last year and they cut him off because of the
> huge amount of roaming. I don't know where people are who proclaim Sprint
> is great but it likely isn't the NE where I am.
>
> The other consideration is free M2M. I think at least 95% of the people I
> call have VZW so my billable minute usage has gone way down.

Same here, in the NE and 95% of the mobile users I speak with are on VZW.
It would be nice to be able to call landlines though. And have included
text messages; even though I have a Blackberry, I still send and receive TXT
messages to phones.

Alan Marryat wrote:
> "George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> SMS wrote:
>>> George wrote:
>
>> I know someone who did that last year and they cut him off because of the
>> huge amount of roaming. I don't know where people are who proclaim Sprint
>> is great but it likely isn't the NE where I am.
>>
>> The other consideration is free M2M. I think at least 95% of the people I
>> call have VZW so my billable minute usage has gone way down.
>
> Same here, in the NE and 95% of the mobile users I speak with are on VZW.
> It would be nice to be able to call landlines though. And have included
> text messages; even though I have a Blackberry, I still send and receive TXT
> messages to phones.

Yes, M2M is a big deal for me. Remember, Verizon has the most retail
customers of any carrier, and those are the only ones with M2M. AT&T may
have a lot of MVNOs using its network, but these users don't get M2M
included. It's especially an issue out west, where Verizon has an
overwhelming lead in subscribers. I don't know a single person with
Sprint anymore. It just doesn't work well in most of California once you
get outside the city. Look at how poorly they rate in the Consumer
Reports survey, including for Northern and Southern California.

However if you can force roaming onto Verizon, and there is no penalty
for too much roaming, Sprint can be a good deal. If you pair Sprint's
$30 SERO plan with Sprint to Home and a service such as Voicestick, you
essentially can get unlimited calling for around $52.

In alt.cellular.verizon Jar-Jar Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
> Verizon phones will roam if they cannot pick up a verizon signal. A Verizon
> phone will lock onto a Verizon signal even if the signal is very weak and
> unusable. With a Sprint Phone, you have the ability to force roaming on
> Verizon. Also, if you have the "all you can eat" unlimited plan, there is no
> cap on roaming. Both Verizon and Sprint have their advantages and
> disadvantages and I can choose either network from a single phone. That
> really rocks!
>

Yes, I know all about it ... I used them for many years [and have posted here
for nearly as many]. One thing that Sprint does not have is customer service.
They won't have the opportunity to screw me again.

Either way, you CAN force your Sprint phone over to roaming [hopefully, you
don't have AMPS on that phone, or you will most likely go analog], but you had
better not forget to switch it back. Sprint has a rule about 50% used minutes
being in network. If you roam more than 50% of the time, you may lose the
privilege to roam at all [without cost]. I have posted about this elsewhere I
believe.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

In the land of the dark the Ship of the Sun is driven by the Grateful Dead.
-- Egyptian Book of the Dead

In alt.cellular.verizon Bill T <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
> The reason I occasionally force roaming on my Sprint phone is that in
> fringe coverage areas (like my house), the phone stays on Sprint until
> the signal is almost non-existent. This causes poor reception and
> frequent dropped calls. Forcing it to go to the stronger carrier
> manually solves that problem.
>

Sounds like a good reason to just use Verizon to me. Plus, you won't have
your contract extended over a minor contract change ... or get screwed out of
a new phone rebate because you had to do a warrantee swap [or any ESN change],
etc etc. Sprint, as far as technology goes, is fine. But that is where it
ends.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

In the land of the dark the Ship of the Sun is driven by the Grateful Dead.
-- Egyptian Book of the Dead

In alt.cellular.verizon Jar-Jar Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sprint also doesn't enforce the old 50 percent roaming rule anymore if
> roaming is included in your plan. Sprint is certainly not for everyone,
> however, it is not nearly as bad as many folks claim that it is. I know a
> lot of quite technically savvy folks that like Sprint for a number of good
> reasons and they have tried all of the cellular service providers. YMMV.
>

They most certainly DO enforce the 50% rule. They just don't hassle you on
the first offense, but if you do it enough, you will hear from them. I
already posted about a guy I work with who got a call from them. He explained
that coverage at his employer is marginal on Sprint. They haven't hassled him
since [but he has been good about switching back to automatic or home when he
leaves].

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

In the land of the dark the Ship of the Sun is driven by the Grateful Dead.
-- Egyptian Book of the Dead

>
> They most certainly DO enforce the 50% rule. They just don't hassle you
> on
> the first offense, but if you do it enough, you will hear from them. I
> already posted about a guy I work with who got a call from them. He
> explained
> that coverage at his employer is marginal on Sprint. They haven't hassled
> him
> since [but he has been good about switching back to automatic or home when
> he
> leaves].
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse

The roaming rule is NOT enforced on the all you can eat $99 plan that
includes everything. I was told this by the retentions department yesterday
morning. The unlimited plan is really "unlimited".