How many users actually benefit from $99 unlimited?

4phun wrote:

> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.

Yeah, unless: a) you want to have DSL, in which case you may as well get
a landline anyway since the price difference between naked DSL and DSL
plus a landline is minimal, and b) you have kids or seniors that need
the 911 service of a landline.

Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
or go down, but landlines still work. During the bad hurricane season a
few years ago, we also saw that a lot of wireless sites had no back-up
generator, only batteries, so they went down pretty quickly. Cingular
had 25% of their sites with generators (according to their own press
release), while Verizon had 80% with back up power (Verizon claims to
have a generator at every site where they are allowed to have one).
Cingular's goal is to have enough sites up to provide complete coverage,
but to sacrifice capacity, "We will sacrifice the capacity piece to try
to attain blanket coverage as much as possible."

"http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_signal_end_storm/"
"http://news.vzw.com/news/2006/03/pr2006-04-04a.html"

> Magic Jack is one kick ass phone company when it comes to net cost!
> Now if AT&T could drop the cell bill to only $20 a year that would be
> something.

How long do you think Magic Jack is going to survive at $20/year? It's
great while it lasts though. They'll probably be going the way of
SunRocket before long.

---

› See More: How many users actually benefit from $99 unlimited?

4phun wrote:

> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.

I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.

Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>
> "Richard B. Gilbert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> 35 cents a minute? Gawd! If my mother or my stepmother had lived to
>> see cell phones, they would have talked sixteen hours per day and the
>> family would have been bankrupt!
>
>
>
> Really? My mother, after having a cellphone for several years still
> wonders why there's no dial tone.
>
> I think she's used 10 minutes in the last 12 months. (Thank you,
> T-Mobile, for a $10/year minimum refill policy!) ;-)
>

My father married a couple of motor mouths! They could talk for hours
at a time. Sometimes it seemed as if they only got off the phone to eat
or go to the bathroom!

I see women in the parking lot of the local supermarket with BlueTooth
headsets chattering away. I can't help wondering if they wear them to bed!!

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>> unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>> subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>
> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>
> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
> was probably $375/month.
>
> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.

Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of sales people that would benefit, but
for the vast majority of subscribers, I don't believe that it's much of
a deal.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>>I suppose, but if I were those people I'd definitely choose the PagePlus
>>unlimited at about $75 per month, plus it's not "plus taxes, fees, etc."
>
> Deity help us -- you're morphing into a shill for PagePlus!

Hey, if he has to shill for someone, why not PP? They offer, hands down,
the best prepaid plan in the industry right now, between the low cost, large
native network, and ability to roam. T-Mo's "2Go" prepaid runs a close
second- it has the largest coverage area of any non-MVNO due to it's
inclusion of free roaming.

>>Actually you can get it for about $2.30/day or about $69/month, if you
>>buy the refill cards at a discount. I.e. the $80 card can be purchased
>>for $73.72, a discount of 7.85%.
>>
>>The biggest benefit is that it's on Verizon, which has the best coverage
>>of any U.S. network.
>
> But still a Verizon shill I see.

Even assuming that AT&T and Verizon postpaid service has comparable
coverage, AT&T's prepaid GoPhone coverage is decidedly lackluster. PagePlus
has better coverage that GoPhone or any AT&T prepaid MVNO (at least now that
Beyond Wireless TDMA is history, since it had the ability to roam off-net
for additional cost.)

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Richard B. Gilbert" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>My father married a couple of motor mouths!
>
>
> At once?
>
> Man, I wouldn't care if they were motor mouths...
>

Nope, one at a time!

If he'd married both at once he never would have gotten a word in
edgewise. Or anything else for that matter! ;-)

Todd Allcock wrote:

> Hey, if he has to shill for someone, why not PP? They offer, hands
> down, the best prepaid plan in the industry right now, between the low
> cost, large native network, and ability to roam. T-Mo's "2Go" prepaid
> runs a close second- it has the largest coverage area of any non-MVNO
> due to it's inclusion of free roaming.

Since when does stating the facts about a carrier, prepaid or otherwise,
constitute shilling? I gain nothing if people sign up for PagePlus, or
Verizon for that matter. I just want to get the facts out there since
there are others that would benefit from them.

> Even assuming that AT&T and Verizon postpaid service has comparable
> coverage,

Don't assume that. The coverage maps may show comparable coverage, but
in reality the Verizon coverage is far superior. Just check all the
independent surveys if you have any doubts.

> AT&T's prepaid GoPhone coverage is decidedly lackluster.

Do they not allow off-AT&T roaming? I would have thought that at least
they were equivalent to AT&T's postpaid coverage.

> PagePlus has better coverage that GoPhone or any AT&T prepaid MVNO (at
> least now that Beyond Wireless TDMA is history, since it had the ability
> to roam off-net for additional cost.)

Yeah, I had Beyond Wireless TDMA for my kids' phones. Too bad they went
over to the dark side, both in terms of coverage and cost.

I wonder about 7-11 SpeakOut GSM coverage. Their literature claims to
allow roaming onto other GSM networks at extra cost, but
"http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_compare.htm" states "Can't Roam." Some
users claim that there is some roaming in western states. Some claim
that there used to be Dobson roaming in some areas but not any more.

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

> Since when does stating the facts about a carrier, prepaid or otherwise,
> constitute shilling? I gain nothing if people sign up for PagePlus, or
> Verizon for that matter. I just want to get the facts out there since
> there are others that would benefit from them.

I apologize- I wasn't agreeing, I was just parrotting Navas' choice of words
back at him. In retrospect I should've encased it in quotes ("shill") to
emphasize I wasn't agreeing.

I appreciate the "shilling"- if not for you, I'd have never heard of them,
and I'm a happy customer.

>> Even assuming that AT&T and Verizon postpaid service has comparable
>> coverage,
>
> Don't assume that. The coverage maps may show comparable coverage, but in
> reality the Verizon coverage is far superior. Just check all the
> independent surveys if you have any doubts.

I was speaking to a specific audience. John will never concede Verizon has
wider coverage, so I was making the logical point that even if their
postpaid coverage was comparable, PagePlus is superior product offering
because it's a SUPERset of Verizon coverage (albeit with roaming charges in
some areas) while GoPhone is a SUBset of AT&T coverage.

>> AT&T's prepaid GoPhone coverage is decidedly lackluster.
>
> Do they not allow off-AT&T roaming? I would have thought that at least
> they were equivalent to AT&T's postpaid coverage.

Oh, Lord, no. The monthly GoPhone "hybrid" plans include a small amount of
roaming, but nothing like postpaid, and I don't believe the "pay as you go"
plans offer any. Go look at the online maps. Entire states are blank
except for a metro area or two!

>> PagePlus has better coverage that GoPhone or any AT&T prepaid MVNO (at
>> least now that Beyond Wireless TDMA is history, since it had the ability
>> to roam off-net for additional cost.)
>
> Yeah, I had Beyond Wireless TDMA for my kids' phones. Too bad they went
> over to the dark side, both in terms of coverage and cost.

I assume BW TDMA was operating under a legacy agreement with the old,
pre-merger, AT&T Wireless, who seemed far more agreeable to MVNOs (Beyond,
JusTalk, Locus' varied offerings, etc.) than Cingular was. Post merger, it
seems a middle ground was reached- they still entertain MVNOs but they seem
to offer lousier deals to them!


> I wonder about 7-11 SpeakOut GSM coverage. Their literature claims to
> allow roaming onto other GSM networks at extra cost, but
> "http://www.cellguru.net/prepaid_compare.htm" states "Can't Roam." Some
> users claim that there is some roaming in western states. Some claim that
> there used to be Dobson roaming in some areas but not any more.

I think the "problem" is that most of the roaming available on SpeakOut was
provided by affiliates that AT&T eventually acquired, so essentially the
very few former roam areas are now native, so SO users didn't lose much of
anything. Universal "extra cost" roaming, like BW TDMA offered and PP
currently offers, simply isn't available on any AT&T MVNO that I'm aware of.

SMS <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
news:[email protected]:

> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>>> unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>>> subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>>
>> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
>> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>>
>> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so
>> he was probably $375/month.
>>
>> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.
>
> Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of sales people that would benefit,
> but for the vast majority of subscribers, I don't believe that it's
> much of a deal.
>

The answer to this question is amazingly simple- look at ARPU for each
carrier. With voice ARPU generally being in the $55-60 range, $100 users
are going to represent the upper end of the scale. With the influx of
lower creditworthy customers on all networks over the last three years,
there will be more customers on the network below that line than above it.

At 21 Feb 2008 18:27:55 -0500 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> > I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
> > unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
> > subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>
> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>
> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
> was probably $375/month.
>
> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.


Agreed. My cousin, a consultant back east who uses 3000 or so daytime
minutes a month is still on a grandfathered ATTWS GSM Charter plan (a $99
unlimited plan they originally used to con suckers from switching from
their excellent TDMA/analog network to their, at the time, very crummy GSM
one.)

Since the merger he's been stuck buying unlocked handsets to upgrade since
the "new" AT&T can't sell him a subsidized phone that'll accept his blue
"old" AT&T SIM, and won't switch him to a "new" orange AT&T SIM unless he
takes a new plan.

Ironically, I'll bet he'll probably switch to Ve izon- Verizon has a little
better reception in his neighborhood, and he uses a Verizon EVDO laptop
card for mobile data- it works on his boat, where the AT&T 3G card he tried
first doesn't always reach- (apparently "Extended UMTS" didn't make it to
Rhode Island!) ;-) IIRC, Verizon will knock the PC card rate down from
$79 to $59 if you also have a voice plan. The $20 savings didn't justify
dumping the AT&T Charter plan, but when Verizon offers the $99 unlimited,
he can port over and save the $20/month on the data card.

At 21 Feb 2008 20:41:32 -0600 The Bob wrote:

> The answer to this question is amazingly simple- look at ARPU for each
> carrier. With voice ARPU generally being in the $55-60 range, $100
users
> are going to represent the upper end of the scale. With the influx of
> lower creditworthy customers on all networks over the last three years,
> there will be more customers on the network below that line than above it.


True- the question is what percentage of customers are actually above the
$99 mark now- I suspect it's not too big a percentage, and can you con
enough $60-80 users to jump to $99 to offset that.

Maybe he should try extended GSM.

"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> At 21 Feb 2008 18:27:55 -0500 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>> > I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>> > unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>> > subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>>
>> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
>> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>>
>> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
>> was probably $375/month.
>>
>> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.
>
>
> Agreed. My cousin, a consultant back east who uses 3000 or so daytime
> minutes a month is still on a grandfathered ATTWS GSM Charter plan (a $99
> unlimited plan they originally used to con suckers from switching from
> their excellent TDMA/analog network to their, at the time, very crummy GSM
> one.)
>
> Since the merger he's been stuck buying unlocked handsets to upgrade since
> the "new" AT&T can't sell him a subsidized phone that'll accept his blue
> "old" AT&T SIM, and won't switch him to a "new" orange AT&T SIM unless he
> takes a new plan.
>
> Ironically, I'll bet he'll probably switch to Ve izon- Verizon has a
> little
> better reception in his neighborhood, and he uses a Verizon EVDO laptop
> card for mobile data- it works on his boat, where the AT&T 3G card he
> tried
> first doesn't always reach- (apparently "Extended UMTS" didn't make it to
> Rhode Island!) ;-) IIRC, Verizon will knock the PC card rate down from
> $79 to $59 if you also have a voice plan. The $20 savings didn't justify
> dumping the AT&T Charter plan, but when Verizon offers the $99 unlimited,
> he can port over and save the $20/month on the data card.
>
>

> Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
> or go down, but landlines still work.

Actually, just the opposite is true. Granted, as usual you showed an
exception to the rule in order to pass it along as the rule. However,
during most natural disasters it's the landlines that go down first.

Janet Wilder wrote:

> Since so many of the people we call are also Verizon users, the IN
> calling saves gallons of minutes. We hardly eat in to our paid minutes
> with nights and weekends and IN. It would make no sense for us to go to
> "unlimited"

Yes, I have a feeling that between off-peak and MTM, very few
subscribers will benefit from a move up to $100 unlimited, while nearly
_all_ of the heavy users (not using smart phones) will move down to $100
unlimited. I notice the same scenario as your's around here. Most of my
relatives, friends, and co-workers have Verizon so I don't even use up
my measly 300 peak minutes.

The carriers also better hope that the heavy users don't find out about
the ways to get unlimited use at much lower cost. PagePlus offers
unlimited for about $75 per month, and that $75 isn't burdened with
extra fees and taxes like the $100 unlimited plans are. With Sprint and
Voicestick, unlimited is $52 plus taxes and fees paid to Sprint, and
Voicestick offers a lot of other advantages as well.

SMS wrote:
> 4phun wrote:
>
>> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
>> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
>> the time.
>
> Yeah, unless: a) you want to have DSL, in which case you may as well get
> a landline anyway since the price difference between naked DSL and DSL
> plus a landline is minimal, and b) you have kids or seniors that need
> the 911 service of a landline.
>
> Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
> or go down, but landlines still work. During the bad hurricane season a
> few years ago, we also saw that a lot of wireless sites had no back-up
> generator, only batteries, so they went down pretty quickly. Cingular
> had 25% of their sites with generators (according to their own press
> release), while Verizon had 80% with back up power (Verizon claims to
> have a generator at every site where they are allowed to have one).
> Cingular's goal is to have enough sites up to provide complete coverage,
> but to sacrifice capacity, "We will sacrifice the capacity piece to try
> to attain blanket coverage as much as possible."
>
> "http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_signal_end_storm/"
> "http://news.vzw.com/news/2006/03/pr2006-04-04a.html"
>

I bet many people don't realize how Mickey Mouse some carriers are.
Tmobile doesn't believe in generators and at least in my area the old
AT&T TDMA/analog sites had generators but now the GSM stuff just has
battery.