Verizon Worsens America's Choice Calling Plan--No more roaming, even at extra cost, No more National Single Rate Plan.

On Thu, 26 May 2005 09:11:14 -0700, Quick wrote:

> Very good point! I didn't think of that. I've spent the last
> 10 years of my life in areas solidly covered by (GTE) VZW
> and there is *almost* no chance I will go somewhere else
> in the foreseeable future... BUT if the plane goes down in
> the Black Mountains I'M GOING TO BE SCREWED.

No, 911 will work if there is an analog or CDMA signal present.

---

› See More: Verizon Worsens America's Choice Calling Plan--No more roaming, even at extra cost, No more National Single Rate Plan.

"Quick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1117124231.142354@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> >
> > This is the change. It is catastrophic to some users, a
> > non-issue to others. Many users will not realize how
> > catastrophic it is until they travel to an area with no
> > Verizon or Extended network.
>
> Very good point! I didn't think of that. I've spent the last
> 10 years of my life in areas solidly covered by (GTE) VZW
> and there is *almost* no chance I will go somewhere else
> in the foreseeable future.

Good point. Since the world obviously revolves around where you go in your
life, there is no need for anyone else to have coverage in other places.

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> "Quick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:1117124231.142354@sj-nntpcache-3...
>> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>>>
>>> This is the change. It is catastrophic to some users, a
>>> non-issue to others. Many users will not realize how
>>> catastrophic it is until they travel to an area with no
>>> Verizon or Extended network.
>>
>> Very good point! I didn't think of that. I've spent the
>> last 10 years of my life in areas solidly covered by
>> (GTE) VZW and there is *almost* no chance I will go
>> somewhere else
>> in the foreseeable future.
>
> Good point. Since the world obviously revolves around
> where you go in your life, there is no need for anyone
> else to have coverage in other places.

No. The point is your claim that VZW is intentionally
trying to obfuscate/trick/mislead/screw their customers...

"Many users will not realize how catastrophic
it is until they travel to an area with no Verizon
or Extended network."

I managed to figure out where I frequent and if
I can expect to have coverage (or not) and I'm
certainly no genius. And *catastrophic*? c'mon.

-Quick

CellGuy <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> No, 911 will work if there is an analog or CDMA signal present.
>
>

Not true in Charleston, SC. Inside my local WalMart, on a fresh VZW phone,
within 1/2 mile of an AMPS/CDMA Alltel tower and within SIGHT of a CDMA PCS
Sprint tower, the phone says NO SERVICE, because Verizon has a very weak
signal in the Oakbrook section of Summerville, SC, and the VZW PRL forbids
the phone from roaming IN-MARKET to a carrier that works....no VZW nearby
tower.

While loaning a lady my trusty old V60i on Alltel, I asked her if I could
test dialing 911 on her NO SERVICE new Verizon phone. Her call to her
husband on Alltel was perfect. My call to 911 resulted in the phones no
service warning tones and it NEVER SEARCHED for Sprint or Alltel because
both are on the exclusion list of the phone's PRL...same as her regular
calls.

Solution is simple.....If you want unhobbled 911 service for the next few
years, buy a 99 cent, 3W bagphone with a cigarette lighter plug on it from
a thrift shop and toss it in the trunk. NONE of them can stop IT from
searching for an A or B AMPS signal that works to 911....no service or
contract agreements are necessary by FCC decree.

Larry W4CSC wrote:

> Not true in Charleston, SC. Inside my local WalMart, on a fresh VZW phone,
> within 1/2 mile of an AMPS/CDMA Alltel tower and within SIGHT of a CDMA PCS
> Sprint tower, the phone says NO SERVICE, because Verizon has a very weak
> signal in the Oakbrook section of Summerville, SC, and the VZW PRL forbids
> the phone from roaming IN-MARKET to a carrier that works....no VZW nearby
> tower.
>
> While loaning a lady my trusty old V60i on Alltel, I asked her if I could
> test dialing 911 on her NO SERVICE new Verizon phone. Her call to her
> husband on Alltel was perfect. My call to 911 resulted in the phones no
> service warning tones and it NEVER SEARCHED for Sprint or Alltel because
> both are on the exclusion list of the phone's PRL...same as her regular
> calls.

So naturally you filed a complaint with the FCC, then? Not allowing 911
calls is against the law.

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"

Steve Sobol wrote:
> Larry W4CSC wrote:
>
>> Not true in Charleston, SC. Inside my local WalMart, on
>> a fresh VZW phone, within 1/2 mile of an AMPS/CDMA
>> Alltel tower and within SIGHT of a CDMA PCS Sprint
>> tower, the phone says NO SERVICE, because Verizon has a
>> very weak signal in the Oakbrook section of Summerville,
>> SC, and the VZW PRL forbids the phone from roaming
>> IN-MARKET to a carrier that works....no VZW nearby
>> tower.
>>
>> While loaning a lady my trusty old V60i on Alltel, I
>> asked her if I could test dialing 911 on her NO SERVICE
>> new Verizon phone. Her call to her husband on Alltel
>> was perfect. My call to 911 resulted in the phones no
>> service warning tones and it NEVER SEARCHED for Sprint
>> or Alltel because both are on the exclusion list of the
>> phone's PRL...same as her regular calls.
>
> So naturally you filed a complaint with the FCC, then?
> Not allowing 911 calls is against the law.

O jees, you had to do it didn't you... Now we're going
to hear how he made that dealership pay when he returned
that Skee-do 20 years ago.

-Quick

Quick wrote:

> O jees, you had to do it didn't you... Now we're going
> to hear how he made that dealership pay when he returned
> that Skee-do 20 years ago.

Yes, I did have to do it. Just to prove a point. Larry's a crank (among
other things, but I'm trying to keep this post polite), and he loves to
complain. I'll bet you $10 his reply will be "No, I didn't. I figured it
won't do any good. The FCC is in the pockets of big business!"

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"

On Tue, 24 May 2005 21:29:41 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<[email protected]> chose to add this to the great equation of
life, the universe, and everything:

>I called Verizon three times, just to be certain that the information was
>correct. It is all true. There is no more roaming off-network on America's
>Choice (AC). I think your confusion is that when the rest of us refer to AC
>we mean all of AC, including the Extended Network, but you think that we are
>referring only to native Verizon coverage.

Because that's what you said in your original post. Let's reexamine it:

> The original America's Choice calling plan from Verizon was a great plan. It
> included a lot of off-network roaming, at no extra charge, in areas where
> Verizon did not have a network.

See? You originally said "off-network roaming at no extra charge." That's
Extended Network.

>what they really mean is that you cannot
> actually roam onto any other carrier's network.

Sure you can, as long as it's part of the Extended Network. Your original
alarmist post makes a strong implication that even Extended Network is
gone. Then when someone says you're wrong, you come back and say no,
Extended Network is part of the network. You can't have it both ways.

> Previous America's Choice subscribers will still be able to roam off
> Verizon, though there will be less and less included roaming, as Verizon
> abandons roaming agreements.

>The bottom line is that if you are in one of the many areas where there is
>no AC coverage, either on Verizon or on the Extended Network, then your
>phone will no longer work, even if you are perfectly willing to pay 69˘ per
>minute to roam.

In at least a few cases, former pay-roaming areas (which may still be pay
areas for AC1) have been included in the Extended Network for AC2. (True,
many other areas are "no service" for AC2, which is why I'm sticking with
AC1.)

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"Good appearance please.
No watermelon please."
- sign in Fragrant Hills Hotel, Beijing

Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> So naturally you filed a complaint with the FCC, then? Not allowing 911
> calls is against the law.
>
>

They didn't refuse to call 911. The phone had NO SERVICE on its PRL.
Alltel's 00156 system isn't listed on 50295, at all, so it doesn't exist as
far as this phone was concerned....

I think we may have a misconception of the PRLs power over this emergency
call. It would be most interesting to hear from the carriers and phone
manufacturers that, in fact, simply dialing 911 makes the phone ignore the
PRL, entirely, going on a frantic search across its receiver/technology for
any signal from anywhere. My observation is it does not.

Another fine example of FCC not forcing its will on the corporations.

Larry W4CSC wrote:

>>So naturally you filed a complaint with the FCC, then? Not allowing 911
>>calls is against the law.
>
> They didn't refuse to call 911. The phone had NO SERVICE on its PRL.

But Larry, the phones are supposed to ignore the PRL if you make a call to
911. The last (and only) time I made a call from a Verizon phone to 911, in
an area of Lake County, Ohio where VZW's signal is almost nonexistent but
the phone will insist on trying to acquire a VZW carrier anyhow, the phone
(a Nokia 3285) went into emergency mode and made the call in analog on... I
assume... Cingular or Alltel. As I've mentioned before, Sprint has a tower
two minutes from my house, which is where I was, but they don't have analog
so I know it wasn't their network.

Actually, it *might* have been a Verizon analog signal, now that I think
about it...

> Alltel's 00156 system isn't listed on 50295, at all, so it doesn't exist as
> far as this phone was concerned....

Does not being listed in the PRL shut you out? I thought only NEG entries in
the PRL shut you out of using a certain network.

> I think we may have a misconception of the PRLs power over this emergency
> call. It would be most interesting to hear from the carriers and phone
> manufacturers that, in fact, simply dialing 911 makes the phone ignore the
> PRL, entirely, going on a frantic search across its receiver/technology for
> any signal from anywhere. My observation is it does not.

Well, my personal experience, having had to make an actual call to 911 from
a VZW phone, is different, but that call was made three years ago (roughly).
So things might have changed since then.

> Another fine example of FCC not forcing its will on the corporations.

*banging head against wall*

How are you going to sit there and piss and moan about the FCC if you didn't
even file a complaint? Go file a complaint... if nothing improves, THEN you
have lots of justification for being angry.

This situation reminds me of people who had trouble with their ISP
connection at the provider where I used to work. Some of them would call
immediately and get the problem fixed. Others waited two weeks and then
called, furious that their Internet connection was down for two weeks. Of
course, any good ISP (including the one where I worked) monitors their
network and attempts to be proactive about fixing things, but there is NO
way we could catch every problem before it happened. Likewise, with hundreds
of SIDs across the country, it's going to be impossible for the FCC to
monitor each and every one for compliance.

I agree with you that Big Business has the FCC in its pockets. But you have
to at least *try* to get them to make things right.

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Larry W4CSC wrote:
>
> >>So naturally you filed a complaint with the FCC, then? Not allowing 911
> >>calls is against the law.
> >
> > They didn't refuse to call 911. The phone had NO SERVICE on its PRL.
>
> But Larry, the phones are supposed to ignore the PRL if you make a call to
> 911. The last (and only) time I made a call from a Verizon phone to 911,
in
> an area of Lake County, Ohio where VZW's signal is almost nonexistent but
> the phone will insist on trying to acquire a VZW carrier anyhow, the phone
> (a Nokia 3285) went into emergency mode and made the call in analog on...
I
> assume... Cingular or Alltel.

What happens once AMPS is turned off?

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> What happens once AMPS is turned off?

As I mentioned, my home in Lake County had a 1900 MHz Sprint PCS transmitter
literally right around the corner. Sprint and Alltel both service Greater
Cleveland, so there would be absolutely NO problem having the phone acquire
a CDMA signal.

Same in Larry's area, serviced by VZW, Sprint and Alltel.

Same in the area where I now live, serviced by VZW and Sprint.

Etc., etc.


--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"

This is just spam.

This is what happens when your #1. You think you can do whatever the ****
you want and your customers are just suppose to take it. I liken Verizon to
Microsoft if their attitude and arrogance. Not to mention the fact that I
can't stand that moronic Can You Hear Me Know asshole in those stupid
commercials.



On 5/24/05 12:31 PM, in article
[email protected], "Steven M. Scharf"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Verizon Worsens America's Choice Calling Plan--No more roaming, even at
> extra cost, No more National Single Rate Plan.
>
> The original America's Choice calling plan from Verizon was a great plan. It
> included a lot of off-network roaming, at no extra charge, in areas where
> Verizon did not have a network. Where Verizon didn't have a roaming
> agreement, your phone could still be used, but at extra cost.
>
> Verizon has been worsening America's Choice almost from its inception. They
> began by abandoning roaming agreements, so that there was a lot less
> included roaming, and a lot more extra-cost roaming. When this was disclosed
> by people who were analyzing their PRLs (preferred roaming lists), they
> forced these people to take this information off the web.
>
> Now they have changed the plan again, and new subscribers will have no
> roaming at all, even at an extra charge. This means that you can only use
> the phone in areas where Verizon has service (except for 911 calls). If
> you're out of Verizon's coverage area, your phone is a paperweight except
> for 911 access.
>
> Driving from the San Francisco Bay Area to Yosemite? Your phone will stop
> working completely on the outskirts of Oakdale, where Golden State Cellular
> is the carrier, and you'll have no coverage inside the park. Driving up the
> California Coast to Mendocino? No coverage. Alaska? No coverage. The list
> goes on and on.
>
> To complete the service reduction, Verizon no longer offers the National
> Single Rate plan. According to their sales people, they have NO plans that
> offer off-network roaming (though their web site states that their Digital
> Choice plan (local plan), and their InPulse prepaid plan, allow roaming at
> 69˘ per minute).
>
> Verizon's web site is intentionally misleading. It states, for America's
> Choice, "Domestic Roaming (No roaming charges) (Coverage not available in
> all areas)," without stating that what they really mean is that you cannot
> actually roam onto any other carrier's network.
>
> Previous America's Choice subscribers will still be able to roam off
> Verizon, though there will be less and less included roaming, as Verizon
> abandons roaming agreements.
>
>

In article <BEBEFB99.7A4D%bull****@youass.com>,
Argon15 <bull****@youass.com> wrote:

> This is what happens when your #1. You think you can do whatever the ****
> you want and your customers are just suppose to take it. I liken Verizon to
> Microsoft if their attitude and arrogance. Not to mention the fact that I
> can't stand that moronic Can You Hear Me Know asshole in those stupid
> commercials.

No, I can't hear you know. What does it sound like for you to know?