Adios, Cingular!

"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> As for Cingular's heavy handed approach? Maybe so, but I think that when
> you buy a company (ATTWS) and then have over 12 Million customers out of
> the
> 22 Million customers you just purchased on an old technology then you HAVE
> to be firm or you will never get them to change. I think the one thing
> you
> see as a big difference between Cingular and ATTWS is that Cingular
> expects
> you to be an adult - take responsibility for your actions and live with
> it.
>

THE #1 FCC complaint about Cingular is their heavy-handed tactic of trying
to force customers into paying more for plans that give them less.

I bailed. I'm happy. I am THE CUSTOMER, and I get to decide how much crap
I will take from a service provider.

I have a new provider that is charging less than ATTWS was, and I get better
service than Cingular. All I lost was free incoming text messages--and I
rarely used text anyway.

As I said, life goes on. I shut down my Cingular phones yesterday and I
don't miss them. If you prefer to be pushed around by a vendor, I respect
your right to have it so. But, judging from Cingular's recent performance
figures, I get the feeling that there are a lot more customers that think
the same way that I do--and they are walking away from Cingular, too.

If we are all such lousy customers, why is Cingular's financial performance
not shooting up, as we all leave?????????

Why did Cingular buy us customers from ATTWS, if all they were going to do
was alienate us and drive us away? They'll spend MILLIONS of dollars on
national advertising, all to entice new people to sign on, and they'll take
a guy like me--a customer since 1997--and tighten the noose by withdrawing
service until it becomes unbearable, just so they can get another $10 bucks
per line out of me . . . Well, now they'll get nothing!

I think that the Einstein that thought up that strategy is an asshole.

---

› See More: Adios, Cingular!

"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Fri, 10 Feb 2006
>> 09:28:21 -0700, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>>
>>>>>John, he's right. Cingular lied to him about "required by law to shut
>>>>>off TDMA by 2007". And they treated him badly.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree.
>>>
>>>You disagree that he lied?
>>
>> If by "he" you mean Jeremy, I think it quite possible that his report
>> isn't
>> accurate, and the Cingular person alleged to have said that is a "she",
>> not a
>> "he".
>

1: The retention rep was a "she," but how does gender matter?

2: She specifically said that Cingular was "REQUIRED BY LAW" to shut down
TDMA by 2007.

3: I responded, "You know there is no such law."

4: She insisted that there was, and suggested that Cingular was powerless to
do other than shut down TDMA.

5: The issue with me was NOT that they were going to discontinue TDMA, but
rather that they were slowly and methodically cutting back on the service,
intentionally causing dropped calls and times when no service was available,
as tdma phones searched in vain for signals. My Panasonic Versio phone
began actually SHUTTING ITSELF OFF whenever I traveled beyond my home area.
All of this happened starting about a year ago, when the Cingular name
replaced "AT&T" in my phone's display.

It is one thing to announce that TDMA is going away. It is another thing to
deliberately deny service while continuing to charge customers. It is
analogous to a service station watering down their gasoline.

Anyway, I'm out of Cingular, I'm pleased with the level of service and the
price that my new carrier is charging me, and all I can say to Cingular is
"good riddance."

"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:6-udnRh4keAx1HDeRVn-
>
> And of course they want everybody off TDMA, but I would bet that they
> could accomplish it much quicker by not treating the TDMA customers like
> crap. The money they would spend on decent incentives would be easily
> recovered in the first year of not having to maintain the network.
>

I would have been happy if they just subsidized part of the cost of new
basic phones, and if they continued charging me per my ATTWS Digital One
Rate plan. Jeez, I've been a customer for EIGHT YEARS. I used less than
200 minutes per month. I paid them like clockwork, for THREE LINES.

If I haven't made it clear already, my objection was not that TDMA would be
withdrawn, but that Cingular would use that as an excuse to strong-arm all
of us long-time ATTWS customers (who have earned various perks and bonus
services over the years) into giving all that up, just to migrate to GSM.
It doesn't cost Cingular more to carry my call on GSM than it does on TDMA.

This is the same mentality on the part of management that was used in the
60s and 70s by American auto manufacturers, who built unreliable cars and
now complain that the Japanese and Koreans (and, soon, the Chinese) have
come to dominate the automobile industry. Jesus, they ASKED for it!

Cingular may have a lot of capital, but they are sorely lacking in common
sense, when they jettison their paying customers, all the while advertising
for new ones. They have a half-page ad in the Philadelphia Inquirer (and,
probably a hundred other papers) every weekday. They spend tons of money
operating stores, paying salespersons' salaries, rents, utilities,
insurance, etc., just to bring on new customers. What morons!

I wonder how much they paid for my account when they bought me from ATTWS?
I wonder how many millions they will spend to attract new customers to
replace all of us that have walked away? Morons!

Back on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:47:18 GMT, while hiding out in
alt.cellular.cingular,"Jeremy" <[email protected]> surprised everyone
by saying:

>Cingular may have a lot of capital, but they are sorely lacking in common
>sense, when they jettison their paying customers, all the while advertising
>for new ones. They have a half-page ad in the Philadelphia Inquirer (and,
>probably a hundred other papers) every weekday. They spend tons of money
>operating stores, paying salespersons' salaries, rents, utilities,
>insurance, etc., just to bring on new customers. What morons!
>
>I wonder how much they paid for my account when they bought me from ATTWS?
>I wonder how many millions they will spend to attract new customers to
>replace all of us that have walked away? Morons!
>
Unfortunately, this is something that is all too common these days.
Damn companies do things according to their own best interests without
even asking us what we think. Damn them all!

However, there is one thing that is worth learning and remembering:
don't take it personally. They aren't out to get you or strongarm
you. They are simply doing what seems right to them given the
information they have available. We don't really know what it is, but
I've had enough experience to know that if I knew what they knew, it
would make more sense, even if I didn't agree with them.

But, if you aren't happy with the way a company does business, then I
think it's a great idea to withdraw your support. You should be
satisfied that you are doing the right thing, and you should speak the
truth when people ask why you changed. But you should also realize
that if you keep pushing your opinions, lots of people that don't feel
the same way as you will get tired of hearing it, and will resent your
opinions. After all, most of the people in the Cingular newsgroup use
Cingular, and may even like it. Anything's possible.

Personally, I have no allegiance to Cingular, and I think there's some
things that they could do better. But I've never had any real gripes
or animosity toward them. I moved from AT&T long ago, because I did
have some gripes with them, both cellualr and landline problems, so I
considered Cingular to be a step up. Ya never know.

--
Marty public.forums at gmail.com
Sorry, I don't believe in taglines today

Back on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:28:21 -0700, while hiding out in
alt.cellular.cingular,"Scott" <[email protected]> surprised everyone by
saying:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>John, he's right. Cingular lied to him about "required by law to shut
>>>off TDMA by 2007". And they treated him badly.
>>
>> I disagree.
>
>You disagree that he lied? Please point to any US statute that mandates the
>shutdown of TDMA by 2007.
>
>Once again, you have posted inaccurate opinions. At least you are
>consistent.
>
Ummm, excuse me, but nobody said there was a "US statute" that makes
TDMA illegal or anything. That's a drastic interpretation of what was
said.

It could be any number of things. What if they signed some type of
agreement when they took over that specified that they had to shut it
down by a certain date? They could say they are required by law to do
it, because they agreed to it earlier. They could say they are bound
by law to follow this agreement. We don't really know the exact
wording of whatever was said, anyway, so this seems very possible.

It's even possible that they had to agree to this, and had no choice
if they wanted to go ahead with the deal.

There could be other similar things that would lead to the same
situation.
--
Marty public.forums at gmail.com

Scott wrote:
>
> I would have killfiled him long ago, but some of his 'opinions'
> shouldn't be allowed to sit out there as uncontested fact. The
> amusement is simply a by-product.

Well you are a little harsh on the poor guy. In fact, he has many great
qualities--such as the following...

Navas can divide by zero. He CAN believe it's not butter. One time when
he was denied an Egg McMuffin at McDonald's because it was 10:35, he
annoyed the staff so much it became a Wendy's. In just thirty-eight
seconds John can drink an entire gallon of milk, send 142 text messages,
AND defend Cingular by replying to 27 threads in this very newsgroup.

Quite amazing, actually.


--
Mike



Not bad, when you think about it.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <wAeHf.10264$0H1.1004@trnddc04> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:26:52 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>THE #1 FCC complaint about Cingular is their heavy-handed tactic of trying
>to force customers into paying more for plans that give them less.

Proof?

>Why did Cingular buy us customers from ATTWS, if all they were going to do
>was alienate us and drive us away? ...

Cingular is actually doing a good job of migrating ATTWS customers.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <aIeHf.10265$0H1.3169@trnddc04> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:35:02 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>5: The issue with me was NOT that they were going to discontinue TDMA, but
>rather that they were slowly and methodically cutting back on the service,
>intentionally causing dropped calls and times when no service was available,
>as tdma phones searched in vain for signals.

What Cingular is actually doing is just what ATTWS was doing, migrating
spectrum as customers migrate from D-AMPS ("TDMA") to GSM, which the great
majority have now done. It's unrealistic to expect a carrier to maintain an
old network for an ever-shrinking minority of customers.

>My Panasonic Versio phone
>began actually SHUTTING ITSELF OFF whenever I traveled beyond my home area.

Then you must have had a phone problem -- that's not a network issue.

>It is one thing to announce that TDMA is going away. It is another thing to
>deliberately deny service while continuing to charge customers. It is
>analogous to a service station watering down their gasoline.

As I've explained above, this is a well-publicized migration of D-AMPS to GSM.
Expecting the old network to be maintained for a small minority is as
unrealistic as expecting gas stations to continue selling leaded gas for the
few that want it.

>Anyway, I'm out of Cingular, I'm pleased with the level of service and the
>price that my new carrier is charging me, and all I can say to Cingular is
>"good riddance."

There is no one perfect carrier, and people should of course choose the
carrier that best serves their needs. For me that's currently Cingular. For
you that's not. Fair enough. No point to all the venting.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <GTeHf.10267$0H1.7677@trnddc04> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:47:18 GMT, "Jeremy"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:6-udnRh4keAx1HDeRVn-
>>
>> And of course they want everybody off TDMA, but I would bet that they
>> could accomplish it much quicker by not treating the TDMA customers like
>> crap. The money they would spend on decent incentives would be easily
>> recovered in the first year of not having to maintain the network.
>
>I would have been happy if they just subsidized part of the cost of new
>basic phones, and if they continued charging me per my ATTWS Digital One
>Rate plan. Jeez, I've been a customer for EIGHT YEARS. I used less than
>200 minutes per month. I paid them like clockwork, for THREE LINES.

It makes no sense for Cingular to keep giving away the store. That's part of
what got ATTWS into trouble. Cingular naturally expected you to pay current
rates, just like any other vendor, including your new carrier. Are you just
as angry at the corner gas station because prices are now so much higher than
a year ago? Must they keep selling gas to you forever at the same price?

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <GTeHf.10267$0H1.7677@trnddc04> on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:47:18 GMT,
> "Jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:6-udnRh4keAx1HDeRVn-
>>>
>>> And of course they want everybody off TDMA, but I would bet that
>>> they could accomplish it much quicker by not treating the TDMA
>>> customers like crap. The money they would spend on decent
>>> incentives would be easily recovered in the first year of not
>>> having to maintain the network.
>>
>> I would have been happy if they just subsidized part of the cost of
>> new basic phones, and if they continued charging me per my ATTWS
>> Digital One Rate plan. Jeez, I've been a customer for EIGHT YEARS.
>> I used less than 200 minutes per month. I paid them like clockwork,
>> for THREE LINES.
>
> It makes no sense for Cingular to keep giving away the store. That's
> part of what got ATTWS into trouble. Cingular naturally expected you
> to pay current rates, just like any other vendor, including your new
> carrier.

John, he mentioned--in his first post--that he's now paying $10 per
month *less* with Sprint than he was with Cingular. On top of that,
Sprint gave him three phones--with no activation fees.

I'm afraid this doesn't jive with the opinion of him not being a
"worthy" enough customer. He was worthy enough for Sprint--for less
money. And do note Sprint is treating him as a new customer, not a
retention deal (and IIRC, the retention offer Cingular made to him still
didn't match Sprint's).

That being said, I am--oddly enough--considering moving to Cingular. And
I'm with Sprint. In my case I don't have any coverage issues (been with
Sprint for 5 years; ironically, before that ATTWS TDMA). And I do have a
sweet retention deal that I'd hate to lose (my bill is still >$100 per
month).

So why would I even consider Cingular? Ironically, I'm starting to feel
like a second-class citizen with Sprint--ever since they merged the
Nextel/Sprint PCS websites into sprint.com. I am in an affiliate market.
Anytime I try to buy anything online, or even just view coverage, the
Website asks for my zip-code. Wham! I get redirected to a, IMNSHO,
sub-par Website that offers a small sub-set of the phones and plans
available to non-affiliate customers. Indeed the Website seems to hint
I'm better off calling the 800# they list before redirecting me. Gee
thanks.

Now, granted, that in itself isn't such a big deal. But it's not the way
it was before the merger. And Sprint's first-tier CSRs
don't--can't--even know what I am talking about. Sprint took away their
ability to use 90% of their own Website, or so they tell me. When I
escalated my problem about being treated differently as an "affiliate"
customer--more so than before the merger--the reps are sympathetic, but
can do nothing to help.

Plus, some of my travel plans for this year will seemingly take me into
roaming areas (digital-only, as I have a Treo 650). Due to my
"affiliate" status, I cannot add the $5 roaming package, which would
allow me to roam without paying per-call (nor can retention add that
option--they can only give me 50 minutes for $10).

On top of this, Sprint, who has been in this area for over five-years
now, doesn't even have a (real) store in my city. They have a
privately-owned Sprint-branded "Express" store--and it's really pitiful
(no repair/update ability, and hardly any stock). Meanwhile, Cingular
stores are popping up like crazy--and they are adding more-and-more
coverage here all of the time (north-western AZ). And their advertising
is increasing by the week.

It also seems GSM has finally reached "critical mass," in that I can at
least (hopefully) count on it as an everyday phone. Not everywhere, but
I would hope about the same coverage as Sprint. Further, since moving to
the Treo, around six-months-ago, I haven't used AMPS (and I used it once
in the prior year, using my tri-mode phone--and the signal was so poor I
couldn't even talk).

Anyway, it's kind of amusing--to me--that as I come to check out the
Cingular NG one of the biggest threads is about a guy moving from
Cingular to Sprint (albeit, an old ATTWS customer).

I am under contract with Sprint, but a $150 ETF is not really a big deal
(though I might contest it, based on the Website change--a long-shot,
but worth a try). But I am not rushing into anything just yet,
because...

My affiliate, Alamosa, is being purchased by Sprint:
"http://www.mobiletracker.net/archives/2005/12/20/sprint-alamosa"

I will see how this turns out before doing anything. I will point out
that, last time I checked, I would have had to pay about 50% more with
Cingular than I am with Sprint. That's a tough one to overcome, and I
will need to further investigate before making a decision (e.g., I use
less than half of my anytime minutes with Sprint, so it's likely that I
don't need the same number of minutes on a new plan--especially with
rollover). Time will tell...


--
Mike

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

>
> It makes no sense for Cingular to keep giving away the store. That's part
> of
> what got ATTWS into trouble. Cingular naturally expected you to pay
> current
> rates, just like any other vendor, including your new carrier. Are you
> just
> as angry at the corner gas station because prices are now so much higher
> than
> a year ago? Must they keep selling gas to you forever at the same price?
>

Then please explain how he is moving to Sprint and paying LESS than his
current plan. After all, Sprint has shown much stronger financials than
Cingular, so it can't be that they are mismanaging the business by doing so.
So- please explain how this relates to your dimwitted view of the industry.

Tinman wrote:

> It also seems GSM has finally reached "critical mass," in that I can at
> least (hopefully) count on it as an everyday phone. Not everywhere, but
> I would hope about the same coverage as Sprint. Further, since moving to
> the Treo, around six-months-ago, I haven't used AMPS (and I used it once
> in the prior year, using my tri-mode phone--and the signal was so poor I
> couldn't even talk).

Wow, I hope that someday N CA, will be as good as NW AZ, in terms of not
needing AMPS. There are parts of the SF Bay Area that I can reach with a
10 minute drive, that are still AMPS only. If AMPS is turned off when
the feds permit it to be turned off, these areas will change to "No
Service" as no carrier could afford to cover them with GSM or CDMA. In
the Sierra's, on the way to Lake Tahoe, there are still long stretches
where AMPS is the only service available. These will probably remain on
after the sunset of AMPS, since they generate roaming revenue for the
small carriers.

Scott wrote:

> Then please explain how he is moving to Sprint and paying LESS than his
> current plan. After all, Sprint has shown much stronger financials than
> Cingular, so it can't be that they are mismanaging the business by doing so.
> So- please explain how this relates to your dimwitted view of the industry.

Due to the Nextel acquisition, Sprint has a very high ARPU. They
probably aren't too concerned with having some lower ARPU customers,
they're more interested in upping their net additions. Cingular has a
low ARPU, partly as a result of all the low ARPU AT&T customers that
they acquired.

OTOH, Cingular wants to get rid of those low ARPU customers, either by
converting them to a higher cost plan, or by having them leave. Most
customers will simply pay more, while a small percentage will find
another provider.

How well is it working? Cingular's 4Q results were very poor in
comparison to the other carriers, especially in net additions, but the
ARPU also fell slightly, by 2.2%. The spin on this was especially
amusing, "This represents an improvement over the 5.2 percent
year-over-year ARPU decline in the third quarter of 2005." So I guess
you could conclude that the lower ARPU customers are leaving, because
the ARPU is going down less than it did before.

"Marty Fried" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Back on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:47:18 GMT, while hiding out in
> alt.cellular.cingular,"Jeremy" <[email protected]> surprised everyone
> by saying:
>
>>Cingular may have a lot of capital, but they are sorely lacking in common
>>sense, when they jettison their paying customers, all the while
>>advertising
>>for new ones. They have a half-page ad in the Philadelphia Inquirer (and,
>>probably a hundred other papers) every weekday. They spend tons of money
>>operating stores, paying salespersons' salaries, rents, utilities,
>>insurance, etc., just to bring on new customers. What morons!
>>
>>I wonder how much they paid for my account when they bought me from ATTWS?
>>I wonder how many millions they will spend to attract new customers to
>>replace all of us that have walked away? Morons!
>>
> Unfortunately, this is something that is all too common these days.
> Damn companies do things according to their own best interests without
> even asking us what we think. Damn them all!
>
> However, there is one thing that is worth learning and remembering:
> don't take it personally. They aren't out to get you or strongarm
> you. They are simply doing what seems right to them given the
> information they have available. We don't really know what it is, but
> I've had enough experience to know that if I knew what they knew, it
> would make more sense, even if I didn't agree with them.
>
> But, if you aren't happy with the way a company does business, then I
> think it's a great idea to withdraw your support. You should be
> satisfied that you are doing the right thing, and you should speak the
> truth when people ask why you changed. But you should also realize
> that if you keep pushing your opinions, lots of people that don't feel
> the same way as you will get tired of hearing it, and will resent your
> opinions. After all, most of the people in the Cingular newsgroup use
> Cingular, and may even like it. Anything's possible.
>
> Personally, I have no allegiance to Cingular, and I think there's some
> things that they could do better. But I've never had any real gripes
> or animosity toward them. I moved from AT&T long ago, because I did
> have some gripes with them, both cellualr and landline problems, so I
> considered Cingular to be a step up. Ya never know.
>
> --
> Marty public.forums at gmail.com
> Sorry, I don't believe in taglines today

I believe that my experience with the ATTWS-Cingular merger are not unique,
and that there are tons of us that feel betrayed by the new company. I just
feel like expressing my dissatisfaction. But I acknowledge that there are
lots of satisfied Cingular customers, and I am glad for them.

The one factor that disturbs me most is that Cingular appears to have
DELIBERATELY taken steps to diminish the level of service for a large
segment of the former ATTWS customer base, in the hope that we would give in
and "upgrade" to higher-priced plans that offer less than we had before.
Had Cingular simply been overwhelmed with the technical difficulties of
merging the Blue and Orange networks, I'd have been more forgiving, but this
seems to be intentional on Cingular's part, and I think that people should
know that.

The only way to mount an offense against tactics like Cingular's is to
publicize them and get people talking about them. I was a loyal paying
customer of ATTWS for years, and I always felt that ATTWS reciprocated by
giving me more minutes and other perks. Frankly, I admit that I'm pissed
about Cingular's strategy of taking that away from me, because in my
estimation, loyalty should count for something.

They'll not be getting another cent from me once I pay my final bill, and
that fact does give some measure of gratification. I voted with my
pocketbook, and I encourage other consumers to try it out for themselves.

"Marty Fried" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Back on Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:28:21 -0700, while hiding out in
> alt.cellular.cingular,"Scott" <[email protected]> surprised everyone by
> saying:
>
>>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>John, he's right. Cingular lied to him about "required by law to shut
>>>>off TDMA by 2007". And they treated him badly.
>>>
>>> I disagree.
>>
>>You disagree that he lied? Please point to any US statute that mandates
>>the
>>shutdown of TDMA by 2007.
>>
>>Once again, you have posted inaccurate opinions. At least you are
>>consistent.
>>
> Ummm, excuse me, but nobody said there was a "US statute" that makes
> TDMA illegal or anything. That's a drastic interpretation of what was
> said.
>
> It could be any number of things. What if they signed some type of
> agreement when they took over that specified that they had to shut it
> down by a certain date? They could say they are required by law to do
> it, because they agreed to it earlier. They could say they are bound
> by law to follow this agreement. We don't really know the exact
> wording of whatever was said, anyway, so this seems very possible.
>
> It's even possible that they had to agree to this, and had no choice
> if they wanted to go ahead with the deal.
>
> There could be other similar things that would lead to the same
> situation.
> --
> Marty public.forums at gmail.com
>

Sorry, friend, but this was no misinterpretation. The rep tried to justify
Cingular's lousy technical performance by suggesting that TDMA had to go
away BY LAW.

She really wanted to deflect attention away from my comments to her that
Cingular was deliberately cutting back on service in markets all across the
country, making my continuing on with TDMA unbearable.

I compared it to "death by a thousand cuts." She responded that they were
complying with the "law." No "law" requires them to slowly cut back on
signal availability. No "law" requires them to decline to offer ATTWS
subscribers a new plan with the same perks as they had received from ATTWS.
No "law" requires Cingular to jeopardize their customers' safety by
DELIBERATELY making it less likely that they can get a signal and call for
emergency personnel if they need to.

Numerous posters here have made similar complaints, and that seems proof
enough that this is not coincidental, but deliberate. I never had any
problems until Cingular took over operation of the network.

Their tactics speak volumes about how they perceive their customers.