Cingular charges too much

My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?

---

› See More: Cingular charges too much

On 3 Mar 2006 19:42:48 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
>time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
>course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
>let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
>every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
>per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
>should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?

As long as you get the coverage/services you need and the prices are
truly what you state, then I see no reason for YOU to NOT go to
T-Mobile.

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 04 Mar 2006
06:20:17 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>(When you check TMobile's web site, be careful; their coverage map for
>their contracted customers is much more extensive than their coverage
>map for their prepaid, $100/year customers.)

The difference is actually relatively small.

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

Am I missing something? We seem to be comparing prepaid to postpaid here.

Fred

"Anonymous" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 3 Mar 2006 19:42:48 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
>>time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
>>course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
>>let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
>>every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
>>per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
>>should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?
>
> As long as you get the coverage/services you need and the prices are
> truly what you state, then I see no reason for YOU to NOT go to
> T-Mobile.

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

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 04 Mar 2006
> 06:20:17 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >(When you check TMobile's web site, be careful; their coverage map for
> >their contracted customers is much more extensive than their coverage
> >map for their prepaid, $100/year customers.)
>
> The difference is actually relatively small.

T-Mobile national rate plan (contract) coverage:

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/


T-Mobile To Go (non-contract, also known as "prepaid") coverage:

http://www.t-mobile.com/prepaid/coverage.asp


Navas, you're a complete idiot. An ass.

You were caught a few weeks ago claiming that the two coverages were
identical, and I called you on it. You didn't even come back to say
"sorry, guys, I was wrong" (but then, when have you ever). And now
you're coming back claiming "the difference is actually relatively
small".

And yet any simpleton with half a brain* can look at T-Mobile's coverage
maps as linked to above and see that the difference is HUGE.

Unless, John, it's your contention that your definition of the idea of
"relatively small" is the difference as outlined by T-Mobile? Is that
what it is, John? In YOUR twisted world, the difference between those
two maps is "relatively small"?

Yeah, when you're having a heart attack, the difference in ambulance
rides between a local Key West hospital and the Cleveland Clinic is
"relatively small". Just take me to the Cleveland Clinic, then.
<snort> Navas, you're such an ass, and you prove it every day, and we
call you on it every day, and every day you come back for more--which
does nothing but prove even more what an ass you are.


*proving that John Navas isn't even a simpleton with half a brain

Back on 3 Mar 2006 19:42:48 -0800, while hiding out in
alt.cellular.cingular,[email protected] surprised everyone by
saying:

>My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
>time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
>course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
>let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
>every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
>per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
>should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?
Until you learn to interpret the plan options, you should not use a
cell phone. If you're paying $80/month for a few calls, you really,
really have the wrong plan. You can get a 2 phone family plan with
over 9 hours of anytime minutes for less than that price from
Cingular.

But T-Mobile probably does have the cheapest prepaid plan. If your
usage is really what you say, it's probably the cheapest way to go if
you are in an area they have good coverage in.
--
Marty public.forums at gmail.com
Sorry, I don't believe in taglines today

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 04 Mar
>> 2006
>> 06:20:17 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >(When you check TMobile's web site, be careful; their coverage map for
>> >their contracted customers is much more extensive than their coverage
>> >map for their prepaid, $100/year customers.)
>>
>> The difference is actually relatively small.
>
> T-Mobile national rate plan (contract) coverage:
>
> http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/
>
>
> T-Mobile To Go (non-contract, also known as "prepaid") coverage:
>
> http://www.t-mobile.com/prepaid/coverage.asp
>
>
Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?
Is it related to roaming rights? Just seems a bit strange to restrict the
pre-paid users. There money is as good as anyone else's.

[email protected] wrote:
> My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
> time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
> course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
> let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
> every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
> per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
> should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?

because you have a one or two year contract.............

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

In <X9FOf.19871$n%[email protected]> on Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:25:11
GMT, "Austinman" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?

There isn't -- it's relatively small.

>Is it related to roaming rights? ...

Bingo.

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

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

> >Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?
>
> There isn't -- it's relatively small.

T-Mobile national rate plan (contract) coverage:

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/


T-Mobile To Go (non-contract, also known as "prepaid") coverage:

http://www.t-mobile.com/prepaid/coverage.asp


Navas, you're a complete idiot. An ass.

You were caught a few weeks ago claiming that the two coverages were
identical, and I called you on it. You didn't even come back to say
"sorry, guys, I was wrong" (but then, when have you ever). And now
you're coming back claiming "the difference is actually relatively
small".

And yet any simpleton with half a brain* can look at T-Mobile's coverage
maps as linked to above and see that the difference is HUGE.

Unless, John, it's your contention that your definition of the idea of
"relatively small" is the difference as outlined by T-Mobile? Is that
what it is, John? In YOUR twisted world, the difference between those
two maps is "relatively small"?

Yeah, when you're having a heart attack, the difference in ambulance
rides between a local Key West hospital and the Cleveland Clinic is
"relatively small". Just take me to the Cleveland Clinic, then.
<snort> Navas, you're such an ass, and you prove it every day, and we
call you on it every day, and every day you come back for more--which
does nothing but prove even more what an ass you are.


*proving that John Navas isn't even a simpleton with half a brain

Marty Fried wrote:

>
> But T-Mobile probably does have the cheapest prepaid plan. If your
> usage is really what you say, it's probably the cheapest way to go if
> you are in an area they have good coverage in.

Virgin Mobile has the cheapest plan (http://virginmobileusa.com/greatrates/minute2minute.do). Only
requires that you pay $20/90 days. Check your coverage here:
http://virginmobileusa.com/coverage/prepareCoverage.do (Sprint's nation-wide PCS network). I used
it for about 18 months and was able to keep it under $10-$15/month for the most part. Once my bill
started going over $20/month on a regular basis I switched to a contract plan ($24/mo - 2nd line
under a Cingular family plan, mainly to get free M2M minutes).

-Jason

[email protected] wrote:
> My wife and I use our phones a few times a week for a few minutes each
> time and Cingular charges us about $80.00 per month(including, of
> course, all of the various taxes, fees, add ons, etc. T Mobile will
> let you go a whole year on $100.00 with no messing around adding cards
> every month or two. That gets you 1000 minutes. That is about $18.00
> per month for the two phones instead of $80.00. Any thoughts on why I
> should continue to enrich Cingular by giving them money for nothing?

If T-Mobile has coverage where you need it, then you should switch. I
switched my mother from Cingular GSM to T-Mobile GSM in south Florida,
for the same reasons as you wrote. With all the junk fees, she was
paying $50 per month for way more minutes than she needed. 1000 minutes
is more than she needs, and the south Florida T-Mobile service is fine
(though she can't use her phone at my house any more!).

Amusingly, she had kept with Cingular mainly because she didn't want to
deal with learning a new phone and transferring her phone book. I walked
her through unlocking her Nokia phone, and she kept it when she went to
T-Mobile prepaid, though this didn't save her any money.

There are cheaper options for very low use.

7-11's Speak Out plan uses the Cingular network and is 20 cents per
minute (on Cingular's network) with no minimums other than adding $25
once a year. This is more per minute, but less of a minimum, and the
coverage is much better than T-Mobile's coverage. You can roam at a cost
of at least 39 cents per minute.

Their brochure now mentions a 99 cent per month fee,
"http://www.7-eleven.com/products/docs/SpeakOutBrochure_eng.pdf" and
someone mentioned that this is now $1.25. Ostensibly this is a fee for
"911 emergency tax and regulatory cost recovery."

The T-Mobile plan is very attractive for moderate usage if you have
T-Mobile coverage. I don't have T-Mobile coverage where I live yet (and
my friend is fighting against a T-Mobile tower going in right behind his
house, which would add coverage to my neighborhood!).

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> And yet any simpleton with half a brain* can look at T-Mobile's coverage
> maps as linked to above and see that the difference is HUGE.

This is correct. The reason is that with T-Mobile prepaid you don't roam
onto Cingular (or other) 850 Mhz in areas with no T-Mobile 1900 Mhz
coverage, with postpaid you do. Too bad they don't let you roam for an
extra per-minute fee, i.e. 20 cents per minute to roam.

This is why it may be better for low-usage customers to go with the 7-11
Speak Out plan, which uses Cingular's network and charges 20 cents per
minute, $25/year minimum, plus a monthly fee/tax charge of around $1.
Supposedly can roam for an additional per-minute fee, in areas with
non-Cingular GSM coverage, though I've never tried this. If I get up to
EDGE wireless territory, I can try it, but since they're a Cingular
affiliate I might not have to pay the extra.

You can see information on this plan at
"http://www.7-eleven.com/products/docs/SpeakOutBrochure_eng.pdf" but you
can only sign up at a 7-11 store, and you must buy a phone (though you
can always move your SIM to a different unlocked phone).

> Unless, John, it's your contention that your definition of the idea of
> "relatively small" is the difference as outlined by T-Mobile? Is that
> what it is, John? In YOUR twisted world, the difference between those
> two maps is "relatively small"?

> *proving that John Navas isn't even a simpleton with half a brain

John is simply so dedicated to Cingular in particular, and to GSM in
general, that he lets it cloud his judgment in this particular area.
Remember how he got caught lying about 1900 Mhz technology, Radio
Shack's sales problems with their switch to Cingular, Consumer Reports'
wireless surveys, and coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area. In each
case, there was overwhelming evidence that contradicts what he said, yet
he persists anyway. He's a firm believer in situational science, see:
"http://www.ucomics.com/doonesbury/2006/03/05/"

OTOH, if you need to know how to connect your GSM phone for wireless
data, his information is valuable.

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

In <[email protected]> on Mon, 06 Mar 2006 11:07:32
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>John is simply so dedicated to Cingular in particular, and to GSM in
>general, that he lets it cloud his judgment in this particular area.
>Remember how he got caught lying about 1900 Mhz technology, Radio
>Shack's sales problems with their switch to Cingular, Consumer Reports'
>wireless surveys, and coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area. ...

The only one lying here about those things is you, as my citations have shown.

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

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Mon, 06 Mar 2006 11:07:32
> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>John is simply so dedicated to Cingular in particular, and to GSM in
>>general, that he lets it cloud his judgment in this particular area.
>>Remember how he got caught lying about 1900 Mhz technology, Radio
>>Shack's sales problems with their switch to Cingular, Consumer Reports'
>>wireless surveys, and coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area. ...
>
> The only one lying here about those things is you, as my citations have
> shown.
>
> --

Where? All I see you posting is opinion. And when confronted, you run
away. You lie by omission.