American Consumer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) Report Evaluates ConsumerSatisfaction with Wireless Carriers. T-Mobile and Verizon top ratings, Cingularand Sprint tied at the bottom.

SMS wrote:
> John Richards wrote:
>
>> It must not be very common. Over the past 40 years I've had
>> mortgage loans from at least 10 different companies, and was never
>> required to have auto-draft from checking. Perhaps if one's
>> credit history was bad enough, it might be a requirement.
>
>
> That's probably what they do, if your credit score is below a certain
> level, or maybe if the LTV is below a certain ratio, then they require
> auto-pay. I know that some banks will jack up the base rate, then offer
> a discount for auto-pay, but the places that already have the lowest
> rates don't do this.
>

My current lender (Wells Fargo) did require auto-draft because I re-financed with a special program
they had to get a great rate. Actually they also required the auto-draft from a Wells Fargo
checking account, which I didn't have a the time. But I set one up just for the mortgage payment.
This program was really nice because there were no closing costs for the refinance. Before that I
always had auto-draft setup for my mortgage payments anyway, one less thing to deal with each month.

-Jason

---

› See More: American Consumer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) Report Evaluates ConsumerSatisfaction with Wireless Carriers. T-Mobile and Verizon top ratings, Cingularand Sprint tied at the bottom.

In alt.cellular.t-mobile [email protected]lid wrote:
>
> My current lender (Wells Fargo) did require auto-draft because I re-financed with a special program
> they had to get a great rate. Actually they also required the auto-draft from a Wells Fargo
> checking account, which I didn't have a the time. But I set one up just for the mortgage payment.
> This program was really nice because there were no closing costs for the refinance. Before that I
> always had auto-draft setup for my mortgage payments anyway, one less thing to deal with each month.
>

Wells Fargo does it because they really hope you will do it with an account
with them. Their real goal is selling your multiple products. Other than
their online banking, I am not sure they are competitive with anything at all!

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006
>> 14:56:39 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In any event, as I
>>> have indicated over and over, you have not cited non-response bias, simply the
>>> potential for it to exist based on the response pattern.
>> That's sufficient. The burden of proof is on those conducting the survey.
>>
>
> Actually, it is not. It is YOU with the doubt. Why don't YOU request the
> data, if they refuse to supply it, then yes, you might surmise they don't want
> to tell you because the bias is high, but right now, you have inferred data
> that you don't have and can not reasonably say is likely the case.

Unless the survey or poll favors Cingular, no amount of data will
suffice. You will see a never-ending demand for more information on the
methodology, response rates, etc.

It was so sweet to see Telephia come out with a statement regarding
Cingular's false conclusions from the survey that Cingular paid Telephia
to do. Telephia was very worried that Cingular's mis-statements would
damage their reputation, and negatively affect future business.

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> In alt.cellular.t-mobile [email protected]lid wrote:
>> My current lender (Wells Fargo) did require auto-draft because I re-financed with a special program
>> they had to get a great rate. Actually they also required the auto-draft from a Wells Fargo
>> checking account, which I didn't have a the time. But I set one up just for the mortgage payment.
>> This program was really nice because there were no closing costs for the refinance. Before that I
>> always had auto-draft setup for my mortgage payments anyway, one less thing to deal with each month.
>>
>
> Wells Fargo does it because they really hope you will do it with an account
> with them. Their real goal is selling your multiple products. Other than
> their online banking, I am not sure they are competitive with anything at all!

I found their mortgage rates very uncompetitive (same with Washington
Mutual). The best rate I found was through Costco, through Lending Tree.
E-Trade mortgage ended up offering the best rate through Lending Tree,
on the last two properties I refinanced. Plus you get a 200-$400 Costco
Cash Card after the loan funds. E-Trade will negotiate rates, especially
on jumbo loans.

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 19 May 2006 13:28:24
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>>
>>> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006
>>> 14:56:39 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In any event, as I
>>>> have indicated over and over, you have not cited non-response bias, simply the
>>>> potential for it to exist based on the response pattern.
>>> That's sufficient. The burden of proof is on those conducting the survey.
>>
>> Actually, it is not. It is YOU with the doubt. Why don't YOU request the
>> data, if they refuse to supply it, then yes, you might surmise they don't want
>> to tell you because the bias is high, but right now, you have inferred data
>> that you don't have and can not reasonably say is likely the case.
>
>Unless the survey or poll favors Cingular, no amount of data will
>suffice. You will see a never-ending demand for more information on the
>methodology, response rates, etc.
>
>It was so sweet to see Telephia come out with a statement regarding
>Cingular's false conclusions from the survey that Cingular paid Telephia
>to do. Telephia was very worried that Cingular's mis-statements would
>damage their reputation, and negatively affect future business.

Yet another fabrication. What it actually said:

In a letter sent on Monday to the four largest wireless companies,
Telephia confirmed that Cingular had a "statistically significant
lower dropped-call rate than the competition across some market/time
period groupings." But Telephia also said it had "no knowledge of the
specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped
call' conclusion."

--
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 <[email protected]> on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:00:02 -0500,
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

>Reading your comments below ... you are clearly the real Thomas and I am an
>imposter ... I do not hold the doubt and cynacism so close to my heart.

You hold the ad hominems instead.

>You have aggressively post editted my quote and removed all references to the
>fact that I am talking about Verizon here. Verizon is doing QC work with
>those mobile vans. The data has its marketting uses obviously, and they are
>using it. They do not hide the fact that they are the company gathering the
>information. As an informed consumer, I am surprised you take such a negative
>opinion of it.

That's a joke -- right?

>> My own experience is that very few companies are that objective.
>
>It is their own QC data ... there is no point in doing QC work if you don't do
>it objectively.

That's another joke -- right?

>> Looks like a big budget ad campaign to me, which pretty much eviscerates the
>> case for objectivity.
>
>Cynic. Cynic ... cynic!

Realist.

>The only way to overlap TDMA/GSM zones are to put them on different bands.
>CDMA does not have to worry about it. The interference caused by overlapping
>GSM/TDMA is absolute, so deployment is much more problematic.

Not true. Learn more about antenna design.

>>>With CDMA it works more like IP packets.
>>
>> CDMA is actually quite different from IP packets, which is why cell
>> "breathing" is an issue.
>
>I understand perfectly why breathing occurs. ...

Not if you think it's "like IP packets".

>> That's not the actual difference, but again, the difference in capacity is
>> relatively small, and irrelevant to subscribers.
>
>Actually, it is the difference. The "packet" of data sent in CDMA is smaller
>than that in GSM, thus, one can approach the theoretical limit more closely.

Nope.

I'm not going to waste any more time here on a pointless and meaningless CDMA
is better than GSM flame war. So knock yourself out, and have the last word.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Fri, 19 May 2006 05:11:21
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Did I say that? No. But to be (even more) clear:
>>>
>>> * I don't put any stock in surveys and polls conducted by the entity
>>> benefitting from the results.
>>
>> You are a naturally distrustful person apparently. It is entirely within the
>> realm of reason that a company will conduct such "polling" or review so that
>> they can maintain the quality of their product. It is a truly self-serving
>> interest as to why they do it. In that case, the information is as accurate
>> as they need it to be and would serve no purpose to have it skewed. I am not
>> saying that is the case in general, but I do believe that is the reasoning
>> behind Verizon's field trucks checking coverage and call quality.
>
>This is all true, but the reason that they make a big deal about it is
>because the results turned out favorably for them. If they had done
>poorly in coverage, then they would obviously not used the results as
>the basis for an advertising campaign. Clearly the other carriers do
>coverage checking too, but they don't want to use the results of their
>tests in an ad campaign, for obvious reasons. Verizon was emboldened to
>use their test results by the corroboration from independent sources,
>since they now can point to the other surveys as proof that their tests
>were fair.

Nonsense. Because it's so easy to structure tests to produce a desired
result, there's simply no way that any tests done in house can be considered
objective and/or reliable. In house tests, like those relied on by Verizon,
are the least credible form of evidence.

>[SNIP usual flaming of Cingular]

Your personal vendetta continues.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Fri, 19 May 2006 04:48:36
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>
>>> NONRESPONSE BIAS ANALYSES AT THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION
>>> STATISTICS
>>> In surveys with low response rates, non-response bias can be a major
>>> concern. While it is not always possible to measure the actual bias
>>> due to non-response, there are different approaches that help
>>> identify potential sources of non-response bias. In the National
>>> Center for Education Statistics (NCES), SURVEYS WITH A RESPONSE RATE
>>> LOWER THAN 70% MUST CONDUCT A NON-RESPONSE BIAS ANALYSIS. This paper
>>> discusses the different approaches to non-response bias analyses
>>> using examples from NCES. [emphasis added]
>>> <http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=11-522-X20010016269>
>>
>> Canadian this time- you're getting closer, but no more credible.

Only USA statisticians are credible? How droll!

>Look at the first line, "In surveys with low response rates." That's the
>key point that Navas is ignoring. Once you have a high response rate,
>non-response bias isn't an issue, unless you're doing some sort of
>survey where there is a reason that one group would be much less likely
>to respond. In terms of wireless, the surveys by Consumer Reports, JD
>Power, and others, aren't asking people "which carrier do you think is
>the best?" they are surveying individuals regarding their experience
>with their own carrier. Thus, it's not a valid complaint to claim that
>maybe the reason that Cingular always does so poorly is because only
>people that are unhappy with their wireless service choose to respond
>because as long as the response rate for each carrier, in each region,
>is sufficient, the results are valid. Occasionally CR will leave out
>ratings for a carrier in a specific region if they did not receive
>enough responses. No one takes Navas's criticism of the CR surveys
>seriously, it's simply sour grapes.

The issue of non-response bias pertains to ACSI, the subject of this thread.
"Stay on target, Luke!"

CU/CR suffers more from a different issue: non-random, self-seleted sample.

Finally, any survey that lumps different technologies together (D-AMPS and GSM
in the case of Cingular, CDMA and iDEN in the case of Sprint-Nextel) isn't a
meaningful measure of either, since it's roughly comparable to saying the
average person has one testicle.

That you don't acknowledge these real statistical issues makes your bias all
the more apparent.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006 16:40:13
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Marty wrote:
>
>> As seen on TV. Guess it must be a fact, then.
>
>Well of course if it were just Verizon saying "we have the best
>coverage" then only people with personal experience that backed up that
>assertion would likely believe them. In my area, you've got at least
>three different very respected surveys that back up that claim (Bay Area
>Consumer Checkbook, Consumer Reports, and J.D. Power), and in other
>areas at least two. Actually there was a fourth one that came out today,
>and even though it also states that Verizon is the best, it wasn't a
>very scientific study and some of the other "Best Of" picks were for
>truly awful businesses. See
>"http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/entertainment/special_packages/bestinsv/14594148.htm".

Yet you cite it nonetheless. Why am I not surprised.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006 15:29:42
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>> Consider options with teenagers and their ability to suddenly smack you with
>> large usage ... and you might find that Sprint's F&F plans will be the best
>> in the business With other carriers, your only option is to pick a plan
>> and overpay with the trust in your child that you don't get build hundreds of
>> overage dollars Alright ... I just cited a single example, but I find it a
>> compelling argument in the price wars.
>
>Good points. Actually I manage my daughters use by telling her that she
>has to pay for extra minutes on her PagePlus prepaid phone. It's a phone
>to use when necessary--she can have a gabfest with her friends on the
>land line. I might have went to a family plan, but I'd lose too much
>grandfathered stuff on Verizon if I did that.

Arguably the best plan for teenagers is flat-rate unlimited MetroPCS.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006 15:15:53
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Marty wrote:
>
>> As seen on TV. Guess it must be a fact, then.
>
>It wasn't an advertisement though. There was some news show that was
>looking at how the carriers test coverage. It's a very sophisticated
>system that automatically makes calls as the van is driving around, and
>logs the results (no signal, dropped call, completed call) of all the
>phones from all the carriers.
>
>I'm sure that other carriers do something similar, but of course they
>don't want to advertise the results!

All carriers do it, and could easily dictate favorable outcomes, but
apparently have more restraint than Verizon, which seems to think people are
gullible enough to take its ad claims at face value.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006
15:29:13 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:

>CDMA compression doesn't change, the noise increases do to more phone chatter.
>It is like walking into a room where there are 20 people talking at the same
>time at the same volume. It can be hard to hear what the one person you are
>talking to is saying. But, if you remove the other 19 people in the room, you
>can hear just fine. Essentially, your choice is to talk louder (not allowed
>to boost the power on CDMA phones beyond the required limit (what is it 0.2W?)
>or you can move closer (effectively reducing the noise).

Or you get sound so bad you can't understand the person at the other end, or
you lose the call altogether due to cell "shrinkage."

>With GSM ... there
>are just 20 cups and 10 pieces of string and each call may use one or more
>cups ... so if all the cups are in use at the same time, then the call can not
>be initiated ... or if a site handoff is occurring, it may result in a dropped
>call.

Possible, but capacity is almost never an issue, and there's no risk of being
dropped due to cell "shrinkage."

>That doesn't change the bandwidth at all, that changes the codec. You can use
>the same codecs with CDMA you want.

Only in theory. In practice GSM and CDMA use different codecs.

--
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 <[email protected]> on Thu, 18 May 2006 12:48:33
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>... The Consumer Reports poll was
>especially well done, with large numbers of responses for each carrier
>in each region.

Not true. CU/CR suffers from non-random, self-selected sampling, plus low
sample sizes when broken down. It also suffers from lumping different
technologies together (D-AMPS and GSM in the case of Cingular, CDMA and iDEN
in the case of Sprint-Nextel), which isn't a meaningful measure of either,
since it's roughly comparable to saying the average person has one testicle.

>Most people discount surveys that are done by, or paid for by the entity
>that does the best in the survey, ...

Like Verizon.

>> Sprint PCS
>> has a few more holes in the system, probably to be expected on PCS (requires a
>> denser tower distribution).
>
>In an urban setting it's not an issue, though out in the 'burbs it's
>definitely a problem both for T-Mobile and Sprint PCS. I'm always amused
>when these carriers show up at a planning commission meeting in my city,
>and have to explain why they need towers in areas that the other
>carriers don't need them. They have to be careful not to say too much,
>because they don't want to let on that the 800 Mhz carriers have much
>better coverage, but at the same time they have to state the real
>reasons. ...

More nonsense(tm). 800/850 and 1900 have essentially the same coverage in
metro areas (where spacing is less than maximum in order to increase network
capacity), and the difference (due to lower permitted power for 1900) is
relatively small even in non-metro areas.

>It's inherent in GSM technology to drop calls if the cell you're moving >into has no more capacity.

True, but rare.

>With CDMA, the quality will decrease as the
>compression increases.

It's inherent in GSM technology to drop calls if the cell load increases and
you're near the limit of cell coverage. Again true, but rare.

>However, at least where I am, the GSM capacity
>issues have been solved for at least the last two years. There are still
>a lot of coverage issues with GSM in the San Francisco Bay Area, which
>is one reason why Cingular has always done so poorly in all the surveys.

Also not true. As a result of the ATTWS merger, Cingular now has arguably the
best network in the San Francisco Bay Area.

>I have a Cingular phone on an MVNO, and it's useless in many parts of
>the Bay Area that are on the outskirts of cities.

Then, assuming you're not making that up too, your phone is either ancient or
defective.

>The bandwidth issue with GSM isn't as bad as it once was, due to CoDecs
>that do more compression (at the expense of voice quality).

More nonsense(tm). GSM sound quality is as good or better than CDMA.

>Besides the surveys, look at what has happened to stores that stopped
>selling Verizon. Radio Shack's recent problems were directly caused by
>the switch from Cingular to Verizon, and the tremendous drop in wireless
>sales that resulted. ...

More nonsense(tm). Radio Shack's problems, which actually began last year
with Verizon, are due to its own poor management, as evidenced by its CEO
scandal. Cingular is actually part of its solution, not the cause of its
problems. That Radio Shack is continuing to struggle is no great surprise.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford

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

>
> Only USA statisticians are credible? How droll!

Actualy, nothing you linked to was very credible. Most of it was not even
well written.

My attention to nationality was more to point out your inability to find any
american sources in the first two pages of the Google search performed to
retrieve the links you posted.

>
>>Look at the first line, "In surveys with low response rates." That's the
>>key point that Navas is ignoring. Once you have a high response rate,
>>non-response bias isn't an issue, unless you're doing some sort of
>>survey where there is a reason that one group would be much less likely
>>to respond. In terms of wireless, the surveys by Consumer Reports, JD
>>Power, and others, aren't asking people "which carrier do you think is
>>the best?" they are surveying individuals regarding their experience
>>with their own carrier. Thus, it's not a valid complaint to claim that
>>maybe the reason that Cingular always does so poorly is because only
>>people that are unhappy with their wireless service choose to respond
>>because as long as the response rate for each carrier, in each region,
>>is sufficient, the results are valid. Occasionally CR will leave out
>>ratings for a carrier in a specific region if they did not receive
>>enough responses. No one takes Navas's criticism of the CR surveys
>>seriously, it's simply sour grapes.
>
> The issue of non-response bias pertains to ACSI, the subject of this
> thread.

No, it doesn't.

> "Stay on target, Luke!"

Get a life, Spongebob.

>
> CU/CR suffers more from a different issue: non-random, self-seleted
> sample.
>
> Finally, any survey that lumps different technologies together (D-AMPS and
> GSM
> in the case of Cingular, CDMA and iDEN in the case of Sprint-Nextel) isn't
> a
> meaningful measure of either, since it's roughly comparable to saying the
> average person has one testicle.

Rubbish. You very flawed and uneducated opinion and logic would mean that
you could not compare surveys of Verizon and Cingular, due to the different
technologies involved. Nielson surveys would be totally irrelevent because
programming is not of the same format.

Do you have any sources to back up this juvenile claim of yours, or is this
simply more of your own uneducated drivel?




>
> That you don't acknowledge these real statistical issues makes your bias
> all
> the more apparent.
>
> --
> 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 Thu, 18 May 2006 12:48:33
> -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>... The Consumer Reports poll was
>>especially well done, with large numbers of responses for each carrier
>>in each region.
>
> Not true. CU/CR suffers from non-random, self-selected sampling, plus low
> sample sizes when broken down. It also suffers from lumping different
> technologies together (D-AMPS and GSM in the case of Cingular, CDMA and
> iDEN
> in the case of Sprint-Nextel), which isn't a meaningful measure of either,
> since it's roughly comparable to saying the average person has one
> testicle.

Says who? You?

>
>>Most people discount surveys that are done by, or paid for by the entity
>>that does the best in the survey, ...
>
> Like Verizon.

And Cingular.


>
> Also not true. As a result of the ATTWS merger, Cingular now has arguably
> the
> best network in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Says who? You? No survey done to date backs up this laughable claim.

>
>>I have a Cingular phone on an MVNO, and it's useless in many parts of
>>the Bay Area that are on the outskirts of cities.
>
> Then, assuming you're not making that up too, your phone is either ancient
> or
> defective.

Or, the network sucks.


>
>>The bandwidth issue with GSM isn't as bad as it once was, due to CoDecs
>>that do more compression (at the expense of voice quality).
>
> More nonsense(tm). GSM sound quality is as good or better than CDMA.

Rubbish.

>
>>Besides the surveys, look at what has happened to stores that stopped
>>selling Verizon. Radio Shack's recent problems were directly caused by
>>the switch from Cingular to Verizon, and the tremendous drop in wireless
>>sales that resulted. ...
>
> More nonsense(tm). Radio Shack's problems, which actually began last year
> with Verizon, are due to its own poor management, as evidenced by its CEO
> scandal. Cingular is actually part of its solution, not the cause of its
> problems. That Radio Shack is continuing to struggle is no great
> surprise.


According to who? You?


>
> "John Navas is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -
> massive,
> difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
> boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."