JD Power Wireless Customer Care Performance: T-Mobile and Verizontie for First, Cingular and Sprint tie for Last, Alltel in the middle

I always thought JD Powers did enough surveys so that everyone ended up
being number 1 at something. I wonder what they charge companies to mention
their surveys in their advertising.

---

› See More: JD Power Wireless Customer Care Performance: T-Mobile and Verizontie for First, Cingular and Sprint tie for Last, Alltel in the middle

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

> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:04:56 GMT, "BruceR" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >I just can't understand why someone who is not be paid by a company to
> >perform some sort of PR function would go to such (or any) lengths to
> >defend them. Navas must either be paid by Cingular or a "Cingular
> >Groupie" to care so much about the results of professionally run
> >studies.
> It's called viral marketing. Companies pay people like that to be
> their "advocates" in news groups and on blogs.
> It's rather simple to recognize, and somewhat sad.
> These pseudo surveys - long recognized in the auto industry as
> marketing tools and nothing more - are couched in terms that lead to
> the result the company wants.
>
> The only kernel of truth in that entire diatribe was that the best
> service is the one that works where you spend the most time.

Works reliably you mean?

Nick Danger wrote:
> I always thought JD Powers did enough surveys so that everyone ended up
> being number 1 at something.

You can commission a survey that is designed to elicit the results you
want, and if by some chance it doesn't, you don't have to use it. and if
you do use it most people don't realize how narrowly defined the survey
was. Not all the surveys are commissioned, some of their studies are
done on their own dime, and then sold, with only a summary of the
results published for free.

Some carriers pay for ridiculous studies and surveys from sham survey
companies, that can "prove" anything. This is especially common when the
reputable surveys show poor results for the carrier. They run out,
commission a survey, then endlessly tout it in advertising, while
refusing to release the data behind it. Sometimes they get called on it,
often not. Bottom line is to not believe any carrier's own studies and
surveys, unless it's corroborated by an unbiased study or survey.

Cyrus Afzali wrote:

>> The difference between Cingular and Sprint-Nextel versus Verizon and
>> T-Mobile is just 95 versus 104, a difference of only 9 percentage
>> points. The confidence level of the study isn't disclosed, so we don't
>> even know if this difference is significant or not.
>
> Uhhhh, not for nothing, but the customer care index scores aren't
> percentages.

Precisely.

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

>
> Churn Rates - a monthly percentage of lost customers is an unbiased
> self-reported reflection of the failings of any carrier. Yet the
> apologists/shills make excuses for that too, in some cases falsely
> calling the number a quarterly number.


Actually, the churn figures are an arbitrarily calculated number that can be
calculated different from carrier to carrier. There is no generally
accepted calculation suggested or used throughout the industry. Case in
point- Nextel announced either right before or right after the merger was
completed that they were changing the way they calculated churn.

Scott wrote:
> "Jack Zwick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Churn Rates - a monthly percentage of lost customers is an unbiased
>> self-reported reflection of the failings of any carrier. Yet the
>> apologists/shills make excuses for that too, in some cases falsely
>> calling the number a quarterly number.
>
>
> Actually, the churn figures are an arbitrarily calculated number that can be
> calculated different from carrier to carrier. There is no generally
> accepted calculation suggested or used throughout the industry.

Still, it's not totally arbitrary. Some carriers even break it down into
pre-paid and post-paid churn.

It's safe to say that all the carriers will choose the calculation
method that best benefits themselves, so each reports a number that is
probably a little better than the actual churn rate.

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:54:16 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>It's safe to say that all the carriers will choose the calculation
>method that best benefits themselves, so each reports a number that is
>probably a little better than the actual churn rate.

Not at all. Some carriers may wish to highlight gross additions, which
are contrary to low churn.

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

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:54:16 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>It's safe to say that all the carriers will choose the calculation
>>method that best benefits themselves, so each reports a number that is
>>probably a little better than the actual churn rate.
>
> Not at all. Some carriers may wish to highlight gross additions, which
> are contrary to low churn.
>


Name one.

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

>
> Still, it's not totally arbitrary. Some carriers even break it down into
> pre-paid and post-paid churn.

But unless it is calculated identically for all carriers, measuring Verizon
against Sprint againt Cingular is meaningless. The number only has merit
when trending a specific carrier.

>
> It's safe to say that all the carriers will choose the calculation method
> that best benefits themselves, so each reports a number that is probably a
> little better than the actual churn rate.

I would agree with that to a point. Many of the differences can be the
result of unavailability of data, even from their own systems. A company
could want to measure something that they do not have available to them
Others could be due to the exclusion of a particular product offering.

There are many other reliable ways to measure carriers other than using
churn as an industry barometer between carriers.

Paul Miner wrote:

> Not only that, I'm trying to figure out how gross additions can be
> contrary to low churn. The two don't seem to be related. Net adds are
> affected by churn, but gross adds?

Gross additions are unrelated to churn, so the carriers with high churn
like to emphasize gross addition in their news releases. What Navas
wrote is untrue.

You could look at only gross additions for Verizon and Cingular over a
long period of time, and conclude that Cingular was gaining more
customers, when in fact, Verizon almost always has more net additions
than Cingular.

Somewhere around Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:04:56 GMT, while reading
alt.cellular.cingular, I think I thought I saw this post from "BruceR"
<[email protected]>:

>I just can't understand why someone who is not be paid by a company to
>perform some sort of PR function would go to such (or any) lengths to
>defend them. Navas must either be paid by Cingular or a "Cingular
>Groupie" to care so much about the results of professionally run
>studies.
>
So, what about the posters that go to such great lengths to put down
Cingular all the time - wonder who pays them?

--
Marty - public.forums (at) gmail (dot) com
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...
well, I have others." - Groucho Marx

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:25:36 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Jack Zwick wrote:
>
>> Every year this excellent study tells you what the users really think.
>> Then the shills for the loser go to work trying to belittle it.
>
>Well, this happens with almost every study. Look at the Consumer Reports
>annual wireless study, a study that everyone agrees is performed with a
>sound methodology, and statistically huge sample which gives results
>with a very, very small margin of error. To make it even more accurate,
>they break down the survey by region, because carrier quality varies by
>region.

Consumer Reports actually suffers from a self-selected sample from a
non-representative universe, and a poor methodology in the case of
cellular.

>Of course, each year after the survey is released, people like Navas go
>beserk trying to belittle it. This year he complained that the survey
>didn't take into account the Cingular subscribers that were still using
>TDMA, even though it's a small percentage of subscribers using even a
>smaller percentage of total minutes, and even though, if anything, the
>TDMA users would have slightly boosted Cingular's ratings because
>TDMA/AMPS had better coverage than GSM-only.

Just the opposite, given the network migration from D-AMPS ("TDMA") to
GSM.

>It's sad to see people that are so blinded by their loyalty to a
>corporation that they can't honestly look at its performance, and admit
>when there is a problem. G-d knows, I'm no fan of many of the stunts
>that Verizon has pulled in the past few years, and I haven't hesitated
>to criticize them for it.

Right.

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

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 20:51:22 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Paul Miner wrote:
>
>> Not only that, I'm trying to figure out how gross additions can be
>> contrary to low churn. The two don't seem to be related. Net adds are
>> affected by churn, but gross adds?
>
>Gross additions are unrelated to churn, so the carriers with high churn
>like to emphasize gross addition in their news releases. What Navas
>wrote is untrue.

The difference between gross adds and net adds is churn. Thus all are
related.

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

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:07:30 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Jack Zwick wrote:
>
>> Churn Rates - a monthly percentage of lost customers is an unbiased
>> self-reported reflection of the failings of any carrier. Yet the
>> apologists/shills make excuses for that too, in some cases falsely
>> calling the number a quarterly number.
>
>I was actually amazed when I learned that the churn rate was a monthly
>number (well actually an average of each of the quarter's three months).
>Even at Verizon's 1.2% rate, that's still losing 14.4% of your customers
>every year, and Verizon at 1.7% is losing 20.4% of it's customers every
>year. Cingular consistently has more gross additions than any carrier,
>but their churn is so high, even at the improved 1.7%, that they keep
>losing market share.

"Mobile Carriers Cope With 24% Annual Churn"
<http://www.forrester.com/FirstLook/Print/Vertical/Issue/0,,556,00.html>

Who Are The Switchers?

The 24% of US mobile subs who switched carriers between 2004 and 2005
are younger, more likely to be female, less likely to be white, and
are more optimistic about technology than the average mobile
subscriber. Most defectors went to Verizon and Cingular Wireless: 43%
of AT&T Wireless' displaced subs were acquired in Cingular's buy-out.
Many of Cingular's lost subscribers went to Verizon, while Verizon's
turncoats signed up with Cingular and T-Mobile. Sprint lost subs to
Verizon, while T-Mobile former subscribers went to Cingular. In this
game of musical mobile providers, the biggest -- Verizon and Cingular
-- win, while the littler guys -- like Alltel, Cellular One, and U.S.
Cellular -- are just treading water.

Why Do They Switch?

Consumers who are planning to switch mobile carriers in the future
are primarily looking to improve two aspects of their mobile
experience: price and service. Handset selection, customer service,
data services, and unique content are all secondary considerations,
even for those consumers who currently use advanced mobile features
like data or messaging. Consumers' desire for better quality gives an
indication of why providers like Verizon and Cingular won more
churned subs between 2004 and 2005: their reliable networks.
Providers should pay extra attention to potential switchers. They are
valuable customers, spending more than $4 more per month on mobile
service than those who are likely to stay put.

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

Paul Miner wrote:

> Actually, what I was questioning was your assertion that gross adds
> are contrary to churn. I know gross adds are *related* to churn; what
> I want to know is how gross adds are *contrary* to churn? Was it a
> simple misstatement on your part? Perhaps I'm being too picky.

In the sense that you can calculate the number of lost customers by
subtracting net additions from gross additions, it's "related" but of
course the number of lost customers doesn't go down just because your
gross additions go down.

It would only be contrary to churn if a higher number of gross additions
actually _caused_ more customers to leave. In reality, the gross
additions and the net additions track each other, and the factor by
which they track each other is the churn rate.

It's ridiculous to claim that gross additions are contrary to churn.