Cingular/ATTWS Unlimited 8PM Off Peak "For Life"

A number of years ago, we obtained three (then) ATTWS TDMA accounts under
AT&T's "Regional Advantage" plan (or something like that), which basically
allowed for roam-charge free use in a given regional area of the US
(typically 10 to 15 states), no long distance, no charge for incoming text
and e-mail messages, and unlimited off-peak starting at 8PM and all day on
weekends, anywhere in the given regional area.

Additionally, as has been touched on in various groups in the past, the plan
was to be "For Life", that is, ostensibly, as long as a given customer
maintained the given TDMA Regional Advantage account with AT&T Wireless, the
8PM off-peak unlimited feature would continue as well. This was done, to a
large extent, as other carriers at the time were also starting to offer
unlimited off-peak, but for only the first year of a contract or some other
limited amount of time. AT&T wished to differentiate itself from the other
carriers (things were more competitive then in many ways ) and thus made
a commitment, in writing, that as long as a given customer maintained the
aforementioned TDMA account(s), the 8PM unlimited would continue.

(Copies of AT&T Wireless's literature detailing these TDMA plans have been
uploaded to:

http://www.interpage.net/webfax/cingupgrd
http://www.interpage.net/webfax/attwstdma

You may resize the later set to view the fine print if needed; the former is
already enlarged by us)

As also has been noted on many of the groups, Cingular/ATT has been doing
EVERYTHING under the sun to try to convert TDMA customers to GSM, other than
offering them the same plan they have always had under TDMA, but with a GSM
phone.

I read an article a year or two ago, located at:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...ingular07.html

.... and at that time said to myself "Ah, Seattle, all the hills and what
not, it's probably just an isolated coverage issue" (even though that used
to be ATTWS's base of operations; not that that is apparently dispositive
with cell cos; Verizon in Bedminster has some very bad spots along
US-202/206 only a few miles from their corporate offices; their Wallingford
office has a drop right outside along I-91, etc. See the Verizon dropped
call list at:
http://www.wirelessnotes.org/verizon...lar-drops.html for
details.)

As time went on, we started noticing problems with coverage in areas that
previously had excellent service, dropped calls, e-mail and SMS were even
slower than normal (generally, Cingular/ATT, on BOTH TDMA and GSM, agt times
have inexplicable delays in getting e-mail messages; all customer service
can do is say "Reboot your phone", which usually works, but it seems
ridiculous that this hasn't been fixed yet; in the instant case, it was even
worse than it normally can be), handoffs were sloppy, and the otherwise
generally acceptable TDMA network was incrementally getting worse on a daily
basis in many ATT/Cingular markets.

As we were and are paying $50 per month per account for a service which was
getting increasingly useless, we called to report these problems last fall,
figuring that maybe after 25 or so calls from us someone would pay
attention. Nothing was done, and since we generally rely on GSM from them as
well as Verizon's CDMA service (GSM is preferred due to the lesser delay in
conversation), no one really had the time to bother going through the
Byzantine support hierarchy to actually get someone with more than three
neurons firing at the same time who could help us, and we figured "they'll
fix it when sufficient numbers of people complain" and left it at that.

A few months later, we noticed that Caller ID was being presented from one
phone when it placed calls (it is normally set have the local switch or
whatever send the privacy bit and thus the remote switch to hopefully honor
it). We did some tests on our end, and found that in the ATTWS/Cingular
DC/00013 market, even if your home register shows privacy active, as a
roamer, that field is for some reason ignored, and thus TDMA people using
the phones in parts of the 00013 market (closer to DC) may THINK their
Caller ID is "per-line" blocked but in fact are sending it out on each call.
This was not the case for GSM or for "home" TDMA customers who are based in
the 00013 DC market.

Although these are by no means our primary phones, it's nice to have a
predictable pattern of Caller ID being displayed or not, and with
ATT/Cingular not paying attention (or not sending) the privacy bit when TDMA
calls were placed from the DC area, we figured it was time to call them and
press them on it.

I had a staffer here give them a call (for practice in dealing with them),
knowing full well what the call would initially be like. I said "I'll give
them 20 minutes to do the 'Is your phone on?', 'Did you pay your bill?', 'Is
your battery charged?', 'Do you have warranty service with us?' stuff, and
after they've exhausted all that nonsense get someone who can help us and
conference me in."

After about 30 minutes, I was connected with their "tech support" in
Arkansas (my notes are vague at this point as I didn't figure this would be
an issue) and was told the following (this was Summer 2006):

1. We don't offer TDMA
2. When you use TDMA in DC you are roaming on someone else, call them
3. Does your phone say Cingular or AT&T? (And when I answered "AT&T" they
said, "Oh, we're
Cingular; we don't support AT&T anymore", and then when I said "OK,
well, I have another
TDMA here that says "Cingular" on the screen and it is having the same
caller ID problems,
the moron says "Oh, well, I can only support 'blue' (meaning ex-ATT)
accounts; I'll
need to send you to the Cingular side."!!)

After another 30 minutes of this intellectual banter the rep gave in and
told us he'd look into it (and of course I didn't believe him). I insisted
we get a trouble ticket number and that we be contacted
at our office when they resolve the problem or if they have any additional
questions, and that they may NOT close the ticket until they call us.

Needless to say, 30 or so days later we never heard from them, and when we
called we were told "Oh, we couldn't reach you and we closed the ticket a
few days after you called" (which is typical; they will do anything to
dispense with a trouble ticket by saying "We left voicemail" or "We called
and no one was there", etc. This happens so many times with the GSM side we
gave up counting and complaining to corporate about it and just tell them
"If you do not call back at our main number, which does NOT have voicemail
and is open ALL DAY during business hours, we will cancel the given GSM
account and tell the "save"/retention manager your name and your failure to
call is why we are canceling." This usually works to at least result in a
callback.).

We then escalated the matter to Corporate (which has an Atlanta number but
seems to be located in Arkansas as well...Hmmm...), and after speaking to
people who actually did have some semblance of a brain, we were told that
the matter would be looked into, but that the TDMA network was going to be
removed during the first quarter of 2008 (probably at the same time they
will be released from offering analog by the FCC), and that at such a point
we would need to upgrade. However, I made it clear that we are paying
$39.95+taxes per month for each TDMA account, and that until such time that
the network is turned off, we expect the same level of support and service
that GSM customers receive (OK, well, that's not asking for much!).

While we were waiting to hear back from Cingular Corporate about the Caller
ID (lack of) per-line blocking in DC, we noticed, around late Sept 2006, a
sudden decline in many markets of the TDMA network. It was as if all of a
sudden 75% of the TDMA towers were taken down and/or converted to GSM (not
that I really noticed any significant improvement on our GSM accounts).

We called regular support about this, and got the usual "HUH? You haven't
upgraded to GSM YET? You need to do that right away....". The rep went on to
gleefully explain (paraphrasing) "all you have to do is sign a two year
contract and buy a new phone from us and pay us for each incoming text and
pay us $20 more to get to the account up to the level with off peak after
9PM airtime and you'll be all set" (and maybe let them stay at my house when
they are traveling too..! Anything else I need to do?!?). I asked "Well, if
we have to do all this, why don't I just get a phone from Verizon instead?
I'm basically setting up a new account with a new contract and Cingular is
showing no consideration that we've had these TDMA accounts for years and
have put up with your nonsense for years only to be treated like we were new
customers right off the street??". We got the usual "Oh but of COURSE we
appreciate your business", after which, in disgust, I said "I'm busy now;
we'll keep the TDMA. Thank you anyhow. Please get me someone who I can speak
to about the current TDMA coverage issues...".

I spoke briefly about the TDMA coverage to some tech/repair person, but had
to go, so didn't press the issue and just told him to call us back after
he's looked into the various coverage problems we had.

About a month later, in October, when TDMA stopped working altogether in
areas of DC and west of Sacramento along I-80 where it had worked fine
before (as well as countless other areas), we called to inquire about the
status of TDMA coverage issues, only to be told "We don't support TDMA
anymore and all it will do it get worse, so upgrade to GSM now...". When I
was called to the phone to handle this, I said "Look, we'll move to TDMA
when you guys offer a plan that is just like our current TDMA and migrate us
at no charge. WE did not get rid of TDMA - that was your decision, and we
respect it. However, as Cingular is forcing this issue, provide us with the
SIMS (we already have extra unlocked GSM phones), a similar rateplan, and
concomitant benefits of our current TDMA plans and we would be glad to move
over, and we will of course not sign a new contract as we have already 'put
in our time' with the TDMAs and do not need to give you the benefit of two
more years just because YOU decided to drop TDMA." The rep flippantly
refused, and infuriated at the way the she so condescendingly assumed it was
OUR responsibility to purchase new SIMs, sign a new contract, and basically
accede to their "conversion" (which is no better than what a new customer
would get) , I asked for a manager to discuss this further.

I was put in touch with Takisha if the Florida Call center, who said (I had
my assistant type this out as she said it): "Cingular cannot and will not be
bound by promises of AT&T" and then she reaffirmed that they will not offer
unlimited plans to us (huh?), nor will they excuse us of from a contractual
"obligation". No exceptions.

"Well, OK..." I thought, any other niceties you want to share with us lady?


We asked for corporate, and got Melody Brown in Oklahoma City, OK (They
moved again from Atlanta? ), and Melody basically reiterated what Takisha
said, and added "Cingular will not offer
unlimited off-peak minutes on any account, irrespective of AT&T's previous
guarantees on the subject." (This was in Jan 2007; I think they were either
offering or shortly afterwards started offering off-peak unlimited, but at
higher account levels than the AT&TWS Regional Advantage.).

After all this, I decided to give up, and Melody was told "Well, if
basically you are treating existing customers with the same policies as a
new customer in terms of rates and contractual obligations, we can certainly
look elsewhere and see no reason to stay with you and indeed have a punitive
motivation to find another carrier to give our (ex-TDMA) monies to rather
than reward Cingular".

Thus, the points of the lengthy peroration:

1. Cingular has totally messed up the conversion from TDMA to GSM. ANY other
company, us (Interpage), Volvo, Macy's, Joe's Fish Store, whatever, would
all come up with a plan in the event that a service had to be changed or
eliminated which mitigates the net effect to the customer and tries to
preserve as closely as possible (or even improve upon) the levels of service
previously enjoyed. Having Cingular exculpatively say "Our billing system
won't support that" isn't sufficient -- there are 5 million TDMA
customers -- I think a special ex-TDMA account code/rateplan could easily be
promulgated for the benefit of these customers so that they could enjoy the
same rate basis and services as they "enjoyed" under TDMA.

2. Cingular doesn't appear to care about the reportedly 5 million or so TDMA
customers. It takes down elements of its network before the announced date
of cessation, it sends out "warning" letters that it will start to assess a
$5 fee on its current TDMA customers unless they migrate, it has its reps
press and press and press TDMA customers to migrate, it fails and indeed
refuses to support current TDMA customers, and in general seems to have the
attitude "Convert or go away".

3. Cingular seems to think that TDMA customers should in part fund the
conversion to TDMA: A TDMA Regional Advantage customer who pays $39.95 per
month, and receives unlimited off-peak after 8PM, unlimited incoming
messaging, supposedly regional roaming on any carrier (when they plan
started; Cingular has blocked most of this a long time ago, thus changing
the basis on the plan) will now have to pay:

-$50(?) for a new phone
-$15 for a new SIM (if not included with the phone)
-$36 activation fee (may be waived, but I was told not)
-$59.95 or $65 for the first tier of service with unlimited AFTER 9PM (NOT
8)
-$10 for an option (in some markets?) to extent off-peak to 7PM or 8 PM.
-$ 5 for unlimited messaging (new plan; I am not sure if it is "in network"
only or not)
-Sign a one or two (generally two) year contract with an early cancellation
penalty

Thus, a TDMA Regional Advantage customer currently paying $39.95 per month
can expect to pay about twice as much for close to the same level of
service. The customer will STILL not be able to roam on most other local,
non-GSM carriers when Cingular has no coverage (for example, ATT TDMA
customers could use their TDMA phones on the Washington Metro in analog mode
via roaming on Verizon; the same was true in Vermont or areas lacking other
AT&T/Cingular TDMA and/or analog networks), and, to add insult to injury,
will also be forced to purchase new equipment and enter into a two year
contract!

Other carriers have had conversions before -- Verizon did a much better job
(although they had to be prodded into doing so) in converting its CDPD data
customers to 1XRTT/EvDO. This is not rocket science -- it should be a
relatively simple matter for AT&T/Cingular, which, as per the literature in
the URLs above, _promised_ the unlimited off peak after 8PM "FOR LIFE" to
create a rateplan for TDMA conversions to GSM offering the same basis as the
TDMA accounts.

Without getting into any of the legal merits (or lack thereof) of action
against Cingular/ATT, from an ethical and customer service perspective (as
well as one of just common sense!) one would think Cingular, which pays on
average about $250 to acquire a new customer (and with market saturation
these costs as going up), would want to induce TDMA customers to migrate by
creating a transition plan which generously and effusively helps the TDMA
customer into a seamless transition to GSM.

Instead, inexplicably, Cingular has chosen a heavy-handed and didactic
methodology to force customers to migrate, hoping along the way that they
don't realize that local number portability allows them to take their
business elsewhere, which, until (if ever) AT&T/Cingular promulgates a rate
basis for ex-TDMA customers which matches the current TDMA plan offerings
which they boasted would last "For Life", will mean we take our business and
give it to someone else who is more appreciative than AT&T/Cingular is. I
encourage any other ex-TDMA customers to do so as well, and to explain this
to Cingular at their corporate office at: (877) 707-1163.

Regards,

-Doug

(This post, others, and contact info are also available at
http://www.wirelessnotes.org)

[email protected] (remove the first three letters of the alphabet to
mail me)
Interpage(TM) Network Services Inc. / http://www.interpage.net

---

› See More: Cingular/ATTWS Unlimited 8PM Off Peak "For Life"

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:00:41 -0400, "Interpage Network Services Inc."
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>As also has been noted on many of the groups, Cingular/ATT has been doing
>EVERYTHING under the sun to try to convert TDMA customers to GSM, other than
>offering them the same plan they have always had under TDMA, but with a GSM
>phone.

Three simple facts:
1. AT&T Wireless is no more, due in part of bad business like that.
2. AT&T/Cingular has no obligation to continue AT&T Wireless deals.
3. TDMA is going away, a process started by AT&T Wireless.

>1. Cingular has totally messed up the conversion from TDMA to GSM. ANY other
>company, us (Interpage), Volvo, Macy's, Joe's Fish Store, whatever, would
>all come up with a plan in the event that a service had to be changed or
>eliminated which mitigates the net effect to the customer and tries to
>preserve as closely as possible (or even improve upon) the levels of service
>previously enjoyed.

Nonsense: All businesses make decisions about what makes good business
and what doesn't.

>2. Cingular doesn't appear to care about the reportedly 5 million or so TDMA
>customers. ...

Nonsense: It offers them the same deals it offers to everyone else.

>3. Cingular seems to think that TDMA customers should in part fund the
>conversion to TDMA: ...

Nonsense: Those customers must buy their own phones just like everyone
else.

AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
You're beating dead horses. Time to move on.

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

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:51:00 -0500, Mike M <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
>>
>> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed over
>> every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>>
>> Every single one.
>>
>They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
>before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
>technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
>They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...

Of course not. In fact it didn't treat any of them badly, honoring old
ATTWS service plans for considerable time even though it had no
obligation to do so.

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

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed over
> every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>
> Every single one.

That's not an accurate portrayal. Cingular did away with the low cost
plans that AT&T Wireless was desperately offering to survive. Cingular
figured that a large percentage of AT&T customers would switch to
Cingular rather than leave, and the ones that left over price weren't
worth keeping if it meant offering the lower prices to the entire AT&T
customer base.

Mike M wrote:
> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
>>
>> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed
>> over every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>>
>> Every single one.
>>
> They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
> before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
> technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
> They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...

Whatever happened to last July's class action lawsuit on behalf of the
former AT&T wireless customers? Is it still winding its way through the
courts? Cingular asked for it to be dismissed of course, but I don't
think it was. Cingular's position is that all customers agreed to
binding arbitration.

"http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/corporate/nw/?postId=7455"

I know that Cingular finally conceded defeat with the California PUC,
and paid the fine and penalties, and I thought that they were making an
effort to get all the lawsuits settled.



[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:37:17 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Mike M wrote:
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
>>>
>>> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed
>>> over every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>>>
>>> Every single one.
>>>
>> They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
>> before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
>> technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
>> They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...
>
>Whatever happened to last July's class action lawsuit on behalf of the
>former AT&T wireless customers?

An absurd abuse of process that would mostly just enrich lawyers.

>Is it still winding its way through the
>courts? Cingular asked for it to be dismissed of course, but I don't
>think it was. Cingular's position is that all customers agreed to
>binding arbitration.
>
>"http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/corporate/nw/?postId=7455"

You don't know that status of significant litigation is disclosed in SEC
filings? Or you just haven't bothered to look?

>I know that Cingular finally conceded defeat with the California PUC,
>and paid the fine and penalties, and I thought that they were making an
>effort to get all the lawsuits settled.

Your usual spin notwithstanding, Cingular didn't admit any wrongdoing.

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

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 17:37:39 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed over
>> >> every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>> >>
>> >> Every single one.
>> >>
>> >They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
>> >before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
>> >technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
>> >They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...
>>
>> Of course not. In fact it didn't treat any of them badly, honoring old
>> ATTWS service plans for considerable time even though it had no
>> obligation to do so.
>
>No obligation to do so?
>
>Yeah, those messy contracts those people signed--you can just ignore
>them anytime you want.

Contracts were in fact honored.

>You're so full of ****, it's incredible. What's even more incredible is
>that you ignorantly spout it out to the world for all to see.

You've described yourself quite well.

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

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:36:56 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >> Of course not. In fact it didn't treat any of them badly, honoring old
>> >> ATTWS service plans for considerable time even though it had no
>> >> obligation to do so.
>> >
>> >No obligation to do so?
>> >
>> >Yeah, those messy contracts those people signed--you can just ignore
>> >them anytime you want.
>>
>> Contracts were in fact honored.
>
>So you contradict yourself?

Nope. But thanks for playing. See the hostess on your way out for your
consolation prize.

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

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> Of course not. In fact it didn't treat any of them badly, honoring old
>>>> ATTWS service plans for considerable time even though it had no
>>>> obligation to do so.
>>> No obligation to do so?
>>>
>>> Yeah, those messy contracts those people signed--you can just ignore
>>> them anytime you want.
>> Contracts were in fact honored.
>>
>
> So you contradict yourself?
>
> Again?

Normally, part of the contract you sign states that service will
continue at the same rate, with the same terms, after the contract
obligation on the part of the subscriber. It's not like DSL or broadband
service where there is a period of introductory pricing after which you
know that the price will go up.

However this isn't a guarantee, and they do have the right to modify the
terms after the contract period is over (they can modify them during the
contract as well, but if they do that then they have to let you cancel
service without a termination fee).

As to the "8 pm Off Peak for Life," they didn't say whose life! The life
of the carrier? The carrier that made the promise doesn't exist anymore.
I have 8 pm Off Peak on Verizon, and they have kept this in effect for
many years after they stopped offering it. If I ever change plans then
I'll lose it. It's probably one of the features that I use the most, and
it enables me to get by with fewer peak minutes.

[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
>
> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed over
> every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
>
> Every single one.
>
They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...

I'm still fighting with the big "C" over support of a locked GAIT phone.
They have done everything they can think of to get me to switch to a
straight GSM phone. The latest is to screw up the internet functionality. It
seems that they think that they can just change the user profile/settings
for a GSM "compatable" phone without checking to see if the changes will
work on a specific model. In this cas a Nokia 6340i. Cingular screwed up
this model in the first place, by loading a cingular unique patch that wipes
out the ability of the customer to over ride switch to a working cell site,
even if it's another Cingular site.
If I end up buying a replacment, it sure will not be from Cingular!

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:37:17 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
> >Mike M wrote:
> >> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> AT&T Wireless is over. TDMA is over.
> >>>
> >>> navas, none of what you said changes the fact that Cingular ****ed
> >>> over every AT&T Wireless customer they acquired.
> >>>
> >>> Every single one.
> >>>
> >> They didn't **** me over and I was with AT&T wireless/whatever it was
> >> before that since 1992. I was ready for a new phone and a newer
> >> technology. And now I have Rollover, which I did NOT have before. So.
> >> They didn't **** over every former AT&T customer they had...
> >
> >Whatever happened to last July's class action lawsuit on behalf of the
> >former AT&T wireless customers?
>
> An absurd abuse of process that would mostly just enrich lawyers.
>
> >Is it still winding its way through the
> >courts? Cingular asked for it to be dismissed of course, but I don't
> >think it was. Cingular's position is that all customers agreed to
> >binding arbitration.
> >
> >"http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/corporate/nw/?postId=7455"
>
> You don't know that status of significant litigation is disclosed in SEC
> filings? Or you just haven't bothered to look?
>
> >I know that Cingular finally conceded defeat with the California PUC,
> >and paid the fine and penalties, and I thought that they were making an
> >effort to get all the lawsuits settled.
>
> Your usual spin notwithstanding, Cingular didn't admit any wrongdoing.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> That's not an accurate portrayal. Cingular did away with the low cost
> plans that AT&T Wireless was desperately offering to survive. Cingular
> figured that a large percentage of AT&T customers would switch to Cingular
> rather than leave, and the ones that left over price weren't worth keeping
> if it meant offering the lower prices to the entire AT&T customer base.


You ignore the fact that AT&T/CINGULAR promised their customers that nothing
would change. I have the notice, signed by both presidents.

AT&T made much of "lifetime" perks, as long as the customer remained on his
plan and paid the bill each month. Cingular, as successor, had a moral and,
I believe, a legal obligation to uphold ATTWS' commitments.

I left--for Sprint--and couldn't have been happier. It's been 14 months
now, and I have had no surprises and no fine print.

It was pointless to argue with Cingular. Millions of us left, rather than
have our arms twisted, and we're better off for it. In the end, competition
was what ruled.

Cingular COULD have turned us former ATTWS customers into boosters, instead
of detractors.

jeremy wrote:

> You ignore the fact that AT&T/CINGULAR promised their customers that nothing
> would change. I have the notice, signed by both presidents.
>
> AT&T made much of "lifetime" perks, as long as the customer remained on his
> plan and paid the bill each month. Cingular, as successor, had a moral and,
> I believe, a legal obligation to uphold ATTWS' commitments.

What they did with the $5 surcharge for continuing on TDMA to the bitter
end violated that promise, but other than that they could argue that
customers that switched to a a GSM plan, for whatever reason, were no
longer on the plan they signed up for. On the other hand, the technology
change was not something that those AT&T customers asked for, so you
could argue that Cingular should have kept them on plans with the same
cost structure even when they moved them to GSM.

> I left--for Sprint--and couldn't have been happier. It's been 14 months
> now, and I have had no surprises and no fine print.

Good for you. For many of us, Sprint and T-Mobile are not viable
options. I.e., I just got pissed at PagePlus because by not adding money
within 4 months to my daughter's prepaid account, I had lost the $50
balance on the account (they restored it, but just this once). I looked
into prepaid from T-Mobile, but they still have no coverage (well 1 bar)
on the map for my area. Sprint also has big gaps in coverage. I know the
reasons for these gaps, as I follow the planning commission meetings
where Sprint and T-Mobile are routinely denied permits for new sites.
They have a double disadvantage in that they arrived on the scene after
cities got stricter about permits for sites, and they operate at 1900
MHz which has less range per site. Other cities in my area present
similar obstacles to the PCS carriers.

Many of us are stuck if we want the most complete coverage for our area.
In the SF Bay Area, Verizon has the best coverage by a wide margin, with
Cingular a distant second, and Sprint and T-Mobile an even further
distant third and fourth. I know that it some areas of the country this
is not the situation, but that's the fact of the matter in my area.

> Cingular COULD have turned us former ATTWS customers into boosters, instead
> of detractors.

Clearly they made the business decision to dump the low ARPU customers
because they knew that a sufficient number of those customers with
sweetheart deals would agree to the higher cost plans rather than leave.
After all, even the higher priced Cingular plans were no more expensive
than the offerings from the other carriers.


[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]

"SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> What they did with the $5 surcharge for continuing on TDMA to the bitter
> end violated that promise, but other than that they could argue that
> customers that switched to a a GSM plan, for whatever reason, were no
> longer on the plan they signed up for. On the other hand, the technology
> change was not something that those AT&T customers asked for, so you could
> argue that Cingular should have kept them on plans with the same cost
> structure even when they moved them to GSM.
>

I agree completely, in principle. But, what is TDMA vs. GSM to the
consumer? Merely a change in transmission protocol?

Cingular COULD HAVE offered an attractive upgrade path. Perhaps free or
subsidized GSM phones and a monthly price for service that reflected the
loyalty of ATTWS' long-time customers. I wonder, if AT&T were still around,
would they have been so indifferent?

Anyway, Cingular pissed me off. I'm sure that they offer a good level of
service, but I just didn't want to give them my business, so I jumped ship.
Fortunately, my wireless phone requirements are so modest that virtually any
carrier could have satisfied them. I rarely roam beyond 100 miles from
home. I need no data services. All I want to do is to make and receive
occasional calls, and to have free M2M. Sprint stepped up to the plate and
offered me free phones, no activation fees, excellent service here in
Philadelphia and no surprises. I pay my $90/month for three lines and I'm
perfectly happy.

I may not be the most desirable customer, in terms of my low usage, but
neither am I unprofitable. I make a few calls, pay my bill each month, make
very few requests of Customer Service, and life goes on.

Cingular didn't have to treat me as though I were a new customer, with no
track record. They made that decision and millions of us left--and will
probably never look back. I just cannot imagine how any business could turn
away millions of customers, but I won't lose any sleep over that question.
I'm extremely pleased with Sprint.

Sprint phoned me a few days ago, just to ask if everything was all right
with their service. That speaks volumes about the way they view their
customers, versus Cingular's view of them.

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:55:22 UTC, "jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > That's not an accurate portrayal. Cingular did away with the low cost
> > plans that AT&T Wireless was desperately offering to survive. Cingular
> > figured that a large percentage of AT&T customers would switch to Cingular
> > rather than leave, and the ones that left over price weren't worth keeping
> > if it meant offering the lower prices to the entire AT&T customer base.
>
>
> You ignore the fact that AT&T/CINGULAR promised their customers that nothing
> would change. I have the notice, signed by both presidents.
>
> AT&T made much of "lifetime" perks, as long as the customer remained on his
> plan and paid the bill each month. Cingular, as successor, had a moral and,
> I believe, a legal obligation to uphold ATTWS' commitments.
>
> I left--for Sprint--and couldn't have been happier. It's been 14 months
> now, and I have had no surprises and no fine print.
>
> It was pointless to argue with Cingular. Millions of us left, rather than
> have our arms twisted, and we're better off for it. In the end, competition
> was what ruled.
>
> Cingular COULD have turned us former ATTWS customers into boosters, instead
> of detractors.

Too bad that, over this same timeframe, Sprint seems to be in a
talespin, losing customers to the other wireless providers. Maybe
losing customers to people who need larger coverage areas, and
retaining people who stay within their areas.