Re:Number Port Deals Tomorrow

Steven J Sobol wrote:
> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs Aboutdakota <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>No, I'm not anymore. I learned about Verizon deals with international
>>raoming in areas a customer service representative "guarantees" native
>>Verizon service. I keep up with the issues because Verizon Wireless has
>>a monopoly in several areas. I am also a member of a group that is
>>trying to get local wireless started up in areas with no service, and
>>increase competition in areas with only a single provider.
>
>
> *nodding*
>
> Have you tried voicing your concerns to the VZW executive office that handles
> your area?
>
> I don't have problems with them, but I used to live in the 24th largest
> metro area in the country and now live just outside the 2nd (90 miles NE
> of Los Angeles)...
>

When I had problems with them, I lived in a town with less than 200
people. The Canadian border was only 5 miles away; the high school for
the town was 15 miles away. The area in question (Divide County, North
Dakota) and the county east of it (Burke County, North Dakota) have
consistently ranked in the top 10 areas in the United States for
population loss. From 1990 to 2000, Burke County lost 25.3% of its
population; Divide County lost 21% of its population in the same 10 year
period. It is estimated that North Dakota lost 2% of its total
poulation from census 2000 until July 1, 2002. West Virgina was down
0.38%, and the District of Columbia was down 0.2%.


It's all nice that VZW executive offices have people that work in them,
but in reality they don't give a damn about North Dakota, only about the
$$ we pay them each month. Do you think VZW wants to pump any money
into an area that was once 10,000+ people, but is expected to be only
1420 by 2020? The Divide County School District covers an area twice
the size of the State of Rhode Island! A majority of Verizon's
coverage, to this day, in that area is still AMPS only. They haven't
even bothered upgrading many of those towers to CDMA digital. Canadian
carriers have great coverage throughout the area. "To the north, dozens
of Canadian oil rigs, coal mines, and a SaskPower plant loom in the
distance, a mirage of economic activity only miles away but a country
apart."

This is why we want to start up a co-operative for wireless services. I
no longer live in that area, either, but I am an active participant in
the group. When/if we do get started up, most likely GSM or wCDMA
services would be provided (to help provide links to AT&T, Cingular, and
T-Mobile) to help stimulate some competition.

==AD

Sources of population information:

U.S. Census Bureau; www.census.gov

University of North Dakota, courtesy of U.S. News and World Report
http://tinyurl.com/xlux

North Dakota State Data Center at North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND
http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/sdc/data/p...s/frontend.pdf

---

› See More: Re:Number Port Deals Tomorrow

Very interesting concept. You might want to have a look at REI.com. REI
started out back in the 30's as a co-op for purchasing outdoor gear. It's
grown, but still has "members". Organizationally, it might be a good model.

Good luck!!

Ken
(former Montana resident, courtesy of the USAF)
"Aboutdakota" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Steven J Sobol wrote:
> > In alt.cellular.sprintpcs Aboutdakota <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>No, I'm not anymore. I learned about Verizon deals with international
> >>raoming in areas a customer service representative "guarantees" native
> >>Verizon service. I keep up with the issues because Verizon Wireless has
> >>a monopoly in several areas. I am also a member of a group that is
> >>trying to get local wireless started up in areas with no service, and
> >>increase competition in areas with only a single provider.
> >
> >
> > *nodding*
> >
> > Have you tried voicing your concerns to the VZW executive office that
handles
> > your area?
> >
> > I don't have problems with them, but I used to live in the 24th largest
> > metro area in the country and now live just outside the 2nd (90 miles NE
> > of Los Angeles)...
> >
>
> When I had problems with them, I lived in a town with less than 200
> people. The Canadian border was only 5 miles away; the high school for
> the town was 15 miles away. The area in question (Divide County, North
> Dakota) and the county east of it (Burke County, North Dakota) have
> consistently ranked in the top 10 areas in the United States for
> population loss. From 1990 to 2000, Burke County lost 25.3% of its
> population; Divide County lost 21% of its population in the same 10 year
> period. It is estimated that North Dakota lost 2% of its total
> poulation from census 2000 until July 1, 2002. West Virgina was down
> 0.38%, and the District of Columbia was down 0.2%.
>
>
> It's all nice that VZW executive offices have people that work in them,
> but in reality they don't give a damn about North Dakota, only about the
> $$ we pay them each month. Do you think VZW wants to pump any money
> into an area that was once 10,000+ people, but is expected to be only
> 1420 by 2020? The Divide County School District covers an area twice
> the size of the State of Rhode Island! A majority of Verizon's
> coverage, to this day, in that area is still AMPS only. They haven't
> even bothered upgrading many of those towers to CDMA digital. Canadian
> carriers have great coverage throughout the area. "To the north, dozens
> of Canadian oil rigs, coal mines, and a SaskPower plant loom in the
> distance, a mirage of economic activity only miles away but a country
> apart."
>
> This is why we want to start up a co-operative for wireless services. I
> no longer live in that area, either, but I am an active participant in
> the group. When/if we do get started up, most likely GSM or wCDMA
> services would be provided (to help provide links to AT&T, Cingular, and
> T-Mobile) to help stimulate some competition.
>
> ==AD
>
> Sources of population information:
>
> U.S. Census Bureau; www.census.gov
>
> University of North Dakota, courtesy of U.S. News and World Report
> http://tinyurl.com/xlux
>
> North Dakota State Data Center at North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND
> http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/sdc/data/p...s/frontend.pdf
>

> Very interesting concept. You might want to have a look at REI.com. REI
> started out back in the 30's as a co-op for purchasing outdoor gear. It's
> grown, but still has "members". Organizationally, it might be a good model.
>
> Good luck!!
>
> Ken

One of our thought has been to approach Extend America and market
Nextel's iDEN services. This seems as a good possibility because Extend
America was incorporated in North Dakota, and is headquartered in
Bismarck, North Dakota. Nextel has co-operated not only with Nextel
Partners, but also with Extend America. Our goal is not to have a large
money making regional carrier, but a carrier that actually works for the
people. And if we successfully marketed iDEN services, we would
literally be partners of all iDEN carriers in the United States. This
could also provide additional revenue because of the border security.

One of our other thoughts has been to approach Cingular for a possible
"partnership" where we would build our own little system, but market
under the Cingular name. The biggest advantage, but also the biggest
disadvantage of this is the current lack of GSM coverage in the U.S. in
this region. The biggest advantage would be roaming coverage from all
GSM providers (being able to provide GSM roaming on our system to any
GSM carrier), but the biggest disadvantage would be the lack of GSM
service available for local users to roam on. Even if were to market
only GAIT phones, a good majority of the surrounding area would be
roaming with Western Wireless, and that would eat up any revenue the
small carrier would make. We would also be unable to market competitive
regional or national plans due to the fact that we would be unable to
allow customers to "free roam", because a majority of our customers
would in fact roam at some time or another, costing a startup company
with a small footprint exhorbant amounts of money.

Basically, the thought of CDMA (CDMA 2000 in its various flavours) has
pretty much been distinguished. Because our goal would be to provide
blanked coverage to a rural area, there would be many overlap areas with
Verizon Wireless. Because of this, it would be harder to strike roaming
agreements with other CDMA carriers as they are more likely to be
offered a better deal from Verizon Wireless. Also, because Verizon
Wireless has rural coverage around here, we would be at the mercy of
Verizon Wireless for CDMA (or AMPS) roaming.

Another thought is the possibility of UMTS, or wCDMA. Althought that
technology is in its infancy, by the time we get up and running (if we
get up and running), UMTS could be much more mature, allowing us to have
one of the top of the line networks without associated upgrade costs, as
UMTS would be our first technology. However, if UMTS were to be
launched now, there would be lack of compatibility with surrounding
networks at all.

Althought there are many more factors than these, the utmost deciding
factor will be the initial companies that would choose to ally with us.
It would make no sense to build a GSM network yet have the GSM
carriers ostracise you, but it would make no sense to build a CDMA 2000
network and have the CDMA carrier ostracise you, either. Royalties,
franchising, and technological aspects all play an active role.
(However, if used TDMA equipment became available, that would also
suffice, as we are only interested in voice services at this time.)

==AD

Well what I really want is no contracts. If I can purchase a phone at
the going rate without subsidy and no contract I would do that. I am
just sick of having to be tied down to a contract. Even when you go
and get new service with a phone that you brought with you (say
unlocked GSM phone) they still want you in a contract even though they
are not subsidising the phone price. They also get very sneaky on
contracts. If I want to change my rate plan, even if it is to a higher
price, they want the contract to get extended to 12 months from the
date of the request.


"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Phillip ." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I am hoping for some gutsy tactics like. We will credit your account
> > for the termination fee of your other carrier if you subscribe to a
> > certain level of plan where $ + more than a certain amount. Or
> > something like that.
>
>
>
> Don't hold your breath.
>
> Look at it from a carrier's perspective. They spend $200-300 in acquisition
> costs grabbing any new customer (phone subsidies, dealer commissions, etc.)
> and you want them to go another $100-200 in the hole paying your ETF when
> you are demonstrating by switching, that you have no loyalty to any
> particular cell carrier!
>
> (I don't mean "you" personally above, but "you" as in the general public,
> wohm up to 1 in 4 switch carriers whenever they want a shiny new phone.)
>
> Besides, why would WNP change the "gutsy tactics"? Any carrier desparate
> enough to pay EFTs to get customers would've done it long before Nov. 24th.
>
> Amazingly enough, despite seeming evidence to the contrary, wireless
> carriers know more about the wireless industry than their customers, and
> they already knew WNP wasn't going to open the Gates of Hell. They fought
> it not because they feared losing customers, but because they were too cheap
> and lazy to implement the systems to handle porting. As far as they were
> concerned it was money spend that would generate no income or profit.

"Phillip ." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Well what I really want is no contracts. If I can purchase a phone at
> the going rate without subsidy and no contract I would do that. I am
> just sick of having to be tied down to a contract. Even when you go
> and get new service with a phone that you brought with you (say
> unlocked GSM phone) they still want you in a contract even though they
> are not subsidising the phone price. They also get very sneaky on
> contracts. If I want to change my rate plan, even if it is to a higher
> price, they want the contract to get extended to 12 months from the
> date of the request.
>
>

Cingular allows you to bring your own phone and not get tied into
contract.

Steven J Sobol wrote:

>
> I wasn't talking to you, I was replying to AboutDakota who has
> complained a lot about lack of coverage and customer service issues
> in his area. Note that I followed up to his post, not yours.

In case you didn't know, Patrick Bosley if Phillip.

Tom Veldhouse

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> > Very interesting concept. You might want to have a look at REI.com. RE=
I
> > started out back in the 30's as a co-op for purchasing outdoor gear. I=
t's
> > grown, but still has "members". Organizationally, it might be a good m=
odel.
> >=20
> > Good luck!!
> >=20
> > Ken
>=20
> One of our thought has been to approach Extend America and market=20
> Nextel's iDEN services. This seems as a good possibility because Extend=
=20
> America was incorporated in North Dakota, and is headquartered in=20
> Bismarck, North Dakota. Nextel has co-operated not only with Nextel=20
> Partners, but also with Extend America. Our goal is not to have a large=
=20
> money making regional carrier, but a carrier that actually works for the=
=20
> people. And if we successfully marketed iDEN services, we would=20
> literally be partners of all iDEN carriers in the United States. This=20
> could also provide additional revenue because of the border security.
>=20
> One of our other thoughts has been to approach Cingular for a possible=20
> "partnership" where we would build our own little system, but market=20
> under the Cingular name. The biggest advantage, but also the biggest=20
> disadvantage of this is the current lack of GSM coverage in the U.S. in=
=20
> this region. The biggest advantage would be roaming coverage from all=20
> GSM providers (being able to provide GSM roaming on our system to any=20
> GSM carrier), but the biggest disadvantage would be the lack of GSM=20
> service available for local users to roam on. Even if were to market=20
> only GAIT phones, a good majority of the surrounding area would be=20
> roaming with Western Wireless, and that would eat up any revenue the=20
> small carrier would make. We would also be unable to market competitive=
=20
> regional or national plans due to the fact that we would be unable to=20
> allow customers to "free roam", because a majority of our customers=20
> would in fact roam at some time or another, costing a startup company=20
> with a small footprint exhorbant amounts of money.
>=20
> Basically, the thought of CDMA (CDMA 2000 in its various flavours) has=20
> pretty much been distinguished. Because our goal would be to provide=20
> blanked coverage to a rural area, there would be many overlap areas with=
=20
> Verizon Wireless. Because of this, it would be harder to strike roaming=
=20
> agreements with other CDMA carriers as they are more likely to be=20
> offered a better deal from Verizon Wireless. Also, because Verizon=20
> Wireless has rural coverage around here, we would be at the mercy of=20
> Verizon Wireless for CDMA (or AMPS) roaming.
>=20
> Another thought is the possibility of UMTS, or wCDMA. Althought that=20
> technology is in its infancy, by the time we get up and running (if we=20
> get up and running), UMTS could be much more mature, allowing us to have=
=20
> one of the top of the line networks without associated upgrade costs, as=
=20
> UMTS would be our first technology. However, if UMTS were to be=20
> launched now, there would be lack of compatibility with surrounding=20
> networks at all.

Have you looked into the option of 450 MHz service? I know=20
that severely limits the available hardware, if there's any=20
to be had at all, that is.

I remember seeing it mentioned by a Lucent bigwig at an ITU=20
get-together. For a widespread area like you mention, that=20
might be just what you need. Once more, though, that=20
depends on whether or not the equipment even exists for=20
this.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
Jason [email protected] says...
> Cingular allows you to bring your own phone and not get tied into
> contract.
>=20

Can't bring your own phone, but Sprint allows 0-year=20
contracts. $10 premium every month, but the option *is*=20
there.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

O/Siris wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Jason [email protected] says...
>
>> Cingular allows you to bring your own phone and not get tied into
>>contract.
>>
>
>
> Can't bring your own phone, but Sprint allows 0-year
> contracts. $10 premium every month, but the option *is*
> there.
>

Cingular allows you to that without the premium charge. If Verizon
signs up a customer without a contract, the customer is forbidden from
receiving mobile-to-mobile, night/weekend or other off peak minutes, or
even free long distance, because those are normally considered
"promotional". I'm not sure if that's true for all markets. Also, when
you change a price plan on a Verizon account, if you want to keep
night/minute weekends, you must extend your contract.

==AD

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 08:50:49 GMT, O/Siris <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm>
posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>I remember seeing it mentioned by a Lucent bigwig at an ITU
>get-together. For a widespread area like you mention, that
>might be just what you need. Once more, though, that
>depends on whether or not the equipment even exists for
>this.

MTS (or IMTS) equipment probably still exists for 450 (I still have a
couple), but I don't think cellular equipment (read: handsets) ever
existed.

On 3 Dec 2003 19:12:52 -0800, [email protected] (Phillip .)
posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>Well what I really want is no contracts. If I can purchase a phone at
>the going rate without subsidy and no contract I would do that. I am
>just sick of having to be tied down to a contract. Even when you go
>and get new service with a phone that you brought with you (say
>unlocked GSM phone) they still want you in a contract even though they
>are not subsidising the phone price. They also get very sneaky on
>contracts. If I want to change my rate plan, even if it is to a higher
>price, they want the contract to get extended to 12 months from the
>date of the request.

I don't know who "they" is, but I used to change my plan almost every
month, as far as the number of minutes - even after my contract had
expired. And "they" (Verizon) didn't insist on a new contract.

> Have you looked into the option of 450 MHz service? I know
> that severely limits the available hardware, if there's any
> to be had at all, that is.
>
> I remember seeing it mentioned by a Lucent bigwig at an ITU
> get-together. For a widespread area like you mention, that
> might be just what you need. Once more, though, that
> depends on whether or not the equipment even exists for
> this.

Worth possibly looking into for a local basis, but the problem would be
with roaming...we wouldn't be able to provide any to customers of any
other company, and they would not be able to provide any to our customers.

==AD

Al Klein wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2003 19:12:52 -0800, [email protected] (Phillip .)
> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
>
>
>>Well what I really want is no contracts. If I can purchase a phone at
>>the going rate without subsidy and no contract I would do that. I am
>>just sick of having to be tied down to a contract. Even when you go
>>and get new service with a phone that you brought with you (say
>>unlocked GSM phone) they still want you in a contract even though they
>>are not subsidising the phone price. They also get very sneaky on
>>contracts. If I want to change my rate plan, even if it is to a higher
>>price, they want the contract to get extended to 12 months from the
>>date of the request.
>
>
> I don't know who "they" is, but I used to change my plan almost every
> month, as far as the number of minutes - even after my contract had
> expired. And "they" (Verizon) didn't insist on a new contract.

Verizon will not insist that you do this with a National Single Rate
plan because there are no promotions normally offered with this. It
depends on the promotions. Technically, if you want to keep the
promotions when you switch plans, you have to renew your contract.

==AD

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 01:39:08 -0600, Aboutdakota
<[email protected]> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

>Verizon will not insist that you do this with a National Single Rate
>plan because there are no promotions normally offered with this. It
>depends on the promotions. Technically, if you want to keep the
>promotions when you switch plans, you have to renew your contract.

Or find a good rep.