All I want for Xmas is... good reception, no gimmicks

In alt.cellular.verizon David <[email protected]> wrote:
: In article <[email protected]>,
: [email protected] (Andrew) wrote:

: > In alt.cellular.verizon Colleen <[email protected]> wrote:
: > : Does anyone out there just want a decent phone that's not too
: > : expensive (since I'm not into taking pictures or emailing with my
: > : phone) with a company that has good reception? I must be in the
: > : minority because the cell phone companies aren't focusing their
: > : business models towards customers like myself...
: >
: > I just got a Nokia 3589i with Verizon. Basic phone, great reception
: > in my house and elsewhere. I paid $29.99 with a 2-year contract;
: > might find it free in some markets, perhaps at Circuit City. You can
: > do a two-week trial to test it and get your money back if it's bad for
: > you.

: WRONG. You will pay at least the $36 activation fee, and likely a full
: monh of service also at Sprint.

No, *YOU* are wrong. Free trial restrictions vary by the carrier;
some do indeed offer a 100% refund. I tried Verizon in the summer and
because the phone they gave me at that time didn't work well,
cancelled within the trial period and got a 100% refund, just as
advertised. I believe AT&T is the same way - I can't speak for the
others.

Try not to make blanket statements.

Andrew
--
----> Portland, Oregon, USA <----
*******************************************************************
----> http://www.bizave.com <---- Photo Albums and Portland Info
----> To Email me remove "MYSHOES" from email address
*******************************************************************

---

› See More: All I want for Xmas is... good reception, no gimmicks

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Andrew) wrote:

> In alt.cellular.verizon David <[email protected]> wrote:
> : In article <[email protected]>,
> : [email protected] (Andrew) wrote:
>
> : > In alt.cellular.verizon Colleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> : > : Does anyone out there just want a decent phone that's not too
> : > : expensive (since I'm not into taking pictures or emailing with my
> : > : phone) with a company that has good reception? I must be in the
> : > : minority because the cell phone companies aren't focusing their
> : > : business models towards customers like myself...
> : >
> : > I just got a Nokia 3589i with Verizon. Basic phone, great reception
> : > in my house and elsewhere. I paid $29.99 with a 2-year contract;
> : > might find it free in some markets, perhaps at Circuit City. You can
> : > do a two-week trial to test it and get your money back if it's bad for
> : > you.
>
> : WRONG. You will pay at least the $36 activation fee, and likely a full
> : monh of service also at Sprint.
>
> No, *YOU* are wrong. Free trial restrictions vary by the carrier;
> some do indeed offer a 100% refund.

BUT NOT SPRINTPCS.

In alt.cellular.verizon David <[email protected]> wrote:
: In article <[email protected]>,
: [email protected] (Andrew) wrote:
: > No, *YOU* are wrong. Free trial restrictions vary by the carrier;
: > some do indeed offer a 100% refund.

: BUT NOT SPRINTPCS.

Could be. Probably one reason I would try Verizon or AT&T first
before trying Sprint.

Andrew
--
----> Portland, Oregon, USA <----
*******************************************************************
----> http://www.bizave.com <---- Photo Albums and Portland Info
----> To Email me remove "MYSHOES" from email address
*******************************************************************

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Andrew) wrote:

> In alt.cellular.verizon David <[email protected]> wrote:
> : In article <[email protected]>,
> : [email protected] (Andrew) wrote:
> : > No, *YOU* are wrong. Free trial restrictions vary by the carrier;
> : > some do indeed offer a 100% refund.
>
> : BUT NOT SPRINTPCS.
>
> Could be. Probably one reason I would try Verizon or AT&T first
> before trying Sprint.

Good idea. AT&T is lower priced and has better promotional deals on new
phones, Verizon is perceived as having the best network and customer
service.

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

> Good idea. AT&T is lower priced and has better promotional deals on new
> phones, Verizon is perceived as having the best network and customer
> service.

An AT&T and Verizon apologist... watch out!

Just remember, you can go check out Phillipe's allegations of fraud by
AT&T in alt.cellular.attws. Yet he still recommends people to AT&T.

(It wasn't under his current ID, either, it was under a couple others he's
used in the past week.)


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

The Village Idiot <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> Good idea. AT&T is lower priced and has better promotional deals on new
> phones, Verizon is perceived as having the best network and customer
> service.

And what Phil, the blithering Village Idiot (aka Dave) fails to point out
are the many CURRENT complaints against both carriers and their Customer
Service on both newsgroups, the multiple system issues ATT has been
struggling with for almost two months, and the constant 'change of heart'
that Verizon seems to take when they see dollar signs- I'll use their
portability fee as an example (they originally said they would never charge
one).

Now, Phil (Dave, whichever of his 43 ID's he decides to use) will
automatically point out a survey done by JD Powers six months ago, that does
not reflect the current state of affairs in the industry. It was probably
accurate at the time, but there have been too many layoffs, too many
technical glitches, and WNLP that did not exist at the time of the survey.
I'll guarantee that a survey done today would have much different results,
with both ATT and Verizon scoring much lower than six months ago.

And unlike you, Phil, I can be totally unbiased in stating all of this,
because I have never worked for, used the services of, or had any direct
interaction with any of these three companies, and unlike you, I am able to
look at all of them from both a business and customer's perspective. You
look at them as a jaded and very biased ex-customer of one particular
company, and will say or do anything to put them in a bad light.

And Phil- Verizon can be perceived to be anything you want. Don't use
perceptions- use facts. I percieve you to be a complete idiot when it comes
to the inner workings of the cellular industry (despite your numerous,
factless posts). Using your logic, my perception would then be true.

David <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Andrew) wrote:
> >
> > I just got a Nokia 3589i with Verizon. Basic phone, great reception
> > in my house and elsewhere. I paid $29.99 with a 2-year contract;
> > might find it free in some markets, perhaps at Circuit City. You can
> > do a two-week trial to test it and get your money back if it's bad for
> > you.
>
> WRONG. You will pay at least the $36 activation fee, and likely a full
> monh of service also at Sprint.

Excuse me, but this post says, "...with Verizon." Verizon is not
Sprint, and Verizon does not charge a $36 activation fee necessarily
and does not charge for a full month of service necessarily.

Don't talk about the wrong carrer; read the post.

*Michael Notforyou*