Results 31 to 42 of 42
- 03-19-2004, 09:33 AM #31Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Robert M. wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Not only that, but while Michael makes it seem that Sprint is bumbling
>>in the wireline sector, the truth us that nearly ALL ILECs are losing
>>market share.
>
>
> So if another ILEC is losing market share, that makes Sprint good?
Phillipe, don't twist my words around to suit your logic. My point is
that your view of Sprint's performance is myopic. You failed to take
the entire sector's results into perspective.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
› See More: Another Corporate Disgrace
- 03-19-2004, 09:35 AM #32Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Eric wrote:
> (Phillipe's Quoted Post)
> Isaiah Beard wrote:
> Not only that, but while Michael makes it seem that Sprint is bumbling
> in the wireline sector, the truth us that nearly ALL ILECs are losing
> market share.
>
> Why did you change the name when you quoted Isaiah?
Probably because he doesn't want to be attributed when he makes
inaccurate statements.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 03-19-2004, 09:43 AM #33Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Scott Nelson wrote:
> Starpower blows as well.
>
> I agree, POTs isn't a money maker and hasn't been for more than 10+ years or
> so.
Never was, actually. Even in the days of the Bell System and the old
network, AT&T made it work by gouging customers in LD and using the
profits to subsidize local. That's why intercarrier access fess still
exist: during the breakup, that was a concession the baby bells got,
because they feared they couldn't turn a profit selling just local service.
Of course now, LECs make money using either flat-rate packages, selling
their own long distance service, or making money off of features (call
waiting, call forwarding, CID and *69) that are built-in to the
switching equipment and costs them very little if any money to
implement. If you get basic POTS service that's little more than a bare
dial-tone, the LEC will lose money off of you, and they will try VERY
hard to get you to subscribe to a feature package so they can turn a
profit on servicing your line.
> I am not sure *HOW* Nextel is doing it with free incoming calls.
Higher rates. It's no secret that Nextel doesn't compete in price wars.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 03-19-2004, 09:47 AM #34Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Robert M. wrote:
> You still haven't idnetified any worker bees at SprintPCS got got any
> bonus for 2003, let alone 30 times their annual salary.
Well the way you've told it in here phillipe, there isn't a single
"worker bee" who deserves a job at Sprint, much less a bonus. Now
suddenly you're their labor advocate?
With ombudsmen like you around, I don't think I'd ever vote union.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 03-19-2004, 09:48 AM #35Scott Nelson - Wash DCGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Isn't this all kind of academic?
It would be one thing to not have SprintPCS service and be talking about how
bad Sprint is, but when you have the service and talk bad about it, aren't
you going against your own logic by continuing to use it?
If I am going to bring up how bad something is without a plan for making it
better, what's the point?
If someone thinks a carrier is bad for them, don't use 'em. Go to another
carrier. Why continue to bad mouth a carrier you use?
Fairly obvious to me anyway. ;-)
Why talk about the obvious?
My .02 anyway........
Scotty
"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Robert M. wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Not only that, but while Michael makes it seem that Sprint is bumbling
> >>in the wireline sector, the truth us that nearly ALL ILECs are losing
> >>market share.
> >
> >
> > So if another ILEC is losing market share, that makes Sprint good?
>
> Phillipe, don't twist my words around to suit your logic. My point is
> that your view of Sprint's performance is myopic. You failed to take
> the entire sector's results into perspective.
>
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
>
- 03-19-2004, 10:51 AM #36Robert M.Guest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
In article <[email protected]>,
"Scott Nelson - Wash DC" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why talk about the obvious?
To the Sprint apologists its not obvious that Sprint landline is losing
market share and SprintPCS is losing money, and it makes no sense, and
is a disgrace to give Giant bonuses to its CEO, and worse such giant
bonuses, while Sprint is laying off.
- 03-19-2004, 10:59 AM #37Bob SmithGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Scott Nelson - Wash DC" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why talk about the obvious?
>
> To the Sprint apologists its not obvious that Sprint landline is losing
> market share and SprintPCS is losing money, and it makes no sense, and
> is a disgrace to give Giant bonuses to its CEO, and worse such giant
> bonuses, while Sprint is laying off.
It's a part of big business Phillipe ... Considering your attitude, maybe
it's time to get service with China Unicom ...
Bob ::wondering if Phillipe will figure it out:::
- 03-19-2004, 03:28 PM #38Scott StephensonGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Scott Nelson - Wash DC" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why talk about the obvious?
>
> To the Sprint apologists its not obvious that Sprint landline is losing
> market share and SprintPCS is losing money, and it makes no sense, and
> is a disgrace to give Giant bonuses to its CEO, and worse such giant
> bonuses, while Sprint is laying off.
It makes no sense to you, because you have absolutely no common sense,
business knowledge or industry knowledge. I defy you to reference one post
in this group where someone has challenged the fact that landline is down.
You won't, because you won't find one. As for PCS losing money, ever heard
of network buildout? CapEx? Investing in the future? Name one cellular
provider that didn't lose money for years before becoming profitable- again,
you can't, because they don't exist.
And your whining about them losing money directly contradicts every post you
make wanting to know why certain savings aren't passed off to you. They
could have probably saved in excess of $500,000 in salaries if they didn't
have to ramp up Executive Services to handle the call volumes your posting
of the phone number numerous times created.
- 03-19-2004, 03:28 PM #39Scott StephensonGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Bob ::wondering if Phillipe will figure it out:::
>
>
yeah- right.
- 03-19-2004, 07:21 PM #40Jim CateroGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Because Philly is TROLL and a MORON.
Jim C.
Scott Nelson - Wash DC wrote:
> Isn't this all kind of academic?
> It would be one thing to not have SprintPCS service and be talking about how
> bad Sprint is, but when you have the service and talk bad about it, aren't
> you going against your own logic by continuing to use it?
>
> If I am going to bring up how bad something is without a plan for making it
> better, what's the point?
> If someone thinks a carrier is bad for them, don't use 'em. Go to another
> carrier. Why continue to bad mouth a carrier you use?
>
> Fairly obvious to me anyway. ;-)
> Why talk about the obvious?
>
> My .02 anyway........
>
> Scotty
>
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Robert M. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>> Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Not only that, but while Michael makes it seem that Sprint is bumbling
>>>>in the wireline sector, the truth us that nearly ALL ILECs are losing
>>>>market share.
>>>
>>>
>>>So if another ILEC is losing market share, that makes Sprint good?
>>
>>Phillipe, don't twist my words around to suit your logic. My point is
>>that your view of Sprint's performance is myopic. You failed to take
>>the entire sector's results into perspective.
>>
>>
>>--
>>E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
>>Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
>>
>
>
>
- 03-24-2004, 12:45 PM #41Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Scott Nelson - Wash DC wrote:
> Isn't this all kind of academic?
> It would be one thing to not have SprintPCS service and be talking about how
> bad Sprint is, but when you have the service and talk bad about it, aren't
> you going against your own logic by continuing to use it?
welcome to the world of trolling, Scott. Phillipe, for whatever reason,
refuses to go to any other carrier. We have reason to believe he tried
AT&T Wireless, and he ended up trolling their group for a while (he may
still be, actually). But now he's back with Sprint. Why? Who knows?
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 03-24-2004, 12:46 PM #42Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Another Corporate Disgrace
Robert M. wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Scott Nelson - Wash DC" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Why talk about the obvious?
>
>
> To the Sprint apologists its not obvious that
You avoided his question, Phillipe. Why are you still using Sprint PCS
if you hate it so?
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Similar Threads
- General Cell Phone Forum
- Nokia
- Nokia
- Computers
- Computers
Lifeline cell phone service
in Chit Chat