Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42
  1. #31
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    At 08 May 2008 02:28:36 +0000 Steve Sobol wrote:

    > > Perhaps... or it could be Verizon's and AT&T's 15 year head start?

    >
    > Good point. Let's look at the facts.



    In THIS thread? Why start now? ;-)

    > Verizon. Formed by the merger of Bell Atlantic and GTE. Verizon Wireless
    > included those properties plus the properties of Vodafone AirTouch
    > Cellular and PrimeCo (A 1900MHz carrier, Phillippe, FYI).


    Funny you mentioned the 1900MHz bit. I was going to throw Consumer
    Reports' cellular survey back at Steven Scharf in my last post but forgot
    to get around to it- despite his "Verizon-dominates-independent-surveys" as
    "proof" 1900 MHz is inferior to 800MHz, CR's survey ranked Verizon as best
    in
    the Miami market (like in many cities) in the No Signal, and Dropped Calls
    categories as well as overall score. The "punchline" of course, is that
    Verizon is a 1900MHz-only carrier in Miami. AT&T owns both 800MHz licenses
    there. (T-Mobile often came in second to Verizon many markets in the CR
    survey, above AT&T, despite AT&T being 800 and T-Mobile 1900. Maybe
    Verizon is just a little better at building out a network than the others,
    and it has nothing to do with frequency? Or maybe an even simpler
    explanation is the "can you hear me
    now" brainwashing is market independent?)


    > Sprint's network, much newer than the incumbents, had coverage at my house
    > along Lake Erie in a neighborhood no one else covered until a year after I
    > moved there, and Verizon's coverage in Ashtabula was horrible where
    > Sprint's was very good. Ashtabula is about an hour east of Cleveland;
    > smallish town, but not middle-of-nowhere small.


    Bah! Anecdotal! ;-)

    > > Why hasn't the free market done it's job?

    >
    > Well, that's the thing, the free market IS doing its job.
    >
    > I believe that was your point.



    Guilty as charged!






    See More: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall




  2. #32
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Thu, 8 May 2008 02:20:17 +0000 (UTC), Steve Sobol
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
    >On 2008-05-07, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> I can't speak for them, all I know is the complaints I see regularly
    >> at alt.cellular.sprintpcs.

    >
    >The problem with your premise is that you know (well before the trial period
    >ends) whether the coverage will be good enough, and if you don't cancel before
    >the end of the trial period, how is that the carrier's fault? (SPCS or
    >any other carrier)


    Because all too often as time changes and Tower broadcasting is
    tweaked or as a phone ages, areas that did receive coverage
    or coverage indoors indoors change.

    It also happens that people move or change jobs, and THEN find that
    coverage elsewhere discribed as everywhere ISN'T.



  3. #33
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Wed, 07 May 2008 23:19:34 -0600, Todd Allcock
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >Funny you mentioned the 1900MHz bit. I was going to throw Consumer
    >Reports' cellular survey back at Steven Scharf in my last post but forgot
    >to get around to it- despite his "Verizon-dominates-independent-surveys"


    Consumer Reports did mention how Sprint was WORST for dropped calls.



  4. #34
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Thu, 8 May 2008 02:29:22 +0000 (UTC), Steve Sobol
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
    >On 2008-05-07, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> The 1900 Mhz phones have also spawned a thriving industry of cellular
    >> repeaters for folks to use at their home or office.

    >
    >Really. Point me to a company that sells repeaters or antennas for 1900MHz
    >handsets, that DOESN'T also sell devices for use with 800MHz handsets.



    Point to one of those companies that doesnt sell FAR MORE for 1900
    Mhz.



  5. #35
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Thu, 8 May 2008 02:17:39 +0000 (UTC), Steve Sobol
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
    >On 2008-05-07, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> "Discover too late?" You mean people don't try their phone at home or work
    >> during the 14-30 day trial period?

    >
    >That would make sense, but you have to understand you're talking to a liar
    >and troll. Troll because, although he sometimes does post the truth, more
    >often he posts half-truths in an attempt to make SPCS look bad. Liar because
    >he repeatedly said a couple years ago that he was never going to post in the
    >SPCS newsgroup again.



    Don't like the message, INSULT the messanger.
    It's not trolling to post the truth.

    THE TRUTH:

    Sprint for many years in a row now has rated WORST by

    Consumer Reports

    J.D. Power

    The Yankee Group.

    when they do unbiased scientific studies of consumer preferences.

    SPRINTPCS is BAD, And it's Churn, and loss of customers deomstrates
    that. Now its trying to get some customers by being the lowest price
    provider.

    http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...own-churn.aspx

    The Minnesota AG sued Sprint, saying:
    “In some cases, Sprint extended the contract when customers called
    to complain or to get new batteries or small repairs for the phone,”

    http://www.wirelessforums.org/alt-ce...ons-29588.html

    Things are so bad for Sprint that its been in the news this week
    that its in discussions to sell itself.

    http://www.redorbit.com/news/technol..._with_tmobile/

    And of course with have the title of this thread with Qwest adandoning
    Sprint.
    http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=207501987

    And of course the stock market fully reflects Sprint's woes,
    with its stock crashing in the last year from 23 to under 6, and now a
    "dead cat" bounce to 9. Spint keeps changing CEOs in hpes
    of making Wall Street happy, but in the long run, its numbers, not
    personalities that count.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=S&t=2y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

    So Todd show your childishness by insulting me, but the FACTs support
    what I say.



  6. #36
    Dennis Ferguson
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-08, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
    > At 08 May 2008 02:28:36 +0000 Steve Sobol wrote:
    >> Verizon. Formed by the merger of Bell Atlantic and GTE. Verizon Wireless
    >> included those properties plus the properties of Vodafone AirTouch
    >> Cellular and PrimeCo (A 1900MHz carrier, Phillippe, FYI).

    >
    > Funny you mentioned the 1900MHz bit. I was going to throw Consumer
    > Reports' cellular survey back at Steven Scharf in my last post but forgot
    > to get around to it- despite his "Verizon-dominates-independent-surveys" as
    > "proof" 1900 MHz is inferior to 800MHz, CR's survey ranked Verizon as best
    > in
    > the Miami market (like in many cities) in the No Signal, and Dropped Calls
    > categories as well as overall score. The "punchline" of course, is that
    > Verizon is a 1900MHz-only carrier in Miami. AT&T owns both 800MHz licenses
    > there. (T-Mobile often came in second to Verizon many markets in the CR
    > survey, above AT&T, despite AT&T being 800 and T-Mobile 1900. Maybe
    > Verizon is just a little better at building out a network than the others,
    > and it has nothing to do with frequency? Or maybe an even simpler
    > explanation is the "can you hear me
    > now" brainwashing is market independent?)


    Yes, that's correct. In fact the Consumer Reports survey covers
    three markets where Verizon is a 1900 MHz carrier: Miami, Tampa
    and Dallas. Verizon's coverage is rated no worse there than anywhere
    else in the country. And a couple of the very worst coverage scores in
    that survey are for AT&T in Washington, DC and Boston, where AT&T is a
    cellular operator.

    Dennis Ferguson



  7. #37
    Dennis Ferguson
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-07, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Dennis Ferguson wrote:
    >> On 2008-05-06, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> mentioned is forcing roaming to Verizon). If you have Virgin, MetroPCS,
    >>> etc., you're using Sprint sites _only_. Yesterday I got a call from a
    >>> guy I knew and he kept dropping, and I said to him that I thought he had
    >>> an iPhone on AT&T. He told me that it was too expensive to use all the
    >>> time, and that he had a MetroPCS phone to use in the Bay Area.

    >>
    >> I believe that, but MetroPCS isn't a Sprint MVNO and doesn't use
    >> Sprint's network so that particular anecdote says nothing about Sprint.
    >> MetroPCS owns and operates its own network and their coverage in the bay
    >> area is not too wonderful.

    >
    > Yes, my mistake. MetroPCS leases infrastructre from Sprint, but they are
    > not an MVNO. Their coverage is worse than a Sprint MVNO's because they
    > are using a subset of Sprint's towers. You're still using Sprint sites
    > only, just not all of them.


    Somehow that just doesn't sound right. I found a MetroPCS phone someone
    left in a cafe not too long ago, and I took a look at the system menu
    before turning it in. It was connected to SID 5037 and operating on
    a PCS block C channel, so they aren't sharing Sprint's CDMA base stations
    or operating in Sprint's spectrum. The only MetroPCS cell site I happen
    to know the location of (in East Palo Alto) is on a tower all by
    itself; the Sprint cell site is on a building on the other side of the
    highway. I find it hard to believe Sprint is providing them backhaul
    since Sprint itself is short of that around here; they frequently whine
    to the California PUC about how much AT&T charges for that. And Sprint
    and MetroPCS don't seem friendly at all, in fact MetroPCS is one of the
    very few US CDMA operators which Sprint's PRL blocks roaming on.

    So what infrasture does MetroPCS lease from Sprint? I believe they
    share towers some places just because everyone shares towers some
    places; Sprint, AT&T and Verizon share a tower in the parking lot where
    I work. Beyond this I don't see, and have never heard of, the connection,
    though I may have missed something.

    Dennis Ferguson



  8. #38
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-08, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:

    > It also happens that people move or change jobs, and THEN find that
    > coverage elsewhere discribed as everywhere ISN'T.


    Happened to my bro-in-law, moving up to California City, near Edwards AFB.

    Sprint let him out of contract. No ETF, no hassle.

    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
    Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol




  9. #39
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-08, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:

    >>Really. Point me to a company that sells repeaters or antennas for 1900MHz
    >>handsets, that DOESN'T also sell devices for use with 800MHz handsets.

    >
    > Point to one of those companies that doesnt sell FAR MORE for 1900
    > Mhz.


    The burden of proof is on you, since you're making the claim.. Show me
    some numbers.

    I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them.

    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
    Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol




  10. #40
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-08, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Don't like the message, INSULT the messanger.
    > It's not trolling to post the truth.


    Except you didn't. We weren't talking about CS, we were talking about
    coverage.

    > So Todd show your childishness by insulting me, but the FACTs support
    > what I say.


    You were talking about coverage. What you just posted isn't directly related
    to coverage. And the fact is you ARE a liar. You have repeatedly, over the
    course of at least a year or two, posted here after insisting that you never
    would again. (Please trot out your tired response to this. I'm kinda expecting
    it)

    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
    Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol




  11. #41
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall


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

    > Don't like the message, INSULT the messanger.
    > It's not trolling to post the truth.


    You posted some truth? I must have missed it...

    > THE TRUTH:
    >
    > Sprint for many years in a row now has rated WORST by
    >
    > Consumer Reports


    And? No one is disputing Sprint has problems- if you do back to the start
    of this thread, I suggested that those problems had nothing to do with Qwest
    dumping them all of a sudden. An old 5-year contract was expiring early
    next year, and Qwest is getting out of the MVNO business to be a Verizon
    seller.

    Then the thread twisted when you jumped on SMS' "1900 MHz is inferior"
    bandwagon and used that to prop up your tired claim that Sprint's coverage
    stinks, which it doesn't, despite your belief that this sprintpcs NG is
    teeming with coverage complaints (which it isn't, unless we count your
    multiple complaints.)


    > J.D. Power


    Ranks "customer care" not coverage. T-Mobile, the carrier with arguably the
    worst coverage of every national carrier usually walk away with the J.D.
    Power award. No one here is defending Sprint's CS!

    > The Yankee Group.
    >
    > when they do unbiased scientific studies of consumer preferences.


    Also ranks CS, not coverage.

    > SPRINTPCS is BAD, And it's Churn, and loss of customers deomstrates
    > that. Now its trying to get some customers by being the lowest price
    > provider.
    >
    > http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...own-churn.aspx
    >
    > The Minnesota AG sued Sprint, saying:
    > "In some cases, Sprint extended the contract when customers called
    > to complain or to get new batteries or small repairs for the phone,"
    >
    > http://www.wirelessforums.org/alt-ce...ons-29588.html
    >
    > Things are so bad for Sprint that its been in the news this week
    > that its in discussions to sell itself.


    Again, where does ANY of that point to coverage issues? That's what we're
    talking about here- COVERAGE. Anyone who reads this group knows all about
    your history with Sprint back when you were "Phillipe." Why not stick to
    those facts- their CS stinks, they burned you, and you take any opportunity
    to take a swipe at them. If Sprint's R&D department came up with a cure for
    cancer, you'd complain that they were causing overpopulation.

    > http://www.redorbit.com/news/technol..._with_tmobile/
    >
    > And of course with have the title of this thread with Qwest adandoning
    > Sprint.
    > http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=207501987
    >
    > And of course the stock market fully reflects Sprint's woes,
    > with its stock crashing in the last year from 23 to under 6, and now a
    > "dead cat" bounce to 9.


    Funny how it's a "dead cat bounce" because it's Sprint, rather than,
    perhaps, the beginning of a recovery.

    > Spint keeps changing CEOs in hpes
    > of making Wall Street happy,


    "Keeps changing CEOs?" Hesse is the first change since the Nextel merger.

    > but in the long run, its numbers, not personalities that count.


    That remains to be seen- Hesse is a smart guy, and knows wireless better
    than almost anyone. (He invented "One Rate" for the old AT&T Wireless,
    which revolutionized wireless, and is still the basic rate plan type all
    carriers use to this day.)

    If anyone can turn Sprint around, it's Dan Hesse. He even looks better in a
    trenchcoat than the last Sprint adman did... ;-)


    > http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=S&t=2y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=


    Please don't remind me- I placed a nice limit order to buy Sprint at $5.50
    that didn't get filled, and my greed made me wait for it drop again before
    trying to buy. Now it just keeps going up... When it's $15 next year, I'll
    really be po'ed I didn't buy it when I should have!


    > So Todd show your childishness by insulting me, but the FACTs support
    > what I say.


    No, the facts support what everyone ELSE here is saying- Sprint has
    problems. Only YOU are extrapolating them to support your "bad network"
    position. Customer problems don't neccessarily equate to "bad network"
    despite your insistence it does. Look at T-Mobile- they easily have a
    smaller network than Sprint, but they're making money, reducing churn, and
    adding subscribers. And no matter how much YOU may hate Sprint, you, I, and
    all wireless consumers are far better off with the competition of four major
    players then they would be with three, so I wish Sprint a fast turnaround.






  12. #42
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    Dennis Ferguson wrote:

    > Yes, that's correct. In fact the Consumer Reports survey covers
    > three markets where Verizon is a 1900 MHz carrier: Miami, Tampa
    > and Dallas. Verizon's coverage is rated no worse there than anywhere
    > else in the country. And a couple of the very worst coverage scores in
    > that survey are for AT&T in Washington, DC and Boston, where AT&T is a
    > cellular operator.


    Last time I was in South Florida (where I am originally from) in
    December 2006, I roamed onto AT&T AMPS with my Verizon phone out in the
    Everglades. Kind of amusing that the AT&T GSM customers had no coverage
    at all out there, nor did the Verizon customers with digital-only
    phones. Now of course, presuming AT&T turned off both of their AMPS
    network, Verizon and AT&T have equal coverage out there, which is none.

    But as to the reason Verizon is not hampered by 1900 MHz in those
    markets, it's probably because you don't have the kind of local
    opposition to towers you have out West.



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123