Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42
  1. #1
    Ron
    Guest

    Qwest will switch from Sprint to Verizon for selling Cellular to its
    customers

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/2008...pcworld/145503



    See More: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall




  2. #2
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall


    "Ron" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Qwest will switch from Sprint to Verizon for selling Cellular to its
    > customers
    >
    > http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/2008...pcworld/145503


    Sort of. Currently Qwest sells "Qwest Wireless" to it's customers, not
    Sprint. Qwest just happens to be a Sprint MVNO (Mobile Virtual Network
    Operator) like, for example, Virgin Mobile is. Qwest buys airtime at
    wholesale from Sprint but in all other respects, is just like a cellular
    company themselves- they sell handsets, offer their own rate plans, and bill
    customers directly.

    The article makes it sound like this switch to Verizon basically is a
    retreat from the wireless business for Qwest- they'll be selling Verizon
    service AS Verizon service- not rebranding it as "Qwest" and competing
    against Sprint, Verizon, etc. for customers. They'll sell it like they sell
    DirecTV for TV service- as an already popular "parner" product you can
    bundle with your Qwest home phone/DSL bill to save a few bucks a month.

    After four years, Qwest still has less than 1,000,000 wireless customers, so
    this story is really more a reflection of Qwest's inability to market
    wireless (they used to be the incumbent wireline 800MHz cellular carrier in
    their market and sold their entire system to Verizon, which is why they had
    to go the MVNO route in the first place!) rather than any reflection on
    Sprint. Qwest had a 5-year MVNO deal and seems to simply be bailing out of
    the biz at it's expiration.








  3. #3
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Tue, 6 May 2008 08:05:51 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >"Ron" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >>
    >> Qwest will switch from Sprint to Verizon for selling Cellular to its
    >> customers
    >>
    >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/2008...pcworld/145503

    >
    >Sort of. Currently Qwest sells "Qwest Wireless" to it's customers, not
    >Sprint. Qwest just happens to be a Sprint MVNO (Mobile Virtual Network
    >Operator) like, for example, Virgin Mobile is. Qwest buys airtime at
    >wholesale from Sprint but in all other respects, is just like a cellular
    >company themselves- they sell handsets, offer their own rate plans, and bill
    >customers directly.
    >
    >The article makes it sound like this switch to Verizon basically is a
    >retreat from the wireless business for Qwest- they'll be selling Verizon
    >service AS Verizon service- not rebranding it as "Qwest" and competing
    >against Sprint, Verizon, etc. for customers. They'll sell it like they sell
    >DirecTV for TV service- as an already popular "parner" product you can
    >bundle with your Qwest home phone/DSL bill to save a few bucks a month.
    >
    >After four years, Qwest still has less than 1,000,000 wireless customers, so
    >this story is really more a reflection of Qwest's inability to market
    >wireless


    Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints
    1900 Mhz poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.



    \=
    >(they used to be the incumbent wireline 800MHz cellular carrier in
    >their market and sold their entire system to Verizon, which is why they had
    >to go the MVNO route in the first place!) rather than any reflection on
    >Sprint. Qwest had a 5-year MVNO deal and seems to simply be bailing out of
    >the biz at it's expiration.
    >
    >
    >
    >




  4. #4
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall


    "Ron" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news[email protected]
    >>The article makes it sound like this switch to Verizon basically is a
    >>retreat from the wireless business for Qwest- they'll be selling Verizon
    >>service AS Verizon service- not rebranding it as "Qwest" and competing
    >>against Sprint, Verizon, etc. for customers. They'll sell it like they
    >>sell
    >>DirecTV for TV service- as an already popular "parner" product you can
    >>bundle with your Qwest home phone/DSL bill to save a few bucks a month.
    >>
    >>After four years, Qwest still has less than 1,000,000 wireless customers,
    >>so
    >>this story is really more a reflection of Qwest's inability to market
    >>wireless

    >
    > Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints
    > 1900 Mhz poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.


    Look Phillipe, we all know about your axe to grind with Sprint, so stick a
    sock in it. Only an absolute idiot would believe a single word you post
    about Sprint, knowing your history.

    As to the "poor coverage," Sprint's been able to amass 40 million customers
    despite long-time customer service issues. Obviously their network WORKS or
    they'd have no customer base left- those 40 million aren't hanging around
    for the stellar CS! Even the bulk of their current customer hemmoraging is
    coming from the Nextel side, not the PCS service. Look over the complaints
    in the SprintPCS newsgroup (other than the 400 or so you've inserted via
    various sockpuppets)- the majority are about billing issues, surrepitious
    extensions of contracts, etc. VERY few complaints here are about coverage.

    As to Qwest, I live in a Qwest market (Denver.) I know a load of people
    with Sprint service (most of whom are relatively happy.) I don't know a
    single Qwest Wireless user! Again, they're not dumping Sprint due to any
    issues with Sprint- they simply haven't been able to market a successful
    wireless service in the 25+ years of cellular's existence. Heck, when I
    moved to Denver 4 years ago, Qwest was still hawking LOCAL plans at the
    prices other carriers sold nationwide service for, and charged outlandish
    roaming fees when you roamed off of "their" (Sprint's) network, despite the
    fact that Sprint itself offered better plans with no roaming fees!

    Whatever problems Sprint may have, Qwest created far more of their own!
    Qwest Wireless' problems are on Qwest- not Sprint. Qwest has just never
    taken wireless seriously- it's as if they only offer it at all because
    "bundling" internet, phone, TV and wireless is expected of a telco or
    cableco these days. Bundling services people actually know and use (like
    DirecTV or Verizon) makes more sense than trying to launch or increase
    awareness of their own brand.






  5. #5
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
    On 2008-05-06, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints
    >> 1900 Mhz poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.

    >
    > Look Phillipe, we all know about your axe to grind with Sprint, so stick a
    > sock in it. Only an absolute idiot would believe a single word you post
    > about Sprint, knowing your history.
    >
    > As to the "poor coverage,"


    Poor coverage is not the problem. ****ty customer service is the problem.

    > extensions of contracts, etc. VERY few complaints here are about coverage.


    Didn't have any when I was a Sprint customer either.


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




  6. #6
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    Ron wrote:

    > Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints
    > 1900 Mhz poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.


    It's worse than that actually. Not only do the Sprint MVNO's have to
    deal with Sprint's coverage (which according to every independent survey
    is much worse than Verizon's), they don't get to roam onto other CDMA
    carriers to compensate (a trick that many Sprint subscribers have
    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.

    The latecomers to wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile U.S., got stuck with
    1900 MHz, and it works okay in densely populated areas where they can
    install enough towers. However an area like mine, a suburb in Silicon
    Valley, has terrible Sprint and T-Mobile coverage because the zoning in
    the large residential areas doesn't allow for cell sites. It's a
    tremendous battle every time a carrier proposes a site someplace where
    they aren't permitted. The 800 MHz carriers essentially surround the
    residential neighborhoods with sites in the commercial areas, and it's
    good enough to provide good coverage.



  7. #7
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Tue, 6 May 2008 13:28:38 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >


    >As to the "poor coverage," Sprint's been able to amass 40 million customers
    >despite long-time customer service issues. Obviously their network WORKS or
    >they'd have no customer base left- those 40 million aren't hanging around
    >for the stellar CS!


    Thats why they have the high churn of Customers and CSRs?



  8. #8
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Tue, 6 May 2008 20:54:14 +0000 (UTC), Steve Sobol
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >
    >Poor coverage is not the problem. ****ty customer service is the problem.
    >




    No argument from me about the Customer Service.



  9. #9
    Ron
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Tue, 06 May 2008 14:20:54 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >Ron wrote:
    >
    >> Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints
    >> 1900 Mhz poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.

    >
    >It's worse than that actually. Not only do the Sprint MVNO's have to
    >deal with Sprint's coverage (which according to every independent survey
    >is much worse than Verizon's), they don't get to roam onto other CDMA
    >carriers to compensate (a trick that many Sprint subscribers have
    >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.
    >
    >The latecomers to wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile U.S., got stuck with
    >1900 MHz, and it works okay in densely populated areas where they can
    >install enough towers. However an area like mine, a suburb in Silicon
    >Valley, has terrible Sprint and T-Mobile coverage because the zoning in
    >the large residential areas doesn't allow for cell sites. It's a
    >tremendous battle every time a carrier proposes a site someplace where
    >they aren't permitted. The 800 MHz carriers essentially surround the
    >residential neighborhoods with sites in the commercial areas, and it's
    >good enough to provide good coverage.



    You mean Todd was wrong? and its not just <poor> Customer Service ?



  10. #10
    AZ Nomad
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On Tue, 06 May 2008 17:14:38 -0500, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:
    >On Tue, 6 May 2008 13:28:38 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    ><[email protected]> wrote:


    >>


    >>As to the "poor coverage," Sprint's been able to amass 40 million customers
    >>despite long-time customer service issues. Obviously their network WORKS or
    >>they'd have no customer base left- those 40 million aren't hanging around
    >>for the stellar CS!


    >Thats why they have the high churn of Customers and CSRs?


    Have you stopped beating your wife?



  11. #11
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall


    "Ron" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Tue, 6 May 2008 13:28:38 -0600, "Todd Allcock"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>

    >
    >>As to the "poor coverage," Sprint's been able to amass 40 million
    >>customers
    >>despite long-time customer service issues. Obviously their network WORKS
    >>or
    >>they'd have no customer base left- those 40 million aren't hanging around
    >>for the stellar CS!

    >
    > Thats why they have the high churn of Customers and CSRs?


    Poor coverage causes CSRs to quit? Ok, I'll bite- it should be entertaining
    to hear you try and connect those dots!





  12. #12
    Dennis Ferguson
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    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.

    Sprint's coverage isn't too bad, it improved dramatically over the
    years I had service with them. I'm sure you can find Sprint coverage
    holes, but I can also find coverage holes for the two carriers whose
    phones I carry now (AT&T and Verizon).

    Dennis Ferguson



  13. #13
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall


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


    >> Nice try at spinning. Even a Sprint MVNO has to suffer Sprints 1900 Mhz
    >> poor coverage and lack of indoor penetration.

    >
    > It's worse than that actually. Not only do the Sprint MVNO's have to deal
    > with Sprint's coverage (which according to every independent survey is
    > much worse than Verizon's), they don't get to roam onto other CDMA
    > carriers to compensate (a trick that many Sprint subscribers have
    > mentioned is forcing roaming to Verizon).


    That's up to the MVNO. Qwest customers have the same roaming abilities as
    Sprint customers.

    > 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.


    MetroPCS has their own licenses, spectrum and infrastructure- they aren't an
    MVNO. They typically build tiny systems covering the smallest possible area
    to launch a viable service.

    > The latecomers to wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile U.S., got stuck with 1900
    > MHz, and it works okay in densely populated areas where they can install
    > enough towers.


    Fair enough. That generally covers 80+% of the population.

    > However an area like mine, a suburb in Silicon Valley, has terrible Sprint
    > and T-Mobile coverage because the zoning in the large residential areas
    > doesn't allow for cell sites.


    That's an atypical situation, though.

    > It's a tremendous battle every time a carrier proposes a site someplace
    > where they aren't permitted. The 800 MHz carriers essentially surround the
    > residential neighborhoods with sites in the commercial areas, and it's
    > good enough to provide good coverage.


    That's why it's atypical- in most cases the 1900MHz carriers can do exactly
    the same thing, unless extreme distance or topography interfere.







  14. #14
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    On 2008-05-06, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Tue, 6 May 2008 20:54:14 +0000 (UTC), Steve Sobol
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >>Poor coverage is not the problem. ****ty customer service is the problem.

    >
    >
    > No argument from me about the Customer Service.


    And we all know why it tanked. You and I disagree about the level of customer
    service pre-merger. I didn't have any problems at all pre-merger. But after
    the merger went through...

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




  15. #15
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Qwest sees the handwriting on the wall

    ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
    On 2008-05-06, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:

    > You mean Todd was wrong? and its not just <poor> Customer Service ?


    Steven is wrong, unless MetroPCS is a Sprint MVNO. And as far as I
    know, none of the flat-rate wireless providers are Sprint MVNO's --
    not Metro, not Cricket, not Revol (and I know for sure Revol isn't; I
    got a phone a month after they launched, back when they were still
    Northcoast PCS, and they were building out their own network then).

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




  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast