SPCS loses big on Wall Street Today - Verizon Snowball

CAT0NHAT wrote:

> SPIN. The maps currently available are more generalized and smaller scale
> than those that led to the creation of the Consumer Code.

Provide your source for this statement, and by that, I mean provide a source
(other than your own mind) that qualifies these maps as inadequate by
Consumer Code standards.


>
> The code does not say overly generalized to be worthless either, but that
> is what current maps are.
> They omit any swiss cheese hole smaller than 20 miles across, when the
> carriers can easily do better.
> No carrier has yet come up with a new improved map.

I didn't see anything in the code that mentions new and improved maps. You
really need to go back and get your GED- focus on reading and comprehension
when you do.

>
> And what about the lie you made up about the maps being available on the
> FCC web site.
>
> Worse than SPIN, lies.

No spin (no need or reason for it), and you better watch who you accuse of
lying. Just because I value my dog's opinion more than yours doesn't give
you free license to attempt and label me a something I'm not (at least I am
able to quote fact, and not just go on opinion) Are you saying that the
government doesn't have readily available coverage maps? Please say yes,
because I am always amused by ignorance and laziness.



>
> But Sprint stock continues to decline today
> now at 4.1 down another 5% on top of yesterdays crash.

Good- that just makes them that much more attractive as a takeover target.
I'll be real interested to see who you end up trolling when it happens.

---

› See More: SPCS loses big on Wall Street Today - Verizon Snowball

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

<snip>

All correct. The question is what's going to happen. Two possibilities:

1. BellSouth leaves the Cingular joint venture and buys Sprint
2. Nextel buys Sprint

But both may be waiting for Sprint to deteriorate further so they
can get it for a lower price.

CAT0NHAT wrote:

> Scott - please stop Trolling that Sprint's coverage map is of any use.
> When it shows Justins area as not covered then we'll know its closer to
> honest.
>

Sorry it took so long to respond- the tears of laughter were clouding my
vision. You calling someone else a troll is hilarious.

And please show me where I said that the maps were useful- I merely said
that they meet the guidelines as set forth by the Consumer Code. And
that's all I said- don't try reading something else into my statements
(you're really bad at it).



>
> You never heard of Chapter 7? Thats what happened to Alpha1 satellite, a
> competitor to Dish and DirecTv, they closed down and sold off their
> assests. With all their 10's of Billions of debt, Sprint might not be an
> attractive takeover target even for free.
>
>

Are you really thinking that they just go belly up? The entire Corporation
is sitting on about $18B of debt, not all of which is the responsibility of
PCS. And at less than $5 a share, the pruchase price is well worth the
debt. Not a bad price for a full network with subscribers.


Stop trolling and check the facts before spouting off- you'll look like less
of an idiot that way.

Your talking about Sprint's maps being wrong, ever look at a Verizon
map? The show the entire state of Kansas and Missouri under digital
coverage.

The cover the main cities and use Sprint's network to cover the
highways. That map is so badly exagerated it falls under the category
of false advertisement!

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

You'll break your arm patting yourself on the back with your faulty logic. Do
you even listen to yourself?

> show me where I said that the maps were useful- I > merely said that they
meet the guidelines as set
> forth by the Consumer Code.

Useless maps are good by you?

> And at less than $5 a share, the pruchase price is well
> worth the debt.

Obviously not true on its face. The price is below 4 1/4 and no one is stepping
up to buy Sprint.

CAT0NHAT wrote:

> You'll break your arm patting yourself on the back with your faulty logic.
> Do you even listen to yourself?

Point out the faulty logic- baseless accusation from a troll (with how many
names in this group- 15??).


>
>> show me where I said that the maps were useful- I > merely said that they
> meet the guidelines as set
>> forth by the Consumer Code.
>
> Useless maps are good by you?

You still haven't provided any other opinion other than your own. Give
sources that back up your claim to them being useless. And I never made
any claims about the maps, other than that they meet the definition of the
Consumer Code. In other words, put up or shut up.


>
>> And at less than $5 a share, the pruchase price is well
> > worth the debt.
>
> Obviously not true on its face. The price is below 4 1/4 and no one is
> stepping up to buy Sprint.

Are you this naive in real life?

You are so contradicting yourself, I'm not even replying anymore.

Wall Street has spoken, JD Power has spoken, I dont need to

CAT0NHAT wrote:

> You are so contradicting yourself, I'm not even replying anymore.

That's fine- I guess that tells us the true lack of sources you possess for
all of your trolling drivel. Go away and hide when ask for sources- I
would expect no less. And I DARE YOU to point out any contradictions in my
posts.


>
> Wall Street has spoken, JD Power has spoken, I dont need to

That hasn't ever stopped you before, but I guess your wealth of financial
and business acumen (none of which has ever been used in this group) speaks
for itself.


Troll.

"CAT0NHAT" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You'll break your arm patting yourself on the back with your faulty logic.
Do
> you even listen to yourself?
>
> > show me where I said that the maps were useful- I > merely said that
they
> meet the guidelines as set
> > forth by the Consumer Code.
>
> Useless maps are good by you?
>
> > And at less than $5 a share, the pruchase price is well
> > worth the debt.
>
> Obviously not true on its face. The price is below 4 1/4 and no one is
stepping
> up to buy Sprint.

So when has SPCS or Sprint as a whole, ever been in play? You make it sound
like they've been trying to sell the company, and I certainly have not seen
anything of that nature reported.

Bob

Bob Smith wrote:

>
> "CAT0NHAT" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>>
>> Obviously not true on its face. The price is below 4 1/4 and no one is
> stepping
>> up to buy Sprint.
>
> So when has SPCS or Sprint as a whole, ever been in play? You make it
> sound like they've been trying to sell the company, and I certainly have
> not seen anything of that nature reported.
>
> Bob


Don't try to use facts, Bob- Phil doesn't know how to handle them.

But you are right- there have to be two parties in a sale, and I don't think
Sprint is quite ready to give up on PCS. Although a few more quarters like
this last one and they may change their tune.

Tom, I don't know if I agree with you on this. Verizon has a certain
number of carrier frequencies deployed in each market. I believe in
their busiest markets they have 5 1.25mhz carriers on both the uplink
and the downlink. Thats only 6.25mhz of spectrum (without
guardband)both down and up. A good remaning portion of the spectrum
is analog channels which are a total waste, but still needed. This
will get phased out eventually yielding additional spectrum. Even
without eliminating these analog channels they have plenty of
spectrum. Each carrier frequencies holds large amount of
calls/erlangs. In many/most markets, Verizon has 12.5mhz of spectrum
on both the down and the up, for a total of 25 mhz. They still have
plenty of spectrum to deploy additional carrier frequencies, so thanks
to CDMA, they have plenty of capacity to satisfy capacity
requirements. While adding additional carrier frequencies may be
somewhat expensive, the incremental revenue from adding new customers
far outweighs the benefits.

In addition, since they upgraded to CDMA2000 1x, they get
approximately 1.7x as much capacity in the same carrier frequencies.
As each month goes by, efficiency gets even better as customers turn
over their CDMA IS95 phones for CDMA 20001x phone. I don't see them
having any air interface capacity problems, even if they gain millions
upon millions of new subscribers from LNP As far as landline
switching capacity, customers service reps, etc, this is a different
story which has little to do with spectrum capacity. Verizon is far
from facing the problems with the old AT&T TDMA air interface system
and the Analog capacity problems of the early 90's solved by cell
splitting and high prices.




"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> The problem with the borg style of growth you mention is that in the
> wireless industry, each carrier has limitted spectrum resources. If Verizon
> were to take on too many customers in a given market, they will starter
> suffering capacity issues and the customer base will defect. It is for this
> reason that Verizon charges some of the highest rates around, they are at
> capacity in many areas and don't actually want new customers, they just
> don't want other carriers to get the customers .. so it is a catch 22.
>
> Tom Veldhouse

Hear, hear, I second this motion !!!

Larry

On 24 Oct 2003 04:41:52 GMT, [email protected] (CAT0NHAT) wrote:

>> So I guess my question is, how can you break this > kind of cycle?
>
>Sprint could do the following.
>
>1. First by being the first provider to provide good coverage maps, as they
>were obligated by the Industry standard consumer code.
>
>2. Improve customer service so:
> *2 folks have authority to help
> they arent pissing people off by having to
> upsell
> They arent rushing people off the phone to
> "complete the call"
> Have a working escalation path.
>
>3. Improve the stores
> pay by salary so sales folks dont have incentive
> to lie to make sales and commissions
> have enough staff so repairs can be done in
> Real Time

In WI, verizon does not cover as much square miles or as many
people as Sprint PCS. Sprint PCS covers all of verizon's areas in WI.
The only antenna sites verizon has is WI are in the national access
areas on verizon's map.


wldthng842 wrote:

> Your talking about Sprint's maps being wrong, ever look at a Verizon
> map? The show the entire state of Kansas and Missouri under digital
> coverage.
>
> The cover the main cities and use Sprint's network to cover the
> highways. That map is so badly exagerated it falls under the category
> of false advertisement!
>
> --
> Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
> Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap
>

There is no verizon analog service in some states like here in WI.


Craig wrote:

> Tom, I don't know if I agree with you on this. Verizon has a certain
> number of carrier frequencies deployed in each market. I believe in
> their busiest markets they have 5 1.25mhz carriers on both the uplink
> and the downlink. Thats only 6.25mhz of spectrum (without
> guardband)both down and up. A good remaning portion of the spectrum
> is analog channels which are a total waste, but still needed. This
> will get phased out eventually yielding additional spectrum. Even
> without eliminating these analog channels they have plenty of
> spectrum. Each carrier frequencies holds large amount of
> calls/erlangs. In many/most markets, Verizon has 12.5mhz of spectrum
> on both the down and the up, for a total of 25 mhz. They still have
> plenty of spectrum to deploy additional carrier frequencies, so thanks
> to CDMA, they have plenty of capacity to satisfy capacity
> requirements. While adding additional carrier frequencies may be
> somewhat expensive, the incremental revenue from adding new customers
> far outweighs the benefits.
>
> In addition, since they upgraded to CDMA2000 1x, they get
> approximately 1.7x as much capacity in the same carrier frequencies.
> As each month goes by, efficiency gets even better as customers turn
> over their CDMA IS95 phones for CDMA 20001x phone. I don't see them
> having any air interface capacity problems, even if they gain millions
> upon millions of new subscribers from LNP As far as landline
> switching capacity, customers service reps, etc, this is a different
> story which has little to do with spectrum capacity. Verizon is far
> from facing the problems with the old AT&T TDMA air interface system
> and the Analog capacity problems of the early 90's solved by cell
> splitting and high prices.
>
>
>
>
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>The problem with the borg style of growth you mention is that in the
>>wireless industry, each carrier has limitted spectrum resources. If Verizon
>>were to take on too many customers in a given market, they will starter
>>suffering capacity issues and the customer base will defect. It is for this
>>reason that Verizon charges some of the highest rates around, they are at
>>capacity in many areas and don't actually want new customers, they just
>>don't want other carriers to get the customers .. so it is a catch 22.
>>
>>Tom Veldhouse

"Jerome Zelinske" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In WI, verizon does not cover as much square miles or as many
> people as Sprint PCS. Sprint PCS covers all of verizon's areas in WI.
> The only antenna sites verizon has is WI are in the national access
> areas on verizon's map.
>

New Richmond WI is covered by Verizon, and not by Sprint PCS, although
Sprint's maps show the New Richmond zipcode as covered. I just had a chance
to test it this weekend and indeed, my calls were roaming [Digitally].

Tom Veldhouse