PRICE INCREASES BY SPRINT

No wonder the apologists haven't posted about it. Its hard to disguise these
price increases. It's not a Troll to post the **FACTS**. but since it's bad
news watch the apologists falsely label this as a Troll.

> "try to find Vision for free now". O/Siris says

++ With $100 plan, no free Vision now.

++ With 2 year agreement and shared minutes plan, no free "Unlimited PCS to
PCS".

================
Thats smart competing. NOT - Verizon starts its "IN" promotion with free
connection to other subscribers, SprintPCS does away with offering it for free.

---

› See More: PRICE INCREASES BY SPRINT

[email protected] (Nebby00007) wrote:
<<++ With $100 plan, no free Vision now. >>

Is Vision free on any higher end plans now?

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

> [email protected] (Nebby00007) wrote:
> <<++ With $100 plan, no free Vision now. >>
>
> Is Vision free on any higher end plans now?

None currently show on the Website.

SprintPCS is certainly free to change their pricing and promotions, but
it seems like they're going the wrong way if their Growth Rate is less
than they'd like, and 1/3 of that of Verizon.

Nebby00007 wrote:
> No wonder the apologists haven't posted about it. Its hard to disguise these
> price increases. It's not a Troll to post the **FACTS**. but since it's bad
> news watch the apologists falsely label this as a Troll.
>
> > "try to find Vision for free now". O/Siris says
>
> ++ With $100 plan, no free Vision now.
>
> ++ With 2 year agreement and shared minutes plan, no free "Unlimited PCS to
> PCS".
>
> ================
> Thats smart competing. NOT - Verizon starts its "IN" promotion with free
> connection to other subscribers, SprintPCS does away with offering it for free.


REALLY HATE to agree , but it is stupid move .
Not too sure I'm happy with Sprints recent plans on how to handle things.

Jim

"Jim Catero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Nebby00007 wrote:
> > No wonder the apologists haven't posted about it. Its hard to disguise
these
> > price increases. It's not a Troll to post the **FACTS**. but since it's
bad
> > news watch the apologists falsely label this as a Troll.
> >
> > > "try to find Vision for free now". O/Siris says
> >
> > ++ With $100 plan, no free Vision now.
> >
> > ++ With 2 year agreement and shared minutes plan, no free "Unlimited PCS
to
> > PCS".
> >
> > ================
> > Thats smart competing. NOT - Verizon starts its "IN" promotion with free
> > connection to other subscribers, SprintPCS does away with offering it
for free.
>
>
> REALLY HATE to agree , but it is stupid move .
> Not too sure I'm happy with Sprints recent plans on how to handle things.
>

I think what we are seeing here is the carriers betting on a stabilized
market:

One carrier choice goes away in ATTWS- even if Cingular backs out, they are
bleeding customers so fast that they wouldn't be able to sustain themselves
for very long.

Except for ATTWS, churn numbers are down from a year ago (pretty much across
the board), which shows some stability in light of WLNP.

The 'Big Six' probably end up winning when the rest of the country can take
advantage of portability- that sucking sound you hear is the air deflating
from the regional wireless carriers and telcos. There will be some initial
shift among the big carriers, but the regionals won't be able to compete on
both price and coverage.

Except for T-Mobile, nobody has come down in price, despite all of the
'guarantees' that prices would come down with portability. All we see are
'cheap' add-on features and a few free options that don't have much of an
impact on the average user. Verizon's IN is great IF you call someone on the
network. Speaking from experience, there isn't a carrier that has the great
majority of my calls covered by their own subscribers. Even Cingular's
rollover minutes has a limited use- if you are building up minutes quicker
than you can use them, you're on the wrong plan to begin with. Free
incoming would be the type of feature that would be of better benefit.

If anything, carriers are making it less attractive to come on as a postpay
customer. Rumor has it Verizon has tightened their credit requirements to
the point of asking for up to $1000 deposit per phone for some potential
customers. Sprint is eliminating features on new plans. Its pretty obvious
that they are all heading down the same path- prepaid, the ultimate Cash
Cow. Everybody has it (some better than others), and for more revenue per
minute, they can provide you with less support- no collections, no rate plan
issues to resolve, no credit checks to run, and the 16 year old bagger at
WalMart can point you to the phones on aisle 15. The only thing to really
put a dent in this point is the need for steady cash to fund the last rounds
of network buildout and upgrades. After that, who knows?

Scott Stephenson wrote:
The only thing to really
> put a dent in this point is the need for steady cash to fund the last rounds
> of network buildout and upgrades. After that, who knows?



Good point , My son has a Virgin phone, it's not really a bad deal, more
expensive but simpler, less hassle and he doesn't worry about roaming.
If i didn't still have an agreement w/ Sprint i might consider it for my
wife and I.


Jim

In article <[email protected]>, nebby00007
@aol.com says...
> No wonder the apologists haven't posted about it. Its hard to disguise th=
ese
> price increases. It's not a Troll to post the **FACTS**. but since it's b=
ad
> news watch the apologists falsely label this as a Troll.
>=20

"the apologists"

Nice "facts."

That's why I get on you so much about editorializing, Phill. You're=20
patently incapable of a "just the facts" post.

That's too bad, too. Because if you'd ever make the effort to do=20
what you claim, you'd find out we're basically in agreement here. =20
Not that you're interested. That would be factual posting without=20
editorializing.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
>=20
> REALLY HATE to agree , but it is stupid move .
> Not too sure I'm happy with Sprints recent plans on how to handle things.
>=20
> Jim
>=20
>=20
>=20

Try having to sell it.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

sender wrote:
>
>
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> The only thing to really
>
>> put a dent in this point is the need for steady cash to fund the last
>> rounds
>> of network buildout and upgrades. After that, who knows?
>
>
>
>
> Good point , My son has a Virgin phone, it's not really a bad deal, more
> expensive but simpler, less hassle and he doesn't worry about roaming.
> If i didn't still have an agreement w/ Sprint i might consider it for my
> wife and I.
>
>
> Jim
>

Jim - Set your Sprint phone's Roaming setting to "Sprint PCS Only" and
you won't have to worry about roaming either. Or change your plan to
one that includes roaming and you won't have to worry about roaming either.

--
Frank Harris in San Francisco with an A620

> Except for ATTWS, churn numbers are down from > a year ago (pretty much
across
> the board), which shows some stability in light of
> WLNP.

Sprint is fooling itself if it uses year to year numbers and ignores the
Quarter to quarter numbers, showing CHURN trending up for Sprint PCS.

2.7%/month Q4 2002; 2.9%/month Q1 2004

Typical apologist employee double standard.

Osiris can editorialize, no one else can.

Rob J Vargas remains the Disgrace of Sprint PCS.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Phillip <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Except for ATTWS, churn numbers are down from > a year ago (pretty much
> across
>> the board), which shows some stability in light of
>> WLNP.
>
> Sprint is fooling itself if it uses year to year numbers and ignores the
> Quarter to quarter numbers, showing CHURN trending up for Sprint PCS.
>
> 2.7%/month Q4 2002; 2.9%/month Q1 2004

You are fooling yourself if you are making conclusions from quarter to
quarter, especially with only two quarters in your "trend". There is a
reason financial analysts [for the wireless communications industry]
release numbers comparing quaters with the same quarter one year ago.
If there is a *trend* as you say, it will appear in these numbers in due
time. But to be sure, two quarters and a declaration by the troll
Phillip certainly don't make it a trend. It may work out that way, but
it no credit can be given to you for your analytical prowess; you have
none.


- --

Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAq1VH1p0e3NXsrtERAgI7AJ9ix78nIdEPpSf0EXkTvgA/WAknGwCgqR0v
WKWWU6iiOpuujxLCPvPFq8I=
=itb8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Phillip <[email protected]> wrote:
> Typical apologist employee double standard.
>
> Osiris can editorialize, no one else can.
>
> Rob J Vargas remains the Disgrace of Sprint PCS.

And THIS is why you are a troll, and why you are a disgrace to
Earthlink!

- --

Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAq1WN1p0e3NXsrtERAsfLAJ4qLJrL91ilmWh2pw0CXjHWzjpyTQCeOfmA
yqy1qMldgkpKTeJoKMfGO+0=
=7W1q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Sprint is a loser from WLNP and you need to face up and admit it.

"Nebby00007" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sprint is a loser from WLNP and you need to face up and admit it.

So, where's the documentation to prove your point Phillipe? And don't try to
turn around and say no documentation posted proves your point. Show
something to prove your point.

Bob