I'm Coming to Nextel

X-No-Archive: yes

Well, I just ported my number over to Nextel from Verizon. Even paying the
Verizon ETF of $175. Just orderred the I-830. It looks like if I planned
this right, I can save money in the long run because my Verizon Bill is
really high at times. Verizon is a good carrier, but most of my family I
talk to use either Cingular, whom I hate or Nextel. Can anyone provide
feedback on Nextel in the DC area? Thanks

---

› See More: I'm Coming to Nextel

Biggest mistake you made. Just kidding. In NYC area, Verizon is much better.


"TripleThreat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Well, I just ported my number over to Nextel from Verizon. Even paying
> the Verizon ETF of $175. Just orderred the I-830. It looks like if I
> planned this right, I can save money in the long run because my Verizon
> Bill is really high at times. Verizon is a good carrier, but most of my
> family I talk to use either Cingular, whom I hate or Nextel. Can anyone
> provide feedback on Nextel in the DC area? Thanks
>

I'm in the DC area, they seem pretty good here.

"KC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Biggest mistake you made. Just kidding. In NYC area, Verizon is much
> better.
>
>
> "TripleThreat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> X-No-Archive: yes
>>
>> Well, I just ported my number over to Nextel from Verizon. Even paying
>> the Verizon ETF of $175. Just orderred the I-830. It looks like if I
>> planned this right, I can save money in the long run because my Verizon
>> Bill is really high at times. Verizon is a good carrier, but most of my
>> family I talk to use either Cingular, whom I hate or Nextel. Can
>> anyone provide feedback on Nextel in the DC area? Thanks
>>
>
>

TripleThreat wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
>
> Well, I just ported my number over to Nextel from Verizon. Even
> paying the Verizon ETF of $175. Just orderred the I-830. It looks
> like if I planned this right, I can save money in the long run
> because my Verizon Bill is really high at times. Verizon is a good
> carrier, but most of my family I talk to use either Cingular, whom I
> hate or Nextel. Can anyone provide feedback on Nextel in the DC
> area? Thanks


I think Nextel Sucks all the way around. Wait until you find your phone
needs replacement. You will be required to pay full(over inflated price) for
a new phone unless you agree to sign on for an additional contract from that
point on. (Most will probable say it is in the fine print somewhere). My
phone needed replacement a few months until the end of my contract and they
said I got not deal just because I am a good customer. Dropouts in the
southern NH area many times. Nextel may be good for corps who don't care but
for the family better ask before you get more than you know.

Evan Platt wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:35:51 -0400, "John" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You will be required to pay full(over inflated price) for
>> a new phone unless you agree to sign on for an additional contract
>> from that point on. (Most will probable say it is in the fine print
>> somewhere).
>
> Maybe because it is?

Are you SURE it is? Would you care to point out exactly where it is? Maybe
is right and maybe it is not in the contract anywhere. Do you think if
enough people show that they are unhappy things might change or is that
concept something that escapes you?

Plans are usally more expensive with Nextel. They usually have a good network in most areas. I would take them on a 15 day trial before you port to see that where you go there aren't any weak spots or holes where you need coverage.

Have you stopped to think how much a cell phone actually costs? Nextel is a
provider, not a manufacturer; they purchase the equipment from Motorola, who
has them by the short-hairs because they own the Iden platform and no one
else (except RIM) can make equipment for that platform. Nextel sells you
the replacement phone at their cost unless your sign a contract because they
use business sense. Why lose money on a customer who may not be there in
3 - 6 months, the time it takes to recoup the loss they have taken on the
phone?


"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Evan Platt wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:35:51 -0400, "John" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> You will be required to pay full(over inflated price) for
> >> a new phone unless you agree to sign on for an additional contract
> >> from that point on. (Most will probable say it is in the fine print
> >> somewhere).
> >
> > Maybe because it is?
>
> Are you SURE it is? Would you care to point out exactly where it is? Maybe
> is right and maybe it is not in the contract anywhere. Do you think if
> enough people show that they are unhappy things might change or is that
> concept something that escapes you?
>
>
>

[email protected] wrote:
> Have you stopped to think how much a cell phone actually costs?
> Nextel is a provider, not a manufacturer; they purchase the equipment
> from Motorola, who has them by the short-hairs because they own the
> Iden platform and no one else (except RIM) can make equipment for
> that platform. Nextel sells you the replacement phone at their cost
> unless your sign a contract because they use business sense. Why
> lose money on a customer who may not be there in 3 - 6 months, the
> time it takes to recoup the loss they have taken on the phone?

Nextel sells at cost? Who do you think you are trying to convince? Maybe
some of the fools you hang around with but not to many here I bet. I am
already a good customer that forks over well over $150.00 per month and they
will do me a big favor and let me buy a new phone for $500.00. Geee I feel
real sorry for those nice people at NEXTEL being forced to charge such an
outrageous price.




>
>
> "John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Evan Platt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:35:51 -0400, "John" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You will be required to pay full(over inflated price) for
>>>> a new phone unless you agree to sign on for an additional contract
>>>> from that point on. (Most will probable say it is in the fine print
>>>> somewhere).
>>>
>>> Maybe because it is?
>>
>> Are you SURE it is? Would you care to point out exactly where it is?
>> Maybe is right and maybe it is not in the contract anywhere. Do you
>> think if enough people show that they are unhappy things might
>> change or is that concept something that escapes you?

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

>
> Nextel sells at cost? Who do you think you are trying to convince? Maybe
> some of the fools you hang around with but not to many here I bet. I am
> already a good customer that forks over well over $150.00 per month and
they
> will do me a big favor and let me buy a new phone for $500.00. Geee I feel
> real sorry for those nice people at NEXTEL being forced to charge such an
> outrageous price.
>
>

Well, unless you can contradict the facts, Nextel 1st Quarter earnings (as
filed with the SEC) show equipment COSTS of $532M and equipment REVENUES
(not profits) of $352M. Not a secret number, and in line with every other
cellular provider. Now, if you want to accuse them of padding the books, I
would caution you by saying that in the current business, political and
social environment, numbers like these would have been exposed as frauds
long ago by a press and public keen on hanging the cellular companies out to
dry. They are a matter of public record- cellular companies pay much more
for thephones than they sell them for. You don't have to like it, but
unless you can provide proof (not opinion) to the contrary, these are the
only facts on the table.

Originally Posted by SS

Well, unless you can contradict the facts, Nextel 1st Quarter earnings (as
filed with the SEC) show equipment COSTS of $532M and equipment REVENUES
(not profits) of $352M. Not a secret number, and in line with every other
cellular provider. Now, if you want to accuse them of padding the books, I
would caution you by saying that in the current business, political and
social environment, numbers like these would have been exposed as frauds
long ago by a press and public keen on hanging the cellular companies out to
dry. They are a matter of public record- cellular companies pay much more
for thephones than they sell them for. You don't have to like it, but
unless you can provide proof (not opinion) to the contrary, these are the
only facts on the table.

GOOD POST

SS wrote:
> "John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Nextel sells at cost? Who do you think you are trying to convince?
>> Maybe some of the fools you hang around with but not to many here I
>> bet. I am already a good customer that forks over well over $150.00
>> per month and they will do me a big favor and let me buy a new phone
>> for $500.00. Geee I feel real sorry for those nice people at NEXTEL
>> being forced to charge such an outrageous price.
>>
>>
>
> Well, unless you can contradict the facts, Nextel 1st Quarter
> earnings (as filed with the SEC) show equipment COSTS of $532M and
> equipment REVENUES (not profits) of $352M. Not a secret number, and
> in line with every other cellular provider. Now, if you want to
> accuse them of padding the books, I would caution you by saying that
> in the current business, political and social environment, numbers
> like these would have been exposed as frauds long ago by a press and
> public keen on hanging the cellular companies out to dry. They are a
> matter of public record- cellular companies pay much more for
> thephones than they sell them for. You don't have to like it, but
> unless you can provide proof (not opinion) to the contrary, these are
> the only facts on the table.

Maybe you could provide something to back up what you say. Talk IS cheap no
matter how many of the ignorant like your post.Like a link maybe? If Nextel
pays more than the $500 they are asking me for then maybe they should make a
better deal. I seriously doubt Nextel is losing anything and am well aware
how big business cooks figures to say what ever they like.

1badss wrote:
> SS Wrote:
>>
>>
>> Well, unless you can contradict the facts, Nextel 1st Quarter
>> earnings (as
>> filed with the SEC) show equipment COSTS of $532M and equipment
>> REVENUES
>> (not profits) of $352M. Not a secret number, and in line with every
>> other
>> cellular provider. Now, if you want to accuse them of padding the
>> books, I
>> would caution you by saying that in the current business, political
>> and
>> social environment, numbers like these would have been exposed as
>> frauds
>> long ago by a press and public keen on hanging the cellular companies
>> out to
>> dry. They are a matter of public record- cellular companies pay much
>> more
>> for thephones than they sell them for. You don't have to like it,
>> but unless you can provide proof (not opinion) to the contrary,
>> these are the
>> only facts on the table.
>
> GOOD POST

Want to buy some swamp land?

"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> SS wrote:
> > "John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>
> >> Nextel sells at cost? Who do you think you are trying to convince?
> >> Maybe some of the fools you hang around with but not to many here I
> >> bet. I am already a good customer that forks over well over $150.00
> >> per month and they will do me a big favor and let me buy a new phone
> >> for $500.00. Geee I feel real sorry for those nice people at NEXTEL
> >> being forced to charge such an outrageous price.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Well, unless you can contradict the facts, Nextel 1st Quarter
> > earnings (as filed with the SEC) show equipment COSTS of $532M and
> > equipment REVENUES (not profits) of $352M. Not a secret number, and
> > in line with every other cellular provider. Now, if you want to
> > accuse them of padding the books, I would caution you by saying that
> > in the current business, political and social environment, numbers
> > like these would have been exposed as frauds long ago by a press and
> > public keen on hanging the cellular companies out to dry. They are a
> > matter of public record- cellular companies pay much more for
> > thephones than they sell them for. You don't have to like it, but
> > unless you can provide proof (not opinion) to the contrary, these are
> > the only facts on the table.
>
> Maybe you could provide something to back up what you say. Talk IS cheap
no
> matter how many of the ignorant like your post.

You're right- talk is cheap, and the only thing you've provided.

>Like a link maybe?

Nah- if you're such a smart guy, all I'll tell you is that the numbers I
quoted are both readily available from the 10-Q filed with the SEC and
available on both the SEC and Nextel sites. Actually, all of the major
investment newswires will have a link to them as well.

>If Nextel
> pays more than the $500 they are asking me for then maybe they should make
a
> better deal. I seriously doubt Nextel is losing anything and am well aware
> how big business cooks figures to say what ever they like.

As you said, talk is cheap. And opinions are worthless when they aren't
backed up by any facts. As I said in my last post, for all of the thousands
Usenet business experts to spout this opinion (you just being the latest
model), I have yet to see any one of them provide any facts. It appears
that you will keep that streak intact.

Now, maybe you could enlighten us as to the informational source of your
knowledge. IOW, time to put up or shut up.


>
>
>

that fact remains, Nextel as well as other companies make their money off of monthly service not phones. the problem is not with nextel but the prices motorola is charging them for the phones and we pay for it. Don't get me wrong I think motorola makes the best phones but with no compitition they can charge nextel higher prices which in turn means we pay higher prices.

"1badss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> that fact remains, Nextel as well as other companies make their money
> off of monthly service not phones. the problem is not with nextel but
> the prices motorola is charging them for the phones and we pay for it.
> Don't get me wrong I think motorola makes the best phones but with no
> compitition they can charge nextel higher prices which in turn means we
> pay higher prices.


That might be the case with Nextel, but I think the real probelm is that
most people don't understand the level of technology they carry on their
belt and how much it costs to cram all of that into a package smaller than a
deck of cards. Think about this- you can get a fully loaded desktop
computer for $400-$500, but to get a fully loaded laptop costs three times
that. With cell phones, most people assume that it is too small to cost
more than a few dollars to make, and yet minaturized technology costs top
dollar to develop, manufacture and market.

The lack of competition will ultimately change down the road with the
merger, but that only explains Nextel prices. All of the other carriers are
feeling the same pain, and they do have multiple vendors vying for business.
At the end of the day, it costs them all a lot to make these phones.