67% of F&CA minutes must be in-network?!

We all have been told, countless times, that the Free&Clear America option
means that roaming carries no extra charges as long as less than half of our
minutes are roaming--in other words, as long as our roaming minutes are less
than our in-network minutes. After all, that is what Sprint reps have told
us, and that is what Sprint's Web site says:

http://www.sprintpcs.com/common/popu...arAmerica.html

"PCS Free & Clear America

Enjoy no additional charges for roaming in this expanded coverage area,
reaching more than 280 million people, as long as less than half of your
monthly call time is used while roaming."

Right? Wrong, says cruznis300, a (highly placed?) Sprint employee and the
moderator of the HowardForums section devoted to Sprint. cruznis300 has a
"novel" interpretation of the F&CA restriction, and he says, "I'd state
[sic] my job on it." cruznis300 essentially says that not just 51%, but
rather 67%, of our used minutes must be in-network. You can read his FAQ
entry and a related thread here

http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...19#post1308619

http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...hreadid=286508

So, do the rest of you feel as cheated as I do that Sprint sold us a service
advertised as A but is now claiming, "We meant B"? Can other Sprint
employees either verify that cruznis300's interpretation is "what Sprint
meant" (despite Sprint's clear language stating otherwise)? Or is
cruznis300 himself confused?

---

› See More: 67% of F&CA minutes must be in-network?!

In article <[email protected]>, lgmayka000
@ameritech.net says...
> We all have been told, countless times, that the Free&Clear America optio=
n
> means that roaming carries no extra charges as long as less than half of =
our
> minutes are roaming--in other words, as long as our roaming minutes are l=
ess
> than our in-network minutes. After all, that is what Sprint reps have to=
ld
> us, and that is what Sprint's Web site says:
>=20
> http://www.sprintpcs.com/common/popu...arAmerica.html
>=20
> "PCS Free & Clear America
>=20
> Enjoy no additional charges for roaming in this expanded coverage area,
> reaching more than 280 million people, as long as less than half of your
> monthly call time is used while roaming."
>=20
> Right? Wrong, says cruznis300, a (highly placed?) Sprint employee and th=
e
> moderator of the HowardForums section devoted to Sprint. cruznis300 has =
a
> "novel" interpretation of the F&CA restriction, and he says, "I'd state
> [sic] my job on it." cruznis300 essentially says that not just 51%, but
> rather 67%, of our used minutes must be in-network. You can read his FAQ
> entry and a related thread here
>=20
> http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...8619#post1308=
619
>=20
> http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...eadid=3D286508
>=20
> So, do the rest of you feel as cheated as I do that Sprint sold us a serv=
ice
> advertised as A but is now claiming, "We meant B"? Can other Sprint
> employees either verify that cruznis300's interpretation is "what Sprint
> meant" (despite Sprint's clear language stating otherwise)? Or is
> cruznis300 himself confused?

I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes=20
are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if=20
less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or=20
less of the total, then you're covered.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

"O/Siris" <Osiris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, lgmayka000
@ameritech.net says...
> I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
> are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
> less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or
> less of the total, then you're covered.

Then can someone please tell cruznis300? He says of the cited Web page, "I
will report it to sprint so they can correct the wording"! If he succeeds,
everyone will be all confused.

"Lawrence G. Mayka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> "O/Siris" <Osiris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, lgmayka000
> @ameritech.net says...
> > I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
> > are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
> > less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or
> > less of the total, then you're covered.
>
> Then can someone please tell cruznis300? He says of the cited Web page,
"I
> will report it to sprint so they can correct the wording"! If he
succeeds,
> everyone will be all confused.

I've read both threads, and I don't see where SPCS's comments are
misleading. Of course it would be 50% of in network minutes. If you weren't
calling or receiving calls on SPCS's system, they would be off network
minutes, i.e.: roaming ...

Bob

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <Osiris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, lgmayka000
> @ameritech.net says...
> > We all have been told, countless times, that the Free&Clear America option
> > means that roaming carries no extra charges as long as less than half of our
> > minutes are roaming--in other words, as long as our roaming minutes are less
> > than our in-network minutes. After all, that is what Sprint reps have told
> > us, and that is what Sprint's Web site says:
> >
> > http://www.sprintpcs.com/common/popu...arAmerica.html
> >
> > "PCS Free & Clear America
> >
> > Enjoy no additional charges for roaming in this expanded coverage area,
> > reaching more than 280 million people, as long as less than half of your
> > monthly call time is used while roaming."
> >
> > Right? Wrong, says cruznis300, a (highly placed?) Sprint employee and the
> > moderator of the HowardForums section devoted to Sprint. cruznis300 has a
> > "novel" interpretation of the F&CA restriction, and he says, "I'd state
> > [sic] my job on it." cruznis300 essentially says that not just 51%, but
> > rather 67%, of our used minutes must be in-network. You can read his FAQ
> > entry and a related thread here
> >
> > http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...19#post1308619
> >
> > http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...hreadid=286508
> >
> > So, do the rest of you feel as cheated as I do that Sprint sold us a service
> > advertised as A but is now claiming, "We meant B"? Can other Sprint
> > employees either verify that cruznis300's interpretation is "what Sprint
> > meant" (despite Sprint's clear language stating otherwise)? Or is
> > cruznis300 himself confused?
>
> I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
> are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
> less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or
> less of the total, then you're covered.



Have of used minutes, not plan minutes; just to confuse customers and
hope they go over so you can slam them with roaming charges. Again,
a customer unfriendly policy earning SprintPCS its reputation as worst
in Customer Service.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
<snipped>
> Have of used minutes, not plan minutes; just to confuse customers and
> hope they go over so you can slam them with roaming charges. Again,
> a customer unfriendly policy earning SprintPCS its reputation as worst
> in Customer Service.

Which bodes the question an Nth time Phillipe. Why did you return to SPCS if
you hate them so much? Inquiring minds want to know ...

Bob

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 05:09:07 GMT, "Lawrence G. Mayka"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>We all have been told, countless times, that the Free&Clear America option
>means that roaming carries no extra charges as long as less than half of our
>minutes are roaming--in other words, as long as our roaming minutes are less
>than our in-network minutes. After all, that is what Sprint reps have told
>us, and that is what Sprint's Web site says:
>
>http://www.sprintpcs.com/common/popu...arAmerica.html
>
>"PCS Free & Clear America
>
>Enjoy no additional charges for roaming in this expanded coverage area,
>reaching more than 280 million people, as long as less than half of your
>monthly call time is used while roaming."
>
>Right? Wrong, says cruznis300, a (highly placed?) Sprint employee and the
>moderator of the HowardForums section devoted to Sprint. cruznis300 has a
>"novel" interpretation of the F&CA restriction, and he says, "I'd state
>[sic] my job on it." cruznis300 essentially says that not just 51%, but
>rather 67%, of our used minutes must be in-network. You can read his FAQ
>entry and a related thread here
>
>http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...19#post1308619
>
>http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...hreadid=286508
>
>So, do the rest of you feel as cheated as I do that Sprint sold us a service
>advertised as A but is now claiming, "We meant B"? Can other Sprint
>employees either verify that cruznis300's interpretation is "what Sprint
>meant" (despite Sprint's clear language stating otherwise)? Or is
>cruznis300 himself confused?
>


Highly placed or not ... I think he is quite likely wrong. How often
have we seen reports like this and had them wrong? Still, even if it
turns out to be correct ... I don't give a damn because I have a 500
minute plan, so 167 minutes of roaming / month for $5 is one hell of a
deal if you ask me!

Tom Veldhouse

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:59:17 GMT, "Lawrence G. Mayka"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"O/Siris" <Osiris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>In article <[email protected]>, lgmayka000
>@ameritech.net says...
>> I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
>> are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
>> less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or
>> less of the total, then you're covered.
>
>Then can someone please tell cruznis300? He says of the cited Web page, "I
>will report it to sprint so they can correct the wording"! If he succeeds,
>everyone will be all confused.
>


And what is official about cruznis300's statement? Judging by the
fact that there is nothing in writing anywhere, Sprint can change it
tomorrow if they like.

Tom Veldhouse

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 13:39:48 GMT, "Robert M." <[email protected]>
wrote:


>Have of used minutes, not plan minutes; just to confuse customers and
>hope they go over so you can slam them with roaming charges. Again,
>a customer unfriendly policy earning SprintPCS its reputation as worst
>in Customer Service.

Your opinion of this is about as official as the non-official opinion
of anybody elses ... you just reiterate and nothing more.

Tom Veldhouse

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> > "O/Siris" <Osiris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
> > > are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
> > > less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half
or
> > > less of the total, then you're covered.

> I've read both threads, and I don't see where SPCS's comments are
> misleading. Of course it would be 50% of in network minutes. If you
weren't
> calling or receiving calls on SPCS's system, they would be off network
> minutes, i.e.: roaming ...

<Sigh> Let's take an arithmetic example, then. Let's say that in a given
month, I use a total of 1999 minutes: 1000 in-network minutes, and 999
roaming minutes. Thus, my roaming minutes (999) are less than 50% of my
total minutes (1999). According to O/Siris, my usage is just fine and I
have no extra charges. O/Siris' understanding agrees with mine, and with
Sprint's Web site, and with what almost everyone has said about F&CA since
Day One.

cruznis300, on the other hand, says that if I use 1000 in-network minutes, I
can then use only 499 roaming minutes. So cruznis300 would say that my
actual usage of 999 roaming minutes was a full 500 minutes over the limit!

Do you now understand just how drastically different cruznis300's
"reinterpretation" is?

"Lawrence G. Mayka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
<snipped>
> <Sigh> Let's take an arithmetic example, then. Let's say that in a given
> month, I use a total of 1999 minutes: 1000 in-network minutes, and 999
> roaming minutes. Thus, my roaming minutes (999) are less than 50% of my
> total minutes (1999). According to O/Siris, my usage is just fine and I
> have no extra charges.

Who said there would be any additional charges? It's been mentioned here
that if one does go over that 50% mark for a period of time, possibly 2 or 3
months in a row, SPCS would send the account a nastygram, saying that if
this type of usage continues, they would remove the F&CA option on the
account.

> O/Siris' understanding agrees with mine, and with
> Sprint's Web site, and with what almost everyone has said about F&CA since
> Day One.
>
> cruznis300, on the other hand, says that if I use 1000 in-network minutes,
I
> can then use only 499 roaming minutes. So cruznis300 would say that my
> actual usage of 999 roaming minutes was a full 500 minutes over the limit!
>
> Do you now understand just how drastically different cruznis300's
> "reinterpretation" is?

Absolutely I do ... I don't read it that way, not when it was originally
described last year, or now ...

Now, since it's been in effect, have you seen any posts where anyone, based
in a corporate area, has complained, to where they were charged additional
roaming expenses for going over 50% usage, or even if someone had received a
nastygram for going over the 50% threshold? I haven't ...

I've seen a few posts, one on mine also, where F&CA accounts were charged a
minimal roaming expense, but it was only on the secondary phones on the
account and that was because those phone numbers were miscoded, or not even
coded showing F&CA coverage. I noticed some roaming charges on my account in
June or July, on my daughter's phone. When I called SPCS CS, they noticed
that my primary phone was coded correctly for F&CA, but that the two
secondary phones on the account were not. During that call, the coding was
fixed, and I haven't seen a charge for a roaming call since.

Bob

I agree with Bob. Until someone actually posts that they have a problem,
why are we worrying about this?

Cheers

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Lawrence G. Mayka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> <snipped>
> > <Sigh> Let's take an arithmetic example, then. Let's say that in a
given
> > month, I use a total of 1999 minutes: 1000 in-network minutes, and 999
> > roaming minutes. Thus, my roaming minutes (999) are less than 50% of my
> > total minutes (1999). According to O/Siris, my usage is just fine and I
> > have no extra charges.
>
> Who said there would be any additional charges? It's been mentioned here
> that if one does go over that 50% mark for a period of time, possibly 2 or
3
> months in a row, SPCS would send the account a nastygram, saying that if
> this type of usage continues, they would remove the F&CA option on the
> account.
>
> > O/Siris' understanding agrees with mine, and with
> > Sprint's Web site, and with what almost everyone has said about F&CA
since
> > Day One.
> >
> > cruznis300, on the other hand, says that if I use 1000 in-network
minutes,
> I
> > can then use only 499 roaming minutes. So cruznis300 would say that my
> > actual usage of 999 roaming minutes was a full 500 minutes over the
limit!
> >
> > Do you now understand just how drastically different cruznis300's
> > "reinterpretation" is?
>
> Absolutely I do ... I don't read it that way, not when it was originally
> described last year, or now ...
>
> Now, since it's been in effect, have you seen any posts where anyone,
based
> in a corporate area, has complained, to where they were charged additional
> roaming expenses for going over 50% usage, or even if someone had received
a
> nastygram for going over the 50% threshold? I haven't ...
>
> I've seen a few posts, one on mine also, where F&CA accounts were charged
a
> minimal roaming expense, but it was only on the secondary phones on the
> account and that was because those phone numbers were miscoded, or not
even
> coded showing F&CA coverage. I noticed some roaming charges on my account
in
> June or July, on my daughter's phone. When I called SPCS CS, they noticed
> that my primary phone was coded correctly for F&CA, but that the two
> secondary phones on the account were not. During that call, the coding was
> fixed, and I haven't seen a charge for a roaming call since.
>
> Bob
>
>

"Amazingly Smooth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I agree with Bob. Until someone actually posts that they have a problem,
> why are we worrying about this?

That's exactly what we all used to say about modem-style ("tethered") usage
of Vision, originally. Some customers became rather dependent on it,
because no one was actually getting any flak from Sprint about it. Then
later, Sprint started to crack down on the practice--first rarely, then more
frequently--and many customers felt cheated because Sprint appeared to be
"reinterpreting" past statements, denying reps' and supervisors' verbal or
even notated promises, etc.

Most customers like to know where they stand. They don't like to be in a
situation where the vendor can "reinterpret" the rules to harass them
whenever the vendor chooses.

Okay, not to confuse things anymore ...

O/Siris wrote:
"I disagree. Based upon repeated emails to us in Tier 1, F&CA minutes
are tallied by adding up all usage in a month, and then determining if
less than half of that total is/was roaming minutes. If it was half or
less of the total, then you're covered."

This sounds like my TOTAL minutes. From my bills, I get the following
breakdown:
PCS-to-PCS minutes
Night/Weekend minutes
Anytime minutes (actual used amount, not those provided by the plan).
Roaming minutes

Even if I have a 300 anytime minute plan, I could easily use 1000 minutes on
the Sprint network. Would I then be allowed 500 minutes roaming?

Thanks,
Thomas (not to be confused with the original Mr. Veldhouse)


"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 05:09:07 GMT, "Lawrence G. Mayka"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >We all have been told, countless times, that the Free&Clear America
option
> >means that roaming carries no extra charges as long as less than half of
our
> >minutes are roaming--in other words, as long as our roaming minutes are
less
> >than our in-network minutes. After all, that is what Sprint reps have
told
> >us, and that is what Sprint's Web site says:
> >
> >http://www.sprintpcs.com/common/popu...arAmerica.html
> >
> >"PCS Free & Clear America
> >
> >Enjoy no additional charges for roaming in this expanded coverage area,
> >reaching more than 280 million people, as long as less than half of your
> >monthly call time is used while roaming."
> >
> >Right? Wrong, says cruznis300, a (highly placed?) Sprint employee and
the
> >moderator of the HowardForums section devoted to Sprint. cruznis300 has
a
> >"novel" interpretation of the F&CA restriction, and he says, "I'd state
> >[sic] my job on it." cruznis300 essentially says that not just 51%, but
> >rather 67%, of our used minutes must be in-network. You can read his FAQ
> >entry and a related thread here
> >
> >http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...19#post1308619
> >
> >http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...hreadid=286508
> >
> >So, do the rest of you feel as cheated as I do that Sprint sold us a
service
> >advertised as A but is now claiming, "We meant B"? Can other Sprint
> >employees either verify that cruznis300's interpretation is "what Sprint
> >meant" (despite Sprint's clear language stating otherwise)? Or is
> >cruznis300 himself confused?
> >
>
>
> Highly placed or not ... I think he is quite likely wrong. How often
> have we seen reports like this and had them wrong? Still, even if it
> turns out to be correct ... I don't give a damn because I have a 500
> minute plan, so 167 minutes of roaming / month for $5 is one hell of a
> deal if you ask me!
>
> Tom Veldhouse

My appologies, I should have said:

This sounds like my TOTAL minutes. From my bills, I get the following
breakdown:
PCS-to-PCS minutes
Night/Weekend minutes
Anytime minutes (used amount)
Roaming minutes

Even if I have a 300 anytime minute plan, I could use for example 1000
minutes (total). For that month's bill, I would be allowed to have 500 of
those minutes as roaming minutes.

It's hard to find details on F&CA anymore, and here is an unoffical link:
http://www.purchasing.ufl.edu/Sprint...r_Pricing1.pdf

-- And one more question --

If you have a plan with add-a-phones, is this per phone or per plan? Do I
add up the minutes for ALL the phones to do this calculation, or on a phone
by phone basis?

Thanks,
Thomas