Lame attempt to attack the JD Power study

"Phill." <[email protected]> wrote in article
<[email protected]>:

>
> But the results have been online since August 28.
>
> The week before your only complaint against a JD Power study was that
> maybe it was out of date. A new study comes out, rates Sprints now as
> worst of the lot, and you're still in DENIAL. YOU EMBARESS SPRINTPCS

I never brought up the previous study, nor mentioned its date as a
criticism, Philly. Obviously, you have trouble keeping your own stories
straight.

And if those "results" have been posted, why can't you provide them?
Why is it you cannot state how SPCS did on, for example, the IVR portion
of the survey?

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them




[posted via phonescoop.com]

---

› See More: Lame attempt to attack the JD Power study

"Phill." <[email protected]> wrote in article
<[email protected]>:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Justin Green" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Well then, ADVERTISE them in that way. Advertise that Sprint customers out
> > of contract can get 10% off their plan price or whatever discount the
> > retention plan of the week is. Let people know it's for people off
> > contracts who have been there X years.
>
> SprintPCS loses retentions by keeping secret its retention plans. Ford
> ADVERTISES a $1000 Loyality rebate for certain cars. SprintPCS keeps its
> deals secret!

Interesting. You've heard about the $130 rebate on the Sanyo 8100,
right?

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them



[posted via phonescoop.com]

"O/Siris ." <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Justin Green" <[email protected]> wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
> >
> > "O/Siris ." <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Can't attack what I haven't seen, Philly. The study is being
withheld.
> > > No one has seen it.
> > >
> > > --
> > > -+-
> > > RØß
> > > O/Siris
> > > I work for Sprint PCS
> > > I *don't* speak for them
> > >
> > >
> > > [posted via phonescoop.com]
> >
> >
> > You've attacked it before, what's stopping you now?
> >
> >
>
> I've never said ANYTHING but that the details of the study have never
> been released. That is factually accurate.
>
> --
> -+-
> RØß
> O/Siris
> I work for Sprint PCS
> I *don't* speak for them
>
> [posted via phonescoop.com]


Really? You CONTINUE to attack it by saying that it's not specific enough.
You play it down, calling it a "press release" and not a study. You ask
questions, some of which were answered, and you STILL won't discuss it.


By they way, did you ever fabricate anything to support your claims that I
lied in my original story? Nope.

"O/Siris ." <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Phill." <[email protected]> wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Justin Green" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Well then, ADVERTISE them in that way. Advertise that Sprint
customers out
> > > of contract can get 10% off their plan price or whatever discount the
> > > retention plan of the week is. Let people know it's for people off
> > > contracts who have been there X years.
> >
> > SprintPCS loses retentions by keeping secret its retention plans. Ford
> > ADVERTISES a $1000 Loyality rebate for certain cars. SprintPCS keeps its
> > deals secret!
>
> Interesting. You've heard about the $130 rebate on the Sanyo 8100,
> right?
>
> --
> -+-
> RØß
> O/Siris
> I work for Sprint PCS
> I *don't* speak for them

What would that prove? As far as I could see, it wasn't ADVERTISED in the
stores, just a small sentence or two at the bottom of a promotional offer,
hidden as to not bring too many people out to claim the rebate.
>
> [posted via phonescoop.com]

"O/Siris ." <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Phill." <[email protected]> wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >
> > But the results have been online since August 28.
> >
> > The week before your only complaint against a JD Power study was that
> > maybe it was out of date. A new study comes out, rates Sprints now as
> > worst of the lot, and you're still in DENIAL. YOU EMBARESS SPRINTPCS
>
> I never brought up the previous study, nor mentioned its date as a
> criticism, Philly. Obviously, you have trouble keeping your own stories
> straight.
>
> And if those "results" have been posted, why can't you provide them?
> Why is it you cannot state how SPCS did on, for example, the IVR portion
> of the survey?
>
> --
> -+-
> RØß
> O/Siris
> I work for Sprint PCS
> I *don't* speak for them
>
>
>
>
> [posted via phonescoop.com]

Why are you such a dip****? How many times does your dumb ass have to be
told that those details aren't available?

In article <[email protected]>,
"Justin Green" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Really? You CONTINUE to attack it by saying that it's not specific enough.
> You play it down, calling it a "press release" and not a study. You ask
> questions, some of which were answered, and you STILL won't discuss it.

We dont need him to discuss it, he'll never accept it, cause it puts
Sprint where it belongs, dead last in customer service. We need him to
GET OVER IT, and stop whining about it like a 4 year old.

In article <[email protected]>,
"Justin Green" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "O/Siris ." <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message

more drivel to prove how he is an embaressment to Sprint

All he does to discuss any issue is to:

1. Call the poster a liar.

2. Claim he has confidential knowledge otherwise

3. Without any basis question JD Power.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]=20
says...
> Really? You CONTINUE to attack it by saying that it's not specific enoug=
h.
> You play it down, calling it a "press release" and not a study. You ask
> questions, some of which were answered, and you STILL won't discuss it.
>=20

I've attacked NOTHING about the JD Power study. I've only pointed out=20
that we haven't seen it. Only a press release about the overall=20
conclusions. We have no way of knowing how their criteria led to the=20
final conclusion, because JD Power has not released it (Their web site=20
seems to suggest they will eventually).

No attacks at all, Justin. Simply factual description of what has *not*=20
been posted.

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

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> We dont need him to discuss it, he'll never accept it, cause it puts=20
> Sprint where it belongs, dead last in customer service. We need him to=20
> GET OVER IT, and stop whining about it like a 4 year old.
>=20

Interesting. *You* bring it up, and that makes me whining about it? =20
There's no study to discuss. Not yet.

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

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> We dont need him to discuss it, he'll never accept it, cause it puts
> Sprint where it belongs, dead last in customer service. We need him to
> GET OVER IT, and stop whining about it like a 4 year old.
>

Interesting. *You* bring it up, and that makes me whining about it?
There's no study to discuss. Not yet.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.


http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases...03074&search=1

Right there *****. The results of the study. You can't claim that one
wasn't done because you don't have the ****ing questions right in front of
you.

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> Really? You CONTINUE to attack it by saying that it's not specific
enough.
> You play it down, calling it a "press release" and not a study. You ask
> questions, some of which were answered, and you STILL won't discuss it.
>

I've attacked NOTHING about the JD Power study. I've only pointed out
that we haven't seen it. Only a press release about the overall
conclusions. We have no way of knowing how their criteria led to the
final conclusion, because JD Power has not released it (Their web site
seems to suggest they will eventually).

No attacks at all, Justin. Simply factual description of what has *not*
been posted.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.


http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases...03074&search=1

There you go. Once again, this is as detailed as you will EVER get. If you
don't want to discuss it, don't. Quit asking for details you know your dumb
ass isn't going to get.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]=20
says...
> There you go. Once again, this is as detailed as you will EVER get.
>=20

Interesting that you ignore the details, now that at least some of them=20
are being made available.

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

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]=20
says...
> Right there *****. The results of the study. You can't claim that one
> wasn't done because you don't have the ****ing questions right in front o=
f
> you.
>=20

Still fabricating, I see, Justin. No results. Only a conclusion=20
without any description of how they got to it other than to proclaim the=20
weighting of certain factors. But no discussion of those factors=20
themselves. Once you actually start looking at the details, the picture=20
changes. Not a lot, but significantly.

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

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> There you go. Once again, this is as detailed as you will EVER get.
>

Interesting that you ignore the details, now that at least some of them
are being made available.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.



Make up your ****ing mind, jerkoff. Either there are or there are not
details. You cannot have it both way. Besides, I don't see your dumb ass
discussing anything.

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> Right there *****. The results of the study. You can't claim that one
> wasn't done because you don't have the ****ing questions right in front of
> you.
>

Still fabricating, I see, Justin. No results. Only a conclusion
without any description of how they got to it other than to proclaim the
weighting of certain factors. But no discussion of those factors
themselves. Once you actually start looking at the details, the picture
changes. Not a lot, but significantly.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.


How does it change?