1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

My experience with Verizon Wireless (Bad naturally) - detailed contracts would be good

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Dan Albrich, Jul 4, 2004.

  1. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     



    › See More: My experience with Verizon Wireless (Bad naturally) - detailed contracts would be good
  2. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  3. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  4. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  5. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  6. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  7. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  8. Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >
    >> verizon's coverage did not change. Only who it had roaming
    >> agreements with changed. As another possibility, a roaming agreement
    >> might stay the same, but the roaming carrier's coverage might change.
    >> Neither is a reason for getting out of your contract.

    >
    > "Coverage" is an interesting word. When refering to a rate plan like AC,
    > then removing an included roaming partner does in fact change the coverage
    > area. Verizon did issue new maps when the coverage was removed.


    I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    argument convincingly.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
     
  9. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  10. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  11. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  12. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  13. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  14. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  15. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  16. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  17. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  18. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  19. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     
  20. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest


    > I think it could be argued either way. It's not NATIVE coverage but it is
    > coverage that is billed as home-area coverage, so you could make either
    > argument convincingly.


    Yes, I agree. AC is an odd ball case. In the case of AC, the two (rate and
    coverage) maps are inextricably tied.
    i.e. The red coverage areas indicate a combination of coverage and
    "included" in rate plan. This isn't the way we historically talk about
    coverage (in the sense of being able to make a call independent of who pays
    for it).

    Anyway, due to the way AC is sold, i.e. as a virtual network of Verizon and
    selected roaming partners, it does require Verizon to update the map when
    either coverage or rate area change.

    -Dan
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?