1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  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!

Verizon first in Consumer Reports satisfaction survey

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by HK, Jan 8, 2004.

  1. Exactly! All you have to do, is ask a question a certain way, and you
    can skew any statistical graph any way you want.



    >
    >The only thing I remember from my stat class was there are three kinds
    >of lies
    >1) white lies 2) black lies & 3) statistics--and as you must well
    >know, you can prove any statement you wish, thru statistics--and when
    >I hear someone make a statment like " statistically speaking" I assume
    >I'm getting ready to be lied to.



    › See More: Verizon first in Consumer Reports satisfaction survey
  2. Carl.

    Carl. Guest

    "plane" <plane@usa.com> wrote in message
    news:68a9acb2.0401101929.46347ed6@posting.google.com...
    > The only thing I remember from my stat class was there are three kinds
    > of lies
    > 1) white lies 2) black lies & 3) statistics--and as you must well
    > know, you can prove any statement you wish, thru statistics--and when
    > I hear someone make a statment like " statistically speaking" I assume
    > I'm getting ready to be lied to.


    I recommend the old book "how to lie with statistics." It's a quick and fun
    book, but 100% educational. It was written a long time ago, but math and
    lies don't age.


    ---
    Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/2004
  3. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 06:26:39 GMT, "Bob Smith"
    <usirsclt_NoSpam_@earthlink.net> posted to alt.cellular.verizon:

    >
    >"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message
    >news:2fq1001bu75kovd1e244du18sue24sr8al@Pern.rk...
    >> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 11:13:35 GMT, HK <HK22073@msn.com> posted to
    >> alt.cellular.verizon:
    >>
    >> >http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi

    >>
    >> >Verizon wins, SprintPCS loses after a survey of 31,000 subscribers was
    >> >tallied and rated for each of 12 cities.

    >>
    >> This is getting boring, isn't it? :)

    >
    >Absolutely ... and the reason to root for the Panthers :)


    How did they rank in customer satisfaction?
  4. SA

    SA Guest

    In article <7LhMb.41446$WS1.21564@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
    "Carl." <KronkKronk@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > "plane" <plane@usa.com> wrote in message
    > news:68a9acb2.0401101929.46347ed6@posting.google.com...
    > > The only thing I remember from my stat class was there are three kinds
    > > of lies
    > > 1) white lies 2) black lies & 3) statistics--and as you must well
    > > know, you can prove any statement you wish, thru statistics--and when
    > > I hear someone make a statment like " statistically speaking" I assume
    > > I'm getting ready to be lied to.

    >
    > I recommend the old book "how to lie with statistics." It's a quick and fun
    > book, but 100% educational. It was written a long time ago, but math and
    > lies don't age.
    >
    >
    > ---
    > Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
    > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/2004
    >
    >


    Despite how easy it is to construct surveys I doubt you could design one
    which would put Sprint anywhere but in the bottom half.
  5. "SA" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
    news:nospam-5132EE.15374611012004@news.la.sbcglobal.net...

    > Despite how easy it is to construct surveys I doubt you could design one
    > which would put Sprint anywhere but in the bottom half.


    Yeah- OK.
  6. David S

    David S Guest

    On 10 Jan 2004 19:29:54 -0800, plane@usa.com (plane) chose to add this to
    the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >The only thing I remember from my stat class was there are three kinds
    >of lies
    >1) white lies 2) black lies & 3) statistics


    I always thought it was lies, damn lies, and statistics (but I never took a
    statistics class).

    Anyway, it is well known that 78% of all statistics are made up on the
    spot. ;-)

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "At a stage in life when other men prosper, I'm reduced to living in
    Philadelphia." - John Adams, "1776"
  7. O/Siris

    O/Siris Guest

    In article <qoq600h17tgnlieqfl6orp68bmav4650qm@4ax.com>,=20
    David Sdwstreeter@att.net says...
    > Anyway, it is well known that 78% of all statistics are made up on the
    > spot. ;-)
    >=20


    LOL.

    And that's the way it is.

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

    Carl. Guest

    "David S" <dwstreeter@att.net> wrote in message
    news:qoq600h17tgnlieqfl6orp68bmav4650qm@4ax.com...
    > On 10 Jan 2004 19:29:54 -0800, plane@usa.com (plane) chose to add this to
    > the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:
    >
    > >The only thing I remember from my stat class was there are three kinds
    > >of lies
    > >1) white lies 2) black lies & 3) statistics

    >
    > I always thought it was lies, damn lies, and statistics (but I never took

    a
    > statistics class).
    >
    > Anyway, it is well known that 78% of all statistics are made up on the
    > spot. ;-)


    78% of Americans failed statistics class and 22% of americans don't
    understand what "78%" means.


    ---
    Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/2004
  9. Mike

    Mike Guest

    Sprint is the evil empire of false billing, as most know. Sprint
    service sucks, their phone staff in India sucks, and their morons in
    the store locations suck. The people at Sprint ripped me off, lied to
    me, and the list goes on. Sprint will burn a customer any chance they
    can get. They will nickel and dime you as long as you have service
    with them. They are well know for putting extra charges on you
    billing statement and letting fight for your money back on a monthly.
    I give the way Sprint deals with customers a ZERO. SPRINT SUCKS.
    Bastards.
  10. "Mike" <slofat1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:7a6fb381.0401151643.37a1276c@posting.google.com...
    > Sprint is the evil empire of false billing, as most know. Sprint
    > service sucks, their phone staff in India sucks, and their morons in
    > the store locations suck. The people at Sprint ripped me off, lied to
    > me, and the list goes on. Sprint will burn a customer any chance they
    > can get. They will nickel and dime you as long as you have service
    > with them. They are well know for putting extra charges on you
    > billing statement and letting fight for your money back on a monthly.
    > I give the way Sprint deals with customers a ZERO. SPRINT SUCKS.
    > Bastards.


    What's the matter? Is Teletubbies a rerun tonight?
  11. Michael Arends <mlarends@NODAMNSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message

    > From the article:
    > "Others have been told by their phone company that they must buy a new
    > phone to be able to transport their number, a practice the magazine
    > calls unfair. "


    You are quoting an article that reports on the CR article. The actual
    CR article does not say anything like this, other than mentioning that
    AT&T would not unlock GSM phones so they could be used on Cingular.

    I don't know what the reporter who wrote the article about the article
    as smoking.
  12. O/Siris <0sîrîs@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a69905c83bcb28198998b@netnews.comcast.net>...

    > Hmmm...
    >
    > "The survey was done by sending more than 100,000 e-mails
    > to online subscribers of Consumers Reports, with more than
    > 31,000 responding."
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/34oer
    >
    > That hardly sounds like even at attempt at scientific
    > neutrality.


    That's actually a very big sample size for a survey. And in most cases
    the differences between carriers was not small. No reason to doubt the
    results.

    The horrible ratings of AT&T are what surprised me. They used to have
    great coverage with their TDMA/AMPS network. What a botched job going
    to GSM!

    The results for San Francisco, LA, and NYC were right on target, the
    other cities I'm not familiar with.
  13. Bob Smith

    Bob Smith Guest

    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:iNidnfM0-KqsfZTd4p2dnA@adelphia.com...
    >
    > "Steven Scharf" <scharf@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:4f153f94.0401171618.3ab80e2b@posting.google.com...
    >
    > >
    > > That's actually a very big sample size for a survey. And in most cases
    > > the differences between carriers was not small. No reason to doubt the
    > > results.

    >
    > 31,000 out of over 70 million cell phone subscribers is very big? Its

    less
    > than .05%, and given the way the survey was conducted, much too small to
    > have any legitimacy.


    I'd agree with Scott. What's more, with the survey, how followed up to make
    sure that what was said was true. BTW, who's doing the independent audit on
    CR? I don't trust one thing they say ...

    Bob
  14. Bob Smith

    Bob Smith Guest

    Whoops, change that "how" below to a "who" ... :)

    Bob

    "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_NoSpam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:yBlOb.12602$i4.737@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    >
    > "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    > news:iNidnfM0-KqsfZTd4p2dnA@adelphia.com...
    > >
    > > "Steven Scharf" <scharf@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > news:4f153f94.0401171618.3ab80e2b@posting.google.com...
    > >
    > > >
    > > > That's actually a very big sample size for a survey. And in most cases
    > > > the differences between carriers was not small. No reason to doubt the
    > > > results.

    > >
    > > 31,000 out of over 70 million cell phone subscribers is very big? Its

    > less
    > > than .05%, and given the way the survey was conducted, much too small to
    > > have any legitimacy.

    >
    > I'd agree with Scott. What's more, with the survey, how followed up to

    make
    > sure that what was said was true. BTW, who's doing the independent audit

    on
    > CR? I don't trust one thing they say ...
    >
    > Bob
    >
    >
  15. "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:iNidnfM0-

    > 31,000 out of over 70 million cell phone subscribers is very big? Its

    less
    > than .05%, and given the way the survey was conducted, much too small to
    > have any legitimacy.


    Yes, statistically it is very large. This large of a sample has a margin of
    error of less than 0.6%, much smaller margin of error than most surveys. You
    can read about sample sizes and margins of errors at:
    http://www.robertniles.com/stats/sample.shtml

    There is no reason to believe that of the people that responded to the CR
    survey, the ones with Verizon conspired to give it good grades, while AT&T
    and Cingular subscribers conspired to give their carriers bad grades.

    The one thing that CR does very well is surveys. You may disagree with their
    opinions on the most important characteristics of automobiles or
    dishwashers, but when they do surveys on products, you can be sure that the
    results are accurate.
  16. "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_NoSpam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:yBlOb.12602

    > > 31,000 out of over 70 million cell phone subscribers is very big? Its

    > less
    > > than .05%, and given the way the survey was conducted, much too small to
    > > have any legitimacy.

    >
    > I'd agree with Scott.


    The margin of error relates strictly to the sample size. This was a huge
    sample size. Do the math yourself. It's one over the square root of the
    sample size (multiply by 100 to convert to a percentage)

    > What's more, with the survey, how followed up to make sure that what was

    said was true.

    This was a survey of subcribers, based on their experiences with their
    carrier. In every survey a few people may lie, but with such a huge sample,
    a few liars are inconsequential. And of course there is no reason to believe
    that subscribers from one carrier lie any more or less than subscribers from
    another carrier. You can't follow up on a survey to ask if what respondents
    said is true was actually true. You have to look to see if there would be
    any motivation for lying.

    >BTW, who's doing the independent audit on CR? I don't trust one thing they

    say ...

    You may not agree with their own evaluations of products for whatever
    reason, and I often feel this way too. But their surveys of owners of
    products and services are very valuable because they always use such large
    sample sizes.
  17. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:AhnOb.13703$1e.5401@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

    >
    > The margin of error relates strictly to the sample size. This was a huge
    > sample size. Do the math yourself. It's one over the square root of the
    > sample size (multiply by 100 to convert to a percentage)


    The margin of error is not the bone of contention here. The survey
    represents less then .05% of all cellular users, and no effort was made to
    equally represent all carriers, or insure that an equal percentage of users
    from each carrier was included. For all we know, this was a survey of
    30,000 Verizon users, 500 ATT users, 300 Cingular users, 100 T-Mobile users,
    80 Nextel users, 10 Sprint users and 10 users of other carriers. The
    controls, and the way the users were gathered, leave too much room for
    inaccurate information.

    >
    > > What's more, with the survey, how followed up to make sure that what was

    > said was true.
    >
    > This was a survey of subcribers, based on their experiences with their
    > carrier. In every survey a few people may lie, but with such a huge

    sample,
    > a few liars are inconsequential. And of course there is no reason to

    believe
    > that subscribers from one carrier lie any more or less than subscribers

    from
    > another carrier. You can't follow up on a survey to ask if what

    respondents
    > said is true was actually true. You have to look to see if there would be
    > any motivation for lying.
    >
    > >BTW, who's doing the independent audit on CR? I don't trust one thing

    they
    > say ...
    >
    > You may not agree with their own evaluations of products for whatever
    > reason, and I often feel this way too. But their surveys of owners of
    > products and services are very valuable because they always use such large
    > sample sizes.
    >


    ..05% of a user base is not a large sample.
  18. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:B9nOb.13694$1e.5388@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    > news:iNidnfM0-
    >
    > > 31,000 out of over 70 million cell phone subscribers is very big? Its

    > less
    > > than .05%, and given the way the survey was conducted, much too small to
    > > have any legitimacy.

    >
    > Yes, statistically it is very large. This large of a sample has a margin

    of
    > error of less than 0.6%, much smaller margin of error than most surveys.

    You
    > can read about sample sizes and margins of errors at:
    > http://www.robertniles.com/stats/sample.shtml
    >
    > There is no reason to believe that of the people that responded to the CR
    > survey, the ones with Verizon conspired to give it good grades, while AT&T
    > and Cingular subscribers conspired to give their carriers bad grades.
    >
    > The one thing that CR does very well is surveys. You may disagree with

    their
    > opinions on the most important characteristics of automobiles or
    > dishwashers, but when they do surveys on products, you can be sure that

    the
    > results are accurate.


    Accurate for the sample surveyed, which is never more than a survey of the
    same customer base time after time. There is never an effort to go outside
    of CR subscriber base (which does not ever represent the average consumer),
    and the use of the same static base for all of their surveys renders all
    data useless- you are getting the opnions of the same group of people every
    time.
  19. "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:W_-dnSxfqviDm5fdRVn-

    > The margin of error is not the bone of contention here. The survey
    > represents less then .05% of all cellular users, and no effort was made to
    > equally represent all carriers, or insure that an equal percentage of

    users
    > from each carrier was included. For all we know, this was a survey of
    > 30,000 Verizon users, 500 ATT users, 300 Cingular users, 100 T-Mobile

    users,
    > 80 Nextel users, 10 Sprint users and 10 users of other carriers. The
    > controls, and the way the users were gathered, leave too much room for
    > inaccurate information.


    Sorry, you're incorrect. The minimum number of respondents per city per
    carrier was 150. The controls were in place to ensure that the data was
    accurate. Even at the minimum response level the margin of error is low.

    Also, remember that this was not a survey where 31,000 people told CR who
    their favorite carrier is. This survey was asking cellular customers from to
    rate the service of their own carrier.

    > .05% of a user base is not a large sample.


    You're correct. It's not large, it's huge. Even if you divide up the total
    number of respondents by metro area, it's still a large sample per metro
    area, statistically speaking.

    As the article stated, the ratings are based strictly on survey results. Now
    if you have some reason to believe that Consumer Report subscribers (of
    which I am not one, BTW), are more likely than the population at large to
    rate a specific carrier better or worse, I'd love to see that evidence.

    I do believe that the margin of error for Verizon was probably less than
    that of other carriers, simply because Verizon is the largest carrier and no
    doubt got the most responses. Furthermore, since CR subscribers tend to be
    better educated and higher income than the population at large, I'd expect
    that there are more Verizon subscribers among CR subscribers than the
    population at large. However this does not change the actual ratings.
  20. "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:8ZmdnWEUZs-

    > Accurate for the sample surveyed, which is never more than a survey of the
    > same customer base time after time. There is never an effort to go

    outside
    > of CR subscriber base (which does not ever represent the average

    consumer),
    > and the use of the same static base for all of their surveys renders all
    > data useless- you are getting the opnions of the same group of people

    every
    > time.


    If the survey was "who's the best cellular carrier in xyz area?" you'd be
    correct. However this was not how the survey was set up. None of the data is
    normalized. It's really 62 separate surveys (4-6 carriers per city), each
    with a minumum sample size of 150. It's asking Verizon subscribers to rate
    Verizon, AT&T subscribers to rate AT&T, and so on. It's not asking Verizon
    subscribers what they think of AT&T, etc.

    You'd have to claim that CR subscriber is more (or less) likely to rate a
    carrier better (or worse) than the general public. Even if this were true,
    the overall ratings would still be the same in relative terms (unless you
    claim that the CR subscriber's bias would vary by carrier).

    Actually the margin of error is higher than what I stated earlier. With the
    minimum of 150 responses, the margin of error per survey could be as high as
    8%, though this would be in very few cases, and probably only for T-Mobile
    or Nextel.

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?