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. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:f92Pb.20194$zj7.14363@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

    <snipped out of courtesy to others.>

    I could take you on point by point, but frankly I'm much too tired and
    questioning too much to go into here. The only true point I will make is
    your lack of credibility, as exhibited by your complete bias towards certain
    carriers. I mention Nextel only because it seems to hit a particular sore
    spot with you. Why? I don't know, and don't really care. But to single
    them out on your websites with inaccurate information is laughable. You
    claim that they make no effort to go after the regular consumer, and yet
    they have spent millions (The Nextel Halftime Report, the Nextel NASCAR Cup)
    to get into the homes of regular consumers. You call your website "An
    Objective Guide to Wireless Carriers in New York City", and then make the
    following statements:

    "Nextel has never tried to market itself to customers for whom ubiquitous
    coverage is a necessity. Nextel has carved out a very profitable niche in
    servicing business customers but makes only token attempts to lure
    individual subscribers." (see above)

    "I originally did not include Nextel in this web site because I felt that it
    was unfair to compare them against conventional cellular carriers." (Hmmmm-
    they sell cellular service, but are not conventional enough to include. You
    need to ignore the one feature that differentiates them from the rest)

    "Nextel could improve by explicitly stating that their phones are not
    suitable for people that travel outside urban areas." (would the mountains
    of Colorado qualify as non-urban?)

    "High non-governmental fees that are ostensibly added to cover the cost of
    complying with government regulations. Verizon and T-Mobile, to their
    credit, have declined to add these fees so far." (Verizon and WNLP fee-
    need I say more?)

    I'll be more than happy to point out some more 'interesting' statements that
    question the objectivity of the site (not to mention citing surveys from
    2002- the market has changed since then). It would appear that a little
    more 'updating' is needed to bring the site into 2004.

    I also like your "Mischief to Watch Out For" section. Most appear to be
    normal practices, and only a few appear to qualify as 'mischief'. It, like
    other sections of your site, put in question the word 'objective' that you
    so proudly disply on the home page.



    › See More: Verizon first in Consumer Reports satisfaction survey
  2. "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:Jc-dnc7bNaizKpHd4p2dnA@adelphia.com...
    >
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    > news:f92Pb.20194$zj7.14363@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >
    > <snipped out of courtesy to others.>
    >
    > I could take you on point by point, but frankly I'm much too tired and
    > questioning too much to go into here.


    I see. You can't dispute the facts. Bye.
  3. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:Fs3Pb.20325$zj7.16256@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >
    > "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    > news:Jc-dnc7bNaizKpHd4p2dnA@adelphia.com...
    > >
    > > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    > > news:f92Pb.20194$zj7.14363@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > >
    > > <snipped out of courtesy to others.>
    > >
    > > I could take you on point by point, but frankly I'm much too tired and
    > > questioning too much to go into here.

    >
    > I see. You can't dispute the facts. Bye.
    >
    >


    And you can't post facts- only opinions by the looks of your 'objective'
    website. Apparently can't defend it either, as you ignored the rest of the
    post.
  4. Scott Stephenson wrote:

    > You claim that they make no effort to go after the regular consumer, and

    yet
    > they have spent millions (The Nextel Halftime Report, the Nextel NASCAR

    Cup)
    > to get into the homes of regular consumers. You call your website "An
    > Objective Guide to Wireless Carriers in New York City", and then make the
    > following statements:


    Look at Nextel's own web site (which you are quite fond of quoting).

    http://nextel.com/about/corporateinfo/profile.shtml

    Target Audiences
    -Enterprise
    -General Business
    -Vertical Markets

    They don't mention going after the individual user, for obvious reasons. I
    know of none of my friends, relatives, or colleagues that would put up with
    Nextel's coverage unless they have another phone to use when travelling
    outside the urban core.

    The reason for the Nextel sponsorships is that they believe that the viewers
    for the shows they sponsor include the decision makers for the target
    audiences that they specify in their corporate profile. They don't expect
    much response from individuals that have no need for PTT, but they don't
    turn away these customers either.

    You seem to think I have it in for Nextel, but in reality it is you who were
    so upset over Nextel's ratings in the Consumer Reports survey that you came
    up with all sorts of bizarre and unsubstantiated excuses and
    rationalizations. At first I was shocked to see the stuff you posted, and
    how blatant the misleading statements on Nextel's site were. But when I look
    further, I'm less upset; even Nextel doesn't claim itself as a service that
    is a suitable replacement for regular cellular or PCS service. In the
    context of their stated target markets, their statements are less
    outrageous, though still misleading.

    I've updated part of my web site with some of the material you provided.
    http://www.nordicgroup.us/ssub/fraud.htm . You provided some excellent
    examples of how important it is to learn how to dissect marketing and
    advertising claims.

    We have a Nextel phone in our family. I have nothing against the company.
    Nextel serves its target audiences well, and has carved out a profitable
    niche. I originally declined to include Nextel on my own web sites. I felt
    that it was unfair to apply the same criteria to them as I applied to other
    carriers, especially the importance of ubiquitous coverage; their target
    customer is clearly not the person who cares about coverage outside the
    urban core.

    My web sites provide referenced facts, as well as informed opinions.

    The best that you can do is attack Consumer Reports for a well designed and
    well executed survey. It's because Consumer Reports has so much credibility
    that companies such as AT&T wireless have attacked them. I have to chuckle
    when I read the responses by the carriers and the trade association to the
    Consumer Reports survey. Cingular always responds to anything negative in
    the same way-they release a statement that details how much money they're
    spending to improve their network. AT&T produced an outright lie regarding
    the outcome of the survey, incorrectly claiming that the data didn't show
    significant gaps between carriers. T-Mobile didn't dispute the findings, but
    stated that they get good marks for customer service in other surveys.
    Sprint wisely kept quiet. Verizon explains the things that they've done to
    achieve the top spot. The CTIA always says something about how overall
    service is improving.
  5. David S

    David S Guest

    On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:17 -0700, "Scott Stephenson"
    <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> chose to add this to the great equation
    of life, the universe, and everything:

    > The advantage for PCS and VZW-
    >they do expand the networks through roaming.


    You just made the point that I was getting ready to. Nextel claims 293 top
    markets, more than anyone else, but a Nextel user is limited to just those
    293 markets -- anyplace else, the phone is a paperweight. The Verizon user
    can make a call in many many places where Verizon itself doesn't provide
    service, AND in a lot of the nowhere in between.

    > The disadvantage to roaming
    >for the consumer- higher costs and some features that don't function on a
    >roaming partner's network.


    Features that don't work is not as bad as a phone that doesn't work.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "I'm fine, sir, but I think the bus is going to have kittens."
    - Corp. Radar O'Reilly
  6. On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 05:23:41 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
    <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

    >They don't mention going after the individual user, for obvious reasons. I
    >know of none of my friends, relatives, or colleagues that would put up with
    >Nextel's coverage unless they have another phone to use when travelling
    >outside the urban core.
    >
    >The reason for the Nextel sponsorships is that they believe that the viewers
    >for the shows they sponsor include the decision makers for the target
    >audiences that they specify in their corporate profile. They don't expect


    I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)

    I myself had Nextel for a little over a year; I left because I just
    had too many phones, T-Mobile's Sidekick proved to be even better than
    Nextel's WAP (the main reason I got Nextel in the first place), and
    because of coverage issues (Dunwoody and parts of Buckhead) that
    Nextel didn't seem to care about fixing and/or that got *worse* after
    system retunes.

    >further, I'm less upset; even Nextel doesn't claim itself as a service that
    >is a suitable replacement for regular cellular or PCS service. In the


    The fact remains that iDEN was designed to handle primarily DISPATCH
    (PTT) traffic and NOT interconnect ("cellular") traffic; some even go
    as far as to say that Nextel has twisted iDEN -- and ESMR -- into
    something that they aren't. FWIW, all of the non-Nextel-related
    iDEN/Harmony carriers in the US (i.e., SoLinc here in the Southeast,
    Airtel in Montana, and Nevada Wireless in Reno) focus heavily on the
    dispatch side and downplay the "cellular" features.

    -SC
    --
    Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/
    ....
    "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might
    be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune
  7. "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 05:23:41 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
    > <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
    >
    > >They don't mention going after the individual user, for obvious reasons.

    I
    > >know of none of my friends, relatives, or colleagues that would put up

    with
    > >Nextel's coverage unless they have another phone to use when travelling
    > >outside the urban core.
    > >
    > >The reason for the Nextel sponsorships is that they believe that the

    viewers
    > >for the shows they sponsor include the decision makers for the target
    > >audiences that they specify in their corporate profile. They don't expect

    >
    > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)


    They're not trying to stay out, but they're not making a big effort to be in
    either. I'd love to see a report of how many individual subscribers they
    have, for whom Nextel is there only phone.

    > I myself had Nextel for a little over a year; I left because I just
    > had too many phones, T-Mobile's Sidekick proved to be even better than
    > Nextel's WAP (the main reason I got Nextel in the first place), and
    > because of coverage issues (Dunwoody and parts of Buckhead) that
    > Nextel didn't seem to care about fixing and/or that got *worse* after
    > system retunes.


    I guess for residents of Dunwoody, it was where people work where Nextel has
    coverage.

    > >further, I'm less upset; even Nextel doesn't claim itself as a service

    that
    > >is a suitable replacement for regular cellular or PCS service. In the

    >
    > The fact remains that iDEN was designed to handle primarily DISPATCH
    > (PTT) traffic and NOT interconnect ("cellular") traffic; some even go
    > as far as to say that Nextel has twisted iDEN -- and ESMR -- into
    > something that they aren't. FWIW, all of the non-Nextel-related
    > iDEN/Harmony carriers in the US (i.e., SoLinc here in the Southeast,
    > Airtel in Montana, and Nevada Wireless in Reno) focus heavily on the
    > dispatch side and downplay the "cellular" features.


    As they should. But the only way Nextel can grow is to expand their markets.
    Especially now that all the other carriers are adding PTT, albeit a much
    poorer PTT.
  8. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:x1oPb.19695$1e.16619@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Scott Stephenson wrote:
    >
    > > You claim that they make no effort to go after the regular consumer, and

    > yet
    > > they have spent millions (The Nextel Halftime Report, the Nextel NASCAR

    > Cup)
    > > to get into the homes of regular consumers. You call your website "An
    > > Objective Guide to Wireless Carriers in New York City", and then make

    the
    > > following statements:

    >
    > Look at Nextel's own web site (which you are quite fond of quoting).
    >
    > http://nextel.com/about/corporateinfo/profile.shtml
    >
    > Target Audiences
    > -Enterprise
    > -General Business
    > -Vertical Markets
    >
    > They don't mention going after the individual user, for obvious reasons. I
    > know of none of my friends, relatives, or colleagues that would put up

    with
    > Nextel's coverage unless they have another phone to use when travelling
    > outside the urban core.


    Now, wait a minute- you defended AT&T's decision not to mention their
    Corporate customers on their site. How would this be different? A clue- it
    wouldn't be. You are quickly showing yourself to be lacking the objectivity
    you claim to have.

    >
    > The reason for the Nextel sponsorships is that they believe that the

    viewers
    > for the shows they sponsor include the decision makers for the target
    > audiences that they specify in their corporate profile. They don't expect
    > much response from individuals that have no need for PTT, but they don't
    > turn away these customers either.


    You don't get out much, do you? You need to keep up with the Investor
    conferences, and the related keynote speeches by the various CEO's. Not to
    mention that your 'logic' makes absolutely no sense.

    >
    > You seem to think I have it in for Nextel, but in reality it is you who

    were
    > so upset over Nextel's ratings in the Consumer Reports survey that you

    came
    > up with all sorts of bizarre and unsubstantiated excuses and
    > rationalizations. At first I was shocked to see the stuff you posted, and
    > how blatant the misleading statements on Nextel's site were. But when I

    look
    > further, I'm less upset; even Nextel doesn't claim itself as a service

    that
    > is a suitable replacement for regular cellular or PCS service. In the
    > context of their stated target markets, their statements are less
    > outrageous, though still misleading.


    You better check the thread- I brought up problems with the survey long
    beofre the word "Nextel' was typed on this keyboard. I have simply used
    them because of the obvious bias you have against them.

    >
    > I've updated part of my web site with some of the material you provided.
    > http://www.nordicgroup.us/ssub/fraud.htm . You provided some excellent
    > examples of how important it is to learn how to dissect marketing and
    > advertising claims.


    Thanks for proving my previous point.

    >
    > We have a Nextel phone in our family. I have nothing against the company.
    > Nextel serves its target audiences well, and has carved out a profitable
    > niche. I originally declined to include Nextel on my own web sites. I felt
    > that it was unfair to apply the same criteria to them as I applied to

    other
    > carriers, especially the importance of ubiquitous coverage; their target
    > customer is clearly not the person who cares about coverage outside the
    > urban core.


    They offer coverage outside of the urban core- furhter proof of your
    ignorance to the facts (did you miss my post about coverage in the mountains
    of Colorado? I've seen it and heard it in person).

    >
    > My web sites provide referenced facts, as well as informed opinions.


    Opinions- yes. Informed- not a clue. There are numerous errors on your
    websites, and the opinions show a clear lack of understanding about many of
    the companies you choose to whine about.

    >
    > The best that you can do is attack Consumer Reports for a well designed

    and
    > well executed survey. It's because Consumer Reports has so much

    credibility
    > that companies such as AT&T wireless have attacked them. I have to chuckle
    > when I read the responses by the carriers and the trade association to the
    > Consumer Reports survey. Cingular always responds to anything negative in
    > the same way-they release a statement that details how much money they're
    > spending to improve their network. AT&T produced an outright lie regarding
    > the outcome of the survey, incorrectly claiming that the data didn't show
    > significant gaps between carriers. T-Mobile didn't dispute the findings,

    but
    > stated that they get good marks for customer service in other surveys.
    > Sprint wisely kept quiet. Verizon explains the things that they've done to
    > achieve the top spot. The CTIA always says something about how overall
    > service is improving.
    >
    >


    And I have never said anything about the responses to the survey, because it
    is to be expected. As far as CR having credibility, that is in the eye of
    the beholder. They have a history of being proven wrong in the past.
  9. Scott Stephenson wrote:

    > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message



    > Care to provide the FACTS that back this up, as it does not appear to be
    > something that AT&T admits to.


    One more cite:

    http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/7760329.htm

    "While AT&T Wireless has struggled with the industry's price wars and the
    huge investments needed to expand and upgrade its network, _rivals are
    envious of the company's large base of business customers_, who tend to buy
    higher-priced calling packages and premium services such as wireless
    Internet access," (underlining mine).
  10. David S wrote:

    > On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:17 -0700, "Scott Stephenson"
    > <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> chose to add this to the great equation
    > of life, the universe, and everything:
    >
    >> The advantage for PCS and VZW- they do expand the networks through

    roaming.
    >
    > You just made the point that I was getting ready to. Nextel claims 293 top
    > markets, more than anyone else, but a Nextel user is limited to just those
    > 293 markets -- anyplace else, the phone is a paperweight. The Verizon user
    > can make a call in many many places where Verizon itself doesn't provide
    > service, AND in a lot of the nowhere in between.


    While 293 out of 300 sounds like a lot, it's the 300 that's misleading. Look
    at the Nextel maps and see just how small of an area that actually is. And
    as you point out, "the nowhere in between" is a big value proposition of
    other carriers, especially the ones that still sell handsets with AMPS
    capability.

    >> The disadvantage to roaming for the consumer- higher costs and some

    features that don't function on a roaming partner's network.
    >
    > Features that don't work is not as bad as a phone that doesn't work.


    Exactly. And it's outside the major metro areas where you want your phone to
    at least function as a phone, if not as a web browser. This is why On-Star
    uses the ancient, but ubiquitous, AMPS network. Roadside call boxes use
    AMPS. Even when AMPS is not legally required to be kept in operation, it
    will almost certainly remain operational in areas where there is no
    alternate system. Having to pay 50-70 cents a minute to summon help out in
    the boonies is nothing, and of course 911 is still free anyway. Anyone that
    uses Nextel as their only phone will be very upset once they go outside one
    of those 293 markets, and really need to make or receive a call. Of course
    there are always pay phones and emergency call boxes, if they are
    convenient.

    One thing I noticed that often doesn't work while roaming is voice mail
    notification. I have to call the voice mail access number from my cell phone
    or from a landline. No biggie.

    As to Nextel's claim of serving more markets than any other carrier, it may
    be true, but of course it's meaningless for most subscribers, especially the
    subscribers to national plans such as Verizon's America's Choice or AT&T One
    Rate (on TDMA/AMPS). The AMPS, GSM, CDMA, and TDMA markets are served by a
    variety of carriers, but Nextel is the only iDEN carrier of any
    significance, and the only one trying to market iDEN as an alternative to
    cellular or PCS. Apple Computer serves more primary schools than any other
    micro-computer maker too.

    It'll be interesting to see if Nextel makes a bid for AT&T Wireless or for
    Sprint PCS. For a while it seemed as if Nextel was going to move to CDMA,
    then they stopped talking about it, see:
    http://wireless.newsfactor.com/perl/story/15780.html. Nextel covets high
    value business customers, which is where AT&T is very strong.
  11. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:LyIPb.21656$1e.14135@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Scott Stephenson wrote:
    >
    > > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message

    >
    >
    > > Care to provide the FACTS that back this up, as it does not appear to be
    > > something that AT&T admits to.

    >
    > One more cite:
    >
    > http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/7760329.htm
    >
    > "While AT&T Wireless has struggled with the industry's price wars and the
    > huge investments needed to expand and upgrade its network, _rivals are
    > envious of the company's large base of business customers_, who tend to

    buy
    > higher-priced calling packages and premium services such as wireless
    > Internet access," (underlining mine).
    >
    >


    Business customers could be Plumbing companies. And ARPU would point to
    another provider carrying more big spending customers. Nice try.

    But it leads to an interesting question- why wouldn't the leader in
    Corporate and Government subscribers have the highest ARPU? All logic would
    certainly point to that being the case. After all, they are the big
    spenders in the cellular world.
  12. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:LyIPb.21656$1e.14135@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Scott Stephenson wrote:
    >
    > > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message

    >
    >
    > > Care to provide the FACTS that back this up, as it does not appear to be
    > > something that AT&T admits to.

    >
    > One more cite:
    >
    > http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/7760329.htm
    >
    > "While AT&T Wireless has struggled with the industry's price wars and the
    > huge investments needed to expand and upgrade its network, _rivals are
    > envious of the company's large base of business customers_, who tend to

    buy
    > higher-priced calling packages and premium services such as wireless
    > Internet access," (underlining mine).
    >
    >


    Now, lets take a look at some numbers. AT&T- 21 million subscribers, goes
    after the consumer market. Nextel- almost 13 million subscribers, and
    according to you, doesn't aggressively pursue the consumer market, and only
    caters to the business community. Are you saying that AT&T has less than 8
    million consumer phones active? You must be, because they are supposed to
    have the business sector locked up. In order for that to be the case, they
    would have to hold a significant advantage over any other competitor in the
    number of units on the network used by business. That doesn't appear to be
    the case.
  13. "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:JapPb.19769$1e.7267@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    > news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...
    > > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 05:23:41 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
    > > <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
    > >
    > > >They don't mention going after the individual user, for obvious

    reasons.
    > I
    > > >know of none of my friends, relatives, or colleagues that would put up

    > with
    > > >Nextel's coverage unless they have another phone to use when travelling
    > > >outside the urban core.
    > > >
    > > >The reason for the Nextel sponsorships is that they believe that the

    > viewers
    > > >for the shows they sponsor include the decision makers for the target
    > > >audiences that they specify in their corporate profile. They don't

    expect
    > >
    > > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)

    >
    > They're not trying to stay out, but they're not making a big effort to be

    in
    > either. I'd love to see a report of how many individual subscribers they
    > have, for whom Nextel is there only phone.


    Yeah- Dennis Franz buying bananas and Earnhart Jr. scoring a touchdown
    weren't targeted for the consumer market. Neither is Boost (Nextel owned
    prepaid), the NASCAR driver phones being released next month (all the execs
    want a picture of Ricky Rudd on their phone), the Phat Farm phones they've
    released, Nextel Retail Stores popping up to the tune of a couple of hundred
    a year or the camera phone being released later this year. And all of the
    big companies need Expenditure Control accounts (modified prepaid accounts
    for those with crappy credit)- another Nextel alternative. Now, who might
    all of these campaigns and programs be targeted towards? Could it
    be..............consumers?

    Your lack of objectivity comes shining through when Nextel is mentioned. I
    don't know why, and I guess I really don't care, but it does exist for all
    to see. You obviously haven't cared to do any homework about them, because
    you have this highly overinflated sense of all-knowing intelligence. And I
    don't expect you to understand any of the things mentioned in this post,
    because your brain obviously can not process anything contrary to your
    anything-but objective opinion.
  14. "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:eomdncj69YChxpLdRVn-uQ@adelphia.com...

    > >
    > >

    >
    > Now, lets take a look at some numbers. AT&T- 21 million subscribers, goes
    > after the consumer market. Nextel- almost 13 million subscribers, and
    > according to you, doesn't aggressively pursue the consumer market, and

    only
    > caters to the business community. Are you saying that AT&T has less than

    8
    > million consumer phones active? You must be, because they are supposed to
    > have the business sector locked up. In order for that to be the case,

    they
    > would have to hold a significant advantage over any other competitor in

    the
    > number of units on the network used by business. That doesn't appear to

    be
    > the case.
    >
    >


    BTW- the AT&T number includes GoPhone and other prepaid accounts. The
    Nextel number does not include either prepaid or Nextel Partners customers
    (another million plus subscribers).
  15. "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...

    > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)


    Maybe you're right after all! Just got a mailing from Nextel today,
    promoting their family plan. Interestingly, it is quite an honest mailing,
    and does not use any of the implicature on their web site, nor do they make
    any statements regarding coverage. It's all promoting PTT, and how useful it
    is with teenagers. Of course I have no teenagers yet, and when I do, they'll
    be spending a lot of time in areas with no Nextel coverage (skiing, camping,
    etc.), so I think I'll pass on Nextel's generous offer. OTOH, by the time my
    kids are teenagers Nextel will be quite different. They are one of the many
    suitors for AT&T. If they don't get AT&T I bet they'll go after Sprint PCS.
    They are anxious to expand beyond iDEN, one way or another.
  16. D.J. Osborn

    D.J. Osborn Guest

    "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

    > "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    > news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...
    >
    > > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)

    >
    > Maybe you're right after all! Just got a mailing from Nextel today,
    > promoting their family plan. Interestingly, it is quite an honest mailing,
    > and does not use any of the implicature on their web site, nor do they

    make
    > any statements regarding coverage. It's all promoting PTT, and how useful

    it
    > is with teenagers. Of course I have no teenagers yet, and when I do,

    they'll
    > be spending a lot of time in areas with no Nextel coverage (skiing,

    camping,
    > etc.), so I think I'll pass on Nextel's generous offer. OTOH, by the time

    my
    > kids are teenagers Nextel will be quite different. They are one of the

    many
    > suitors for AT&T. If they don't get AT&T I bet they'll go after Sprint

    PCS.
    > They are anxious to expand beyond iDEN, one way or another.



    Please give us any *evidence* you have that they are "anxious to expand
    beyond iDEN, one way or another."

    --
    D.J., N8DO; FMCA 147762
    davidjosborn at sbcglobal dot net
  17. Bob Smith

    Bob Smith Guest

    "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    news:HPbQb.24778$zj7.15151@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    > news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...
    >
    > > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)

    >
    > Maybe you're right after all! Just got a mailing from Nextel today,
    > promoting their family plan. Interestingly, it is quite an honest mailing,
    > and does not use any of the implicature on their web site, nor do they

    make
    > any statements regarding coverage. It's all promoting PTT, and how useful

    it
    > is with teenagers. Of course I have no teenagers yet, and when I do,

    they'll
    > be spending a lot of time in areas with no Nextel coverage (skiing,

    camping,
    > etc.), so I think I'll pass on Nextel's generous offer. OTOH, by the time

    my
    > kids are teenagers Nextel will be quite different. They are one of the

    many
    > suitors for AT&T. If they don't get AT&T I bet they'll go after Sprint

    PCS.
    > They are anxious to expand beyond iDEN, one way or another.
    >

    So, you think that Nextel is so cash flush that they can not only afford to
    buy SPCS, but to buy all their users new handsets to use the PCS system?

    Bob
  18. "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_NoSpam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:%9cQb.21022$q4.5842@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    >
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
    > news:HPbQb.24778$zj7.15151@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > > "Stanley Cline" <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
    > > news:ks5s00lj6qr0ljr8989f7nvel1h7l64hfk@4ax.com...
    > >
    > > > I'm not so sure that Nextel is trying to stay "out" of the individual
    > > > market anymore -- especially with some of their recent price plans and
    > > > Nextel trying to get into the "youth" market with Boost Mobile, which
    > > > *Nextel now owns 100% of*. It seems to me to be more of Nextel not
    > > > admitting to that part of the market where they're relatively weak. ;)

    > >
    > > Maybe you're right after all! Just got a mailing from Nextel today,
    > > promoting their family plan. Interestingly, it is quite an honest

    mailing,
    > > and does not use any of the implicature on their web site, nor do they

    > make
    > > any statements regarding coverage. It's all promoting PTT, and how

    useful
    > it
    > > is with teenagers. Of course I have no teenagers yet, and when I do,

    > they'll
    > > be spending a lot of time in areas with no Nextel coverage (skiing,

    > camping,
    > > etc.), so I think I'll pass on Nextel's generous offer. OTOH, by the

    time
    > my
    > > kids are teenagers Nextel will be quite different. They are one of the

    > many
    > > suitors for AT&T. If they don't get AT&T I bet they'll go after Sprint

    > PCS.
    > > They are anxious to expand beyond iDEN, one way or another.
    > >

    > So, you think that Nextel is so cash flush that they can not only afford

    to
    > buy SPCS, but to buy all their users new handsets to use the PCS system?
    >
    > Bob
    >


    If I remember correctly, Nextel bought the rights to some Qualcomm
    technology about two years ago. I think one of the pieces to that was an
    iDen to CDMA bridge.
  19. "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_NoSpam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:%9cQb.21022$q4.5842@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

    > So, you think that Nextel is so cash flush that they can not only afford

    to
    > buy SPCS, but to buy all their users new handsets to use the PCS system?


    Don't know, but they're interested in AT&T, which will certainly be more
    expensive than Sprint, and which would also require new handsets if
    subscribers want both iDEN and GSM together. It'd be a gradual transition
    anyway, they would not have to buy new phones for everyone since both
    systems would remain operational. It's not like TDMA to GSM where the TDMA
    will be turned off. You're not going to get good PTT on GSM or CDMA, and you
    're not going to get good coverage on iDEN. If Nextel wants to grow beyond a
    niche player then they have to do something. Especially because for many
    people, the PTT on CDMA and GSM is adequate, even though it's not as good as
    on iDEN.
  20. "D.J. Osborn" <davidjosborn@sbcglobally.net> wrote in message
    news:n4cQb.33335$P%1.26193986@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...

    > Please give us any *evidence* you have that they are "anxious to expand
    > beyond iDEN, one way or another."


    They would not be going after AT&T unless they wanted to expand beyond iDEN.
    In the past they've said that they're moving to CDMA, but have not done much
    in that direction.

    http://wireless.newsfactor.com/perl/story/15780.html.

    If they are to move beyond being a niche player then they're going to have
    to do something to go after the non-business customers, and the only way to
    do that is to offer CDMA or GSM. They can't afford to expand iDEN coverage
    across the country.

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?