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 Wireless Better Run By Vodaphone? Hell No.

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Trimodeman, Nov 8, 2003.

  1. About Dakota wrote:


    >
    > Scott:
    >
    > I just wanted to point out something that you may not have taken into
    > account. Did you take into account the difference between Nextel and
    > Nextel Partners? Also, Extend America also went live this month. Did
    > you take into account Nextel's affiliates when thinking about Nextel?
    >
    > AD


    I sure did- why do you ask?



    › See More: Verizon Wireless Better Run By Vodaphone? Hell No.
  2. Trimodeman <trimodeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > I agree completely that Verizon Communication's wireline gravy train will
    > decline over time and the gravy train will run out.


    I don't know about that. Here in the Victor Valley region of the Mojave
    Desert, Verizon charges per minute for all outgoing calls, including local
    calls. This is for businesses only; residential lines are still flat rate for
    outgoing calls. Gravy train? VZ is raping business customers here, soaking
    them - picking them up, holding them upside down and shaking them until the
    coins fall out of their pockets. If the Victorville/Apple Valley/Hesperia/
    Adelanto area was all rural, they might have some excuse* - but it's
    a major business center between San Bernardino and Las Vegas, with a couple
    hundred thousand people living in the area (and it's growing, because people
    from the LA area are getting tired of high housing prices, traffic and smog).

    This is in a former Contel/GTE West area, and I know from speaking to people
    around my former hometown that their tarriffs are similar in the outlying
    counties they serve around Cleveland (which used to be GTE North).

    I also note that while the unlimited flat-rate Verizon Freedom landline
    plan is available for homes in this area, it's not available for businesses,
    and the business plan DOES exist.

    Now, down in the Los Angeles area, some cities are served by SBC as their
    ILEC, and some by Verizon, and they probably can't get away with these rates
    down there as they most likely have several competitors down there. But
    Verizon, at least the parts that used to be GTE, serves a lot of smaller
    communities...

    *I said they MIGHT have some excuse. I think even in rural areas, wireline
    providers don't have costs quite as high as they like to complain about because
    they don't invest in upgrades to those areas like they do to bigger areas.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Proprietor
    888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net
  3. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    Scott Stephenson wrote:
    > About Dakota wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Scott:
    >>
    >>I just wanted to point out something that you may not have taken into
    >>account. Did you take into account the difference between Nextel and
    >>Nextel Partners? Also, Extend America also went live this month. Did
    >>you take into account Nextel's affiliates when thinking about Nextel?
    >>
    >>AD

    >
    >
    > I sure did- why do you ask?


    I asked because I assume that Nextel financials regard information only
    on Nextel, but not on Nextel Partners. I haven't taken a look at
    either's fincancials, so it is possible that Nextel has a controlling
    interest in Nextel Partners now. That would mean that the entire Nextel
    subscriber base is actually larger than the base you are comparing to
    Verizon Wireless. Since I don't live in a Nextel or Nextel Partners
    territory, I didn't pay much attention. I will start paying attention
    in the future with the launch of Extend America.

    AD
  4. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    "Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3faea8ac.198795144@news.knology.net...
    > On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 08:56:36 -0800, "Peter Pan"
    > <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > >


    > Gee, I thought we were discussing the dream of broadband internet over
    > a cellular telephone circuit never designed for such data intensive
    > activity. Even CDMA voice is a cluge of the original FM voice
    > channels.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Larry W4CSC
    >
    > "Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
    >


    We were... you gave some crappy & incorrect statement and math saying it
    can't be done, but it's being sold and I have used it...

    You remind me of the people that said "man will never fly" or "I don't
    believe an airplane can fly until I see one" etc.
  5. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    Well, guess according to your "old" math, Verizon must have created a NEW
    math that allows what they sell and is in use, to actually work.


    "Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3faea90c.198890823@news.knology.net...
    > For some reason, logic and arithmetic (you could hardly call it
    > math...(c;) gives way to hype and marketing and magic.
    >
    > Cellular phones are never going to be broadband for obvious reasons of
    > physics unless some really WIDE new bands to operate it come into
    > existence that are not shared with my bagphone....
    >
    >
    >
    > On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 16:44:56 GMT, "N9WOS"
    > <n9wos@nobug.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
    >
    > >> Too bad Larry, I used to think you were halfway smart until you started
    > >> spouting the above lunacy. You just proved to many people how stupid

    you
    > >> really are. Have you ever actually BEEN in DC or San Diego and used the
    > >> system? In both places I regularly get 500kb-1mb, and when the network

    > >isn't
    > >> that busy (3AM or so) bursting up to 2mb. That's as fast as my cable

    modem
    > >> at home, and way faster than my DSL at work. If you won't believe it

    until
    > >> you see it, maybe you should get off your lyin ass and go to one of the
    > >> places that have it, see it for yourself, and shut up?

    > >
    > >Heck, the max through put of one of the cellular A/B bands is 2.5Mbps.
    > >At 500Kbps, you would have a max user base of 5 full speed connections
    > >per tower, per sector.
    > >
    > >If all 5 users tried downloading something at the same time, they
    > >would either have to cut back on the downloading speed
    > >on all of them, or terminate all the voice calls on that sector
    > >to clear up bandwidth.
    > >
    > >What you basically have is a shared 500Kbps pipe.
    > >You see a nice open stream when no one else is using it.
    > >but if someone else actually starts using the network while you are,
    > >then your open stream will become a straw in no time.
    > >
    > >And I can assure you that you won't get through put in the 1Mbps range.
    > >That is more bandwidth that a CDMA carrier has.
    > >The actual through put of a CDMA carrier is around 500Kbps.
    > >If you see any data stream larger than that, then you are
    > >using some form of data compression to get it to fit in
    > >the 500Kbps stream.
    > >1X will give you a through put of around 500Kbps max
    > >with no other voice or data users on that channel.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    > Larry W4CSC
    >
    > "Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
    >
  6. I think that with the advent of new, reliable communication technology,
    traditional wireline will slowly become a thing of the past. VoIP shows
    some promise, and as wireless technology improves, wireline as we know it
    will be a thing of the past, or at least with a far more limited market.

    I agree that businesses are getting raped by landline providers, but the
    average consumer has many more options available. With the FCC mandating
    landline-to-wireless porting, it will be interesting to see how many people
    opt to go wireless only (I'm seriously considering it myself). And until
    DSL becomes more reliable, available in more areas and faster, people will
    continue to migrate to cable as an internet option. And the loss of these
    customers is going to wreak havoc on the bottom line, in spite of the
    business customers' reliance on landline.

    In addition, landline networks are all due for a much needed upgrade, which
    is going to be a Capex nightmare for the companies involved. Tens of
    billions are going to have to be spent in order to provide competing
    services to the few customers they'll have left.
  7. About Dakota wrote:

    >
    >
    > Scott Stephenson wrote:
    >> About Dakota wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Scott:
    >>>
    >>>I just wanted to point out something that you may not have taken into
    >>>account. Did you take into account the difference between Nextel and
    >>>Nextel Partners? Also, Extend America also went live this month. Did
    >>>you take into account Nextel's affiliates when thinking about Nextel?
    >>>
    >>>AD

    >>
    >>
    >> I sure did- why do you ask?

    >
    > I asked because I assume that Nextel financials regard information only
    > on Nextel, but not on Nextel Partners. I haven't taken a look at
    > either's fincancials, so it is possible that Nextel has a controlling
    > interest in Nextel Partners now. That would mean that the entire Nextel
    > subscriber base is actually larger than the base you are comparing to
    > Verizon Wireless. Since I don't live in a Nextel or Nextel Partners
    > territory, I didn't pay much attention. I will start paying attention
    > in the future with the launch of Extend America.
    >
    > AD



    The numbers were purely Nextel. IIRC, Nextel owns about 30% of Partners,
    and has no ownership in Extend America. Partners is still losing money,
    but they are closing the gap quickly- Capex for them is due to decrease, as
    they have completed their network buildout. I am also anxiously waiting to
    see the impact Extend AMerica has on the rural market. If they are able to
    deliver what they have promised, the Nextel brand could end up being a huge
    winner, with the additional benefit of a larger (although technically
    non-native) network.
  8. "Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3faea90c.198890823@news.knology.net...
    > For some reason, logic and arithmetic (you could hardly call it
    > math...(c;) gives way to hype and marketing and magic.
    >
    > Cellular phones are never going to be broadband for obvious reasons of
    > physics unless some really WIDE new bands to operate it come into
    > existence that are not shared with my bagphone....


    Now you know why we want your bagphone :)


    --
    Thomas M. Goethe
  9. N9WOS

    N9WOS Guest

    > For some reason, logic and arithmetic (you could hardly call it
    > math...(c;) gives way to hype and marketing and magic.
    >
    > Cellular phones are never going to be broadband for obvious reasons of
    > physics unless some really WIDE new bands to operate it come into
    > existence that are not shared with my bagphone....


    > >Heck, the max through put of one of the cellular A/B bands is 2.5Mbps.
    > >At 500Kbps, you would have a max user base of 5 full speed connections
    > >per tower, per sector.


    And I am trying to confuse myself again.
    Getting the PCS and Cellular band bass ack wards.
    The A/B bands are 10Mhz wide which will give you a total data stream of
    5Mbps.
    The PCS bands are 5Mhz giving you 2.5Mbps per band
  10. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 22:04:46 GMT, "John R. Copeland"
    <jcopelan@columbus.rr.com> wrote:

    >The smallest spectrum licenses defined in the PCS band are 5 MHz.
    >Others are 15 MHz.
    >As you said, however, they are not shared with your bagphones.
    >---JRC---
    >

    Don't forget to add:

    Times the hundreds online simultaneously....(c;



    Larry W4CSC

    "Very funny, Scotty! Now, BEAM ME MY CLOTHES! KIRK OUT!"
  11. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    Scott Stephenson wrote:
    > I think that with the advent of new, reliable communication technology,
    > traditional wireline will slowly become a thing of the past. VoIP shows
    > some promise, and as wireless technology improves, wireline as we know it
    > will be a thing of the past, or at least with a far more limited market.
    >
    > I agree that businesses are getting raped by landline providers, but the
    > average consumer has many more options available. With the FCC mandating
    > landline-to-wireless porting, it will be interesting to see how many people
    > opt to go wireless only (I'm seriously considering it myself). And until
    > DSL becomes more reliable, available in more areas and faster, people will
    > continue to migrate to cable as an internet option. And the loss of these
    > customers is going to wreak havoc on the bottom line, in spite of the
    > business customers' reliance on landline.
    >
    > In addition, landline networks are all due for a much needed upgrade, which
    > is going to be a Capex nightmare for the companies involved. Tens of
    > billions are going to have to be spent in order to provide competing
    > services to the few customers they'll have left.
    >
    >


    Something else to mention -- if you don't have a landline telephone
    line, isn't it a little bit hard to have DSL? I am one of the people
    who does not have a landline telephone. Without a landline, DSL is not
    an option, nor is dial-up. Since it would have been my first time with
    service here, I would have to dough up a hefty $450 to activate a
    landline ($200 start up fee, and $250 deposit). With my national
    wireless service, I come only dollars more per month than I would with a
    landline, but without the hefty fee. Wireless also gives me mobility
    when I travel, and I wouldn't have to worry about a $50 relocation fee
    if I move across the city. Plus, long distance to the U.S. doesn't cost
    extra. And AT&T prepaid calling cards to call Canada are very economical.

    AD
  12. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    > The numbers were purely Nextel. IIRC, Nextel owns about 30% of Partners,
    > and has no ownership in Extend America. Partners is still losing money,
    > but they are closing the gap quickly- Capex for them is due to decrease, as
    > they have completed their network buildout. I am also anxiously waiting to
    > see the impact Extend AMerica has on the rural market. If they are able to
    > deliver what they have promised, the Nextel brand could end up being a huge
    > winner, with the additional benefit of a larger (although technically
    > non-native) network.


    I do am waiting to see how Extend America will pan out. So far, I
    believe only the I-94 corridor from just west of Bismarck to Fargo
    (Nextel Partners territory) is covered by EA. I called Nextel, and they
    claim there is still no coverage for Nextel customers in Bismarck. I do
    not know anyone that has EA service, and I have not called EA myself to
    inquire. Many businesses in the area seem to be excited about it new
    service. If Extend America could cover US 83 from Bismarck to Minot, I
    would be willing to bet they would have exclusive service to the State
    of North Dakota. We are also hoping that the option of having unlimited
    anytime minutes (long distance being excluded) might become a real
    option to Bismarck.

    I have also heard rumours that RCC's Unicel (which partners with
    T-Mobile) will be building out a GSM network in Bismarck. Qwest
    Wireless currently serves Bismarck, but lacks a customer base (I have
    only met three people who have used Qwest, and two had previously lived
    in Minneapolis).

    If one carrier would build out near blanket coverage, I think that would
    have a huge effect for such a rural state.

    AD
  13. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    Peter Pan wrote:
    > Well, guess according to your "old" math, Verizon must have created a NEW
    > math that allows what they sell and is in use, to actually work.


    I take it Verizon has already attained saturation in SF and DC, right?
    It's going to work a lot like cable internet. The more users there are,
    the slower it will be. There must be, what, about 2,000,000 people on
    simultaneously in San Francisco right now?

    AD
  14. Trimodeman

    Trimodeman Guest

    However, if cellular companies can perfect broadband Internet at a
    reasonable price, one of the reasons people keep a landline (as you so
    rightly say, to be able to get DSL) will be removed and people will be more
    likely to cut the cord entirely.



    "About Dakota" <aboutdakota@REMOVEMEhotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3FAF3709.2090408@REMOVEMEhotmail.com...
    > > The numbers were purely Nextel. IIRC, Nextel owns about 30% of

    Partners,
    > > and has no ownership in Extend America. Partners is still losing money,
    > > but they are closing the gap quickly- Capex for them is due to decrease,

    as
    > > they have completed their network buildout. I am also anxiously waiting

    to
    > > see the impact Extend AMerica has on the rural market. If they are able

    to
    > > deliver what they have promised, the Nextel brand could end up being a

    huge
    > > winner, with the additional benefit of a larger (although technically
    > > non-native) network.

    >
    > I do am waiting to see how Extend America will pan out. So far, I
    > believe only the I-94 corridor from just west of Bismarck to Fargo
    > (Nextel Partners territory) is covered by EA. I called Nextel, and they
    > claim there is still no coverage for Nextel customers in Bismarck. I do
    > not know anyone that has EA service, and I have not called EA myself to
    > inquire. Many businesses in the area seem to be excited about it new
    > service. If Extend America could cover US 83 from Bismarck to Minot, I
    > would be willing to bet they would have exclusive service to the State
    > of North Dakota. We are also hoping that the option of having unlimited
    > anytime minutes (long distance being excluded) might become a real
    > option to Bismarck.
    >
    > I have also heard rumours that RCC's Unicel (which partners with
    > T-Mobile) will be building out a GSM network in Bismarck. Qwest
    > Wireless currently serves Bismarck, but lacks a customer base (I have
    > only met three people who have used Qwest, and two had previously lived
    > in Minneapolis).
    >
    > If one carrier would build out near blanket coverage, I think that would
    > have a huge effect for such a rural state.
    >
    > AD
    >
  15. CharlesH <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote:
    > In article <3q-dnY0aAdUCWzOiRVn-hg@lmi.net>,
    > Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
    >>Trimodeman <trimodeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >>> I agree completely that Verizon Communication's wireline gravy train will
    >>> decline over time and the gravy train will run out.

    >>
    >>I don't know about that. Here in the Victor Valley region of the Mojave
    >>Desert, Verizon charges per minute for all outgoing calls, including local
    >>calls. This is for businesses only; residential lines are still flat rate for
    >>outgoing calls.

    >
    > Here in California, SBC (nee PacBell) has never offered free outgoing
    > calls from business lines.


    Nor did SBC Ameritech in Cleveland. Nor do most telcos. But a single PER-CALL
    charge is one thing (and I don't mind it; SBC gives you around 70 free
    and then charges you usually about 8c per call after that). Verizon is PER
    MINUTE - at least in this area.

    And it should be noted that SBC and Verizon are both marketing unlimited
    business plans. SBC in particular is doing a lot of TV advertising in Southern
    Cali.


    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Proprietor
    888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net
  16. David S

    David S Guest

    On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:54:02 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) chose to
    add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >For some reason, logic and arithmetic (you could hardly call it
    >math...(c;) gives way to hype and marketing and magic.
    >
    >Cellular phones are never going to be broadband for obvious reasons of
    >physics unless some really WIDE new bands to operate it come into
    >existence that are not shared with my bagphone....


    One word for ya, Larry: bumblebees. All the laws of physics say there's no
    way in hell they can fly. I guess they, like Bugs Bunny, never studied law,
    because they just keep right on doing what they absolutely can't do.

    --
    NOTE: the virus mails are starting again, so change nut to net to reply.
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "It's getting so a man can't talk to his own shrub around here." - Hawkeye
    Pierce
  17. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:30:28 GMT, David S <dwstreeter@att.nut> posted
    in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:54:02 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) chose to
    >add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:
    >
    >>For some reason, logic and arithmetic (you could hardly call it
    >>math...(c;) gives way to hype and marketing and magic.
    >>
    >>Cellular phones are never going to be broadband for obvious reasons of
    >>physics unless some really WIDE new bands to operate it come into
    >>existence that are not shared with my bagphone....

    >
    >One word for ya, Larry: bumblebees. All the laws of physics say there's no
    >way in hell they can fly. I guess they, like Bugs Bunny, never studied law,
    >because they just keep right on doing what they absolutely can't do.


    You still can't put a 1.25 MHz wide signal in 200 KHz of band. It
    would be like putting 64 ounces of liquid water in a half-pint jar. "A
    cup and a half" of coffee only works in commercials.

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?