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!

VZW advertising- did they just admit to a lie?

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Scott Stephenson, Nov 17, 2003.

  1. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    Al Klein wrote:
    > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:44:04 -0500, "Viper" <Viper0580@fuse.net>
    > posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    >
    >>the same as it was 3 years ago. Some thing is wrong if they say that they
    >>upgrade there network, because I have not seen any thing happen yet in 3
    >>years.

    >
    >
    > There's a lot more to the network than the Cincinnati towers.


    Yeah, but what does "network" entail? Does it entail the entire Verizon
    Wireless network, which could include brand name, software, staffing, et al.

    Remember how Verizon was bitching about the cost of E911, WLNP, and
    more? Remember how outrageous the claims about price to comply with
    those were? It sounds like Verizon is investing in advertising, and
    with that $1 billion every 90 days, it's barely meeting government
    standards. Remember the estimates? Or the fact that Verizon Wireless
    has spent millions upon millions of dollars fighting WLNP?

    AD



    › See More: VZW advertising- did they just admit to a lie?
  2. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    Scott Stephenson wrote:
    > Mark Allread wrote:
    >
    >
    >>On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:24:16 GMT, Scott Stephenson
    >><scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>On of the things
    >>>mentioned is that Capital Expenditure for the entire company will be in
    >>>the
    >>>range of $12-12.5B. Their current ad campaign for wireless states that
    >>>they spend over a billion dollars a month upgrading their wireless
    >>>network.
    >>>The numbers don't match-

    >>
    >>Sure they do. If you can provide a way of installing $12B in capital
    >>equipment for $0 in expenses, I'm sure Verizon would LOVE to hear from
    >>you. $1B/mo in upgrade costs equates to much less than $1B/mo in capital
    >>equipment.
    >>

    >
    > You know- that makes sense if CapEx does not include anything but
    > equipment.


    Yeah, I bet most of that is spent complying with government regulations
    of WLNP, E911, et al.

    AD
  3. DSL GURU

    DSL GURU Guest

  4. Mark Allread

    Mark Allread Guest

    On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 02:44:24 GMT, Scott Stephenson
    <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:

    > Mark Allread wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:24:16 GMT, Scott Stephenson
    >> <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On of the things
    >>> mentioned is that Capital Expenditure for the entire company will be in
    >>> the
    >>> range of $12-12.5B. Their current ad campaign for wireless states that
    >>> they spend over a billion dollars a month upgrading their wireless
    >>> network.
    >>> The numbers don't match-

    >>
    >> Sure they do. If you can provide a way of installing $12B in capital
    >> equipment for $0 in expenses, I'm sure Verizon would LOVE to hear from
    >> you. $1B/mo in upgrade costs equates to much less than $1B/mo in capital
    >> equipment.
    >>

    > You know- that makes sense if CapEx does not include anything but
    > equipment.


    CapEx is stuff which has lasting value, and needs to be amortized.

    The labor involved in designing, planning, installing, implementing,
    etc. isn't included. Rent paid for cell sites isn't included. Electrical
    and interconnect trunk costs are not included. The costs of a fleet of
    "Can you hear me now?" guys is not included. A bunch of other EXPENSES
    aren't included.

    But, those can all legitimately be considered part of "upgrade costs."

    --
    Mark
  5. Hopper

    Hopper Guest

    "DSL GURU" <dslguru@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:20031118080144.28426.00000500@mb-m14.aol.com...
    > Sure sounds like a TROLL to me.
    >
    > It's all in here:
    >
    > http://biz.yahoo.com/e/031112/vz10-q.html


    And it worked too. People need to quit responding to this type of shit. To
    say nothing of the irony of this very post I am typing. It's killing all the
    alt.cellular groups.
  6. Hopper wrote:

    >
    > "DSL GURU" <dslguru@aol.com> wrote in message
    > news:20031118080144.28426.00000500@mb-m14.aol.com...
    >> Sure sounds like a TROLL to me.
    >>
    >> It's all in here:
    >>
    >> http://biz.yahoo.com/e/031112/vz10-q.html

    >
    > And it worked too. People need to quit responding to this type of shit. To
    > say nothing of the irony of this very post I am typing. It's killing all
    > the alt.cellular groups.



    If you don't like it, don't respond to it. I was making an observation-
    nothing more, nothing less. And if it really bothers you that much, just
    plonk me. No skin off my nose.
  7. DSL GURU wrote:

    > Sure sounds like a TROLL to me.
    >
    > It's all in here:
    >
    > http://biz.yahoo.com/e/031112/vz10-q.html



    Now that's funny, coming from a guy who was bashing everyone in here a
    couple of weeks ago for the quality and topics of the posts here. Are you
    a Verizon apologist?
  8. Hopper

    Hopper Guest

    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:9gyub.2158$_i1.1613660@news2.news.adelphia.net...
    > DSL GURU wrote:
    >
    > > Sure sounds like a TROLL to me.
    > >
    > > It's all in here:
    > >
    > > http://biz.yahoo.com/e/031112/vz10-q.html

    >
    >
    > Now that's funny, coming from a guy who was bashing everyone in here a
    > couple of weeks ago for the quality and topics of the posts here. Are you
    > a Verizon apologist?


    Hey, if you don't like it, don't respond to it. I'm sure he was just making
    an observation. I doubt it's much skin off his nose. Killfile it.
  9. Hopper

    Hopper Guest

    X-No-Archive:yes
    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:8Vxub.2155$_i1.1610234@news2.news.adelphia.net...

    > If you don't like it, don't respond to it. I was making an observation-
    > nothing more, nothing less. And if it really bothers you that much, just
    > plonk me. No skin off my nose.


    I don't recall responding to you. Did you follow the thread?

    Hopper
  10. Hopper wrote:

    > X-No-Archive:yes
    > "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    > news:8Vxub.2155$_i1.1610234@news2.news.adelphia.net...
    >
    >> If you don't like it, don't respond to it. I was making an observation-
    >> nothing more, nothing less. And if it really bothers you that much, just
    >> plonk me. No skin off my nose.

    >
    > I don't recall responding to you. Did you follow the thread?
    >
    > Hopper



    You responded to my post, not the infamous DSL GURU troll- look at the
    thread.
  11. Scott Stephenson wrote:

    > Hopper wrote:
    >
    >> X-No-Archive:yes
    >> "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    >> news:8Vxub.2155$_i1.1610234@news2.news.adelphia.net...
    >>
    >>> If you don't like it, don't respond to it. I was making an observation-
    >>> nothing more, nothing less. And if it really bothers you that much,
    >>> just
    >>> plonk me. No skin off my nose.

    >>
    >> I don't recall responding to you. Did you follow the thread?
    >>
    >> Hopper

    >
    >
    > You responded to my post, not the infamous DSL GURU troll- look at the
    > thread.



    You were right- I f*cked up- my apologies (too much time in front of a
    computer today). I'll take the remedial Newsgroup Reading class tomorrow.

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?