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!

Want to have fun with customer service? Do this!

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by AL, Sep 16, 2003.

  1. Justin

    Justin Guest

    "Mike James" <mjh@mjh.com> wrote in message
    news:vmh3p8f7cush81@corp.supernews.com...
    > Check out the disclaimer on the Verizon Wireless website with regard to
    > coverage:
    >
    > "This map is not a guarentee of coverage and contains area with no
    > service"
    >
    > Plus, how much has the AC map shrunk in the last few months...
    >
    > But yes... It is fun to play with customer service, but I prefer Sprint
    > PCS Customer Service... They are the stupidist most ignorant untrained
    > individuals on the face of the earth... Although Verizon customer
    > service has been deteriorating over the last year...
    >


    I realize there is a disclaimer. In my situation, the service worked fine
    for about 5 months, then it degraded. Since there's no tall construction in
    the area, and no hills have been bulldozed up, I have to assume that they've
    overloaded their towers.

    It's not just a dead spot. There WAS servcie there to begin with. And the
    construction is all residential, so I doubt that is blocking a signal.



    › See More: Want to have fun with customer service? Do this!
  2. John Andrews

    John Andrews Guest

    There is a simple way to end this whole diatribe...

    If teh origianl poster read what he stated he was talking about...


    QUOTE:

    2. Make available maps showing where service is generally available.
    Wireless carriers will make available at point of sale and on their web
    sites maps depicting approximate voice service coverage applicable to
    each of their rate plans currently offered to consumers. To enable
    consumers to make comparisons among carriers, these maps will be
    generated using generally accepted methodologies and standards to depict
    the carrier's outdoor coverage. All such maps will contain an
    appropriate legend concerning limitations and/or variations in wireless
    coverage and map usage, including any geographic limitations on the
    availability of any services included in the rate plan. Wireless
    carriers will periodically update such maps as necessary to keep them
    reasonably current. If necessary to show the extent of service coverage
    available to customers from carriers' roaming partners, carriers will
    request and incorporate coverage maps from roaming partners that are
    generated using similar industry-accepted criteria, or if such
    information is not available, incorporate publicly available information
    regarding roaming partners' coverage areas.

    End Quote

    This says nothing about providing maps to individuals by mail or in any
    other enviornment except at point of sale i.e. STORES, or website...

    They need not be location specific... specifically "generally"...

    All of the requirements of that section ARE being met already by TMobile
    at their corporate retail stores, and their website...

    So this is nto fraud, or any of the issues that have been "cited"
    here...

    Also the whole "code" is voluntary... The FCC nor any other party can
    force any carrier who may have signed the code to abide by anything...

    Hence, try to use it to get out of an early termination fee...

    For those who want a realtime map, showing actaul coverage, sure that is
    possible... That little guy from the Verizon ad.. he weill eb moving in
    next month to updtae their system constantly...

    Do you wnat to pay for that kind of accuracy? I wont... It isnt that big
    of a deal... I know where and when I can use my phone...

    I also know where and when I can ride my bicycle about town...

    So I repeat I make MY choices, and live with them...

    Stop reading between the lines, and read what is written, not what your
    hopes and dreams are...





    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  3. Justin

    Justin Guest

    "John Andrews" <GB1@Ureach.Com> wrote in message
    news:vmhah0o3c1cd8e@corp.supernews.com...
    > There is a simple way to end this whole diatribe...
    >
    > If teh origianl poster read what he stated he was talking about...
    >
    >
    > QUOTE:
    >
    > 2. Make available maps showing where service is generally available.
    > Wireless carriers will make available at point of sale and on their web
    > sites maps depicting approximate voice service coverage applicable to
    > each of their rate plans currently offered to consumers. To enable
    > consumers to make comparisons among carriers, these maps will be
    > generated using generally accepted methodologies and standards to depict
    > the carrier's outdoor coverage. All such maps will contain an
    > appropriate legend concerning limitations and/or variations in wireless
    > coverage and map usage, including any geographic limitations on the
    > availability of any services included in the rate plan. Wireless
    > carriers will periodically update such maps as necessary to keep them
    > reasonably current. If necessary to show the extent of service coverage
    > available to customers from carriers' roaming partners, carriers will
    > request and incorporate coverage maps from roaming partners that are
    > generated using similar industry-accepted criteria, or if such
    > information is not available, incorporate publicly available information
    > regarding roaming partners' coverage areas.
    >
    > End Quote
    >
    > This says nothing about providing maps to individuals by mail or in any
    > other enviornment except at point of sale i.e. STORES, or website...
    >
    > They need not be location specific... specifically "generally"...
    >
    > All of the requirements of that section ARE being met already by TMobile
    > at their corporate retail stores, and their website...
    >
    > So this is nto fraud, or any of the issues that have been "cited"
    > here...
    >
    > Also the whole "code" is voluntary... The FCC nor any other party can
    > force any carrier who may have signed the code to abide by anything...
    >
    > Hence, try to use it to get out of an early termination fee...
    >
    > For those who want a realtime map, showing actaul coverage, sure that is
    > possible... That little guy from the Verizon ad.. he weill eb moving in
    > next month to updtae their system constantly...
    >
    > Do you wnat to pay for that kind of accuracy? I wont... It isnt that big
    > of a deal... I know where and when I can use my phone...
    >
    > I also know where and when I can ride my bicycle about town...
    >
    > So I repeat I make MY choices, and live with them...
    >
    > Stop reading between the lines, and read what is written, not what your
    > hopes and dreams are...



    Ok, and allow the continued FALSE advertising by some carriers? When the
    coverage doesn't exist in more than just a "dead spot" and the company
    continues to advertise coverage in that area, that's blatently dishonest.
  4. PHil_Real <phil_tape@email.org> wrote in article
    <phil_tape-0F5E55.11220317092003@news02.west.earthlink.net>:
    > In article <TI_9b.6416$UN4.179@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,


    > Luckily there's $10,000 profit in a typical Explorer,
    > TrailBlazer or Durango.


    Very lucky, though Toyota and Honda are going after
    that market as well.

    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  5. Isaiah Beard

    Isaiah Beard Guest

    PHil_Real wrote:

    > In article <qFJ9b.379$y63.250@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
    > "AL" <al145@nospam.hotmail.dot> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I have never had so much heming and hawing as I did today. The new 10-point
    >>consumer information code is now in effect and signed by most cellular
    >>companies. Point two says they will "provide coverage maps, illustrating
    >>where service is generally available." Voluntary best practices my foot.

    >
    >
    > SprintPCS says the following on its website:
    >
    > Service area maps approximate our service areas based on
    > computer-generated radio-frequency coverage projections and information
    > provided by third parties, but are not a guarantee of service
    > availability. Actual coverage, quality and availability of coverage may
    > vary based on network problems, signal strength, your equipment,
    > terrain, weather and other limitations or conditions. Planned service
    > areas are subject to change. Local service in some areas is managed and
    > provided under contract with Sprint by independent Affiliates.
    >
    >
    >
    > An argument could be made that it is at variance with the new industry
    > code.



    i don't see how... The code calls for maps where service "is generally
    available." The above seems to fit that description.
  6. John Andrews

    John Andrews Guest

    All I was pointing out was that the original poster stated a blatant
    piece of misinformation... Most folks jumped on it and ran...

    Yes, there should be a way of more timely and specific information for
    coverage...

    But that wasnt the original post... It was how screwed up TMobile was
    because they werent providing what "they" said they would...

    Dead spot differs from no coverage...


    > Ok, and allow the continued FALSE advertising by some carriers? When the
    > coverage doesn't exist in more than just a "dead spot" and the company
    > continues to advertise coverage in that area, that's blatently dishonest.
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  7. Justin

    Justin Guest

    "John Andrews" <GB1@Ureach.Com> wrote in message
    news:vmhgco72a0th32@corp.supernews.com...
    > All I was pointing out was that the original poster stated a blatant
    > piece of misinformation... Most folks jumped on it and ran...
    >
    > Yes, there should be a way of more timely and specific information for
    > coverage...
    >
    > But that wasnt the original post... It was how screwed up TMobile was
    > because they werent providing what "they" said they would...
    >
    > Dead spot differs from no coverage...
    >
    >
    > > Ok, and allow the continued FALSE advertising by some carriers? When

    the
    > > coverage doesn't exist in more than just a "dead spot" and the company
    > > continues to advertise coverage in that area, that's blatently

    dishonest.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > [posted via phonescoop.com]


    Yes, the original post was more trollish than discussionary.
  8. "BlahBlah Blabber" <blah_blah@blahblah.com> wrote in message
    news:vmern76uau4rc7@corp.supernews.com...
    > So, you expect there to be some magic map, available to all consumers
    > that takes into consideration certain things like topography,
    > atmospheric conditions, capacity and the like? Give me a break, the


    You apparently did not read his post. He was complaining of the utter lack of
    *any* Verizon coverage map, contrary to the new "code of conduct" just
    announced.

    > You need this type of detailed map, probably to be developed by NASA or
    > something, so the carrier can pass additional costs on to the consumer?


    Actually, the carriers typically *have* very detailed maps, but they refuse to
    show these to consumers.

    > And then you call for additional regulation? The competitive
    > marketplace has done just fine solving these issues themselves. That's


    Obviously not--cellular has been offered for decades and we still don't have
    access to high-quality coverage maps. In many matters like this one, no single
    carrier is willing to be the first (e.g., to publish its actual coverage map),
    because other carriers will take advantage of the first carrier's weaknesses
    without admitting their own weaknesses. A federal regulation is a very simple
    solution to force *all* the carriers to publish simultaneously, so that no one
    carrier gets put at an unjustified disadvantage. The carriers with poor or
    spotty coverage will suffer the publicity, but then they deserve to.
  9. "BlahBlah Blabber" <blah_blah@blahblah.com> wrote in message
    news:vmficcobn9r5e0@corp.supernews.com...
    > I have electricitly. Sometimes the electricity goes out. I have to pay
    > my electric bill everymonth.. I can switch providers but all they really


    Electricity is a bad example because the bulk of an electric bill is directly
    proportional to actual usage. A better example is a local wireline telephone
    bill, the bulk of which is typically a flat monthly fee. Most/all states, I
    think, require a prorated refund if your local wireline telephone service is
    down for a significant length of time (e.g., 24 hours).
  10. AL

    AL Guest

    The whole point of the "code" is the State of California, and possibly New
    York, and the whole Congress is talking about regulating an unregulated
    industry because of complaints, contract and the cavalier attitude of
    cellular companies.

    My most recent experience with a caviler attitude occurred this weekend with
    VZW. I though my contract ended in November, but the actual date is two
    weeks hence. Did they give me any reason to stay. Nope! Will I stay,
    probably not since I own a nice GSM phone and can go to Cingular without a
    contract.

    One the things with VZW is they keep telling me they don't have coverage in
    certain areas, or it is weak, but the maps all indicate it is well covered.
    And they should be, being small population centers with towers within
    two-to-three miles... but they keep saying don't expect good coverage. Now
    that's a sales technique that car companies should adopt; we just sell the
    cars, but don't expect good gas mileage, it's beyond our control. VZW, we
    sell the phones, coverage is beyond our control. :)

    AL

    "cell play" <lately@late.com> wrote in message
    news:vmh01l89558m78@corp.supernews.com...
    > Gotcha. You ask if I work for a living and then you waste probably an
    > hour composing your post. Genius! My whole theme to my original post
    > is why post a message to have people call and waste CS time about a
    > question that we all know the answer to. If the person had read the
    > consumer code, then his question would've been invalid. He stated that
    > the consumer code was already being broken. How so? The website was
    > updated immediately. It will take time to reprint brochures with
    > correct wording. All compnies will need a grace period to get the
    > proper material out to the stores. I'm not defending any company, but
    > the industry. Things don't happen over night.
    >
    > I was just questioning the validity of his post and his statements. But
    > because I do have a job and I do work for a living, I'm done. Obviously
    > there are people on here that I would guess live in their mom's basement
    > and have nothing better to do than to post to multiple news group all
    > day.
  11. AL

    AL Guest

    Not in the Verizon store I was in today. But I did get a new fantasy story
    line about why my phone is not working properly. (In other words a new lie
    to cover yesterdays lie.)

    AL

    "johnny rodriguez" <j1r2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:vmh2llngn1vu74@corp.supernews.com...
    > The mandated maps will appear in stores on September 29th. Temporary
    > maps should be available in stores today.
    >
  12. AL

    AL Guest

    It has been sinking to a new low lately for me. But while I was in the store
    today waiting for a tech to do something to my phone, the sales rep, kept
    tilling the customer about number portability and how many people would be
    switching to VZW, so she should go ahead and buy a phone today, be cause of
    other people will be switching to them when they can transfer my number.

    I thought to myself, I want to switch today, to another company, and I
    really don't care about taking my number anymore either.

    AL

    "Mike James" <mjh@mjh.com> wrote in message
    news:vmh3p8f7cush81@corp.supernews.com...
    > Check out the disclaimer on the Verizon Wireless website with regard to
    > coverage:
    >
    > "This map is not a guarentee of coverage and contains area with no
    > service"
    >
    > Plus, how much has the AC map shrunk in the last few months...
    >
    > But yes... It is fun to play with customer service, but I prefer Sprint
    > PCS Customer Service... They are the stupidist most ignorant untrained
    > individuals on the face of the earth... Although Verizon customer
    > service has been deteriorating over the last year...
  13. AL

    AL Guest

    The press release from Verizon, which is what I quoted dated 09/09/2003
    says:
    "2. Provide coverage maps, illustrating where service is generally
    available."

    That is all of point two, Verizon version, and since I am VZW customer, I
    called and asked...

    "http://news.vzw.com/news/2003/09/pr2003-09-09.html"

    So that's MY diatribe and I'm sticking to it. Will VZW produce? Not yet, and
    I was in a local store today.
    Wait until number portability becomes a reality?

    AL

    "John Andrews" <GB1@Ureach.Com> wrote in message
    news:vmhah0o3c1cd8e@corp.supernews.com...
    > There is a simple way to end this whole diatribe...
    >
    > If teh origianl poster read what he stated he was talking about...
    >
    >
    > QUOTE:

    SNIP
  14. AL

    AL Guest

    Most carriers lie and use deceptive advertising.
    Look at VZW's ads. Does your phone work in all the places the "geek's" phone
    works, elevators, beaches, swamps. Not on your life. VZW best network
    guarantee, is false as well. The do test, but the do with all the phones
    hooked up to roof top antennas, phones tested and verified, no defective or
    poor performing phones allowed, only the best, and they stay on the road.
    Now I and thousands of others use their phones in cars and trucks, no
    antennas, no testing pf the phones before being put into service.

    In other words the real world use is how I use my phone, VZW uses best case
    scenarios, roof-top antennas, at a height several feet higher and with more
    gain and signal grabbing ability than the average Joe.

    You know probably half the people don't even bother to raise their antennas.
    So if VZW wants a real working test, lay the phone in a box, about vehicle
    window height, half with the antennas raised, and half not, and the rest
    tilted at all kinds of different angles... And don't forget to walking
    inside of building and elevators like the ad guy does... and then lets see
    the best network and coverage maps result.

    AL

    "John Andrews" <GB1@Ureach.Com> wrote in message
    news:vmhgco72a0th32@corp.supernews.com...
    > All I was pointing out was that the original poster stated a blatant
    > piece of misinformation... Most folks jumped on it and ran...
    >
    > Yes, there should be a way of more timely and specific information for
    > coverage...
    >
    > But that wasnt the original post... It was how screwed up TMobile was
    > because they werent providing what "they" said they would...
    >
    > Dead spot differs from no coverage...
  15. PHil_Real

    PHil_Real Guest

    In article <MW5ab.691$7a1.101@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
    "AL" <al145@nospam.hotmail.dot> wrote:

    > Most carriers lie and use deceptive advertising.
    > Look at VZW's ads. Does your phone work in all the places the "geek's" phone
    > works, elevators, beaches, swamps. Not on your life. VZW best network
    > guarantee, is false as well.


    Absolutely false advertising, but it works, in large part because of the
    Billing maps used by other carriers, folks frustrations with the maps
    unreliability. If carriers made proper maps the Verizon commercial would
    be ignored.
  16. Quick

    Quick Guest

    "AL" <al145@nospam.hotmail.dot> wrote
    > You know probably half the people don't even bother to raise their

    antennas.
    > So if VZW wants a real working test, lay the phone in a box, about vehicle
    > window height, half with the antennas raised, and half not, and the rest
    > tilted at all kinds of different angles... And don't forget to walking
    > inside of building and elevators like the ad guy does... and then lets see
    > the best network and coverage maps result.


    ummm, you might be getting a little bit deep here. All the phone
    instructions
    that I've read say to raise the antenna before making a call and after
    answering
    one. You're saying that since people don't bother they should test with
    antennas
    down?? And elevators. (My phone works in the all-stainless steel elevator
    here
    at work.) "what are those teeny-tiny white dots in the center of downtown?"
    "Oh, those are the elevators in some of the office buildings". Do you
    expect
    a map customized for each model of phone too? How about with semi truck
    at intersection and without semi truck at intersection?

    -Quick
  17. Male Bomb

    Male Bomb Guest

    "
    > "2. Provide coverage maps, illustrating where service is generally
    > available."


    Do you see where it says "generally available" ?

    >
    > I was in a local store today.
    > Wait until number portability becomes a reality?
    >
    > AL


    Where ya going? MB


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  18. Male Bomb

    Male Bomb Guest


    > I thought to myself, I want to switch today, to another company, and I
    > really don't care about taking my number anymore either.
    >
    > AL


    So what did you do? MB

    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  19. Male Bomb

    Male Bomb Guest


    > One the things with VZW is they keep telling me they don't have coverage in
    > certain areas, or it is weak, but the maps all indicate it is well covered.
    > And they should be, being small population centers with towers within
    > two-to-three miles... but they keep saying don't expect good coverage. Now
    > that's a sales technique that car companies should adopt; we just sell the
    > cars, but don't expect good gas mileage, it's beyond our control. VZW, we
    > sell the phones, coverage is beyond our control. :)


    Would you rather have the sales reps lie and tell you the phone will
    work everywhere? Your bitching about coverage and your going to
    Cingular GSM, LOL...

    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  20. Marty Bose

    Marty Bose Guest

    (snip)

    > Obviously not--cellular has been offered for decades and we still don't have
    > access to high-quality coverage maps. In many matters like this one, no
    > single
    > carrier is willing to be the first (e.g., to publish its actual coverage map),
    > because other carriers will take advantage of the first carrier's weaknesses
    > without admitting their own weaknesses. A federal regulation is a very simple
    > solution to force *all* the carriers to publish simultaneously, so that no one
    > carrier gets put at an unjustified disadvantage. The carriers with poor or
    > spotty coverage will suffer the publicity, but then they deserve to.
    >

    You seem to be thinking that there is such a thing as a high quality
    coverage map. The bottom line is that CDMA cell service (and to a
    lesser extent GSM service) is not as cut and dried as your local FM
    radio station.

    Your local FM station puts out a fixed power signal from a single or
    few high locations, and is relatively easy to map for the surrounding
    area.

    CDMA service, on the other hand, is emanating from lots of low power,
    relatively low to the ground points. In addition, then methodology is
    such that the more active users there are for a given cell, the lower
    the output power and therefore the smaller the effective radius is.
    It's a function of the need for a low noise floor so that the signal
    isn't impossible to decipher.

    So it is very easy to find situations where the first user of a given
    service can get good service a pretty fair distance from the nearest
    antenna, but if 20 of his neighbors get the same service and activate
    their phones, the actual usable radius decreases significantly. It
    just gets worse if 40 of his neighbors get involved.

    When I was building cell sites (a LONG time ago), the average one cost
    $250K, and were NOT a high density version. There was no need for them
    initially, because there wasn't a customer base yet. We spent $24M
    (give or take) to cover Fresno, CA, when there were no customers there
    yet to pay for it. Pretend for a moment that you are responsible for
    that expenditure, then figure out how long it will take to pay for the
    initial capital expense at $29.95 per month per person. The numbers
    are staggering, and don't even cover the cost of operation and on-going
    maintenance. My educated guess is that updating these same sites to a
    high density, multi-channel setup would cost over double the initial
    costs, and the removed equipment could only be used as spares in East
    Nowhere.

    You don't even want to know what it costs to build new cell sites these
    days; everyone is so NIMBY that it costs at least triple what it cost
    us so that you can disguise the antenna as something else. And that
    for a site that you can get an approval to build in the first place!

    I understand the frustration that started this thread. Hell, I worked
    for one of the carriers, and couldn't get any service at my own house,
    even though it is only 100 yards from a marina full of people with the
    right demographics to be cell phone customers. The cost versus
    technology issues weren't on my side, just like they aren't now.

    BTW, when I built out my system, I made a well-documented, actually
    test-proven coverage map that was about 15 ft by 12 ft. We then
    monitored performance complaints for about 6 months and tried to map
    the locations. Bottom line: There was no viable method we could find
    to predict where coverage holes would exist, and with enough time and
    customers, you could prove that there was virtually nowhere in a given
    system that hadn't had poor coverage at some time for some reason.

    Marty

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?