TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
3 edits |  Branding others services loser for customer
Reselling Sprint cell phone service and just slapping a Time Warner brand on it is a loser for the customer. If they have a problem with cell phone service they will be getting assistance filtered thru some Time Warner employee instead of dealing directly with Sprint. That is a recipe for finger pointing by the 2 corporations and the customer will lose in the shuffle.
My Web Page
My Blog
Join Red Room Forum |
|
TransitMan
Premium,MVM
join:2000-09-05
Dayton, OH
clubs: 
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Time Warner VOIP
·Earthlink TrueVoice
|  At Their Prices
I don't think so.
With a recent rate hike for just classic cable to $45.99 per month, I'm looking at SAT-TV as my next option.
And with some of the packages I am looking at, it is cheaper for me to go al carte!
I already have my land-line, DSL and cellular rolled into a nice package. TWC cannot even match what I get.
Bring the prices down, offer better services, and stop making lame excuses and then I'll consider. Until then, NOT!
--
PROUD TO BE HOST OF CRUNCHENSTEIN #2 |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Funny...
Comcast used to own cellular service in Philadelphia. They sold it off to SBC Mobile which then became Cingular. I'm not sure how good their service was, but Cingular in the Philadelphia area is excellent.
Anyone else remember Comcast Metrophone?
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
nightdesigns
Gone missing, back soon
Premium
join:2002-05-31
AZ | AOL
or they now have a reason to include a free AOL cd with each sprint phone purchase. |
|
Boomerang86
Got FUD?
Premium
join:2002-10-18
VampireState
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
·VOIPo
·Time Warner VOIP
1 edit | Fuggedaboudit!
T/W Digital Phone is already one of the most expensive VOIP services at $39.95 a month before taxes and surcharges, and their cable and internet offerings aren't cheap either (the same level of digital television service costs nearly DOUBLE its closest geographic competitor).
If they decided to market wireless service it WON'T be a good deal, especially if you must bundle already overpriced cable services to get it. No, thanks here. |
|
lovewomen
join:2003-08-07
Springfield, VA | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Branding others services loser for customer
I don't see where this would be bad. It would like where Qwest is selling rebanded cellular service. |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| reply to Boomerang86
Re: Fuggedaboudit!
said by Boomerang86  :T/W Digital Phone is already one of the most expensive VOIP services at $39.95 a month before taxes and surcharges, and their cable and internet offerings aren't cheap either (the same level of digital television service costs nearly DOUBLE its closest geographic competitor). Yes, it is the most expensive. But it also isn't meant for the tech savvy types that come here. I'm sure you know how to get a VoIP TA working and don't need someone to come out to your house if you have a problem with it not working.
But TWC is trying to get people to replace their POTS they've had for years, and a lot of these people are not tech savvy enough to setup their own VoIP, and as well, these people like to call a local company that will come to their house and troubleshoot problems if necessary.
The best Vonage and the like can do when you have noise problems on the phone is say, "Better call your ISP."
If you don't need or want service calls, then you probably shouldn't be paying $39.95 when there are cheaper services out there. But it's silly to assume it's not worth it for the people that like to have a local company that is able to come to their house to fix or diagnose problems. |
|
dustman81
join:2002-05-28
Tallmadge, OH
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Boomerang86
Someone's gotta pay for all the AOL CDs being sent out and all the ex-AOLers defecting to either NetZero, Netscape (ironically owned by AOL) or to broadband like Road Runner (again, ironically owned by AOL).
AOL-TW is digging their own grave and trying to salvage what they can by screwing their current customers that can't leave (like TW cable customers).
BTW, helped a friend cancel his CompuServe (again, owned by AOL) subscription at $23.95/mth yesterday and get signed up with Netscape at $9.95/mth. |
|
dukjunk39
join:2002-07-10
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to smcallah
I can't imagine spending 40-plus bucks for VoIP service when POTS is so much cheaper (inexpensive package) and reliable for me. I mean, during the blackout last year the only thing that worked was my old landline phone. My cell phone service zonked out, the cordless phone of course, broadband, everything except that old corded phone. Same thing happened on Sept. 11, 2001. Tying up all your communications services into one thing does have some appeal but it seems when one thing goes down they all do. You sort of end up stranded. I'd rather keep them seperate for now. |
|
SoulStormBrew
@inebraska.com | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Branding others services loser for customer
What is the point of having both a cell phone and a voip phone? I have always had one or the other, but not both. |
|
bs259
Premium
join:2000-08-19
Little Neck, NY
3 edits | reply to dustman81
Re: Fuggedaboudit!
you are incorrect in saying that aol owns it now, when aol bought out time warner yes that was true, but time warner is in charge again, aol name has been taken off all their bldgs, so its time warner that now owns aol. now if you said: ironically owned by time warner then you would be correct.
Also time warner is already using sprint as the company that is responsible for their voip comunications, so it wouls make sense for them to offer cell also by sprint
another thing is that time warner is not competing with vonage, packet 8, etc, they r competing against phone co's, that is why they charge $40.00 p/month i beleive phone co. charges $70.00 for the same package? |
|
