knarf829
join:2007-06-02
| Re: Ho HD Boxes said by kes601  :Also, while this does affect Vz customers, it is Motorola's fault in the end for not producing enough boxes, as it is affecting cable companies that use boxes from Motorola as well. As I mentioned in the other thread, this "It's Morotola's Fault" excuse hardly matters. It's Verizon I'm paying. Verizon should have been prepared.
Vendor problems occur in business. Consumer-based companies are judged on how much those problems are allowed to effect the paying customer.
A month an a half with NO HD for new customers from a company that pushes and pushes how technologically advanced it is and specifically pushes the HD quality? That's a disaster. | |
|
 kes601
join:2007-04-14
Virginia Beach, VA
| Re: Ho HD Boxes said by knarf829 :said by kes601 :Also, while this does affect Vz customers, it is Motorola's fault in the end for not producing enough boxes, as it is affecting cable companies that use boxes from Motorola as well. As I mentioned in the other thread, this "It's Morotola's Fault" excuse hardly matters. It's Verizon I'm paying. Verizon should have been prepared. So, you are saying Motorola should have no blame in the matter when they are the ultimate cause of the shortage for multiple companies? | |
|
 | DMS1
join:2005-04-06
Carrollton, TX
| Re: Ho HD Boxes said by kes601 :So, you are saying Motorola should have no blame in the matter when they are the ultimate cause of the shortage for multiple companies? It depends entirely on what Verizon and Motorola had agreed. If Motorola failed to ship product in the volumes and timeframe that they had agreed to then it's its fault. If Verizon failed to plan properly and suddenly increased its requirements then it is its fault. The fact that multiple providers are affected would tend to suggest the former, but it could be that all the providers simply failed to predict a sudden increase in HD deployment. | |
|
| | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | Re: Ho HD Boxes Blame is not only irrelevant, but probably off-target. | |
|
| | |
| | | lets456
join:2008-01-21
Hainesport, NJ
| Re: Ho HD Boxes The same thing happened with Comcast a while back...I got so desperate I almost changed to them...luckily they were out of HD boxes...then they said "we have a few HD DVR boxes but you'll be charged that price"....*Click* (me hanging up).
I am reading reports up to 4 months? Is that true? Wow...that is completely not acceptable. This is really going to hurt them...big time.
Even though there are only 28-30 HD channels, I make it a point to watch those channels 90% of the time.
If my HD box goes dead, I still have my dish to fall back on. | |
|
| | | | 
avhokie
@covad.net
| Re: Ho HD Boxes said by lets456 :I am reading reports up to 4 months? Is that true? I called up to order the triple play today and they told me 4 months. I'm now looking at Cox and DirecTV instead. | |
|
| | | | | 
JeepMatt
Delaware Fios
Premium
join:2001-12-28
Wilmington, DE | Re: Ho HD Boxes My co-worker just got installed today in Claymont, DE.
He got 2 HD boxes (1 DVR)
--
"ONE team - ONE city - ONE dream!!" | |
|
| | FatRalphy
join:2007-04-27
Southlake, TX | haha i heard from my neighbor fios tech that they have thousunds of the hd boxes ready and waiting. they arent gettin orders now bec of the no hd box deal. moterola screwd up bad. | |
|
| knarf829
join:2007-06-02
| said by kes601 :said by knarf829 :said by kes601 :Also, while this does affect Vz customers, it is Motorola's fault in the end for not producing enough boxes, as it is affecting cable companies that use boxes from Motorola as well. As I mentioned in the other thread, this "It's Morotola's Fault" excuse hardly matters. It's Verizon I'm paying. Verizon should have been prepared. So, you are saying Motorola should have no blame in the matter when they are the ultimate cause of the shortage for multiple companies? I am saying that people pay Verizon and the Motorola issue is really WGAS for most users.
The apologists have indicated that the reason is Verizon didn't want to fork out the money for unused stock (i.e. fork out the money for assured customer satisfaction). That points to Verizon upping the requirement and then pointing the finger at Motorola for not being able to meet the new (unrealistic) requirement.
But either way, in the end it's Verizon who is responsible for maintaining customer satisfaction among Verizon customers. If they fail at that, they deserve the blame period. | |
|
|
|
|
