2 edits |
Sees Writing on the WallThat VZW is a one trick pony (marketed as best nationwide coverage) and except for wealthy families it's basically a suckers' provider (only sells expensive capped shared data plans) who's marketshare will get slowly eaten away by other carriers more willing to take a risk. At least they'll make a nice tidy profit from it. |
|
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2013-Mar-25 3:20 pm
said by Dr Demento:That VZW is a one trick pony (marketed as best nationwide coverage) and except for wealthy families it's basically a suckers' provider (only sells expensive capped shared data plans) who's marketshare will get slowly eaten away by other carriers more willing to take a risk. At least they'll make a nice tidy profit from it. Well somehow they got to 98 million retail customers. Must be a lot of suckers in the US. |
|
1 recommendation |
There are. |
|
|
hey hey hey to Dr Demento
Anon
2013-Mar-25 4:12 pm
to Dr Demento
said by Dr Demento:That VZW is a one trick pony (marketed as best nationwide coverage) and except for wealthy families it's basically a suckers' provider (only sells expensive capped shared data plans) who's marketshare will get slowly eaten away by other carriers more willing to take a risk. At least they'll make a nice tidy profit from it. What carrier? Sprint and t-mobile ignore over 1/3 of the country. At&t offerings aren't any cheaper than Verizon. So whatever. funny how Verizon got more customers in quarter 4 alone than at&t, Sprint and t-mile got ALL year COMBINED. |
|
1 edit |
said by said by hey hey hey : At&t offerings aren't any cheaper than verizon. Yout mean the second largest company that spawned from the vampiric SBC buying out viable Cingular in a loose regulatory environment, changed its name to capitalize on nostalgia and the largest 'me too' ran business that never thought up ano original idea since ponying up the most money to buy exclusivity for the iPhone? Horrible comparison that makes your argument a strawman. said by hey hey hey : What carrier? Sprint and t-mobile ignore over 1/3 of the country. At&t offerings aren't any cheaper than Verizon. Well that's thanks in part to our supposed agency for managing competition in communications Ok'd carriers that served those areas such as US Cellular and Alltel being bought out by said titans. VZW isn't going to implode over night but it's slow decline will be evident and the hedge fund market that encouraged it's existence and growth will announce it's fall. |
|
ilikeme Premium Member join:2002-08-27 Stafford, TX |
to hey hey hey
said by hey hey hey :said by Dr Demento:That VZW is a one trick pony (marketed as best nationwide coverage) and except for wealthy families it's basically a suckers' provider (only sells expensive capped shared data plans) who's marketshare will get slowly eaten away by other carriers more willing to take a risk. At least they'll make a nice tidy profit from it. What carrier? Sprint and t-mobile ignore over 1/3 of the country. At&t offerings aren't any cheaper than Verizon. So whatever. funny how Verizon got more customers in quarter 4 alone than at&t, Sprint and t-mile got ALL year COMBINED. Agreed. Around here AT&T and Verizon have the best coverage. I have tried each of the big 4. AT&T and Verizon both have very good coverage, even in the more rural areas and have decent LTE coverage. Don't get your hopes up about using Sprint or T-Mobile outside of the major cities, they will most likely be roaming with reduced speed or no data, or will have SOS service only. Plus Sprints LTE network is a joke. Don't even bother trying to use the "Ghetto Phone(Cricket, Metro, etc)" providers in rural areas, or even in a lot of other areas of the cities. |
|
|
Funny you should mention Sprint. These days, they have more of central TX covered land area wise than Verizon with LTE...and it's solid coverage too. Granted, they launched a few of their markets much too early (DFW, Austin) and as such didn't/don't have comprehensive LTE there upon launch. But unlimited data on a network that I've seen hit 35 Mbps down and 13 Mbps up (but averages closer to 15/5) isn't a joke by any stretch. |
|
|
to ilikeme
said by ilikeme: Don't get your hopes up about using Sprint or T-Mobile outside of the major cities,
Seems like Sprint is rolling out 4G everywhere EXCEPT major cities. |
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
|
to Black_Mage
Re: Sees Writing on the Wallsaid by Black_Mage:said by ilikeme: Don't get your hopes up about using Sprint or T-Mobile outside of the major cities,
Seems like Sprint is rolling out 4G everywhere EXCEPT major cities. Uh, take a closer look... » sensorly.com/map/4G/US/U ··· 10sprint |
|
|
to Dr Demento
said by Dr Demento:That VZW is a one trick pony (marketed as best nationwide coverage) and except for wealthy families it's basically a suckers' provider You think someone is a sucker for taking coverage into account when purchasing a mobile phone? There's a perfectly viable and relatively cheap solution for people who don't care about coverage: POTS |
|
|
no_one to FFH5
Anon
2013-Mar-25 7:10 pm
to FFH5
Still have customers with grandfathered plans. |
|
|
hey hey hey to Dr Demento
Anon
2013-Mar-25 7:11 pm
to Dr Demento
said by Dr Demento:said by said by hey hey hey : At&t offerings aren't any cheaper than verizon. Yout mean the second largest company that spawned from the vampiric SBC buying out viable Cingular in a loose regulatory environment, changed its name to capitalize on nostalgia and the largest 'me too' ran business that never thought up ano original idea since ponying up the most money to buy exclusivity for the iPhone? Horrible comparison that makes your argument a strawman. No it doesn't, it's a legit question. You claim Verizon's business practices will entice a huge percentage of their customers to leave. I asked where are these customer going to go? A large percentage live in area where they are the only carrier or at&t is the only alternative. In which you see to agree isn't any better. Even in areas that have t-mobile and Sprint they aren't any better. For some maybe. For others not so much. |
|
ilikeme Premium Member join:2002-08-27 Stafford, TX |
to iansltx
said by iansltx:Funny you should mention Sprint. These days, they have more of central TX covered land area wise than Verizon with LTE...and it's solid coverage too. Granted, they launched a few of their markets much too early (DFW, Austin) and as such didn't/don't have comprehensive LTE there upon launch. But unlimited data on a network that I've seen hit 35 Mbps down and 13 Mbps up (but averages closer to 15/5) isn't a joke by any stretch. In most rural areas I tried it in Sprint dropped to EVDO or 1x while Verizon had LTE and AT&T had at least HSPA if not LTE Not really. I tried them recently and the coverage was horrid (especially indoors) compared to what I get on Verizon and AT&T in DFW, Houston, and Austin. Speeds were also lower. On Verizon I average about 40/10 and At&t is usually between 40-60Mbps/10-15 up. I don't see a point in having unlimited data when I could hardly use it. |
|
·Metronet
|
to Dr Demento
They have really good coverage here and I have a 8-9 year old phone. 4 phones (2 with texting) costs us about $25 phone. Never use more than 100 minutes or so.
When the kids get phone I might try straight talk but since everyone we talk to is on Verizon - straight talk may cost us more.
Maybe if I get a smart phone but I don't know when I would at this point... |
|
|
to Crookshanks
said by user Crookshanks :You think someone is a sucker for taking coverage into account when purchasing a mobile phone? There's a perfectly viable and relatively cheap solution for people who don't care about coverage: POTS Most people typically don't travel around the country most of the time. FCC mandated data roaming agreements are making it possible for other carriers who offer post-paid plans to offer more comprehensive nationwide ones for when people need them. Many people in the US, due to the inability of affording fuel and maintenance costs, are not buying SUVs if they only go offroad a little if not at all, this may have a correlated affect when looking at other services. |
|
|
You don't have to travel "around the country", Verizon simply has better coverage in a lot of markets than the other carriers. Punch up Northeast PA or Upstate NY, they beat AT&T hands down, Sprint only competes because you can (for now) roam on Verizon, and T-Mobile is useless once you wander off the highway.
Heck, even within the urban areas Verizon tends to best T-Mobile (my favorite carrier from a cost/customer service standpoint), particularly with regards to indoor coverage. AT&T is probably more competitive in these markets with regards to coverage, though I can't understand why anybody would do business with them when they cost just as much as Verizon without the extensive network to back up their arrogance. |
|
|
said by Crookshanks: Sprint only competes because you can (for now) roam on Verizon, Sprint has an agreement for 10 more years with VZW and has many other regional partners outside VZW. And Feds already said VZW will need to offer roaming in long term even if Sprint needs them after 10 years. |
|
|
to ilikeme
How recently? Summer/fall 2012, I would agree with you. It's gotten better since. |
|