Jeep Wrangler Forum - Reply to Topic
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > General Discussion Forums > Off-Topic > Verizon hates me.

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Thread: Verizon hates me. Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
02-13-2012 07:06 AM
fan of fanboys http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1270348.html

Saw this today. The more cell phones become a necessity, the more fees will tacked on to everything related to them. As it is the dozens of taxes applies to cell phones is outrageous.
02-12-2012 12:26 PM
Hammerwalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

One of the many reasons the merger was denied. Most certainly would not create jobs.
Yeah that's what I'm saying. That wasn't in the leaked document that I read ( or perhaps I over looked it) but I knew that wouldn't be the case. You offer insight to behind the scenes
02-12-2012 10:52 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerwalk
Wow! Wasn't AT&T also talking about how many jobs it would create? Hrmmmm....
One of the many reasons the merger was denied. Most certainly would not create jobs.
02-12-2012 10:46 AM
Hammerwalk Wow! Wasn't AT&T also talking about how many jobs it would create? Hrmmmm....
02-12-2012 10:42 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerwalk
I doubt it'll ever come to that, at least not right now.

As far as the AT&T&T merger, I'm glad it didn't happen and that AT&T had to pay the $4b cancellation fee to T-mo. The DoJ got involved for a reason. AT&T wasn't being truthful about the whole deal and that leaked document proved it.
Yeah there was a lot behind the scenes.
My sister in law works for t-mo and AT&T was so confident about the deal they sent all the employees an email detailing what their severance package would be and approx time they cold expect it (if I remember they got email in or around Oct and they were to get the money in Feb or March) and if they didn't want severance they would get couple grand for staying with company. I want to say her severance was around $13K. Obviously that never panned out.
02-12-2012 10:28 AM
brightsidememe
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

I'll try to explain, because it is not that simple.

Let's go back 6 years. The most advanced smartphone was a blackberry. Carriers LOVE them bc RIM uses their own server to help break down data and transfer it. Decrease the load on cellular network dramatically. 3G coverage was smaller than the 4G footprint today. And the 3G that was available was not as fast as current 3G (even within 3G there are different tiers. Evdo rev b, evdo rev a, etc)

Go back approx 2 years ago. Carriers have multiple challenges. One is more people using smartphones. That requires more towers, more bandwidth (the single most important thing in cellular technology), better support for the cell sites (this ranges from more salesman, call center reps, network technicians, land and federal licensing for towers, etc). Another challenge is the smartphones themselves. Not only is there an increase in user base but the phones are consuming more data than ever. While average BB user consumes approx 50mb a month the average iPhone and android user is closer to 500mb, with some in the Gb range. So the network strain increases exponentially.

So in a few short years the network roll out, at a cost of billions per year (VZW has averaged $5 billion a year last 6 years or so) just to maintain current growth. Remember first two years AT&T had iPhone? Network crashed a lot. Became a joke. Bc the switch from primarily BB users to iPhone users.

All that before factoring in cost of rolling out future technologies (4G) that runs on an entirely diff spectrum which for Verizon is 700mhz. That has to be bought. Vzw bought majority of theirs during the analog to digital switch. That means new cell sites, new training, more employees, etc.

In theory home ISP have no cap on volume, just speed. And speed primarily capped by wire type. But with cellular technology there is a very real finite amount of data than can be transferred at once based on the spectrum.

One more factor that few see, even majority of employees, is what companies call connected devices. Cell phones ate not only things using the network. Scanners, vehicles with built-in broadband devices, home electronics (think washer machine, tv, even locks) are being developed and tested as well.

I spent few days in NY two weeks ago looking and testing some of the stuff that's out in limited supply or being tested for release. I don't know how much will be a success but some is quite amazing.

But to answer: the tech has been rolled out wider footprint than before, speeds increased, while user base increased. So it has not remained stagnant. Voice/SMS technology has not evolved much so that has become cheaper (voice is changing soon. Vzw is testing VoIP for all calls. Few years before nat'l deployment though)
What he said^
02-12-2012 09:52 AM
Dorambo Thats why I give my money to VZW. I trust them as a company so far. It goes along way.
02-12-2012 09:45 AM
Hammerwalk I doubt it'll ever come to that, at least not right now.

As far as the AT&T&T merger, I'm glad it didn't happen and that AT&T had to pay the $4b cancellation fee to T-mo. The DoJ got involved for a reason. AT&T wasn't being truthful about the whole deal and that leaked document proved it.
02-12-2012 07:58 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerwalk
That all makes sense and I follow you completely but I have a question to add to this. Well more if a comment really.

Take the whole AT&T&T fiasco ( t-mobile merger deal that flopped on its ass) ,the main argument was that more providers allow more competition therefor lower prices.

I hate hearing that. Remember when AT&T and VZW were both all you can eat data? Then AT&T created a tiered data plan costing more? Ok so why, as a competitor, would you want to jack your prices up as well to follow you competitor instead of leaving your all you can eat data plan as a beacon for more customers? Everyone knows VZW has a far more superior network than AT&T :-D

I know there is some algorithm that the bean counters have probably made up to make more money but it certainly doesn't go with the whole " more competition means lower prices" crap that keeps being said.
It is certainly a flawed, or at least incomplete, argument. Seems like a generic answer that can always be thrown out. I agree not really a valid reason for the merger being denied.

To answer your question the best way I can: all the carriers wanted to get away from unlimited data. No one wanted to be the first. AT&T had to be the first bc of their network issues. Once the initial heat died down then Vzw followed suit. Bc t-mo and sprint's target audience tends to be less affluent, combined with their lack of market share, they are holding on longer in hopes to gain some customers. But they will move away soon too.

Similar to fast food joints with the dollar menu. They were losing money on average from that side of menu, but no one wanted to get rid of it. So to counteract they've all launched "premium" menu options that at marketed as higher quality, healthier (even if not true), and "cooler" that also happen to be big money makers. McDonald's purposely makes that $1 chicken sandwich look like garbage compared to the $4 premium version.

With cell carriers no premium alternative.

What I'd like to see if cell carriers mirror home ISP. Get unlimited but pay for speed. I think that'd satisfy the market more.
02-12-2012 07:15 AM
Hammerwalk That all makes sense and I follow you completely but I have a question to add to this. Well more if a comment really.

Take the whole AT&T&T fiasco ( t-mobile merger deal that flopped on its ass) ,the main argument was that more providers allow more competition therefor lower prices.

I hate hearing that. Remember when AT&T and VZW were both all you can eat data? Then AT&T created a tiered data plan costing more? Ok so why, as a competitor, would you want to jack your prices up as well to follow you competitor instead of leaving your all you can eat data plan as a beacon for more customers? Everyone knows VZW has a far more superior network than AT&T :-D

I know there is some algorithm that the bean counters have probably made up to make more money but it certainly doesn't go with the whole " more competition means lower prices" crap that keeps being said.
02-12-2012 05:56 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvertChaos
The thing that blows my mind is how they can charge more and more, yet throttle the connection, and no longer offer unlimited data. Tech is supposed to get cheaper and improve as time progresses, not the opposite.
I'll try to explain, because it is not that simple.

Let's go back 6 years. The most advanced smartphone was a blackberry. Carriers LOVE them bc RIM uses their own server to help break down data and transfer it. Decrease the load on cellular network dramatically. 3G coverage was smaller than the 4G footprint today. And the 3G that was available was not as fast as current 3G (even within 3G there are different tiers. Evdo rev b, evdo rev a, etc)

Go back approx 2 years ago. Carriers have multiple challenges. One is more people using smartphones. That requires more towers, more bandwidth (the single most important thing in cellular technology), better support for the cell sites (this ranges from more salesman, call center reps, network technicians, land and federal licensing for towers, etc). Another challenge is the smartphones themselves. Not only is there an increase in user base but the phones are consuming more data than ever. While average BB user consumes approx 50mb a month the average iPhone and android user is closer to 500mb, with some in the Gb range. So the network strain increases exponentially.

So in a few short years the network roll out, at a cost of billions per year (VZW has averaged $5 billion a year last 6 years or so) just to maintain current growth. Remember first two years AT&T had iPhone? Network crashed a lot. Became a joke. Bc the switch from primarily BB users to iPhone users.

All that before factoring in cost of rolling out future technologies (4G) that runs on an entirely diff spectrum which for Verizon is 700mhz. That has to be bought. Vzw bought majority of theirs during the analog to digital switch. That means new cell sites, new training, more employees, etc.

In theory home ISP have no cap on volume, just speed. And speed primarily capped by wire type. But with cellular technology there is a very real finite amount of data than can be transferred at once based on the spectrum.

One more factor that few see, even majority of employees, is what companies call connected devices. Cell phones ate not only things using the network. Scanners, vehicles with built-in broadband devices, home electronics (think washer machine, tv, even locks) are being developed and tested as well.

I spent few days in NY two weeks ago looking and testing some of the stuff that's out in limited supply or being tested for release. I don't know how much will be a success but some is quite amazing.

But to answer: the tech has been rolled out wider footprint than before, speeds increased, while user base increased. So it has not remained stagnant. Voice/SMS technology has not evolved much so that has become cheaper (voice is changing soon. Vzw is testing VoIP for all calls. Few years before nat'l deployment though)
02-12-2012 12:07 AM
InvertChaos The thing that blows my mind is how they can charge more and more, yet throttle the connection, and no longer offer unlimited data. Tech is supposed to get cheaper and improve as time progresses, not the opposite.
02-12-2012 12:04 AM
Susiee
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightsidememe View Post
I paid $300 to leave att horrible reception. Verizon is great they just slow down my data.
Oh and att does the same when you use more than 5gb
i know i hate AT&T too and i just upgraded not so long ago so I'm stuck with them for about two more years
I'm thinking of sprint next

for internet steal everyones internet jk
02-11-2012 11:51 PM
Dorambo Vzw*
02-11-2012 11:50 PM
Dorambo I work for a vendor company. I'm actually doing 4G LTE surveys in Texas for the ice age towns as I type this.
02-11-2012 09:34 PM
commodore_dude
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightsidememe View Post
Yeah but sprint sucks. They're already abounding their wimax technology and switching to LTE like verizon. And I think they started throttling data too
Like I said... then you have Sprint
02-11-2012 07:47 PM
brightsidememe Look at my speeds. No other network comes close to verizon. Specifically the second from the top
02-11-2012 07:44 PM
brightsidememe
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

They don't have best rates. The cellular companies are more or less in tiers. AT&T and Verizon are at the top. Give you an idea: Sprint and T-Mobile together are smaller than each if them individually. They literally control the market. Android was a blip on the market share while being avail on T-Mo and Sprint. When VZW got android it exploded (along with their marketing of Droid)

The 2nd tier is Sprint and T-Mo. Nat'l carriers but with a fraction of revenue or market share. They both market themselves differently as well (with Sprint being the cheap big guy and T-Mo being the cheap youthful/trendy one)

Afterwards have regional carriers like Cricket, US cellular, etc.

Sprint can not have the nationwide coverage and data speeds of Verizon without raising their price and eliminating unlimited data (they will unequivocally eliminate unlimited data within a couple years max) so as a customer you gotta hope you live in an area with good Sprint coverage and don't need customer service.

For customer service awards the winner is always VZW or T-Mo. One of them always wins (currently VZW is the latest winner of the JD Power award)

On a slightly related note about unlimited data: it maybe awhile down the road but home ISP are discussing capping that data limit as well.

There are very valid reasons why data plans are capped or throttled. Just like with many changes, it's the few who ruin for the majority.

And for those, like myself, who are grandfathered into unlimited data plans: enjoy them. Because they won't last forever. Shortly after Sprint drops theirs expect AT&T and Verizon to start phasing out the feature from accounts by way of forcing you to change once you upgrade your contract.
If it wasn't for verizon and the Droid brand Android wouldn't of been successful. I like how you think man.
02-11-2012 07:41 PM
brightsidememe
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodore_dude
Sprint is the only carrier that won't throttle your data at a certain point. And well... then you have Sprint. Try being somewhere where you can use wifi?
Yeah but sprint sucks. They're already abounding their wimax technology and switching to LTE like verizon. And I think they started throttling data too
02-11-2012 07:39 PM
brightsidememe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Susiee
switch to AT&T
I paid $300 to leave att horrible reception. Verizon is great they just slow down my data.
Oh and att does the same when you use more than 5gb
02-11-2012 06:21 PM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorambo
Well played Sir Fanboy
Ha thanks.

Obviously I work there (it's been on my profile since I started in this site) but I truly believe it is a quality company that is hugely beneficial for America. It is a positive example of a well run capitalist venture. Employees are treated above market standard, the product is consistently above market standard, and it invest back into the communities and people who build it.
02-11-2012 03:05 PM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackdUp
Although Verizon seems to have the best coverage, I don't think they have the best rates. If Sprint would ever up their coverage, they'd be perfect. Plus, Sprint has an unlimited data plan.
They don't have best rates. The cellular companies are more or less in tiers. AT&T and Verizon are at the top. Give you an idea: Sprint and T-Mobile together are smaller than each if them individually. They literally control the market. Android was a blip on the market share while being avail on T-Mo and Sprint. When VZW got android it exploded (along with their marketing of Droid)

The 2nd tier is Sprint and T-Mo. Nat'l carriers but with a fraction of revenue or market share. They both market themselves differently as well (with Sprint being the cheap big guy and T-Mo being the cheap youthful/trendy one)

Afterwards have regional carriers like Cricket, US cellular, etc.

Sprint can not have the nationwide coverage and data speeds of Verizon without raising their price and eliminating unlimited data (they will unequivocally eliminate unlimited data within a couple years max) so as a customer you gotta hope you live in an area with good Sprint coverage and don't need customer service.

For customer service awards the winner is always VZW or T-Mo. One of them always wins (currently VZW is the latest winner of the JD Power award)

On a slightly related note about unlimited data: it maybe awhile down the road but home ISP are discussing capping that data limit as well.

There are very valid reasons why data plans are capped or throttled. Just like with many changes, it's the few who ruin for the majority.

And for those, like myself, who are grandfathered into unlimited data plans: enjoy them. Because they won't last forever. Shortly after Sprint drops theirs expect AT&T and Verizon to start phasing out the feature from accounts by way of forcing you to change once you upgrade your contract.
02-11-2012 01:26 PM
JackdUp Although Verizon seems to have the best coverage, I don't think they have the best rates. If Sprint would ever up their coverage, they'd be perfect. Plus, Sprint has an unlimited data plan.
02-11-2012 01:22 PM
Dorambo Well played Sir Fanboy
02-11-2012 12:57 PM
commodore_dude
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys View Post
One great thing about Verizon, and to my knowledge all 4 big cell companies, they do not outsource. 100% of the time when you call support will get someone in the states. They treat their employees well ranging from bonuses, money for college, and vast majority of supervisors and associate directors are hired from within. Not perfect, but a quality American company.

To the people using 10-16gbs a month: has that's awesome. I stream a ton of pandora and rarely exceed 6-7gb
Yup, Verizon is the best for customer service AND cell service. Just helps if you were grandfathered in with unlimited data
02-11-2012 10:15 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvertChaos

I guess that makes more sense. After thinking about it for a bit, it may have been their Prepaid division, Boost mobile, that continues to grow. I don't know, I'm running off of 3 he's of sleep here lol.
That is true. Boost is one of the most profitable prepaid services. Very popular.
Generally prepaid less profitable compared to postpaid but any profit is good profit.
02-11-2012 10:12 AM
InvertChaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

Net adds, not gross adds.

161K is after losing. 720K before.

At least that's my understanding.
I guess that makes more sense. After thinking about it for a bit, it may have been their Prepaid division, Boost mobile, that continues to grow. I don't know, I'm running off of 3 he's of sleep here lol.
02-11-2012 10:10 AM
fan of fanboys
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvertChaos

Yep just found the link that you just posted

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspe...ut-margins-dip

It says that 1.8 million iPhones were sold, 40% of which were to new customers. 40% of 1.8 million is not 161,000 so the numbers aren't exactly adding up though. By my math that should be 720000.
Net adds, not gross adds.

161K is after losing. 720K before.

At least that's my understanding.
02-11-2012 10:08 AM
fan of fanboys One great thing about Verizon, and to my knowledge all 4 big cell companies, they do not outsource. 100% of the time when you call support will get someone in the states. They treat their employees well ranging from bonuses, money for college, and vast majority of supervisors and associate directors are hired from within. Not perfect, but a quality American company.

To the people using 10-16gbs a month: has that's awesome. I stream a ton of pandora and rarely exceed 6-7gb
02-11-2012 10:07 AM
InvertChaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

Ha no prob!
Yep just found the link that you just posted

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspe...ut-margins-dip

It says that 1.8 million iPhones were sold, 40% of which were to new customers. 40% of 1.8 million is not 161,000 so the numbers aren't exactly adding up though. By my math that should be 720000.
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:26 AM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC