Well I know he went to a bunch of places and they all said he would either have to sign a two year deal or give them a deposit of $175 if he wanted a month to month plan and he'd get it back at the end of the two yrs. How stupid is that?
I think that can be waved at some level, but it is mostly how they are set up. If you don?t have an TaxID (SSN) or your credit is bad, it?s how they put you in the system. The deposit ensures that you aren?t going to skip out on a large bill. He can think of it as an interest-free saving account.
I think that can be waved at some level, but it is mostly how they are set up. If you don?t have an TaxID (SSN) or your credit is bad, it?s how they put you in the system. The deposit ensures that you aren?t going to skip out on a large bill. He can think of it as an interest-free saving account.
I would have no problem with them wanting a deposit so one doesn't run up a huge bill, but let's say after 6 months he decides AT&T is crap and doesn't want their service anymore and up until then he's been a good customer, they're still gonna dick him for the 175
I would have no problem with them wanting a deposit so one doesn't run up a huge bill, but let's say after 6 months he decides AT&T is crap and doesn't want their service anymore and up until then he's been a good customer, they're still gonna dick him for the 175
Yeah with the stipulation that he'll get it at the end of the two years. Most deposits for people with bad credit is given back after 6 months. My friend does not have bad credit. In essence if he signs a two year deal and decides to cancel early they'll hit him with the 175 fee or pay the 175 upfront and if he cancels early they'll keep it. Why?, if he's providing the device.
Verizons's CDMA Smart Phones CAN ?? NOT ?? do Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME, thus they are like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
In contrast, I was on the phone with ATT at ATT Store with ATT's 611, and Browsing on iPhone just fine on 3Gs, with WiFi Off!
Same with a unimpressive Google's My Touch, that was not even LIVE on a Display, but I borrowed one from a Sales Lady at T-Mobile... What a meek store it was...
Of course, when you are DRIVING, you are not gonna do Data, but EITHER OR, when you need to Hang Up the phone to go to a website, and vs. - that's like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
So, THINK OF THAT next time you see all Verizon Commercials!!!
So............ WAITING for iPhone on Verizon is SILLY NOW! Unless Verizon is about to offer Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME any day! And , I am not talking about LTE 4G, whenever it's actually available everywhere, not just in Test Market locations!
And like I've always said -- it's the SUPPORT!!!
NONE of those stores can compete with Apple Stores & Apple Care support of iPhone, all other iPhone online communities! Add the App Store on iTunes!
Now I gotta decide between Bento or and Missing Sync to Sync my Memos/Notes that I need to transfer from Palm Treo 700p!
Documents To Go Editing Word 2004 Files should help too...
Verizons's CDMA Smart Phones CAN ?? NOT ?? do Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME, thus they are like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
Sitting on hold in the queue with the speaker phone on or headphones in while using your phone is great. That is not a feature I wish to give up.
PS: Possible reason for much of AT&T?s network issues?
"It appears AT&T Wireless has configured their RNC buffers so there is no packet loss, i.e. with buffers capable of holding more than ten seconds of data. Zero packet loss may sound impressive to a telephone guy, but it causes TCP congestion collapse and thus doesn't work for the mobile Internet!"
Maybe that's why people in other countries have no idea what you Americans keep whining about.
My iPhone works fine, almost everywhere I go with Vodafone Australia, both voice and data.
It would be pretty good if you could enjoy the same multitasking (voice and data) service I have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Possible reason for much of AT&T’s network issues?
"It appears AT&T Wireless has configured their RNC buffers so there is no packet loss, i.e. with buffers capable of holding more than ten seconds of data. Zero packet loss may sound impressive to a telephone guy, but it causes TCP congestion collapse and thus doesn't work for the mobile Internet!"
AT&T gained 1.385 million postpaid retail subscribers, lost 176K prepaid retail subscribers and gained 817K wholesale (Tracfone) subscribers. On Monday, Verizon is probably going to announce that they gain 1.3 million retail subscribers, 95% of them postpaid.
Essentially a tie with AT&T.
Well, Verizon reported and it's not a tie with AT&T. 1.2 million new subscribers, but only 1.0 million retail subscribers. That's almost 25% less than samab's prediction. Haven't had a chance to look through the details to how many of that 1.0 million is postpaid, so it's even less (though likely not by much).
As for retail postpaid churn (measure of people leaving), it's up to 1.13, just a bit less than AT&T's 1.17. Smallest gap ever between the two. Over last 3 years, Verizon 3Q churn was 0.96, 1.03, and 1.13, while AT&T was 1.31, 1.22, 1.17. See the trend?
And Verizon total churn ballooned to 1.49, higher than AT&T's 1.43. Last 3 years for Verizon: 1.27, 1.33, 1.49. For AT&T: 1.70, 1.69, 1.43. See the trend?
Well, Verizon reported and it's not a tie with AT&T. 1.2 million new subscribers, but only 1.0 million retail subscribers. That's almost 25% less than samab's prediction. Haven't had a chance to look through the details to how many of that 1.0 million is postpaid, so it's even less (though likely not by much).
As for retail postpaid churn (measure of people leaving), it's up to 1.13, just a bit less than AT&T's 1.17. Smallest gap ever between the two. Over last 3 years, Verizon 3Q churn was 0.96, 1.03, and 1.13, while AT&T was 1.31, 1.22, 1.17. See the trend?
And Verizon total churn ballooned to 1.49, higher than AT&T's 1.43. Last 3 years for Verizon: 1.27, 1.33, 1.49. For AT&T: 1.70, 1.69, 1.43. See the trend?
So no tie, but an iPhone kicking.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T beat Verizon in the one full quarter of the new iphone launch. That's pretty bad, isn't it? That's a iphone launch quarter --- so that's as good as it is going to get. What about the other 3 quarters when AT&T doesn't have an iphone launch quarter?
Both Verizon and AT&T are making money hand over fist. A lot of this is just comes down to who has the biggest **** contest.
Verizon never really craved on that number 1 crown. VZW lost their number 1 carrier status when Cingular Wireless bought AT&T Wireless. VZW could have closed that gap a lot faster (or even beat AT&T in the number 1 crown) if VZW decided to get market share by looking at prepaid and MVNO's. But VZW didn't care about market share or the number 1 crown.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T beat Verizon in the one full quarter of the new iphone launch. That's pretty bad, isn't it? That's a iphone launch quarter --- so that's as good as it is going to get. What about the other 3 quarters when AT&T doesn't have an iphone launch quarter?
We were just discussing 3Q. But since you asked, looking back over all quarters since 2Q07 (iPhone launch during last couple of days), AT&T and Verizon are neck and neck in total new subscribers added. (My numbers have AT&T ahead but I think my AT&T numbers include some acquisition adds in 4Q07.) Verizon didn't report retail postpaid subscriber adds until this last fiscal year so can't really comment further on postpaid. But at first glance, looking at total adds, it looks like AT&T also beats Verizon in the Christmas quarter.
As for retail postpaid churn, here's the full string beginning 2Q07:
There's some seasonality (calendar 2nd quarters have lower churn, 3rd quarters have higher churn). But it's clear AT&T has closed the gap (from .35 to .04), and that AT&T's q-o-q results is going in the right direction, while Verizon's is not (for whatever reason).
We were just discussing 3Q. But since you asked, looking back over all quarters since 2Q07 (iPhone launch during last couple of days), AT&T and Verizon are neck and neck in total new subscribers added. (My numbers have AT&T ahead but I think my AT&T numbers include some acquisition adds in 4Q07.) Verizon didn't report retail postpaid subscriber adds until this last fiscal year so can't really comment further on postpaid. But at first glance, looking at total adds, it looks like AT&T also beats Verizon in the Christmas quarter.
As for postpaid churn, here's the full string beginning 2Q07:
There's some seasonality (calendar 2nd quarters have lower churn, 3rd quarters have higher churn). But it's clear AT&T has closed the gap (from .35 to .04), and that AT&T's q-o-q results is going in the right direction, while Verizon's is not (for whatever reason).
If you look at the actual SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has always reported retail postpaid subscribres adds.
Yes, AT&T Wireless has really closed the gap on postpaid churn. But it is much harder for Verizon to obtain 1.13 postpaid churn on 80 million postpaid subscribers than AT&T Wireless to obtain 1.17 postpaid churn on 61 million postpaid subscribers. It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher betting averages in baseball if you don't have to play every single game.
If you look at the actual SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has always reported retail postpaid subscribres adds.
I was just using their spreadsheets and pdfs from their investor relations website. (I haven't been that interested in investing in either Verizon or AT&T to dig into their 10-K/10-Q. In the long run, it seems both will become pipes, so they could be a good "utility" stocks. Critical but too far down in the value chain.)
Quote:
It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher hitting averages in baseball if you don't to play every single game.
Is that really true? You can have higher hitting averages but also lower hitting averages because you don't play every single game. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying...
Yes, AT&T Wireless has really closed the gap on postpaid churn. But it is much harder for Verizon to obtain 1.13 postpaid churn on 80 million postpaid subscribers than AT&T Wireless to obtain 1.17 postpaid churn on 61 million postpaid subscribers. It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher betting averages in baseball if you don't have to play every single game.
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
Is that really true? You can have higher hitting averages but also lower hitting averages because you don't play every single game. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying...
I am not much of baseball fan (living in Toronto basically means that I lost all interest in baseball ever since the Jays stop spending money on free agency players since 1993).
Any baseball player can have a hot streak --- for a month, he can hit 350. But that batting average will come down as more and more games are played. Much harder for a player to hit 350 for the whole season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers. Yes, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7 million postpaid subscribers (pre Alltel merger). But the quarter when AT&T got really really close in churn numbers --- was in Q1 2009 when Verizon finally bought Alltel officially. Laws of large numbers and laws of averages --- Verizon's totally subscriber base went up by 10-15 million with the Alltel merger, of course their churn number had a big jump.
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
We have been talking about postpaid subscribers --- right now in Q3 2009, Verizon Wireless has 81 million postpaid subscribers and AT&T Wireless has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers.
We have been talking about postpaid subscribers --- right now in Q3 2009, Verizon Wireless has 81 million postpaid subscribers and AT&T Wireless has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers.
Ignoring certain subscribers because it makes your argument for Verizon looks better is like choosing to ignore all wireless subs that don?t pay for unlimited data to make AT&T look better.
Comments
Well I know he went to a bunch of places and they all said he would either have to sign a two year deal or give them a deposit of $175 if he wanted a month to month plan and he'd get it back at the end of the two yrs. How stupid is that?
I think that can be waved at some level, but it is mostly how they are set up. If you don?t have an TaxID (SSN) or your credit is bad, it?s how they put you in the system. The deposit ensures that you aren?t going to skip out on a large bill. He can think of it as an interest-free saving account.
I think that can be waved at some level, but it is mostly how they are set up. If you don?t have an TaxID (SSN) or your credit is bad, it?s how they put you in the system. The deposit ensures that you aren?t going to skip out on a large bill. He can think of it as an interest-free saving account.
I would have no problem with them wanting a deposit so one doesn't run up a huge bill, but let's say after 6 months he decides AT&T is crap and doesn't want their service anymore and up until then he's been a good customer, they're still gonna dick him for the 175
I would have no problem with them wanting a deposit so one doesn't run up a huge bill, but let's say after 6 months he decides AT&T is crap and doesn't want their service anymore and up until then he's been a good customer, they're still gonna dick him for the 175
Why? You said it was a deposit, not a fee.
Why? You said it was a deposit, not a fee.
Yeah with the stipulation that he'll get it at the end of the two years. Most deposits for people with bad credit is given back after 6 months. My friend does not have bad credit. In essence if he signs a two year deal and decides to cancel early they'll hit him with the 175 fee or pay the 175 upfront and if he cancels early they'll keep it. Why?, if he's providing the device.
Verizons's CDMA Smart Phones CAN ?? NOT ?? do Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME, thus they are like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
In contrast, I was on the phone with ATT at ATT Store with ATT's 611, and Browsing on iPhone just fine on 3Gs, with WiFi Off!
Same with a unimpressive Google's My Touch, that was not even LIVE on a Display, but I borrowed one from a Sales Lady at T-Mobile... What a meek store it was...
Of course, when you are DRIVING, you are not gonna do Data, but EITHER OR, when you need to Hang Up the phone to go to a website, and vs. - that's like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
So, THINK OF THAT next time you see all Verizon Commercials!!!
So............ WAITING for iPhone on Verizon is SILLY NOW
And like I've always said -- it's the SUPPORT!!!
NONE of those stores can compete with Apple Stores & Apple Care support of iPhone, all other iPhone online communities! Add the App Store on iTunes!
Now I gotta decide between Bento or and Missing Sync to Sync my Memos/Notes that I need to transfer from Palm Treo 700p!
Documents To Go Editing Word 2004 Files should help too...
Oops, I am getting oft topic
Yesterday, I reconfirmed something IMPORTANT:
Verizons's CDMA Smart Phones CAN •• NOT •• do Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME
This has been pointed out several times. In this thread. Including by me, about 15 posts up:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=151
Of course, when you are DRIVING, you are not gonna do Data
Depends. Some of the turn-by-turn direction apps depend on the data connection to download maps, traffic info, etc.
Yesterday, I reconfirmed something IMPORTANT:
Verizons's CDMA Smart Phones CAN ?? NOT ?? do Voice and Data AT THE SAME TIME, thus they are like DIAL UP OF OLD DAYS, WHEN YOU NEEDED A 2ND PHONE LINE!!!!
Sitting on hold in the queue with the speaker phone on or headphones in while using your phone is great. That is not a feature I wish to give up.
PS: Possible reason for much of AT&T?s network issues?
My iPhone works fine, almost everywhere I go with Vodafone Australia, both voice and data.
It would be pretty good if you could enjoy the same multitasking (voice and data) service I have.
Possible reason for much of AT&T’s network issues?
AT&T gained 1.385 million postpaid retail subscribers, lost 176K prepaid retail subscribers and gained 817K wholesale (Tracfone) subscribers. On Monday, Verizon is probably going to announce that they gain 1.3 million retail subscribers, 95% of them postpaid.
Essentially a tie with AT&T.
Well, Verizon reported and it's not a tie with AT&T. 1.2 million new subscribers, but only 1.0 million retail subscribers. That's almost 25% less than samab's prediction. Haven't had a chance to look through the details to how many of that 1.0 million is postpaid, so it's even less (though likely not by much).
As for retail postpaid churn (measure of people leaving), it's up to 1.13, just a bit less than AT&T's 1.17. Smallest gap ever between the two. Over last 3 years, Verizon 3Q churn was 0.96, 1.03, and 1.13, while AT&T was 1.31, 1.22, 1.17. See the trend?
And Verizon total churn ballooned to 1.49, higher than AT&T's 1.43. Last 3 years for Verizon: 1.27, 1.33, 1.49. For AT&T: 1.70, 1.69, 1.43. See the trend?
So no tie, but an iPhone kicking.
Well, Verizon reported and it's not a tie with AT&T. 1.2 million new subscribers, but only 1.0 million retail subscribers. That's almost 25% less than samab's prediction. Haven't had a chance to look through the details to how many of that 1.0 million is postpaid, so it's even less (though likely not by much).
As for retail postpaid churn (measure of people leaving), it's up to 1.13, just a bit less than AT&T's 1.17. Smallest gap ever between the two. Over last 3 years, Verizon 3Q churn was 0.96, 1.03, and 1.13, while AT&T was 1.31, 1.22, 1.17. See the trend?
And Verizon total churn ballooned to 1.49, higher than AT&T's 1.43. Last 3 years for Verizon: 1.27, 1.33, 1.49. For AT&T: 1.70, 1.69, 1.43. See the trend?
So no tie, but an iPhone kicking.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T beat Verizon in the one full quarter of the new iphone launch. That's pretty bad, isn't it? That's a iphone launch quarter --- so that's as good as it is going to get. What about the other 3 quarters when AT&T doesn't have an iphone launch quarter?
Both Verizon and AT&T are making money hand over fist. A lot of this is just comes down to who has the biggest **** contest.
Verizon never really craved on that number 1 crown. VZW lost their number 1 carrier status when Cingular Wireless bought AT&T Wireless. VZW could have closed that gap a lot faster (or even beat AT&T in the number 1 crown) if VZW decided to get market share by looking at prepaid and MVNO's. But VZW didn't care about market share or the number 1 crown.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T beat Verizon in the one full quarter of the new iphone launch. That's pretty bad, isn't it? That's a iphone launch quarter --- so that's as good as it is going to get. What about the other 3 quarters when AT&T doesn't have an iphone launch quarter?
We were just discussing 3Q. But since you asked, looking back over all quarters since 2Q07 (iPhone launch during last couple of days), AT&T and Verizon are neck and neck in total new subscribers added. (My numbers have AT&T ahead but I think my AT&T numbers include some acquisition adds in 4Q07.) Verizon didn't report retail postpaid subscriber adds until this last fiscal year so can't really comment further on postpaid. But at first glance, looking at total adds, it looks like AT&T also beats Verizon in the Christmas quarter.
As for retail postpaid churn, here's the full string beginning 2Q07:
AT&T: 1.20, 1.31, 1.23, 1.25, 1.10, 1.22, 1.20, 1.20, 1.09, 1.17
Veriz: 0.85, 0.96, 0.94, 0.93, 0.83, 1.03, 1.05, 1.14, 1.01, 1.13
There's some seasonality (calendar 2nd quarters have lower churn, 3rd quarters have higher churn). But it's clear AT&T has closed the gap (from .35 to .04), and that AT&T's q-o-q results is going in the right direction, while Verizon's is not (for whatever reason).
We were just discussing 3Q. But since you asked, looking back over all quarters since 2Q07 (iPhone launch during last couple of days), AT&T and Verizon are neck and neck in total new subscribers added. (My numbers have AT&T ahead but I think my AT&T numbers include some acquisition adds in 4Q07.) Verizon didn't report retail postpaid subscriber adds until this last fiscal year so can't really comment further on postpaid. But at first glance, looking at total adds, it looks like AT&T also beats Verizon in the Christmas quarter.
As for postpaid churn, here's the full string beginning 2Q07:
AT&T: 1.20, 1.31, 1.23, 1.25, 1.10, 1.22, 1.20, 1.20, 1.09, 1.17
Veriz: 0.85, 0.96, 0.94, 0.93, 0.83, 1.03, 1.05, 1.14, 1.01, 1.13
There's some seasonality (calendar 2nd quarters have lower churn, 3rd quarters have higher churn). But it's clear AT&T has closed the gap (from .35 to .04), and that AT&T's q-o-q results is going in the right direction, while Verizon's is not (for whatever reason).
If you look at the actual SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has always reported retail postpaid subscribres adds.
Yes, AT&T Wireless has really closed the gap on postpaid churn. But it is much harder for Verizon to obtain 1.13 postpaid churn on 80 million postpaid subscribers than AT&T Wireless to obtain 1.17 postpaid churn on 61 million postpaid subscribers. It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher betting averages in baseball if you don't have to play every single game.
If you look at the actual SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has always reported retail postpaid subscribres adds.
I was just using their spreadsheets and pdfs from their investor relations website. (I haven't been that interested in investing in either Verizon or AT&T to dig into their 10-K/10-Q. In the long run, it seems both will become pipes, so they could be a good "utility" stocks. Critical but too far down in the value chain.)
It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher hitting averages in baseball if you don't to play every single game.
Is that really true? You can have higher hitting averages but also lower hitting averages because you don't play every single game. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying...
Yes, AT&T Wireless has really closed the gap on postpaid churn. But it is much harder for Verizon to obtain 1.13 postpaid churn on 80 million postpaid subscribers than AT&T Wireless to obtain 1.17 postpaid churn on 61 million postpaid subscribers. It's the laws of large numbers and laws of the averages (it's also october --- world series coming up). Much easier to get higher betting averages in baseball if you don't have to play every single game.
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
Is that really true? You can have higher hitting averages but also lower hitting averages because you don't play every single game. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying...
I am not much of baseball fan (living in Toronto basically means that I lost all interest in baseball ever since the Jays stop spending money on free agency players since 1993).
Any baseball player can have a hot streak --- for a month, he can hit 350. But that batting average will come down as more and more games are played. Much harder for a player to hit 350 for the whole season.
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
Yes, you are right --- AT&T has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers. Yes, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7 million postpaid subscribers (pre Alltel merger). But the quarter when AT&T got really really close in churn numbers --- was in Q1 2009 when Verizon finally bought Alltel officially. Laws of large numbers and laws of averages --- Verizon's totally subscriber base went up by 10-15 million with the Alltel merger, of course their churn number had a big jump.
For calendar years 2007 and 2008, which is most of the list, AT&T only trailed Verizon by about 6-7m postpaid subscribers. And AT&T has 63.4m postpaid subscribers.
Verizon is only 7.6M subs away from AT&T now.
Verizon is only 7.6M subs away from AT&T now.
We have been talking about postpaid subscribers --- right now in Q3 2009, Verizon Wireless has 81 million postpaid subscribers and AT&T Wireless has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers.
We have been talking about postpaid subscribers --- right now in Q3 2009, Verizon Wireless has 81 million postpaid subscribers and AT&T Wireless has 63.4 million postpaid subscribers.
Ignoring certain subscribers because it makes your argument for Verizon looks better is like choosing to ignore all wireless subs that don?t pay for unlimited data to make AT&T look better.