Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32
  1. #21  
    Sprints main problem is their awful coverage. Take a coverage map of Sprint, and compare to any of the other carriers. Terrible. I watched their coverage for years, because I wanted to switch, cause they were cheaper. I know their coverage map did not change for 5 years. While the others were adding cell sites left, and right. They have added some the last few years, due to the hybrid CDMA/IDEN phones. Where they added Sprint antennas to the existing Nextel ones. That is what is Sprints problem. Way behind in coverage. It is kinda bad, when Nextel had better coverage than Sprint, and the merger forced them to try and catch up on the Sprint side. The only thing that keeps Sprint from going under is the roaming agreements they have.
    Matty
  2. TimmyB's Avatar
    Posts
    422 Posts
    Global Posts
    713 Global Posts
    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by matty032 View Post
    Sprints main problem is their awful coverage. Take a coverage map of Sprint, and compare to any of the other carriers. Terrible. I watched their coverage for years, because I wanted to switch, cause they were cheaper. I know their coverage map did not change for 5 years. While the others were adding cell sites left, and right. They have added some the last few years, due to the hybrid CDMA/IDEN phones. Where they added Sprint antennas to the existing Nextel ones. That is what is Sprints problem. Way behind in coverage. It is kinda bad, when Nextel had better coverage than Sprint, and the merger forced them to try and catch up on the Sprint side. The only thing that keeps Sprint from going under is the roaming agreements they have.
    I have to believe you are absolutely correct on this. My daughter left Alltel a couple of years ago (where she had NO coverage issues) and switched to Nextel, because her boyfriend was on there. No problems there, either... until Sprint and Nextel merged. Her amount of dropped calls and "no service" areas simply exploded after they began sharing services. Her contract finally ended a couple of months ago and she is (happily) back with Alltel now.

    This is the one (and ONLY) reason that I don't have a Centro yet. I have no idea if they have customer service as bad as everyone says; it's moot if they don't provide coverage to begin with.
  3. mikecc's Avatar
    Posts
    143 Posts
    Global Posts
    362 Global Posts
       #23  
    Every carrier can offer push to talk these days. Nextel already lost their competetive advantage(that's the main reason Sprint acquired them in the first place, not for the coverage area). However, Sprint had trouble integrating the iden into its existing network. In fact, they had to give up some of Nextel's, in order to build on 3G, that's why some of you lost the coverage. Another reason people use less push to talk is the popular use of bluetooth headsets, they can talk without even holding onto the phone. How easy is that.
    Get the latest cell phone news and deals at www.icellphonedeals.com.
    I got my new phones free at bestincellphones.com, where did you get yours?
  4. indyalex's Avatar
    Posts
    27 Posts
    Global Posts
    34 Global Posts
    #24  
    I've been with Sprint 9 yrs.,I think they offer a good selection of ph's & plans but their billing&some of their customer service rep's absolutley Suck.I will be moving on in a few mo's,I have'nt decided who I'll go with or wheather I'll stay with Palm(had 650,now 700p).
    Palm has it's own problems that have little or nothing to do with Sprint..From an economic stand point it makes sense to stay with palm(ph./software investment)but unless they do better I move on from them too. indyalex.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by indyalex View Post
    I've been with Sprint 9 yrs.,I think they offer a good selection of ph's & plans but their billing&some of their customer service rep's absolutley Suck.I will be moving on in a few mo's,I have'nt decided who I'll go with or wheather I'll stay with Palm(had 650,now 700p).
    Palm has it's own problems that have little or nothing to do with Sprint..From an economic stand point it makes sense to stay with palm(ph./software investment)but unless they do better I move on from them too. indyalex.
    I am down to one application on my 650, e-books. Have moved to iPhone for all other applications. Expect to have e-books in weeks to months. Will never look back.
    Up the next election, my citizens; always the next election.
  6. #26  
    I left Cingular( or was it AT&T or no wait aminute it WAS Cingular, no, it was Bell South Mobility, or was it Cellular one) and went to Sprint - and am VERY pleased with their signal reception. But then again I also am using a Sanyo phone now and went back to using my Palm T3 after all the trouble I had with the Treos 650 to 680s.

    I can't help but think that the issues I had with several of the Treo's WERE because of carrier problems because I had similar issues when I bought Sony Ericcson and Nokia phones.

    I soooo want a working Treo - it would simplify my life - well, at least would be one less item to put in my pockets! But I'll admit - I'm leary of them.

    But issues with Sprint stores and layoffs being caused by Palm devices? I'd hardly think so - when there are many more MOTOROLA items in a Sprint store than there are Palm.

    COuld it be that the merger of NEXTEL is the real culprit?

    Cheers! Kim
    This PRE is MINE all MINE! But if you ask nice I might let you hold it!
  7. TimmyB's Avatar
    Posts
    422 Posts
    Global Posts
    713 Global Posts
    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Forgewizard View Post

    COuld it be that the merger of NEXTEL is the real culprit?

    Cheers! Kim
    I'm no expert, but I think you are right.

    tim
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    ...

    Strategically they made a huge blunder when they bought and merged with Nextel. Sprint absolutely mangled the conversion of Nextel's customers (to their network). Alienating those subscribers was a monumental and costly screw up. From what I know Nextel's custormers had been a pretty satisfied and profitable group before Sprint arrived (uninvited ??).

    Most of Sextel's current troubles can be dated from that blunder.
    "...Sprint Nextel, based in Overland Park, Kan., said it lost $29.5 billion, or $10.36 per share, during the quarter ending Dec. 31. By comparison, the company earned $261 million, or 9 cents per share, during the same period a year ago.

    The company said last month it would likely have to write off most of the remaining $30.7 billion in non-cash goodwill value from the acquisition of Nextel and a number of affiliates. Sprint Nextel has struggled since the purchase, plagued by technical problems, unfocused marketing and a difficulty in merging the two companies' work forces into a cohesive whole..."

    By today writing off $30 BILLION dollars, Sprint has in effect recognized that their Sextel merger was a worthless, destructive blunder.
    Last edited by BARYE; 02/28/2008 at 05:44 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    "...Sprint Nextel, based in Overland Park, Kan., said it lost $29.5 billion, or $10.36 per share, during the quarter ending Dec. 31. By comparison, the company earned $261 million, or 9 cents per share, during the same period a year ago.

    The company said last month it would likely have to write off most of the remaining $30.7 billion in non-cash goodwill value from the acquisition of Nextel and a number of affiliates. Sprint Nextel has struggled since the purchase, plagued by technical problems, unfocused marketing and a difficulty in merging the two companies' work forces into a cohesive whole..."

    By today writing off $30 BILLION dollars, Sprint has in effect recognized that their Sextel merger was a worthless, destructive blunder.
    Well, one clearly cannot blame Palm for that.
    Up the next election, my citizens; always the next election.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Well, one clearly cannot blame Palm for that.
    indeed.

    The "creativity" of corporate sorcerers is almost never rewarded with personal consequences that reflect those that emerge from their brilliant alchemy.

    I fully anticipate that the M$ / yahnoo = Boo hoo mashup will bear a similar abortion ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  11. #31  
    In the VERY Old days (gosh, before cell phones even) I used to do a lot of telephone regulatory work. Every time Sprint had some sort of new offering that wasn't part of their authorized monopoly, they seemed to have trouble. The long-standing joke about Sprint was that they would lose money on every sale, but make up for it in volume.

    [Of course, what we call Sprint today is really mostly GTE -Southern Pacific sold "Sprint" to one of the GTE companies in 1982- and in 1986 there was the mergers of GTE/Sprint with US Telcom, GTE Telnet (which, at this point, was a separate "GTE" Company) and several other companies. The Sprint name eventually won out, thanks, in large part, to the success of the Candice Bergan ads. The "dime" ads won out over "Gee...its GTE.."]

    You saw this problem with GTE/Sprint's ability to compete in an open market with payphones, directory services, pager services, Inter-LATA long distance service (don't ask), yellow pages and more.

    I just don't think Sprint management and employees were ever really in-tune with the unregulated open market. It may have changed by now, but it takes a long time to weed out that sort of mentality. Replacing the CEO doesn't do it, its all the mid-level managers that were brought up in a culture where a set rate of return was guaranteed by the regulatory agencies no matter what you did or didn't do and where customers had no other options. I saw similar things at Southwester Bell where I used to work. Some people had worked their whole lives never having to compete with another company and just couldn't adjust.

    When cell phones first came into real use, each geographical area(in most of the country) was awarded two cell phone licenses. One generally went to the landline company and the other was auctioned off. So even then, at the start of the cell phone business, it was still a partial monopoly, especially since it took a while for the non-landline companies to move into servicing many of the areas Sprint was in.

    Of course, Sprint has gotten rid of most of its regulated monopoly business at this point (Embarq) and is left with what they, historically, didn't do best -- the open market.

    IMO you still see vestiges of this mentality at times, things like fighting to keep WiFi off of the phones*, the roadblocks to tethering, limited phone choices, the failure to put enough emphasis on customer service training to keep existing customers happy, "passing the buck" on service problems, doing the "nickel and dime" thing over and over again on billing and charges and so forth. It's like sometimes they have not realized that people now have other options and can dump Sprint and go somewhere else without too much difficulty.

    Ironically, in many areas Sprint is no worse and sometimes even better than its competitors. My old SBC/Cingular billing and charges were constantly wrong and ATT service, in our area, is pretty bad. It just seems with Sprint they have had a confluence of issues all hitting at the same time combined with a merger that has not worked well at all for them - a merger that seems to fit right in with our old GTE/Sprint joke -- They are losing money on each customer, but will make it up by adding more customers! Simply adding customers and market share always equaled more profit in a regulated arena, not so in todays marketplace.

    Lastly, don't tell Sprint this, but they could have made LOTS more money off of the Smartphone data plans. Their data plans have been MUCH lower than the competitors and, frankly, there is no real reason why they could not have been charging at least a little more - while still being the cheapest. If everybody is selling the same widget and the competition sells their's for $8.00/widget you are silly selling yours for $2.00/widget. You could sell them for more and still undercut the competitor. (As an aside, I am wondering how many of those that have recently left sprint were data users and how many of them are going to be shocked when they see there new bill, maybe they will be coming back...). Again this may be a vestige of the old not understanding the competitive marketplace mentality, albeit a vestige that has personally saved me big bucks! [Of course, you can make the point that Sprint's data plans HAVE to be a LOT lower to keep people because of their other issues. I don't think that is the case for most data users and, even it it was, still shows a poor grasp of marketing/service in the competitive market.]

    So did the relationship with Palm cause Sprints problems? No way. However you can see some of Sprint's problems reflected in the relationship with Palm and how that translated to the customers. The Sprint-Palm relationship exhibits some of the symptoms, but Sprint has had the disease for a long time.


    *This is one of my favorites. I was talking to a Sprint person once about no wi-fi. His response is that he had heard somebody did a study that said if there was widespread wi-fi on the Sprint phones, they could lose up to 15% percent off of their usage revenue in the metropolitan areas. My response was, if the customer switches to AA&T, guess what, you have lost 100%.
    Last edited by midmofan; 02/29/2008 at 12:27 PM.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by midmofan View Post
    In the VERY Old days (gosh, before cell phones even) I used to do a lot of telephone regulatory work. Every time Sprint had some sort of new offering that wasn't part of their authorized monopoly, they seemed to have trouble. The long-standing joke about Sprint was that they would lose money on every sale, but make up for it in volume.

    [Of course, what we call Sprint today is really mostly GTE -Southern Pacific sold "Sprint" to one of the GTE companies in 1982- and in 1986 there was the mergers of GTE/Sprint with US Telcom, GTE Telnet (which, at this point, was a separate "GTE" Company) and several other companies. The Sprint name eventually won out, thanks, in large part, to the success of the Candice Bergan ads. The "dime" ads won out over "Gee...its GTE.."] ...
    you bring an interesting point of view to GTE/Sprint/Sextel.

    As I'd written previously, my first encounter with Sprint dates from their emergence as the cell insurgent aborted fetus of the Washington Post.

    My recollection (which I can’t fact check despite major Googling) is that the Post was one of the early and main investors in PCS cell technology -- something that was then considered an unorthodox, less robust cell technique -- but one that had the potential to be less expensive.

    That investment made the Washington Post believe (not unfairly perhaps) that they were “entitled” to be awarded one of the two new PCS franchises to be awarded (at least for Washington, DC.).

    Before the franchises were to be awarded, The Washington Post -- not wanting to trust just to justice -- lobbied Missouri Republican Senator Danforth to insert a provision into a bill that would have the effect of guaranteeing that The Post got it.

    When this came to be revealed, the Post was pilloried for behaving just like the venal corporations that it sometimes investigated in its pages.

    Properly embarrassed, they either sold for a pittance or simply relinquished their rights to what became Sprint PCS.


    "...On September 29, 1994, the Post editorialized in favor of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade treaty (GATT), and noted that the bill contained “no surprises.” But there was a surprise: deep in the GATT legislation was a provision that, competitors complained, would guarantee lucrative licenses to the Post company. Rival companies blasted the Post in full-page advertisements, and it was soon revealed that Donald Graham himself had lobbied at least one senator, along with the Clinton administration, for the GATT provision involving his company.

    Mea culpas soon appeared in the newspaper, and the Post’s ombudsman wrote on October 9, 1994, that the controversy was “a heavy blow to the newspaper’s credibility.” Shortly thereafter, the Post relinquished its cell-phone holdings. The contours of this affair remain opaque even today — although Graham does admit now, “I undoubtedly asked Senator John Danforth to include this provision in the bill.” Graham continues: “In hindsight, there should have been an editorial that mentioned this provision in the GATT treaty. We clearly should have done that.” But he also says, “We run a business and make no apologies for the fact that we try to run it well.”
    Last edited by BARYE; 02/29/2008 at 04:28 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions