[d.moss]

verizon just keeps getting better and better.. NOT! facebook has become very powerful.. it would be awesome if it could lead to the demise of verizon.. i created a page for people to discuss the evils of verizon.. we need 2 million likes on this page

Verizon is Evil! I'm leaving/left/will never switch to Verizon. | Facebook

[peterlemonjello]

AT&T is worse.

[pavvento]

People choose with their wallets. I like the approach, but unless people actually stop renewing their contracts and signing on with Verizon this will continue. Fortunately for us the wireless landscape is quite competitive with 4 nationwide large carriers and a good amount of smaller regional carriers.

[rsanchez1]

People choose with their wallets.

Exactly. You can use Facebook to spread awareness, but the only way to stand up to Verizon is with your wallet and stop renewing contracts.

[d.moss]

Exactly. You can use Facebook to spread awareness, but the only way to stand up to Verizon is with your wallet and stop renewing contracts.

i agree.. but many are not even aware.. sadly a lot of people pay more attention to facebook than they do to contracts that they sign.. maybe them being made aware in a "user friendly" (i.e. facebook) fashion.. they will make a wiser decision with their wallets?

[UncleVanya]

I don't do facebook so I can't even evaluate your points. What are you mad about with them?

[Cantaffordit]

What specifically is the OP's gripe? I've been very happy with vzw.

[Mattykinsx]

AT&T is worse.

Finger pointing doesn't excuse Verizon's behavior. [Much like...fine I won't go there...]

I don't do facebook so I can't even evaluate your points. What are you mad about with them?

What specifically is the OP's gripe? I've been very happy with vzw.

Proving the ops point.


Verizon cuts returns to 14 days, upgrades pushed back to 20 months

[Cantaffordit]

Proving the ops point.


Verizon cuts returns to 14 days, upgrades pushed back to 20 months

Meh, the 15 day thing is a bummer, but all carriers will eventually do that. We see lots of users that switch "just for fun" and that costs the carriers a ton of money. Any phone I've returned has been within a few days because it became obvious right away that I wasn't going to like it.

And the 20 month thing really is just the elimination of the 12 month contract for a slightly more expensive phone. They have always provided upgrade incentives at 20 months for a 2-year contract.

I just wish they were forced to provide a 2 year hardware warranty to match the contract term because Assurion is so expensive and has to be carried during year one so it will be useful in year 2... All carriers do that, too, but I still don't like it.

[Mattykinsx]

Meh, the 15 day thing is a bummer, but all carriers will eventually do that. We see lots of users that switch "just for fun" and that costs the carriers a ton of money. Any phone I've returned has been within a few days because it became obvious right away that I wasn't going to like it.

And the 20 month thing really is just the elimination of the 12 month contract for a slightly more expensive phone. They have always provided upgrade incentives at 20 months for a 2-year contract.

I just wish they were forced to provide a 2 year hardware warranty to match the contract term because Assurion is so expensive and has to be carried during year one so it will be useful in year 2... All carriers do that, too, but I still don't like it.

I don't believe, at all, that all carriers will shorten the length.

I DO believe that they may tighten the rules to get rid of blatant abuse.


The removal of yearly upgrades [without paying $600 outright] is, very likely, due to an agreement between Apple and Verizon.

And it's wrong.

Especially with the advancement of mobile technology.
2 years?

Ha... yeah that was fine a few years ago...
With the current tech explosion, in two years your phone will be the equivalent of a commodore 64 running against a PS3.


Sorry but there is nothing "meh" about either of these changes.
It's nothing more than kicking the customer simply because you know that you have "the best line up" [and iphone now] and "the best coverage" and your customers will still stay on because of it.



The other issue is it encourages more changes that won't favor customers.
The removal of unlimited data usage is on the heals for CDMA [and already reality for GSM].

If Verizon sees that making these changes won't affect the amount of subscribers [because they are too entranced by the shiny new phones]...kiss unlimited data goodbye.

Addition to that last part:
The idea that bandwidth is getting so expensive that carriers NEED to get rid of unlimited data is...ridiculous... to say the least.
Bandwidth is constantly getting cheaper.
That's a fact.
Simply because the carriers spend more money on silly Christmas commercials with rap beats to try to sell you a product, over spending that money on their network, does not make bandwidth more expensive nor does it make their BS claims to being forced into removing it acceptable.

[UncleVanya]

I was already aware of the new policies - as a current customer with a Pre Plus I'm not thrilled but given my experience with Verizon service, coverage, and reliability vs. my past experience and friends current experiences on other carriers I am likely to sign back up with them.

So if you are mad here's the rub - they are gambling that more people are like me than you. They may be wrong or right I can't predict. I would benefit from people who push them into better terms but I will be unlikely to push them that way myself since I am not as disturbed by this as you are.

If Sprint or AT&T or T-Mobile gets significantly better at customer service and coverage overall then I might jump ship if they don't follow suit on changes.

As for other carriers following suit - if you recall there was a time when the early termination fees were lower - slowly but surely everyone moved to higher fees. I can't recall who started that one - AT&T I think - but it was needed and the carriers made the shift to protect themselves against those who took advantage and sold their devices and paid the termination fees and still made a profit. I think a similar problem exists in the 12 month upgrade structure today.

[UncleVanya]

Proving the ops point.

Not so much... really proving my point. The OP didn't post details on or reference this at least not here. The point of a forum is discussion - posting to an off forum facebook page is fine but it stops the conversation cold here for those without access. There are many more things that he or she could have been irked about. I was already well aware of this latest Verizon move - I was not ignorant of it as you imply - and while the change is annoying, it isn't sufficient to make me switch. (Nor for me to equate Verizon with the devil...)

[Mattykinsx]

I was already aware of the new policies - as a current customer with a Pre Plus I'm not thrilled but given my experience with Verizon service, coverage, and reliability vs. my past experience and friends current experiences on other carriers I am likely to sign back up with them.

So if you are mad here's the rub - they are gambling that more people are like me than you. They may be wrong or right I can't predict. I would benefit from people who push them into better terms but I will be unlikely to push them that way myself since I am not as disturbed by this as you are.

If Sprint or AT&T or T-Mobile gets significantly better at customer service and coverage overall then I might jump ship if they don't follow suit on changes.

Here's the problem with this:

Verizon spends so much damned money trying to convince you that their network is superior that it amazes me that they still have the money to maintain the network. [Well, that is, until I see a Verizon customers' bill]


How many people here know that Sprint's network is the second largest?

How many people here know that the differences in Verizon and Sprint's and At&t's networks [as far as coverage] are very minor?

Verizon's

Sprint's

At&t's

Tmobile's


What do you notice about those graphs?
The only major difference is that Tmobile is [obviously] lacking.
That's it.
Otherwise there's very little difference.

If hype was illegal Verizon wouldn't exist because their policies and pricing wouldn't be accepted for the very little 'improvements' you actually get.

[Cantaffordit]

that's because Sprint counts vzw's network in their coverage because they have roaming agreements between them.

And the AT&T map is for voice, not for 3G coverage. AT&T has improved, but they are still lacking 3G coverage.

and this is disclaimer from the AT&T site:

Important Information About the Coverage Map

Map may include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their licensed area rather than an approximation of their coverage. Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage, buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment and other factors. AT&T does not guarantee coverage. Charges will be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the call, not the location of the subscriber. Your phone's display does not indicate the rate you will be charged.

Note: Please carefully review the Plan Terms, which explain the limitations of your service. Service is not available at all times in all places.

[Mattykinsx]

that's because Sprint counts vzw's network in their coverage because they have roaming agreements between them.

Whatever you say.

Roaming is free on Sprint by the way.


Also, funny detail, the Sprint map is the oldest at 2006.

Verizon's and At&t's is current.


And we all know that Sprint has done MAJOR improving since 2006. Network and Customer service.

[UncleVanya]

RE: Coverage.

Maps are not terribly good until you drill down to high magnification.

My house is not avaialble for 4G Sprint Coverage. A few years back Voice was not very good here. I had a friend who had to turn her phone off or risk having it drain trying to connect while she was here. We are about 15 miles from the center of a major metro area in the South Eastern US.

My house IS available for Verizon LTE. I have no plans yet to leverage this. I have lived here 7 years and not had problem 1 with coverage from here to from my common locations I travel (TN, SC, AL). On Sprint at my work (NE section of town) my buddies have to set their phones to roam on Verizon or risk calls and have the battery sucked out due to poor signal.

Again this will vary dramatically over the coverage area.

Lastly I look at the consumer reports customer service ratings. I have person experience with Sprint and AllTel (from before Verizon merger) and I can attest that my Verizon - ON PHONE - customer experience has been head and shoulders above the rest. A buddy has Sprint and his experience has been Great so my past experience may be completely out of date as Sprint is rumored to have improved markedly over the past 5 - 7 years.

The point of all of this is that customer experience is personal and involves far more than one or two bits of policy. For me the high degree of reliability and ease of accessing service has been worth more than my alternate options. I voted with my dollars and left Verizon over annoyances with them and went to AllTel - they came and got me back!

[Mattykinsx]

and this is disclaimer from the AT&T site:

Important Information About the Coverage Map

Map may include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their licensed area rather than an approximation of their coverage. Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage, buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment and other factors. AT&T does not guarantee coverage. Charges will be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the call, not the location of the subscriber. Your phone's display does not indicate the rate you will be charged.

Note: Please carefully review the Plan Terms, which explain the limitations of your service. Service is not available at all times in all places.

Straight from Verizon's coverage page:

These Coverage Locator maps depict predicted and approximate wireless coverage. The coverage areas shown do not guarantee service availability, and may include locations with limited or no coverage. Even within a coverage area, there are many factors, including customer’s equipment, terrain, proximity to buildings, foliage, and weather that may impact service. Some of the Coverage Areas include networks run by other carriers, the coverage depicted is based on their information and public sources, and we cannot ensure its accuracy.


Sprint's page just talks about how estimation is not an exact science and weather and terrain effect coverage...nothing about including other networks.


Decided to quote because it's not fair not to since I did for Verizon.
Our coverage maps provide high level estimates of our coverage areas when using your device outdoors under optimal conditions. Coverage isn't available everywhere. Estimating wireless coverage and signal strength is not an exact science.
There are gaps in coverage within our estimated coverage areas that, along with other factors both within and beyond our control (network problems, software, signal strength, your wireless device, structures, buildings, weather, geography, topography, etc.), will result in dropped and blocked connections, slower data speeds, or otherwise impact the quality of services.
Services that rely on location information, such as E911 and GPS navigation, depend on your device's ability to acquire satellite signals (typically not available indoors) and network coverage. E911 services also depend local emergency service provider systems/support. Estimated future coverage subject to change.
Need more help? Contact us at 888-211-4727.


Conclusion: Besides for Tmobile, they're all pretty much on the same exact page.

[RoverNole]

Mattykinsx,

I enjoy reading many of your posts.....lots of common sense, facts and an understanding of supply/demands, goods/services...keep posting.

[pavvento]

I don't believe, at all, that all carriers will shorten the length.

I DO believe that they may tighten the rules to get rid of blatant abuse.


The removal of yearly upgrades [without paying $600 outright] is, very likely, due to an agreement between Apple and Verizon.

And it's wrong.

Especially with the advancement of mobile technology.
2 years?

Ha... yeah that was fine a few years ago...
With the current tech explosion, in two years your phone will be the equivalent of a commodore 64 running against a PS3.


Sorry but there is nothing "meh" about either of these changes.
It's nothing more than kicking the customer simply because you know that you have "the best line up" [and iphone now] and "the best coverage" and your customers will still stay on because of it.



The other issue is it encourages more changes that won't favor customers.
The removal of unlimited data usage is on the heals for CDMA [and already reality for GSM].

If Verizon sees that making these changes won't affect the amount of subscribers [because they are too entranced by the shiny new phones]...kiss unlimited data goodbye.

Addition to that last part:
The idea that bandwidth is getting so expensive that carriers NEED to get rid of unlimited data is...ridiculous... to say the least.
Bandwidth is constantly getting cheaper.
That's a fact.
Simply because the carriers spend more money on silly Christmas commercials with rap beats to try to sell you a product, over spending that money on their network, does not make bandwidth more expensive nor does it make their BS claims to being forced into removing it acceptable.

I agree with most of your points and don't like being screwed as a customer. The part that I have a problem with (not you in particular, but consumers) is that we place the 'shiny new toy' ahead of any principles we might have. For years people moan and complain about AT&T's coverage yet jumped for the iPhone, only to complain even more. We are all entitled to choices, and if we prioritize a shiny new toy over a decent upgrade policy that's our choice.

Policies like this allow companies like Sprint or T-Mobile to differentiate themselves which is great for the market.

[Mattykinsx]

I agree with most of your points and don't like being screwed as a customer. The part that I have a problem with (not you in particular, but consumers) is that we place the 'shiny new toy' ahead of any principles we might have. For years people moan and complain about AT&T's coverage yet jumped for the iPhone, only to complain even more.

EXACTLY my point.

I wish I could 'thank' your post 50 times for that example too.