Best Cellphone Company? All of Them, to Hear Them Say It

[SMS]

"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"

Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.

Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."

Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.

Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"
Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.
Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."
Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.
Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

Part of what you (not surprisingly) snipped in your pro-Verizon spin:

Some research even suggests that network quality may be less of an
issue than companies and even consumers think it is. In the 50
largest markets nationwide, more than 97 percent of wireless calls
are connected and completed successfully, according to Telephia. More
than one-third of the wireless subscribers surveyed by Telephia also
said their network quality had improved since they signed up with
their current provider, while only 13 percent said it had declined.

The consumers who really value network quality, Mr. Chamberlain and
others say, are those who use a cellphone as their only phone and
those who rely on their phones for work. Many other consumers,
particularly younger ones, are more likely to choose a carrier based
on the handset, not the quality of the network, they said.

"Honestly, these ads don't make a dent," said Meredith Belloli, the
president of Slant, a marketing agency that focuses on consumers in
their 20's. Young consumers "are aware of the 'Can you hear me now?'
guy, but it comes down to the style and coolness of the phones."

[Jos. Wheeler]

"John Navas" <***@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:MBX5g.33464$***@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

"Honestly, these ads don't make a dent," said Meredith Belloli, the

Post by John Navas
president of Slant, a marketing agency that focuses on consumers in
their 20's. Young consumers "are aware of the 'Can you hear me now?'
guy, but it comes down to the style and coolness of the phones."

Not surprising in a demographic cohort where a third to a half of them can't
identify Louisiana, Mississippi, India, Israel or Iraq on a map.

But ah yes, our wonderful government schools continue to insure their high
self-esteem and keep them free of being offended by accurate, descriptive
though non-politically correct speech.....

Jos.

[SMS]

Post by Jos. Wheeler
But ah yes, our wonderful government schools continue to insure their high
self-esteem

ensure, not insure.

[L***@UnReal.invalid]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"
Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.
Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."
Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.
Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

Rest snipped because John did not read the article. How do I know? Because
the paragraph above the negative line is a direct quote from the article the
OP cited.

Suggest all read the article. Yes you have to register to see it, but
registration is free and you will not get spammed.

Lou
Education is about knowing where to look for answers.

[SMS]

Post by L***@UnReal.invalid
Rest snipped because John did not read the article. How do I know? Because
the paragraph above the negative line is a direct quote from the article the
OP cited.
Suggest all read the article. Yes you have to register to see it, but
registration is free and you will not get spammed.

When I read it, no registration was required, but the NYT web site
sometimes does require registration.

Use "http://bugmenot.com/" to avoid the hassle of registration.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by L***@UnReal.invalid

Post by SMS
"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"
Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.
Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."
Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.
Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

Rest snipped because John did not read the article. How do I know? Because
the paragraph above the negative line is a direct quote from the article the
OP cited.

That makes no sense. Regardless, I did in fact read the entire article.

Post by L***@UnReal.invalid
Suggest all read the article. Yes you have to register to see it, but
registration is free and you will not get spammed.

Good advice. See for yourself how Steven's selective quotation was
misleading.

[Stephen]

Post by L***@UnReal.invalid

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"
Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.
Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."
Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.
Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

Rest snipped because John did not read the article. How do I know? Because
the paragraph above the negative line is a direct quote from the article the
OP cited.
Suggest all read the article. Yes you have to register to see it, but
registration is free and you will not get spammed.
Lou
Education is about knowing where to look for answers.

Use www.bugmenot.com and you don't have to register.

Stephen
--

[L***@UnReal.invalid]

Post by SMS
"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03adco.html"
Good article in today's New York Times, regarding all the implicature in
wireless carrier ads.
Telephia, the company that did the survey that Cingular touts as proving
that they have the fewest dropped calls, said it had "no knowledge of
the specific methodology (markets, time periods or statistical
thresholds) Cingular used to reach the nationwide 'lowest dropped call'
conclusion."
Sprint has a novel approach, claiming that they have the "most powerful"
network, whatever the heck that means.
Analysts are surprised that Verizon's rivals are even bringing up the
issue of network quality, stating that Verizon has already won that
battle, as evidenced by their showing in the Consumer Reports survey.

Last three paragraphs are probably the best

"Some research even suggests that network quality may be less of an issue
than companies and even consumers think it is. In the 50 largest markets
nationwide, more than 97 percent of wireless calls are connected and
completed successfully, according to Telephia. More than one-third of the
wireless subscribers surveyed by Telephia also said their network quality
had improved since they signed up with their current provider, while only 13
percent said it had declined.

The consumers who really value network quality, Mr. Chamberlain and others
say, are those who use a cellphone as their only phone and those who rely on
their phones for work. Many other consumers, particularly younger ones, are
more likely to choose a carrier based on the handset, not the quality of the
network, they said.

"Honestly, these ads don't make a dent," said Meredith Belloli, the
president of Slant, a marketing agency that focuses on consumers in their
20's. Young consumers "are aware of the 'Can you hear me now?' guy, but it
comes down to the style and coolness of the phones." "

Lou

[SMS]

***@UnReal.invalid wrote:

<snip>

Post by L***@UnReal.invalid
Last three paragraphs are probably the best
"Some research even suggests that network quality may be less of an issue
than companies and even consumers think it is. In the 50 largest markets
nationwide, more than 97 percent of wireless calls are connected and
completed successfully, according to Telephia. More than one-third of the
wireless subscribers surveyed by Telephia also said their network quality
had improved since they signed up with their current provider, while only 13
percent said it had declined.
The consumers who really value network quality, Mr. Chamberlain and others
say, are those who use a cellphone as their only phone and those who rely on
their phones for work. Many other consumers, particularly younger ones, are
more likely to choose a carrier based on the handset, not the quality of the
network, they said.
"Honestly, these ads don't make a dent," said Meredith Belloli, the
president of Slant, a marketing agency that focuses on consumers in their
20's. Young consumers "are aware of the 'Can you hear me now?' guy, but it
comes down to the style and coolness of the phones." "

I tend to agree with that. The ads may reinforce what people already
have learned from unbiased sources such as JD Powers or Consumer
Reports, but consumers simply filter out proclamations from the carriers
about having the best network. Cingular's "fewest dropped calls"
campaign is especially poor because a) dropped calls are only one of
many factors that determine the quality of a network, and b) there is no
evidence that they have the fewest dropped calls.

OTOH, the statement by Telephia regarding the 50 largest markets is a
bit misleading. They stated that 97% of calls are connected, but this
could mean that one carrier was closet to 100%, while another carrier
was 94%.

Furthermore, I find that a network's coverage is of the most value when
going _outside_ those 50 largest markets. Specifically, in California,
when you go into the Sierra's, Verizon (or other CDMA and AMPS carriers
that you can roam on), provide far greater coverage than is obtainable
on Cingular or T-Mobile. The same level of coverage may be available on
Sprint, via roaming, I don't know, as I don't have a Sprint phone, but
Cingular and T-Mobile are at a big disadvantage.

Another issue is the coverage on the fringes of those markets. In the
San Francisco Bay Area, fringe coverage (outside the urban or suburban
core) varies greatly among carriers (though this will change somewhat if
AMPS is turned off). Go to parks in the green belt, or to some of the
new (or old) developments where there is opposition to cell towers, and
the coverage is very different among carriers, with Verizon being far
better (as evidenced by all the survey results, as well as my own
experience).

So for someone that doesn't travel outside the confines of the core of
those 50 largest markets, maybe the differences in coverage aren't
important, but for many people, the true test of network is how well it
works when they are away from home.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
Furthermore, I find that a network's coverage is of the most value when
going _outside_ those 50 largest markets. Specifically, in California,
when you go into the Sierra's, Verizon (or other CDMA and AMPS carriers
that you can roam on), provide far greater coverage than is obtainable
on Cingular or T-Mobile. The same level of coverage may be available on
Sprint, via roaming, I don't know, as I don't have a Sprint phone, but
Cingular and T-Mobile are at a big disadvantage.
Another issue is the coverage on the fringes of those markets. In the
San Francisco Bay Area, fringe coverage (outside the urban or suburban
core) varies greatly among carriers (though this will change somewhat if
AMPS is turned off). Go to parks in the green belt, or to some of the
new (or old) developments where there is opposition to cell towers, and
the coverage is very different among carriers, with Verizon being far
better (as evidenced by all the survey results, as well as my own
experience).

Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

[Peter Pan]

Post by John Navas
Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

Actually, where *I* live (about 11 miles north of I90 in the spokane area),
*ONLY* Verizon works at all, cingular (and sprint/etc) don't work at ALL!
There they have absolutely terrible/no coverage...

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Peter Pan

Post by John Navas
Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

Actually, where *I* live (about 11 miles north of I90 in the spokane area),
*ONLY* Verizon works at all, cingular (and sprint/etc) don't work at ALL!
There they have absolutely terrible/no coverage...

Not surprising, since all carriers have coverage holes, and no one carrier is
best throughout one given area, let alone all areas (as some proponents try to
claim).

My statement above was specific to the claim that Verizon is "far better" in
the "San Francisco Bay Area".

[SMS]

Post by Peter Pan

Post by John Navas
Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

Actually, where *I* live (about 11 miles north of I90 in the spokane area),
*ONLY* Verizon works at all, cingular (and sprint/etc) don't work at ALL!
There they have absolutely terrible/no coverage...

There's your problem, you don't live in one of the 50 largest
metropolitan areas! Shame on you. Move. Actually, I'd bet you'd fine
that right along I90 you can get coverage on the other carriers, just
not very far from the freeway (US 395 also looks like it has some
coverage, though incomplete). Last month I was up on I80 in the Sierras,
and Cingular worked along the freeway, but as soon as you got a couple
of miles away from the freeway, or other main road, the coverage
disappeared (unless you were on a mountain with line-of-sight to a city).

Of course different areas have different carriers that are the best.
Consumer Reports covered only 18 metropolitan areas in their survey, and
Verizon was the top carrier in 17 of those areas. This was an especially
well-designed survey with a very large statistical sample size, so the
margin of error is very low.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Peter Pan

Post by John Navas
Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

Actually, where *I* live (about 11 miles north of I90 in the spokane area),
*ONLY* Verizon works at all, cingular (and sprint/etc) don't work at ALL!
There they have absolutely terrible/no coverage...

There's your problem, you don't live in one of the 50 largest
metropolitan areas! Shame on you. Move. Actually, I'd bet you'd fine
that right along I90 you can get coverage on the other carriers, just
not very far from the freeway (US 395 also looks like it has some
coverage, though incomplete). Last month I was up on I80 in the Sierras,
and Cingular worked along the freeway, but as soon as you got a couple
of miles away from the freeway, or other main road, the coverage
disappeared (unless you were on a mountain with line-of-sight to a city).

Time for you to get that old defective phone replaced with one that actually
works well.

Post by SMS
Of course different areas have different carriers that are the best.
Consumer Reports covered only 18 metropolitan areas in their survey, and
Verizon was the top carrier in 17 of those areas. This was an especially
well-designed survey with a very large statistical sample size, so the
margin of error is very low.

Not true. The CU is actually a self-selected survey of a non-representative
population with insufficient data to be valid in many areas. In addition, it
inappropriately mixes different networks and technologies for Cingular and
Sprint-Nextel. You just like it because it fits your agenda/vendetta.

[jim]

Post by SMS

Post by Peter Pan

Post by John Navas
Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.

Actually, where *I* live (about 11 miles north of I90 in the spokane
area), *ONLY* Verizon works at all, cingular (and sprint/etc) don't
work at ALL! There they have absolutely terrible/no coverage...

There's your problem, you don't live in one of the 50 largest
metropolitan areas! Shame on you. Move. Actually, I'd bet you'd fine
that right along I90 you can get coverage on the other carriers, just
not very far from the freeway (US 395 also looks like it has some
coverage, though incomplete). Last month I was up on I80 in the
Sierras, and Cingular worked along the freeway, but as soon as you got
a couple of miles away from the freeway, or other main road, the
coverage disappeared (unless you were on a mountain with line-of-sight
to a city).
Of course different areas have different carriers that are the best.
Consumer Reports covered only 18 metropolitan areas in their survey,
and Verizon was the top carrier in 17 of those areas. This was an
especially well-designed survey with a very large statistical sample
size, so the margin of error is very low.

I live in the Chicago area and had been using Verizon for the last year.
I droped Cingular because Verizon network worked in a area of Arizona
that I go, and the gsm did not. The rub was that verizon did not work at
my home in Chicago area. Cingular finally got coverage in the Arizona
area, and I went back to them. It is hard to figure out these things!

Jim

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
Furthermore, I find that a network's coverage is of the most value when
going _outside_ those 50 largest markets. Specifically, in California,
when you go into the Sierra's, Verizon (or other CDMA and AMPS carriers
that you can roam on), provide far greater coverage than is obtainable
on Cingular or T-Mobile. The same level of coverage may be available on
Sprint, via roaming, I don't know, as I don't have a Sprint phone, but
Cingular and T-Mobile are at a big disadvantage.
Another issue is the coverage on the fringes of those markets. In the
San Francisco Bay Area, fringe coverage (outside the urban or suburban
core) varies greatly among carriers (though this will change somewhat if
AMPS is turned off). Go to parks in the green belt, or to some of the
new (or old) developments where there is opposition to cell towers, and
the coverage is very different among carriers, with Verizon being far
better (as evidenced by all the survey results, as well as my own
experience).

Simply untrue. Cingular has very good coverage.
--

No- that is simply untrue. Cingular has the smallest footprint of the big
three.

[SMS]

Post by Scott
No- that is simply untrue. Cingular has the smallest footprint of the big
three.

Actually Cingular has better native coverage than Sprint, but poorer
coverage when you factor in available roaming. Sprint users can roam on
Verizon, other CDMA carriers, and AMPS carriers, where Sprint has no
coverage. Since many of the smaller rural carriers went the CDMA route
due to CDMA's superiority in terms of the the number of cells needed to
cover large areas (i.e. Golden State Cellular in California.

There is a lot of interest by AMPS carriers in using extended range CDMA
to replace their analog networks. Even though the CDMA equipment is more
expensive per cell, you need far fewer cells. In places like Alaska,
where AMPS covers more of the state than any other technology, CDMA is
the way to go if and when a carrier attempts to replace AMPS.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Scott
No- that is simply untrue. Cingular has the smallest footprint of the big
three.

Actually Cingular has better native coverage than Sprint, but poorer
coverage when you factor in available roaming. Sprint users can roam on
Verizon, other CDMA carriers, and AMPS carriers, where Sprint has no
coverage. Since many of the smaller rural carriers went the CDMA route
due to CDMA's superiority in terms of the the number of cells needed to
cover large areas (i.e. Golden State Cellular in California.
There is a lot of interest by AMPS carriers in using extended range CDMA
to replace their analog networks. Even though the CDMA equipment is more
expensive per cell, you need far fewer cells.

There is no such CDMA superiority. GSM is comparable.
<http://www.3gamericas.org/PDFs/gsm_rural_operators_june2003.pdf>

Post by SMS
In places like Alaska,
where AMPS covers more of the state than any other technology, CDMA is
the way to go if and when a carrier attempts to replace AMPS.

Yet Dobson went GSM.
<http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA457762.html?spacedesc=Departments>
Likewise Alaska Wireless Communications.

See also "Chinook Wireless Switches From CDMA to GSM"
<http://www.cellular-news.com/story/17287.php>

Chinook Wireless has selected Nokia to build a GSM/GPRS/EDGE network
throughout Montana, USA. Nokia is supplying the entire radio and core
network, along with network services. The companies have signed a
five-year supply contract covering equipment, network planning
services, deployment services and Nokia Care services. Chinook
Wireless will be deploying one of North America's first 3GPP Release
4 network architectures, using Nokia's mobile softswitch solution MSC
Server System. Additionally, Nokia is providing a portfolio of
services, including network planning, installation, integration, and
testing.

"Chinook Wireless is committed to delivering the highest quality
wireless voice and data services in the State of Montana," said
Jonathan Foxman, President and CEO. "Nokia's GSM/GPRS/EDGE solution
will enable Chinook to deliver state-of-the-art digital wireless
services. With Nokia's support, we will provide a service that will
greatly exceed our customers' expectations."

Nokia says that the GSM/GPRS/EDGE network will replace Chinook
Wireless' CDMA network.

[j***@bellsouth.net]

I use Verizon. Pricey but dependable.

I used US Cellular --- not a good service but run by honest people.
I used Cingular -------not a good service and run by aXXholes
I used SunCom -----lousy service ----- and run by genuine crooked
rat bastards, who keep billing for services after they refunded us in
full, and even turned their bogus account over to a collection agency.

[SMS]

Post by j***@bellsouth.net
I use Verizon. Pricey but dependable.

I think that it's interesting to look at ARPU. For the latest quarter,
Cingular was $48.48, Verizon was $49.36, Sprint-Nextel was $62 (though
this is because of all the high value Nextel customers), T-Mobile hasn't
reported yet, but they should be around $52, same as 4Q2005.

Verizon had actually been lower than Cingular for a long time, but
Cingular's ARPU has been falling faster, partly because Verizon is ahead
of Cingular in the wide deployment of high speed data.

At least in terms of ARPU, Verizon isn't really pricey. Also Verizon has
a great many corporate discount programs, i.e. my wife gets 18% off per
month, and some programs are 25% off. For subscribers that need a large
amount of peak minutes, Verizon used to be more pricey, but they're
about the same as Cingular now. T-Mobile is cheaper, but their coverage
isn't as good. My brother-in-law is a real estate agent and uses about
2000 minutes a month. He was tempted by Cingular's roll-over plan, but
he couldn't deal with the coverage issues in the cities he works in
(he's in the San Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular coverage is not great).

Verizon certainly doesn't see a need to drop their pants on price, with
all the indpendent surveys consistently rating them as having the best
network, but on the other hand, they can't charge an unreasonable
premium for their quality of coverage either.

Also, Verizon, through their PagePlus MVNO, has the best prepaid
offering of any of the carriers ("http://www.pagepluscellular.com/").
T-Mobile has similar pricing, but the T-Mobile prepaid network is very
limited (no Cingular roaming as on T-Mobile's postpaid accounts.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
Verizon had actually been lower than Cingular for a long time, but
Cingular's ARPU has been falling faster, partly because Verizon is ahead
of Cingular in the wide deployment of high speed data.

That's simply speculation on your part, reflecting your personal biases.

Post by SMS
At least in terms of ARPU, Verizon isn't really pricey.

ARPU has absolutely nothing to do with being pricey or not, as your prior
statement actually admits.

Post by SMS
For subscribers that need a large
amount of peak minutes, Verizon used to be more pricey, but they're
about the same as Cingular now.

Verizon has had to cut prices to match Cingular. So much for "It's the
Network" claims.

Post by SMS
My brother-in-law is a real estate agent and uses about
2000 minutes a month. He was tempted by Cingular's roll-over plan, but
he couldn't deal with the coverage issues in the cities he works in
(he's in the San Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular coverage is not great).

Cingular coverage of the San Francisco Bay Area is actually very good,
arguably the best of any carrier.

Post by SMS
Verizon certainly doesn't see a need to drop their pants on price,

Yet you just admitted that it did. ;)

Post by SMS
with
all the indpendent surveys consistently rating them as having the best
network, but on the other hand, they can't charge an unreasonable
premium for their quality of coverage either.

Double-talk. :)

Post by SMS
Also, Verizon, through their PagePlus MVNO, has the best prepaid
offering of any of the carriers ("http://www.pagepluscellular.com/").
T-Mobile has similar pricing, but the T-Mobile prepaid network is very
limited (no Cingular roaming as on T-Mobile's postpaid accounts.

Shameless promotion.

Careful, Steven, your bias is even more painfully clear than usual. ;)

[u***@domain.invalid]

Post by SMS
Also, Verizon, through their PagePlus MVNO, has the best prepaid
offering of any of the carriers ("http://www.pagepluscellular.com/").
T-Mobile has similar pricing, but the T-Mobile prepaid network is very
limited (no Cingular roaming as on T-Mobile's postpaid accounts.

I still think Virgin Mobile's plan is better because you don't have to deal with 2-stage dialing or
roaming charges ($1.95/min for PagePlus roaming).

-Jason

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by u***@domain.invalid

Post by SMS
Also, Verizon, through their PagePlus MVNO, has the best prepaid
offering of any of the carriers ("http://www.pagepluscellular.com/").
T-Mobile has similar pricing, but the T-Mobile prepaid network is very
limited (no Cingular roaming as on T-Mobile's postpaid accounts.

I still think Virgin Mobile's plan is better because you don't have to deal with 2-stage dialing or
roaming charges ($1.95/min for PagePlus roaming).

Doesn't fit with Steven's personal pro-Verizon agenda. ;)

[SMS]

Post by u***@domain.invalid

Post by SMS
Also, Verizon, through their PagePlus MVNO, has the best prepaid
offering of any of the carriers ("http://www.pagepluscellular.com/").
T-Mobile has similar pricing, but the T-Mobile prepaid network is very
limited (no Cingular roaming as on T-Mobile's postpaid accounts.

I still think Virgin Mobile's plan is better because you don't have to
deal with 2-stage dialing or roaming charges ($1.95/min for PagePlus
roaming).

The reason that there are no roaming charges on Virgin is the same
reason that there are no roaming charges on T-Mobile prepaid, you can't
roam, period. If you prefer "no service" to roaming charges, then that's
your choice of course. Virgin uses Sprint's network, which has far less
coverage than Verizon, even without roaming, there are entire states
with no Sprint service. On Sprint postpaid, you can roam on other CDMA
networks (just like T-Mobile postpaid can roam onto Cingular).

I'd be a little concerned about receiving calls while roaming with
PagePlus, but you know when you're _making_ a roaming call.

Virgin also has a lot higher minimum charges per year, at $80, versus
$30 for PagePlus. And of course the Virgin rates are higher, since with
PagePlus, it's 10¢ a minute for all minutes, if you buy the $80 card, no
paying extra for the first ten minutes each day, or paying $10 per month
extra to get 10¢ minutes all the time.