|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Verizon wireless > August 2007 > Hey Navas....
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Ness_net 2007-08-23, 10:33 pm |
| AT&T Ditches 'Fewest Dropped Calls' Ad Campaign
http://blog.wired.com/business/2007...itches-few.html
"Turns out, the assertion was never really true, and was based on
only a small part of a larger Telephia report. As a whole, the report notes
that AT&T Wireless did not have the most reliable network in places like
New York, Chicago, Houston and Los Angeles, according to Broadband
Reports. Recent studies from Consumer Reports and JD Power mirror
these findings, and have placed Cingular/AT&T at or near the bottom
of their rankings for reliability and satisfaction.
| |
| Agent_C 2007-08-24, 4:33 am |
| On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:50:53 -0700, "Ness_net"
<richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>Recent studies from Consumer Reports and JD Power mirror
>these findings, and have placed Cingular/AT&T at or near the bottom
>of their rankings for reliability and satisfaction.
Amen; but it's not like that wasn't already common knowledge.
That ad campaign was a complete fraud, right from the start.
A_C
| |
| The Ghost of General Lee 2007-08-24, 4:33 am |
| On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:50:53 -0700, "Ness_net"
<richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>AT&T Ditches 'Fewest Dropped Calls' Ad Campaign
>
>http://blog.wired.com/business/2007...itches-few.html
>
>"Turns out, the assertion was never really true, and was based on
>only a small part of a larger Telephia report. As a whole, the report notes
>that AT&T Wireless did not have the most reliable network in places like
>New York, Chicago, Houston and Los Angeles, according to Broadband
>Reports. Recent studies from Consumer Reports and JD Power mirror
>these findings, and have placed Cingular/AT&T at or near the bottom
>of their rankings for reliability and satisfaction.
>
This goes right up there with such gems as "water is wet" and "fire is
hot."
| |
|
| Ness_net wrote:
> AT&T Ditches 'Fewest Dropped Calls' Ad Campaign
>
> http://blog.wired.com/business/2007...itches-few.html
>
> "Turns out, the assertion was never really true, and was based on
> only a small part of a larger Telephia report. As a whole, the report notes
> that AT&T Wireless did not have the most reliable network in places like
> New York, Chicago, Houston and Los Angeles, according to Broadband
> Reports. Recent studies from Consumer Reports and JD Power mirror
> these findings, and have placed Cingular/AT&T at or near the bottom
> of their rankings for reliability and satisfaction.
"Update 8/23: An AT&T spokesman says that dropping the "fewest dropped
calls" language is just part of an overall shift to a new message: "More
bars in more places." Okay then!"
Who can argue with more bars in more places, as long as they have
Guinness on tap?"
Maybe it's because I tend to travel more to out-of-the-way places during
the summer months, but this summer I seemed to be in more places where
AT&T/Cingular had no coverage and Verizon did have coverage than ever.
This includes sections of the California coast near Big Sur, big chunks
of southern Oregon, and part of Lafayette on the north side of 24. Most
of this was digital coverage, though there was still some AMPS.
| |
|
| Agent_C <Agent-C-hates-spam@nyc.rr.com> wrote in
news:q4ksc3tfl3ia3b5
u5947i7ulh3qbgi53gt@
4ax.com:
> That ad campaign was a complete fraud, right from the start.
>
Aren't they all?
Larry
--
| |
| John Navas 2007-08-26, 10:33 pm |
| On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:53:04 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 46ce9c29$0$27161$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>Maybe it's because I tend to travel more to out-of-the-way places during
>the summer months, but this summer I seemed to be in more places where
>AT&T/Cingular had no coverage and Verizon did have coverage than ever.
>This includes sections of the California coast near Big Sur, big chunks
>of southern Oregon, and part of Lafayette on the north side of 24. Most
>of this was digital coverage, though there was still some AMPS.
Maybe it's because you have an axe to grind against GSM in general and
AT&T in particular, to the point where you make up stuff to bash them.
In fact coverage by AT&T is as good or better than Verizon in Northern
California, as I've repeatedly shown in rebuttals to your prior
bashings.
(I can't speak to coverage in Oregon, but I'd hazard a guess that you're
off the mark there as well.)
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
|
|
|
|
|