Cellular Phone Forum / General / General Topics / August 2003
Unthinkable: All Wireless Carriers
|
|
Thread rating:  |
The Magnificent Bastard - 12 Aug 2003 16:50 GMT Wireless Companies Try to Keep Customers Happy
By REUTERS Filed at 7:51 a.m. ET August 9, 2003
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Walk into a U.S. wireless telephone carrier's shop these days, and you might be jolted by the friendlier service, and improved quality of sound on the cell phone.
That's because the wireless industry is feeling an urgent need to keep customers happy before the advent of a new government rule on switching services. Starting in November, customers will be able to keep their old phone numbers when switching wireless services.
The so-called number portability rule scares wireless companies because it essentially makes it easier for disgruntled consumers to go elsewhere. And in the $91 billion wireless industry, winning and retaining customers is what it's all about.
``This is a wakeup call,'' said Rich Nespola, chief executive of management consulting firm, the Management Network Group Inc., or TMNG.
As the deadline nears, wireless companies are now trying to head off the potential damage by making network improvements, re-evaluating customer service, and stepping up their marketing.
According to a recent study by TMNG, 24 percent of large businesses -- the most likely segment to take advantage of number portability -- are ready to switch services.
The research also found that 33 percent of businesses that use more than one carrier are likely to consolidate their wireless accounts to a single provider.
``What you're going to see now is a lot of positioning, a lot of repairing and a lot of bridge-building,'' said independent telecommunications analyst Jeff Kagan.
``That comes both on the perception side, where you see a lot of advertising and marketing, and a lot on the reality side, which is improving the systems and the operations.''
CUSTOMERS WILL WIN EITHER WAY
Sprint PCS Group (PCS.N) (FON.N), the nation's No. 4 wireless telephone company, has made changes in everything from greetings at stores to its automated voice services to the way it deals with customer complaints.
The company has also invested in its network by adding new cell sites and increasing signal density so there are fewer dropped or blocked calls.
``Overall, it's been a large culture change that we're not done with yet,'' said Len Lauer, president of Sprint PCS, who took over the reins of the company last fall to address the company's declining subscriber base.
``We're doing a lot of work to be ready for (number portability),'' he told Reuters, adding the company is even informing customers if they are paying too much.
Lauer emphasized that Sprint PCS needed to make the changes regardless of number portability.
However, analysts said companies are feeling a greater urgency ahead of the new regulation.
``No carrier will admit they're going to do anything,'' said Craig Mallitz, wireless analyst with Legg Mason. ``(But) all of the carriers seem to be taking somewhat of a defensive mode.''
Companies like No. 2 Cingular Wireless (SBC.N) (BLS.N) are offering two-year contracts to keep customers longer while AT&T Wireless Services Inc. (AWE.N), the No. 3 operator, is waiving the activation fee on two-year contracts.
Meanwhile, Sprint PCS recently launched advertisements targeted at businesses that tout its superior network quality compared with AT&T Wireless.
Many of the operators' efforts so far have come as they posted solid second-quarter gains in key industry metrics -- customer growth, average revenue per user, and customer turnover.
Verizon Wireless (VZ.N) (VOD.L), the largest U.S. wireless operator which analysts believe will gain the most from number portability, demonstrated exceptional strength, adding twice as many customers as its nearest competitor.
``At the end of the day it's going to benefit consumers either way,'' said Mallitz. ``You're either going to get better quality if you stay with your carrier or you're going to get the ability to leave and go to another carrier, who is also trying to improve their quality.''
John Eckart - 12 Aug 2003 22:31 GMT I don't buy it. I don't believe the cellular providers are doing much of anything. And why are they scrambling to improve services now? Why didn't they do it long ago for consumers who don't care about their cell numbers changing? Besides, you may be able to keep your cell numbers now, but you still have to wait for your 1 or 2 year service agreement is up before you can change providers. Even if they also killed the service agreements, they still have somewhat of a hold on you due to every cellular provider in the U.S. using phones that are locked to only work on their particular network, making it expensive and difficult to bounce from one provider to the next.
> Wireless Companies Try to Keep Customers Happy > [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] > with your carrier or you're going to get the ability to leave and go > to another carrier, who is also trying to improve their quality.'' Group Special Mobile - 13 Aug 2003 01:05 GMT >Even if they also killed the service agreements, they still have somewhat of a hold on you due to every cellular provider in the U.S. using phones that are locked to only work on their particular network, making it expensive and difficult to bounce from one provider to the next. Not all carriers do. T-Mobile for one is very generous about giving out unlock codes. After 90 days is normal and sometimes for certain situations even before that.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
John S. - 13 Aug 2003 12:10 GMT >Not all carriers do. T-Mobile for one is very generous about giving >out unlock codes. After 90 days is normal and sometimes for certain >situations even before that. Although this is true, T-Mobile is still a wanna be carrier.I rolled into Charelston NC last night on a big plane and when trying to use my T-Mobile phone there is no signal at the airport. In the rental car and on to the hotel no signal at all. Attempting to make a call the phone says "No Service".
Fortunatly my Sprint PCS and AT&T WS phones have full bars and work just fine.
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Group Special Mobile - 13 Aug 2003 14:26 GMT >Although this is true, T-Mobile is still a wanna be carrier. Well, your situation may be your situation. At present they are the number six carrier soon to be the number five carrier.
Use what works for you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
John S. - 13 Aug 2003 23:09 GMT > At present they are the >number six carrier soon to be the number five carrier. Who is #5 that they are going to surpass.
I thought that it was -
Verizon Cingular ATT WS Sprint PCS T-Mobile
Which of course makes them #5 now.
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Group Special Mobile - 14 Aug 2003 04:33 GMT >> At present they are the >>number six carrier soon to be the number five carrier. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Which of course makes them #5 now. By most accounts Nextel is number five with T-Mobile right behind. Seems to me that I recall the difference between Nextel and T-Mobile's numbers were not that significant.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
John S. - 16 Aug 2003 03:00 GMT >>Verizon >>Cingular [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Seems to me that I recall the difference between Nextel and T-Mobile's >numbers were not that significant. But but but but...... Nextel is NOT a cellular carrier. They are a 2-way radio company that would like to make people believe that they are a cellular carrier.
SMR is not liscenced as a cellular or a PCS carrier so they o NOT count.
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Group Special Mobile - 16 Aug 2003 16:15 GMT >>>Verizon >>>Cingular [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >SMR is not liscenced as a cellular or a PCS carrier so they o NOT count. Geez John we already know your mantra that Nextel is not a cellular carrier. Surprise surprise though John that most people don't give a rat's patoot that it's not. If you can use it like a cell phone they don't give a hoot whether you call it SMR, PCS, Cellular, DCS, electronic tincans or whatever. You really need to let it go! When people are making up the statistics they count Nextel among the carriers and don't care that it's not cellular or PCS. You're going to have to search for another argument because the strawman that you keep chanting just doesn't matter to most people.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
John S. - 27 Aug 2003 12:11 GMT >You're going >to have to search for another argument because the strawman that you >keep chanting just doesn't matter to most people. You know, I don't care if it matters to ANYONE or not. Newbies read this forum for information. They too need to know that Nextel is NOT cellular.
I agree that they provide a popular service to the construction and trades community and a few that don't fall into that category because they think that the DC is "neat".
But the newbies need to know that it is not cellular.
So to that end, those of you who think you are ducks can walk like one and talk (although the audio is terrible) like one all you want. There is no need for any of you who know what is going on to comment any more.
But. whenever there is a list that purpotes to lump Nextel with the cellular carriers, I AM going to continue to point out that Nextel is NOT cellular in any way shape or form. The newbies will appreciate the information or not.
Fair enough?
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Steve Punter - 27 Aug 2003 15:06 GMT I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with other posters on this matter. Attempting to make iDEN (the technology used by Nextel) seem as though it is radically different from the technologies used by so-called cellular and PCS providers is misleading. In fact, there is FUNDAMENTALLY less difference between GSM and iDEN than there is between TDMA and CDMA.
Ignoring the contrived definitions of "cellular" for a moment, the KEY ELEMENT that makes a wireless technology cellular is its use of a honeycomb of short-range sites, and the ability to HANDOFF a call between one site and another as the subscriber moves through this network. In terms of this key element, iDEN is just as much cellular as any of the other technologies.
The Direct Connect feature offered by iDEN may SEEM similar to traditional two-way radio, and in SOME respects it is. However, it is still fundamentally different from its closest relative, the Trunked Radio System. DC is just a clever use of a standard wireless scheme, and in fact iDEN systems are actually built around modified GSM switches.
Far too many people get hung up on terminology. As it has already been suggested, the underlying technology is relatively unimportant. What's more important is the ROLL that the technology plays. While I'm sure that Motorola engineers envisioned Direct Connect being the primary use of iDEN, it has evolved (with the help of marketing by Nextel and Telus) into a service that relies far less on DC than it does on standard telephone interconnects.
When an iDEN phone is used to make a telephone call, the manner in which the system deals with that call is MARKEDLY similar to a GSM or IS-136 network. Users share the resources by consuming a slot on a designated channel of a cell site, and as they move away from that site their call is HANDED OFF to a different slot on a different channel of a different cell site.
Other considerations, a such at which frequency the system operates, or how the licenses are issued and paid for, are simply not relevant to the end user. Let's stop having endless circular arguments built around mere terminology (cellular vs PCS, CDMA vs TDMA, etc) and look at the roll played by the networks.
 Signature Steve Punter http://www.arcx.com/sites
John S. - 27 Aug 2003 16:30 GMT >the KEY >ELEMENT that makes a wireless technology cellular is its use of a honeycomb >of short-range sites, and the ability to HANDOFF a call between one site and >another as the subscriber moves through this network. In terms of this key >element, iDEN is just as much cellular as any of the other technologies. None of the Nextel systems that I have built are built in a honeycomb type of system. So that rules that out.
Typically a trunked radio system has tall towers and high power allowing the maximum number of people with the fewest number of sites.
This is true of Nextel.
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Carl. - 27 Aug 2003 17:38 GMT > >the KEY > >ELEMENT that makes a wireless technology cellular is its use of a honeycomb [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > This is true of Nextel. They still have more than one tower, and still do frequency re-use.
John S. - 28 Aug 2003 14:12 GMT >They still have more than one tower, and still do frequency re-use. Granted.
-- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Group Special Mobile - 27 Aug 2003 15:33 GMT >But. whenever there is a list that purpotes to lump Nextel with the cellular >carriers, I AM going to continue to point out that Nextel is NOT cellular in >any way shape or form. The newbies will appreciate the information or not. Well, no one except a cellular nerd really gives a crap. They don't really give two craps that technically it's not cellular. If it does the same function as their neighbor's *cellular* phone and does exactly the same thing as their neighbor's cellular phone they don't care. They could care less that it's iDen or for that matter if it was GSM, CDMA, TDMA or electronic tin cans. You can take your own comfort knowing that Nextel or Mike is not cellular. No one else seems to give a crap that you're so concerned that they are not truly cellular. You need to let it go.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Carl. - 27 Aug 2003 17:16 GMT > You know, I don't care if it matters to ANYONE or not. Newbies read this forum > for information. They too need to know that Nextel is NOT cellular. They NEED to? What the hell for?
> But. whenever there is a list that purpotes to lump Nextel with the cellular > carriers, I AM going to continue to point out that Nextel is NOT cellular in > any way shape or form. The newbies will appreciate the information or not. Not "in any way shape or form?" It certainly IS cellular in "shape" and "form." It might not be cellular by frequency and various equipment type, but it is cellular by general arrangement.
Mike Ward - 27 Aug 2003 17:51 GMT >Not "in any way shape or form?" It certainly IS cellular in "shape" and >"form." It might not be cellular by frequency and various equipment type, >but it is cellular by general arrangement. I'm not sure what John S. hopes to accomplish by the "Nextel really isn't cellular" drumbeat he brings up constantly in here. Does he hope that someone who's about to buy a Nextel phone, thinking it's a "cellular system", will read his message and say "oh, crap! It's not really cellular, it's SMR! I can't buy this! Thank you, John, for showing me the light!"??
Whether he is right or wrong about "Nextel not being cellular", the average end user doesn't give a hoot, and other issues will drive whether they choose that particular service or not.
Mike
Carl. - 27 Aug 2003 21:13 GMT > >Not "in any way shape or form?" It certainly IS cellular in "shape" and > >"form." It might not be cellular by frequency and various equipment type, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > average end user doesn't give a hoot, and other issues will drive > whether they choose that particular service or not. Maybe John needs to see the Nextel commercial where they have the single 10,000-mile high tower covering the entire US and it says "that's not how we did it."
James - 14 Aug 2003 21:12 GMT Probably anytime you move carriers you'll have to buy a new handset. Number portability doesn't mean handset portability. Regardless, most companies don't really worry about something until it either affects their finances or their image. I'm not surprised to hear companies like Sprint PCS are trying to improve their image now because of this. Their customer service department was truely the pits a few years ago and once they realized it was drastically affecting their subscriber base, that's when they decided to do something about it. Have you ever seen a telco exec not sit back when things are going fast, fat, and happy? It's only when there's a potential issue that they attempt to drastically improve. Only now that it's easier for a disgruntled client to say screw you, they want to prevent it.
|
|
|