 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Sprint PCS / August 2006When will Sprint get Motorola?
So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). I would like to see the newer model motorola phones available and not just a hit or miss low-end phone. It would be nice to see: Razor V3m KRZR K1m SLVR L7c and other current and upcoming phones. Why does every carrier but Sprint get this stuff?  SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 > So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have > close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). Don't let their relationship via Nextel fool you. Sprint's only in bed with Motorola because they are the exclusive provider for iDEN infrastructure, and because the network is basically a closed system. If Sprint had the choice, they'd probably end that relationship FAST. I do not know why, but it is evident that Sprint has no love lost for Motorola. Same appeared to be true of Nokia. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >> So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have >> close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I do not know why, but it is evident that Sprint has no love lost for > Motorola. Same appeared to be true of Nokia. Considering that there is a cult following for the #1 and #2 manufacturers of cellular phones, that is likely a bad business decision. I know my Daughter is in love with her friends Cingular Razr ... and she has said she would be more than happy with a Verizon Razr V3m. I am not sure that I can afford her, but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same thing. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has more features and better looks than the Razr. >>> So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously >>> have [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same > thing. > Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has > more features and better looks than the Razr. Have you held that phone yet? It has a very cheap feel and I am not all that fond of the form factor as implmented by Samsung. Motorola used metal, which gives a sturdy feel lacking in the Blade. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Smiling Wickedly, Thomas T. Veldhouse answered: >> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has >> more features and better looks than the Razr. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > gives a sturdy feel lacking in the Blade. > Sorry I have to ring the bullshit bell. I have a Blade, and I have been VERY happy with it. It doesn't feel flimsy at ALL. and Samsung uses metal too. Mine feels VERY sturdy. And the form factor is WAY nicer than a razr. Signature*..· ´¨¨)) ¸.·´ .·´¨¨)) ((¸¸.·´ .·´-:¦:-((¸¸.·´(º·.¸(¨*·.¸ ¸.·*¨)¸.·º) «.·°·. Michael .·°·-:¦:- > Sorry I have to ring the bullshit bell. I have a Blade, and I have been > VERY happy with it. It doesn't feel flimsy at ALL. and Samsung uses > metal too. Mine feels VERY sturdy. And the form factor is WAY nicer than > a razr. No bullshit bell. I was in a Sprint store testing phones before I decided on the Samsung A920. I ended up returning that phone because it didn't want to roam when it should have [and my old Sanyo 7400 did] and thus it wasn't much use to me as I work in some marginal signal areas where roaming onto Verizon, among others is essential to be able to receive important calls [yes, the phone was on Automatic for roaming]. I considered the A900 for about 30 seconds .. features were alright, but the phone just does not feel sturdy. I stand by that assessment as my opinion. You are entitled to your own, but there is no "bullshit" involved. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has >> more features and better looks than the Razr. > > Have you held that phone yet? It has a very cheap feel and I am not all that > fond of the form factor as implmented by Samsung. Motorola used metal, which > gives a sturdy feel lacking in the Blade. Thom, have YOU actually held the Blade? I have. It doesn't feel cheap at all. And guess what? I've even DROPPED my A900 on a concrete sidewalk. Guess what I found out then? The phone's made of metal! I will credit Samsung with making an excellent copycat phone. They did a wonderful job. Even so, I do think Sprint should've just carried the RAZR. That too, is a sturdy design. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. > Thom, have YOU actually held the Blade? I have. It doesn't feel cheap > at all. Indeed. I had a chance to look at it [hold it and work through the menus] when I was evaluating phones prior to my [temporary] choice of the Samsung A920. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Sounds horrible. Worst sounding phone I have ever heard. > Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has > more features and better looks than the Razr. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same >> thing. Smiling Wickedly, DonR. answered: > Sounds horrible. Worst sounding phone I have ever heard. Thats funny. The sound on Mine is one of the BEST ones I've had. Signature*..· ´¨¨)) ¸.·´ .·´¨¨)) ((¸¸.·´ .·´-:¦:-((¸¸.·´(º·.¸(¨*·.¸ ¸.·*¨)¸.·º) «.·°·. Michael .·°·-:¦:- > Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has > more features and better looks than the Razr. Actually, no, the V3m is better. And while the A900 is a decent phone, Sprint could have jsut as easily gone to Motorola and gotten the RAZR. How hard could that have been? And then there's the Katana. What an embarrassment! No wonder sanyo is in financial trouble. They used to make great phones, and now they have yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is still stuck in 2001. What happened? SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. Sanyo has really pissed me off. I am done with them! On the positive side, at least the Katana has Bluetooth. That is a big accomplishment for Sanyo. >> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it >> has more features and better looks than the Razr. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is still > stuck in 2001. What happened? >> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has >> more features and better looks than the Razr. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is > still stuck in 2001. What happened? What? The Sanyo 7500 is EVDO. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Motorola is known for having the best RF performance of any cell phones. I have owned several Motorola phones and can validate that fact. On the other hand, Motorola's typically have lame user interfaces and the user interfaces have a slow response time. I would like for Sprint to start offering Motorola Phones simply because of the exceptional RF performance. Folks say that Sanyo has good RF performance, however, it doesn't compare to Motorola. >>> So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously >>> have [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same > thing. > Motorola is known for having the best RF performance of any cell phones. I > have owned several Motorola phones and can validate that fact. On the other > hand, Motorola's typically have lame user interfaces and the user interfaces > have a slow response time. I would like for Sprint to start offering > Motorola Phones simply because of the exceptional RF performance. Folks say > that Sanyo has good RF performance, however, it doesn't compare to Motorola. Interesting thread. When I shop for phones on the Sprint web site in my area, they *do* carry Motorola (and Nokia). Not a huge selection, but they do carry them. Signaturejosh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Bicycle Touring Books List: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/tourbooks.html> >> Motorola is known for having the best RF performance of any cell phones. I >> have owned several Motorola phones and can validate that fact. On the other [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > area, they *do* carry Motorola (and Nokia). Not a huge selection, but > they do carry them. They carry ... maybe one of each? They do not carry the models in demand [yet Verizon does]. Further, in the past, they didn't carry any and there is no real sign that they plan to carry the highly demanded models in the future either ... which is why I asked the question in the first place. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 They are low-end phones. >> Motorola is known for having the best RF performance of any cell phones. >> I [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > area, they *do* carry Motorola (and Nokia). Not a huge selection, but > they do carry them. >> I would like for Sprint to start offering >> Motorola Phones simply because of the exceptional RF performance. Folks say [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > area, they *do* carry Motorola (and Nokia). Not a huge selection, but > they do carry them. Try "barely at all." The Nokia selection has always been one, sometimes 2 phones at a time in the lineup, and they have always been the base model with a minimal feature set. Arguably, Nokia hasn't committed much to CDMA and that's probably why Sprint hasn't felt a need to commit much back. In fact, Nokia last I heard is pulling away from CDMA altogether. Nokia's lack of committment has mainly stemmed from its battles with Qualcomm. Personally, I say good riddance to Nokia. They make great toys that all the teenie boppers like to have as throw away phones, but make very little of substance these days. And yes, Sprint carries many Motorola phones, but almost entirely on the iDEN side. And with good reason: Motorola unilaterally developed iDEN, meaning Sprint has no choice in the matter, really. But Sprint's official commitment to iDEN is slated to end in 2010. On the CDMA side, Sprint offers exactly one (1) Motorola phone. And again, it's nothing to write home about. Aside from the "M" on the faceplate, there is no differentiation at all in features or even general apperance from teh basic-level Sanyos and Samsungs. Why this, when Sprint could have gotten the RAZR, or at least an e815? If anything, the bottom-of-the-barrel c290 might be there simply to keep Motorola happy, since they are the sole supplier of iDEN handsets. Even the ic502 which is slated to come out later this year looks pretty dismal: no EVDO data support and barely an external LCD screen (looks to be black and white). The only thing is has going for it is "dual-mode" iden and CDMA support, but even that is limited: iDEN support is dispatch only, and CDMA is telco-only. But note: still no RAZR in our future. No FONE either, nor the SLVR L7c nor KRZR K1m. These are all phones that will sell at a huge premium when released. BUt evidently Sprint wants no part in it. Gee, if I didn't know better, I'd say Sprint is giving lip service to the Motorola partnership, but really just wants these phones to flop. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >Motorola is known for having the best RF performance of any cell phones. [...] >Folks say that Sanyo has good RF performance, however, it doesn't compare to Motorola. Miij: In my area Sprint sells a Motorola phone called the "C290". It's very reasonably priced in fact. Are you suggesting that for ordinary calling this phone would provide better performance than my Sanyo's? I'm not interested in anything but good voice calling performance and reasonably well put-together equipment. If you say that this phone is superior to other Sprint offerings then I suppose it's the phone I should have. I actually did look around on sites like phonescoop, etc. at one point and found many critical comments against Motorola phones, both in terms of equipment quality issues in general and phone performance. Of course I did not at the time investigate the qualifications of those making the claims. DGI Thomas T. Veldhouse quoted Isaiah Beard: >> I do not know why, but it is evident that Sprint has no love lost for >> Motorola. Same appeared to be true of Nokia. Nokia CDMA phones were utter horsecrap for years. Verizon stopped selling Nokia for a while too. Not sure about Moto. SignatureSteve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room. >Nokia CDMA phones were utter horsecrap for years. Verizon stopped selling >Nokia for a while too. I can't dispute that, but the key point is "for years".The Nokia 6185 was a huge seller for Sprint and it was an absolute stalwart. It had everything one needed around 2000-01. I seem to recall that there was a bad batch - so bad that they were recalled or something. This is just sketchy, but I seem to remember as well that the issue of quality control was at the root of Sprint's problems with Nokia. It was costing them too much money. But I had a perfect 6185. Amazing signal and sound, and it was very much in demand (I was able to get a good price for it) well past its prime. I'm sure there are many out there who remember this phone with great fondness. FWIW, DGI > I can't dispute that, but the key point is "for years".The > Nokia 6185 was a huge seller for Sprint and it was an absolute > stalwart. At first, yes. But the 6185 did eventually reveal is many ugly design flaws, which soon led to the realization that Nokia's idea of making their own CDMA chips instead of licensing designs from Qualcomm was a bad move. The 6185 looked and sounded all right, but it never did well with simple operations like a PRL update. You could not OTA update this phone even though Nokia promised that you could, and many times the handset would fry when hooked up via cable to try and get it to take an update. Bugs were rampant in the firmware. And although Nokia claimed the 6185 could support data, results were iffy at best. > It had everything one needed around 2000-01. I seem to > recall that there was a bad batch - so bad that they were recalled or > something. Try MANY batches. In fact, I'd venture to say that the majority of the phones had one defect or another. A 6185 user who kept his or her phone for awhile was either lucky to get a decent one, or simply put up with its defects. > This is just sketchy, but I seem to remember as well that > the issue of quality control was at the root of Sprint's problems with > Nokia. It was costing them too much money. But I had a perfect 6185. You were one of the few lucky ones then. > Amazing signal and sound, and it was very much in demand (I was able > to get a good price for it) well past its prime. I'm sure there are > many out there who remember this phone with great fondness. Ah yes, Saturday drives out to the Sprint store for yet another warranty replacement. Those ARE fond memories. ;) SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. >> Nokia CDMA phones were utter horsecrap for years. Verizon stopped selling >> Nokia for a while too. > > I can't dispute that, but the key point is "for years". Yes, it is. The finally shaped up, but they've never cared about the CDMA market. They've announced that they're going to discontinue their CDMA partnership with Sanyo and, I believe, they're only going to market a few CDMA models here. SignatureSteve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room. >> I do not know why, but it is evident that Sprint has no love lost for >> Motorola. Same appeared to be true of Nokia. > > Considering that there is a cult following for the #1 and #2 manufacturers of > cellular phones, that is likely a bad business decision. I agree wholeheartedly. Sprint IS making a stupid decision by not capitalizing on Motorola's current chic. All I can tell you is, the anti-Moto propaganda among their staff is rampant. I had one guy tell me that Motorola "simply work terribly on CDMA systems" and that none of the Motorola phones Spritn has tested would work reliably on the network. To which I responded "that's most likely a problem with Sprint's network then, considering that the E815 and RAZR V3c/m work great on Verizon and Alltel." He had no response for me. > I know my Daughter > is in love with her friends Cingular Razr ... and she has said she would be > more than happy with a Verizon Razr V3m. I am not sure that I can afford her, > but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same thing. Yeah, sadly, Sprint thinks that with a little corporate espionage and having Samsung's copycat skills under their wing, they can come with an imitation and that'll be just fine. Don't get me wrong. The Samsung A900 is a fine phone. But it's still not a RAZR. Heck, I hear Samsung makes great imitation luxury cars, too: http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=77847&Samsung Even so, it's no BMW. SignatureE-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. Yes, the Sprint PCS network is not the same as the verizon network or the alltel network. For one, the Sprint PCS network is all PCS, and in the states where verizon's network is all PCS as well, I am sure there are other less obvious differences in implementation and software/hardware that bring the total experience to a different conclusion. Therefore motorola may need to do more in making phones that are tailored to Sprint PCS' network. Perhaps the motorola iden tie-in will help bring them together. > Yes, the Sprint PCS network is not the same as the verizon network > or the alltel network. For one, the Sprint PCS network is all PCS, and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that are tailored to Sprint PCS' network. Perhaps the motorola iden > tie-in will help bring them together. All current CDMA Motorola phones are dual-band and will not have issue with either Ceullar or PCS; no problems with running on Verizon or Sprint PCS. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 > So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have > close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). I [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > and other current and upcoming phones. Why does every carrier but Sprint get > this stuff? I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset selection. This is rather ironic, because a couple of years ago it was Verizon with the poor selection of handsets. OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge. > I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact > Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset > selection. This is rather ironic, because a couple of years ago it was > Verizon with the poor selection of handsets. Where did you read that the RAZR would be coming next year? I would love to read the article myself. In any event, I am not sure it is a case of better late than never ... as Motorola will have moved past the RAZR by that point in time. > OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other > inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which > Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge. Their plans are alright ... but their inflexibility to allow a user to change their plan without a contract renewal is a big turn off. That goes for all relavent carriers. Charging a fee to change plans is one thing, but there is no valid reason to force a contract renewal. In fact, if a customer brings their own phone, there should be no contract at all, as there is no subsidy on the part of the provider to pay down and they already charge an activation fee to cover the customer service costs. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 > Where did you read that the RAZR would be coming next year? I would love to > read the article myself. In any event, I am not sure it is a case of better > late than never ... as Motorola will have moved past the RAZR by that point in > time. http://tinyurl.com/nbxkn >> OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other >> inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the part of the provider to pay down and they already charge an activation fee > to cover the customer service costs. Agreed. I tried to sign up for service a few months ago. I had my own phone. I was unable to do so unless I signed up for a contract. I wasn't going to do that. So, instead of taking my business on a month to month basis, they ended up with nothing. Doesn't make sense to me. Maybe it does for them. > > I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact > > Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > late than never ... as Motorola will have moved past the RAZR by that point in > time. hears a place to read about the moto products coming for sprint: http://www.mobileburn.com/news.jsp?Id=2608&source=SEARCH I have not used any moto products myself, as I have had nothing but wonderful experiences with the nokia phones I have had. Maybe not the most fashionable phone on the block, however It just works, does exactly what I need it to do and is durable. I am a terminal 'butter figers' have dropped my 3650 probably 300 times in the 3 years I have had it. 2 months ago fianlly had to replace the face plate as it broke in a drop in a place that I could not longer snap it back together. But still works as well as it did the day I bought it. I work in the customer service industry of an unnamed company, it has been my experience that 75% of the trouble shooting calls I received, were on motorola products. Especially after new releases of the hottest, most fashionable phones. It tends to take moto about 2 to 3 versions of the phone to get it right as far as being reliable. at leaset that is the way it seems from my stand point. Maybe this is the reason that Sprint has shyed away from following the crowd to quickly with motorola phones, because they want to make sure it is going to be reliable when they DO get it. Just a thought. Personally, I would love to see more nokia product in sprints line up, but as stated earlier, nokia is pulling completely out of CDMA as a result of some very bad experiences with Qualcomm. viva la progress? Can someone please tell me what is so great about the RAZR, its ok. It seems like everyone has gotten the me too syndrome. Their battery life is ok and the menu system is horrible. I trust that sprint has a valid reason for not really dealing with Motorola and they will either bring their models on or not. Makes no real difference to me. I am happy with my Sanyo 8300 and will be upgrading sometime next year. It really is not that serious. And when it comes to NOKIA, their phones on CDMA have always sucked. Good riddance. > > So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have > > close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). I [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which > Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge. Typically the Motorola user interfaces suck wind, however, the RF reception of Motorola phones is the best of any cell phone manufacturer. That in itself is a very good reason for Sprint to sell Motorola. > Can someone please tell me what is so great about the RAZR, its ok. It > seems like everyone has gotten the me too syndrome. Their battery life [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >> inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which >> Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge. > Typically the Motorola user interfaces suck wind, however, the RF reception > of Motorola phones is the best of any cell phone manufacturer. > That in itself is a very good reason for Sprint to sell Motorola. Tell that to the Razr owners. Those phones are notorious for poor reception, with the V3M out performing the V3C. Their crappy internal antennas with an aluminum case doesn't help matters much. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 >> Typically the Motorola user interfaces suck wind, however, the RF reception >> of Motorola phones is the best of any cell phone manufacturer. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > V3C. Their crappy internal antennas with an aluminum case doesn't help > matters much. Phonescoop's editors say the RAZR's "antenna is great." http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/review_moto_razr/index.php?p=wr Most owners say the RF reception is excellent: http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/user_reviews.php?phone=547 As a satisfied RAZR V3 owner for the past five months, I have to agree with those reviews. SignatureJohn Richards >> matters much. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > As a satisfied RAZR V3 owner for the past five months, I have to > agree with those reviews. Perhaps. I based my comment on the couple of times I waited in line at the Verizon kiosk and listening to people complain about the "network" to just find out it was there V3C or V3M phone. One woman went back to using her old phone until her "New Every 2" hit the 12 month point and she could get a lower price on a replacement. After asking the Rep about it [because I was curious] he indicated that they get a LOT of the Razr phones back or receive complaints about them, but that the issue isn't as bad since the release of the V3M. The two kiosks I witnessed this at were in Roseville and Blaine Minnesota (the V3M and V3C complaints respectively). I think Verizon spaces there cells a little further apart in the plains states and indeed, even in urban Minneapolis, so perhaps the phones are more sensitive to that. Just a hypothesis. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.