Verizon wants Sprint to pull network claim advertisments, oh irony

**eve6er69** · 11-25-2009, 07:45 PM

Verizon wants Sprint to pull network claim advertisments, oh irony « Boy Genius Report

i thought this was funny because it is the pot calling the kettle black, lol

**jlsparks** · 11-25-2009, 07:56 PM

I don't see the irony here. AT&T has advertised, since the Summer of 2008, that they have "The Nation's Fasest 3G Network." Verizon called them on it through their ad campaign; AT&T filed suit, and already has failed on their request for a TRO against VZW. They'll fail on the underlying suit, as well, because VZW's ads are factual.

In the Sprint case, again, we see a similar tag line: "America's Most Dependable 3G Network." The phrase "most dependable" implies to me a service which is superior in "dependability" or "reliability" or general QoS as compared to its competitors. VZW, apparently, has provided sufficient impartial fact to the National Advertising Division of the BBB for the BBB to take the unusual step of asking Sprint to voluntarily pull that tag line from their ads. In stark contrast to the AT&T/VZW dispute VZW has not taken any legal action against Sprint to attempt to restrain them from using their tag line. All VZW has done is, successfully, petition the BBB to make an informal request of Sprint.

Big differences in my opinion...

**redhdgirl417** · 11-26-2009, 07:41 PM

Uh, ok. >>>>>>

**dagone12** · 11-27-2009, 07:45 AM

At&t and Verizon need to stop acting like whiny little b*****s and stop these ridiculous lawsuits. Instead, they need to put their money towards improving their business and network.

**ERDude** · 11-27-2009, 08:23 AM

One "Nielsen Co." test is not sufficient proof of reliability or dependability. I can site numerous instances where Sprint is more dependable and reliable than Verizon.

Buddy in Orange County, CA using Verizon constantly drops calls and borrowed my Sprint phone to complete his calls

Driving from OC to FL, out on interstate 8 just before the Arizona border same buddy with Verizon had no service, no data, no voice and once again had to borrow my phone to connect with his law firm, I will admit Sprint didn't have data either. He also had spotty service in Las Cruces, NM, San Antonio, TX and New Orleans, LA.

Merritt Island, Florida, my brother and his family of 4 all on Verizon drop calls left and right. A side by side comparison of a Sprint and Verizon Curve, Sprint full bars and 1XEV service, Verizon 2 bars and 1x service.

That makes Sprint more dependable in my opinion.

What most Sprint customers don't know is when you drop a call you get fast tones similar to a fast busy on a landline and a message that says signal failed when you drop a call.

Originally Posted by jlsparks

I don't see the irony here. AT&T has advertised, since the Summer of 2008, that they have "The Nation's Fasest 3G Network." Verizon called them on it through their ad campaign; AT&T filed suit, and already has failed on their request for a TRO against VZW. They'll fail on the underlying suit, as well, because VZW's ads are factual.

In the Sprint case, again, we see a similar tag line: "America's Most Dependable 3G Network." The phrase "most dependable" implies to me a service which is superior in "dependability" or "reliability" or general QoS as compared to its competitors. VZW, apparently, has provided sufficient impartial fact to the National Advertising Division of the BBB for the BBB to take the unusual step of asking Sprint to voluntarily pull that tag line from their ads. In stark contrast to the AT&T/VZW dispute VZW has not taken any legal action against Sprint to attempt to restrain them from using their tag line. All VZW has done is, successfully, petition the BBB to make an informal request of Sprint.

Big differences in my opinion...

**jlsparks** · 11-27-2009, 09:13 AM

@ER: I can offer anecdotal evidence that VZW is superior, too. The BBB was simply apparently provided with sufficient independent evidence to ask Sprint to cease. That's all I'm sayin...

**Blechtman** · 11-27-2009, 09:25 AM

Gosh...the claws sure do come out when ppl are "defending" their network. I don't think there's any single network that works all the time in every single corner of the world. However, in my little corner, VZ works the best. 90% of the ppl I talk to also have VZ so it works out. For those who don't have it, I just have to wait til 9pm to talk to them. I'm not saying VZ is the best choice for everyone, but it is the best for me. And I know it's expensive, but I guess you get what you pay for. I'm always pleased with my service and I always have a signal. Security like that is worth the $80/month I plunk down.

**hammer4203** · 11-27-2009, 09:41 AM

Face it vzw and att both suck!!! My father had to drop att and move to sprint cuz his phone never worked at home and they have a tower less than a mile from the house. VZW didn't either! So why argue over it? Att has the iphone and that's the only reason they aren't falling behind! VZW has the storm, whoopie! My sprint BB works in the blast freezer!!! Try that with att and vzw! Sorry they suck! Tmobile don't even count!

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

**dagone12** · 11-27-2009, 09:56 AM

Each provider has their highs and lows... period. There's nothing else to it. All these comparisons, arguments, and threads about it are pretty pointless.

**jlsparks** · 11-27-2009, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by dagone12

Each provider has their highs and lows... period. There's nothing else to it. All these comparisons, arguments, and threads about it are pretty pointless.

How are comparisons pointless? If they serve to inform users about pluses and minuses of each carrier I think they serve a useful service in a help forum. Also, I don't think it's inappropriate for the OP to question VZW's BBB action, just as I don't think it's inappropriate for me to have compared the BBB action to AT&T's lawsuit. You mentioned in an earlier post that they all need to stop "suing each other." That statement is a perfect example of why these threads are helpful, namely, to correct misinformation. VZW, as I stated in my post above, hasn't "sued" any carrier. Rather, they're the target of a suit by AT&T, and the filed a civil complaint with an oversight agency. IMO there's a big difference.

**cadman** · 11-27-2009, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by dagone12

Each provider has their highs and lows... period. There's nothing else to it. All these comparisons, arguments, and threads about it are pretty pointless.

exactly and doesn't sprint lease space or something from verizon towers?

IMHO if sprint was so much better, then they wouldn't have cheaper prices. They would be similar to the other two network prices.

**lennyj17** · 11-27-2009, 10:41 AM

So wait the only way to tell if a company has good service is if they're Raping the Sh*t out of our wallets??????

**cadman** · 11-27-2009, 10:59 AM

No but if sprint had the same prices as the other two they would be out of business. Even their ads say how cheaper they are. Sprint has gotten better in my area but still way behind the other two. I have no problem with verizons prices because I never hit a dead spot except for in upstate pa in a small area.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

**ERDude** · 11-27-2009, 01:21 PM

Verizon selected one independent research firms findings to bolster their claim, as I said one Nielsen Co. test is not enough to hang your hat on. Check out the sources that say otherwise in this post.

Verizon Goes After Sprint Advertising Claim |

**ERDude** · 11-27-2009, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Tony Bag O Donuts

exactly and doesn't sprint lease space or something from verizon towers?

IMHO if sprint was so much better, then they wouldn't have cheaper prices. They would be similar to the other two network prices.

You better stop shopping at Walmart, the dollars stores or any store that sells anything cheaper than another because according to your flawed logic it's just not as good as the store charging top dollar.

**lennyj17** · 11-28-2009, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by Tony Bag O Donuts

No but if sprint had the same prices as the other two they would be out of business. Even their ads say how cheaper they are. Sprint has gotten better in my area but still way behind the other two. I have no problem with verizons prices because I never hit a dead spot except for in upstate pa in a small area.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Ok - and I've never hit a dead spot with Sprint, soooooo what would make Verizon better deal for me??????

And just because you dont have problem with pricing, still doesnt no neigate the fact that Verzion is the most expensive as well as the most Nickel and Diming of all carriers.

**cadman** · 11-28-2009, 06:19 AM

Would I prefer eveyone to have sprint pricing? Yes. But again I have no problem paying for quality service. I'm glad sprint works for you.

All I am saying is if verizon and sprint were priced the same, either both higher or lower it is my opinion that more would choose verizon. That being said until recently I have always maintained sprint had the best phones.

Side note let's not turn this into a heated argument. Agreed?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

**cadman** · 11-28-2009, 06:48 AM

Originally Posted by ERDude

You better stop shopping at Walmart, the dollars stores or any store that sells anything cheaper than another because according to your flawed logic it's just not as good as the store charging top dollar.

Good point....but would you go to a Dr that charges 50.00 for treatment that may work or 200.00 for treatment that does work...
Anyhow other than this thread, I always say whatever service works for you, great.
I lived in the NYC area and sprint worked for my buddies, att was shoddy and verizon was great. But again that was my experience.

**ERDude** · 11-28-2009, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Tony Bag O Donuts

Good point....but would you go to a Dr that charges 50.00 for treatment that may work or 200.00 for treatment that does work...
Anyhow other than this thread, I always say whatever service works for you, great.
I lived in the NYC area and sprint worked for my buddies, att was shoddy and verizon was great. But again that was my experience.

Again your logic is flawed. Sprint does and always has worked for me. As an employee of American Airlines (until 9/11) I have flown from one end of our great country to another, to Canada and Mexico without any issue connecting or making calls with my Sprint service. The others that I flew with using AT&T and Verizon can't say the same. I'm paying less for a service that does work, while my brother and his family are paying more for Verizon that may work.

Question when was the last time you were a Sprint customer, or have you ever been? Are you basing your statements on experience or hearsay?

**cadman** · 11-28-2009, 08:55 AM

I am assuming you were a customer. When I was in IT our company had people switch from sprint to att then verizon. I have not used sprint personally. Again great you have coverage. I am not knocking them.
I spent 30 yrs in the nyc area and sprint was spotty for my co workers and friends that had it. I am not saying verizon is what everyone should be on.
I have been across country and the only dead spot I hit is outside of scranton, pa. But we are getting off topic.
Can we agree to just disagree on this one off topic issue?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

**jlsparks** · 11-28-2009, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by Tony Bag O Donuts

I am assuming you were a customer. When I was in IT our company had people switch from sprint to att then verizon. I have not used sprint personally. Again great you have coverage. I am not knocking them.
I spent 30 yrs in the nyc area and sprint was spotty for my co workers and friends that had it. I am not saying verizon is what everyone should be on.
I have been across country and the only dead spot I hit is outside of scranton, pa. But we are getting off topic.
Can we agree to just disagree on this one off topic issue?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Similar the to above. My last job was in Colorado, and IT fell under my span of control. I made the ill-advised decision to move our senior management team from VZW to Sprint for two reasons: 1) the prices were lower on a corporate package and; 2) I was assured by my rep and by their coverage maps that we would have "excellent" service in the Denver-metro area and in the Denver Foothills. Dozens of failed calls and hundreds of missed emails later, oh, and numerous flame emails and calls to me directly from others in senior management, I migrated back to VZW as rapidly as humanly possible. Fortunately, in light of Sprint's utter failure to provide anything approaching useable services the majority of the time, I negotiated out that that contract with no penalty.

If Sprint works great for you that is terrific. You have a good selection of phones to choose from, and lower prices than what I pay. But both in Colorado and in my current employment instant communication is vital. Needless to say, that communication but be consistently reliable. For me, in both locales, VZW has met those criteria in the face of Sprint's total failure. Anecdotal? Yes. Real world experience? Yes.

**atomicdog21** · 11-28-2009, 09:50 AM

I think we can all agree that different carriers are optimal for different people. 5 years ago the only practical solution for most people in Wisconsin. Was U.S. cellular with its string and cans. Now the top three are all very viable, and go figure USCell has at least a Tour. Regardless of what the coverage maps show, all three carriers cover the vast majority of americans in their day to day. Sprint is probably the best example of this in terms their map looking the opposite, as their bread and butter was originally businesses, so the map looks like connect the dots with metro areas and main highways. So I guess my thing is:
1.All things being equal, Sprints lower price is a best value. The networks have overall parity unless someone brings something much more conclusive.
2.If they were priced close to the same as Verizon, people would go to Verizon at least as much as left it. Why? Because people identify with Verizon because it has the most people on it. It reassures them on some level. And other things like that even though Sprint is clearly as good, and often better. And before anyone says my logic is flawed, consider this: Pepsi constantly does bettter than coke in tastes tests. It's sweeter, and on todays taste preferences is simply a better soda. But Coke owns Pepsi on sales six ways from Sunday. Never doubt the power of a large iconic brand.

I've just restarted the cola wars.

**jahoobob** · 11-28-2009, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by dagone12

Each provider has their highs and lows... period. There's nothing else to it. All these comparisons, arguments, and threads about it are pretty pointless.

Yet you made made a comparison between Sprint and Verizon OS upgrades

Sprints .57 update > Verizons .61 update.

that was most lame, especially considering that later in the same thread the OP figured out that the problem he was having was not with the OS but with a non-OEM battery.

**jahoobob** · 11-28-2009, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by ERDude

Again your logic is flawed. Sprint does and always has worked for me. As an employee of American Airlines (until 9/11) I have flown from one end of our great country to another, to Canada and Mexico without any issue connecting or making calls with my Sprint service. The others that I flew with using AT&T and Verizon can't say the same. I'm paying less for a service that does work, while my brother and his family are paying more for Verizon that may work.

Question when was the last time you were a Sprint customer, or have you ever been? Are you basing your statements on experience or hearsay?

An airline employee's experience is somewhat limited in that he flies to the larger cities and doesn't necessarily make it to rural areas. A person traveling by car would experience the highs and lows of their particular carrier. Again, in my area Verizon and Alltel are the ONLY nationwide carriers that offer plans. So, as someone has already stated, whatever carrier meets your needs.
Your last two questions are "mindblowingly" lame when connected with your statements. I'll turn it around on you. When was the last time you were a Verizon, ATT, T-mobile customer, or have you ever been? Are you basing your statements on experience or hearsay? When you say

The others that I flew with using AT&T and Verizon can't say the same.

you are presenting hearsay.
Anyhow, your experience is 8 years old. That is eons in cell phone coverage.

**cheech73** · 11-28-2009, 10:48 AM

chevy VS ford. Verizon vs Sprint, it never ends. one says one is better than the other. If i may add my 2 cents, i had At&t, Verizon and now i have Sprint. I live in a major NY area where all 3 carriers have superior service. And truth is Sprint is just as good as the other 3 in this area. sure i get dropped calls once in a while, but i had them also with the other carriers. point to make is go with what carrier has the best service in your area, not cuz someone says there better. For me Sprint here is the best buy why? cuz i get the same superior service and much better prices its a no brainer.