On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 01:04:31 -0700, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
: At 05 Dec 2006 17:00:50 -0800 SMS wrote:
:
: > While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
: > areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
: > three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
: > for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
: > part in their good ratings.
:
:
: I think you're being a little unfair- T-Mo isn't the new kid on the
: block anymore- they've matured and have built out an excellent network in
: a number of cities. Like Sprint, they've focused on covering population
: rather than geography, and have used roaming agreements to fill in the
: gaps.
:
: Here in southwest Denver, T-Mo (and Sprint) hit places Cingular (and
: sometimes Verizon) don't.
:
: T-Mo's been around for a good number of years now and have invested a lot
: in their network. It's a little disingenuous to say that their rating
: was based on discouraging customers that have no coverage at home or work!

I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was pointing
out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying to
avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied and
drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
carriers should emulate.

Bob