In article <dm7hn29r2uqefr1ec932qigds47i6enq56@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 07:23:06 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <457831d4$0$82525$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
> >dafydd wrote:
> >> So what have we learned from all this chit chat? Basically that every
> >> company has its better parts, and has areas in the country where they
> >> are very strong.
> >
> >Actually we have not learned that at all. Two companies stood out all
> >over the country, and two were very weak all over the country.
>
> Differences were actually relatively small and not terribly meaningful

i can see why cingular would try to spin it that way given that they
looked so bad in the study which showed quite significant differences.

i suspect some low-end types will actually believe that spin.

a lot of people are going to smirk when they see one of those
cingular billboards asserting fewest dropped calls, particularly if
they are driving with someone whose cingular phone has no signal
whatsoever.... something that happens quite often in the new york
metropolitan area and connecticut.