"There's no greater cause of churn than network quality" claims AT&TCEO

In defending AT&T's network in the face of all the recent problems with
network congestion, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson stated:

"There's no greater cause of churn than network quality," he said,
adding that "we have the lowest churn in the company's history."

Actually his premise is incorrect. A Booz, Allen & Hamilton study on
churn found that network quality accounted for only 17% of churn, and
was a distant third in terms of the reasons people churn.

31% Handset Issues
28% Too expensive and too little usage for the cost
17% Coverage and Network Quality
9% Competition has better prices
7% Billing problems
8% Other (Moved out of coverage area, deceased, etc.)

"http://www.boozallen.com/media/file/56757.pdf"

This study is from 2001, I haven't seen any newer studies on the reasons
for churn.

On 2009-10-13, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> This study is from 2001, I haven't seen any newer studies on the reasons
> for churn.

Studies that old don't say much about now, but if network quality
were the primary issue then AT&T's network must be getting better
while Verizon's is getting worse since that's the direction their
churn numbers have been going lately. Last quarter Verizon's
postpaid churn was up to 1.01%, while AT&T's was down to 1.09%;
overall churn was 1.37% compared to 1.49% (with the latter number
including a lot more prepaid and MVNO customers). That's approaching
a dead heat.

Dennis Ferguson

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4ad4b3d9$0$1621$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> In defending AT&T's network in the face of all the recent problems with
> network congestion, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson stated:
>
> "There's no greater cause of churn than network quality," he said, adding
> that "we have the lowest churn in the company's history."
>
> Actually his premise is incorrect. A Booz, Allen & Hamilton study on churn
> found that network quality accounted for only 17% of churn, and was a
> distant third in terms of the reasons people churn.
>
> 31% Handset Issues
> 28% Too expensive and too little usage for the cost
> 17% Coverage and Network Quality
> 9% Competition has better prices
> 7% Billing problems
> 8% Other (Moved out of coverage area, deceased, etc.)
>
> "http://www.boozallen.com/media/file/56757.pdf"
>
> This study is from 2001, I haven't seen any newer studies on the reasons
> for churn.

The lack of new studies hardly means a nearly decade-old one is still valid.
(Nor does it automatically invalidate it, either, of course.) The wireless
landscape has changed quite a bit since 2001, though.

Todd Allcock wrote:

> The lack of new studies hardly means a nearly decade-old one is still
> valid. (Nor does it automatically invalidate it, either, of course.)
> The wireless landscape has changed quite a bit since 2001, though.

This is true, but where did the AT&T CEO get the idea that network
quality is the greatest cause of churn? Another AT&T exec stated: "The
surest indication of customer satisfaction is churn," AT&T's Siegel
said. "And ours is at record-low levels. Our own internal data suggests
that our iPhone customers are very satisfied with AT&T."

This sounds so much like the smugness that has characterized
Cingular/AT&T, including their infamous "dropped call" survey and
resulting ad campaign. Well at least their churn really is down, though
not for the reasons they talk about. Their "fewest dropped calls"
contention was totally bogus...

"According to Kaltwasser's complaint, filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California, Cingular misrepresented
the findings made by Telephia, a data provider for the
telecommunications industry.

Cingular conducted a widespread ad campaign based on what it
claimed was a study by Telephia that rated Cingular as having the fewest
dropped calls of any wireless carrier in the country.

In fact, Kaltwasser alleges, Telephia actually concluded that
Cingular did not have the fewest dropped calls in several major markets,
including New York, Chicago, Houston and Los Angeles.

Moreover, independent studies by two other companies, J.D. Powers &
Associates and Consumer Reports, found Cingular to be the worst or one
of the worst carriers in dropped-call performance, Kaltwasser says."

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:4ad4b3d9$0$1621
$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> In defending AT&T's network in the face of all the recent problems with
> network congestion, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson stated:
>
> "There's no greater cause of churn than network quality," he said,
> adding that "we have the lowest churn in the company's history."
>
> Actually his premise is incorrect. A Booz, Allen & Hamilton study on
> churn found that network quality accounted for only 17% of churn, and
> was a distant third in terms of the reasons people churn.

Oh, Stevie- where to start?

>
> 31% Handset Issues

IIRC, they were a handful (literally less than 5) of phones on the market
that had any kind of internet functionality. They were simple call and
voicemail units. Nothing more, nothing less. The market has changed just
a little bit.

> 28% Too expensive and too little usage for the cost

In 2001, they were a fashion accessory and very few people had them,
relatively speaking. Of course there was little usage. In 2009, they are
more vital to most than a landline.

> 17% Coverage and Network Quality

AMPS and TDMA say hello.


>
> This study is from 2001,

And your posting of it shows how clueless you are and how desperate you are
to try and appear as some kind of expert. In fact, you are (or were)
nothing more than a pedestrian phone salesman.


> I haven't seen any newer studies on the reasons
> for churn.
>

There are a number of them referenced on the internet and easily found with
just a little digging. THe fact that you didn't know that simply proves my
last point.

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4ad51366$0$1635$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>> The lack of new studies hardly means a nearly decade-old one is still
>> valid. (Nor does it automatically invalidate it, either, of course.) The
>> wireless landscape has changed quite a bit since 2001, though.
>
> This is true, but where did the AT&T CEO get the idea that network quality
> is the greatest cause of churn?

From reading your posts on alt.cellular.attws? :-)

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA


"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4ad51366$0$1635$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>> The lack of new studies hardly means a nearly decade-old one is still
>> valid. (Nor does it automatically invalidate it, either, of course.) The
>> wireless landscape has changed quite a bit since 2001, though.
>
> This is true, but where did the AT&T CEO get the idea that network quality
> is the greatest cause of churn? Another AT&T exec stated: "The surest
> indication of customer satisfaction is churn," AT&T's Siegel said. "And
> ours is at record-low levels. Our own internal data suggests that our
> iPhone customers are very satisfied with AT&T."
>
> This sounds so much like the smugness that has characterized
> Cingular/AT&T, including their infamous "dropped call" survey and
> resulting ad campaign. Well at least their churn really is down, though
> not for the reasons they talk about. Their "fewest dropped calls"
> contention was totally bogus...
>
> "According to Kaltwasser's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court
> for the Northern District of California, Cingular misrepresented the
> findings made by Telephia, a data provider for the telecommunications
> industry.
>
> Cingular conducted a widespread ad campaign based on what it claimed
> was a study by Telephia that rated Cingular as having the fewest dropped
> calls of any wireless carrier in the country.
>
> In fact, Kaltwasser alleges, Telephia actually concluded that Cingular
> did not have the fewest dropped calls in several major markets, including
> New York, Chicago, Houston and Los Angeles.
>
> Moreover, independent studies by two other companies, J.D. Powers &
> Associates and Consumer Reports, found Cingular to be the worst or one of
> the worst carriers in dropped-call performance, Kaltwasser says."