regarding roaming on AT&T

A whole bunch of folk (hi, Steve) have commented
that when AT&T took over various (formerly) smaller,
regional, third party cellular companies, they
soon ended the t-mobile roaming arrangements.

Meaning that lots of people woke up one mrrning
with bricks...

Earlier this week I got off the phone with TM and
got into extensive discussions about this problem.
What got us going was that they would give me a discount
if I re-signed up for two years, but I said I wouldn't
risk more than one. Why? Because I spend a lot of
time in (newly) AT&T areas and was worried I'd
lose service.

The rep was pretty knowledgable and forthcoming. He
claimed they had gone through lots of updates about
this issue post the merger/takeover breakup, and
they had been assured that all current roamings
would continue, and most "lost" ones would resume.

Take it for what it's worth, of course...


--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 06:34:04 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein wrote:

> ... tmobile ... that they would give me a discount
> if I re-signed up for two years,

I had an offer like that a month or two ago when the automated bill-payment
IVR system couldn't cope with my DTMF entries -- the human to whom I got
switched, after taking my CC payment data, offered just such a quid pro quo
as danny encountered, but my feeling was: you can try to keep me with you
by the sugar of a discounted monthly base rate, but I'm sure as 773H
(rot180) not going to let you rope me in for any obligatory period -- what
if I move, or die, or T-Mo's tariffs change because of merger, or sum'p'n?

Agent was left speechless. We hung up.
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

In <14gyco89bkwlj$.12xd4t9pfy1wx$.dlg@40tude.net> tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> writes:

>On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 06:34:04 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein wrote:

>> ... tmobile ... that they would give me a discount
>> if I re-signed up for two years,

>I had an offer like that a month or two ago when the automated bill-payment
>IVR system couldn't cope with my DTMF entries -- the human to whom I got
>switched, after taking my CC payment data, offered just such a quid pro quo
>as danny encountered, but my feeling was: you can try to keep me with you
>by the sugar of a discounted monthly base rate, but I'm sure as 773H
>(rot180) not going to let you rope me in for any obligatory period -- what
>if I move, or die, or T-Mo's tariffs change because of merger, or sum'p'n?

>Agent was left speechless. We hung up.

In my case they wound up offering me a similar (roughly 10 percent)
discount for a one year extension... I explained to the CSR that
I spent lots of time in AT&T roaming areas, and even though
(as he said) they were told (and he told me...) that the breakup
of the merger meant all roaming would continue, I said I couldn't
trust the AT&T lawyers...



--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:13:46 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein wrote:

> ... T-Mo ...
> In my case they wound up offering me a similar (roughly 10 percent)
> discount for a one year extension... I explained to the CSR that
> I spent lots of time in AT&T roaming areas, and even though
> (as he said) they were told (and he told me...) that the breakup
> of the merger meant all roaming would continue, I said I couldn't
> trust the AT&T lawyers...

:-) ... ever the diplomat, eh? More power to you! And Happy New Year!

-- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

On 12/30/2011 10:34 PM, danny burstein wrote:

> Take it for what it's worth, of course...

My impression that it was not just lost roaming that would be restored,
but that additional roaming would be added. I'll check on the restored
roaming periodically when I'm in the parts of the Bay Area where it was
lost.

Even extra-cost roaming on a lower cost carrier is acceptable if you
don't have a need for it often. We drove through Yosemite on Sunday (a
rare treat to have Tioga Pass Road open this late (almost no snow yet)
and lots of people ice skating on the lakes). The spousal unit wanted to
call her sister and I told her to wait a bit until we re-entered Verizon
territory (we are all on Pageplus and roaming is 29¢/minute). I know
just about exactly where Golden State Cellular ends and Verizon begins
(a few miles outside of Oakdale, CA). But in Yosemite there has been no
T-Mobile coverage at all for quite a while. Verizon and Sprint roam onto
Golden State Cellular and AT&T has native coverage.

We were also in Death Valley where you used to be able to have pretty
good coverage on AMPS both in the valley itself as well as on
surrounding peaks, but that is gone, replaced by "No Service" in most
areas. So much for the FCC's requirement that analog not be turned off
unless it is replaced by digital.