159 Canadian, 299 American!?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Man, THREE year contracts are crazy. I suppose it's profitable model since it's been around a while. But three years is a long time in cell phone years...

Anyone know if they allow "early upgrades"? We get a few months early on Verizon. I'd hope they'd have something like that on a contract that long...
 
WebDevAnalyst said:
No company B? So AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular, Cricket, etc, are just figments of our imaginations?
Click to expand...

If your coverage requirements are similar to mine, there is no Company B with the possible exception of Sprint, thanks to VZW roaming.
 
Thank you for yet another canned response, myster. But when you live in the "first world" you accept "first world" problems. Btw, even Fox doesn't call it that anymore so I really don't know where you get your news, grandpa.

Try keeping a decent job or staying in touch with your family ice without a mobile. If you don't want your employer snooping on the phone they give you, you have to have your own. If you're going to buy your own, you should buy the best. ("Free market," remember?) How is that a humorous, "first world" problem? Or are you just, once again, riding the cliche train out of troll town on the semantics express?
 
STC09 said:
If your coverage requirements are similar to mine, there is no Company B with the possible exception of Sprint, thanks to VZW roaming.
Click to expand...

Well blame companies B, C, D, E, F etc. for having crappy or no service in your area, company A isn't to blame for that. Perhaps that's why company A is on top and happens to be company A?
 
Why you mad bro? Hehe, here's another cliche for you. Anger with a D...spells...DANGER! :p
 
WebDevAnalyst said:
Well blame companies B, C, D, E, F etc. for having crappy or no service in your area, company A isn't to blame for that. Perhaps that's why company A is on top and happens to be company A?
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension issues?
 
WebDevAnalyst said:
Well blame companies B, C, D, E, F etc. for having crappy or no service in your area, company A isn't to blame for that. Perhaps that's why company A is on top and happens to be company A?
Click to expand...

While we're radically simplifying things & ignoring context I seem to remember Microsoft used that same argument for over a decade while being investigated for antitrust violations. But, you're right, we should have just let them go because B, C, D, Etc were inept & unworthy of competing.

An AT&T & TMO merger would have created a viable alternative to VZ in the market but it is being blocked. I can't help but wonder how much influence VZ is leveraging to keep that deal from happening.

When there is *actual* competition your ideology is great. Sadly this is not the case currently.
 
A7MAN said:
While we're radically simplifying things & ignoring context I seem to remember Microsoft used that same argument for over a decade while being investigated for antitrust violations. But, you're right, we should have just let them go because B, C, D, Etc were inept & unworthy of competing.

An AT&T & TMO merger would have created a viable alternative to VZ in the market but it is being blocked. I can't help but wonder how much influence VZ is leveraging to keep that deal from happening.

When there is *actual* competition your ideology is great. Sadly this is not the case currently.
Click to expand...

How? AT&T is not that much smaller than Verizon. In fact AT&T was the largest carrier until Verizon bought a few of the smaller carries like Alltel. AT&T needs to get their act together in regards to their network, that is simply their fault and nobody else's.
 
STC09 said:
Considering I never said any of that, "reading comprehension difficulties" is putting it kindly.
Click to expand...

So what are you saying then? Do you even know? The argument is the same regardless. There is no company B for you, blame that on the other companies then.
 
A7MAN said:
An AT&T & TMO merger would have created a viable alternative to VZ in the market but it is being blocked.
Click to expand...
It might deepen the coverage but I suspect it wouldn't broaden it significantly, probably at all. It's duplicative, not additive.
 
WebDevAnalyst said:
So what are you saying then? Do you even know? The argument is the same regardless. There is no company B for you, blame that on the other companies then.
Click to expand...

Are you confusing me with someone else? I posted that for some of us, there really isn't a Company B. I didn't blame anyone for that; that's just the way it is.
 
We are way off topic & I apologize for my, apparently, polarizing rant. This thread was finished after "3 years, 16GB." Shut it down...
 
STC09 said:
It might deepen the coverage but I suspect it wouldn't broaden it significantly, probably at all. It's duplicative, not additive.
Click to expand...

I said that in hopes that additional resources would provide the means to expand sufficiently to compete. When iP exclusivity expired everybody jumped ship. Idk current numbers but I know they've been bleeding subscribers for lack of service & coverage as well.
 
A7MAN said:
Canadian is always less but currently only by $.02. So it's about 157 USD.
Click to expand...

There were a few days this year when CAD was worth a bit more than USD. Bad day to go to Canada, good day to convert spare currency you might have from living on the border.
 
Aren't those Brits getting the phone for free with a cheaper minimum required monthly plan?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Trending Posts

Members online

Total: 2,501 (members: 9, guests: 2,492)

Forum statistics

Threads
957,496
Messages
6,973,324
Members
3,163,834
Latest member
Vresbudsbenz

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom