AT&T Sues Verizon for 'Map for That' Ads
Verizon's Next Commercial
If Verizon wanted to slam AT&T again (but without the lawyers) this is how their next commercial should go...
A man with a map of Verizon's coverage on one side of him and a map of AT&T's coverage on the others. His opening line should go...
"Hi Im a Verizon customer because I want the most out of the money I spend. I studied these maps between Verizon", (he points to the Verizon's network), "and their leading competitor." Points to at&t's network. "they looked the same till I did this" removes the voice aspect of the maps and now only shows the 3G coverage. "why would I spend $30 on data for 3G speeds with at&t, when I can't even use it wherever I go?"
The camera zooms in to just him and the Verizon 3G map
"I chose Verizon becau...
(continues)
A man with a map of Verizon's coverage on one side of him and a map of AT&T's coverage on the others. His opening line should go...
"Hi Im a Verizon customer because I want the most out of the money I spend. I studied these maps between Verizon", (he points to the Verizon's network), "and their leading competitor." Points to at&t's network. "they looked the same till I did this" removes the voice aspect of the maps and now only shows the 3G coverage. "why would I spend $30 on data for 3G speeds with at&t, when I can't even use it wherever I go?"
The camera zooms in to just him and the Verizon 3G map
"I chose Verizon becau...
(continues)
...
Good show, murmermer. You & I agree on next to nothing. But your proposed VZW commercial hits the nail on the head.
I have little love for either VZW or AT&T, as they unfairly dominate the domestic wireless landscape. However, fierce competition between the heavyweights is good for consumers.
Lastly, there are technical reasons why VZW 3G coverage trumps AT&T 3G coverage. If I have the time, I will post a write up on those issues later today.
AJ
I have little love for either VZW or AT&T, as they unfairly dominate the domestic wireless landscape. However, fierce competition between the heavyweights is good for consumers.
Lastly, there are technical reasons why VZW 3G coverage trumps AT&T 3G coverage. If I have the time, I will post a write up on those issues later today.
AJ
...
I've been told that every Verizon-owned tower is Rev. A. Do you know if this is true? If so, then think that not only does a VZW customer get 3G coverage everywhere there is a VZW tower, but also when they are roaming off of Sprint's 3G service.
As a side note, does anybody know if the map shown in the commercial includes the 3G roaming coverage as well or not?
As a side note, does anybody know if the map shown in the commercial includes the 3G roaming coverage as well or not?
...
MisterSuperSzar said:
I've been told that every Verizon-owned tower is Rev. A. Do you know if this is true? If so, then think that not only does a VZW customer get 3G coverage everywhere there is a VZW tower, but also when they are roaming off of Sprint's 3G service.
First, the sooner you (and everyone else!!!) drop the "tower" nomenclature, the better. A tower is just an elevated structure. It may or may not elevate a cell site. And VZW has many "cell sites" located on towers, buildings, or properties (e.g. hillsides, mountains) that it does not own. Wireless carriers frequently lease their access from property &/or structure owners. Even so, wireless carriers still retain control of their license...
(continues)
...
Jeez, sorry for not understanding the semantics of a cell site vs. cell tower, let alone the exact technicalities of the roaming agreements that VZW and Sprint have between each other, which is exactly why I was asking; to clarify questions I had.
...
Do not take it personally. But you (and nearly everyone else) need to learn a thing or two about wireless. And, yes, semantics & technicalities matter.
Too many in this forum tend to ask loaded questions, then argue when accurate answers to those questions do not fit their ill conceived notions.
If you asked a legitimate question but interpreted a snide response, then I apologize, as I did not intend such. I just wanted to present a semantically, technically correct answer.
As anyone who knows me will tell you, I am a glutton for accuracy. And that penchant is both a strength & a fault.
AJ
Too many in this forum tend to ask loaded questions, then argue when accurate answers to those questions do not fit their ill conceived notions.
If you asked a legitimate question but interpreted a snide response, then I apologize, as I did not intend such. I just wanted to present a semantically, technically correct answer.
As anyone who knows me will tell you, I am a glutton for accuracy. And that penchant is both a strength & a fault.
AJ
...
This forum is closed.
