AT&T Publishes Public Letter Refuting Verizon Wireless Ads
Even their site does nothing to help their cause
Apparently 75% of the population only live in a few cities. Look at Massachusetts - 6 cities; Rhode Island - 1; They have as many cities covered in Alaska as they do in Delaware.
I think this list just validates those silly maps with specks of blue on them.
AT&T can't force their competitor that Their commercial also say "But AT&T covers 75% of the population with 3G."
And no the commercial is not misleading. To everyone watching the commercial, you look at the map while its airing and you look where you live, where you visit and you see if you do or do not have 3G coverage, Its that simple!
So for those that look and see that att&t does not have 3G coverage and horizon does then that was the point of the commercial.
Whats wrong with that, anybody?
Where I am at in WI, EVDO is not any faster than EDGE. Verizon tries to make it's third gen coverage sound like something great, when it's not any better in the real world ...
(continues)
First off nobody is talking about batteries in the commercial. Maybe you and at&t can make a commercial in response to verizons about the battery life. 🙄
anyways, if the fcc allows verizon to say that their 3g is 3g then its 3g, and on the other foot they allow at&t to say their 3g is 3g and their 2g is not 3g then thats what it is.
At&t needs to make a commercial about how their 2g coverage map is just as large as verizon and on the same commercial explain with facts that their 2g is as fast as verizon's 3g.
So all I am saying is that why not at&t just make a commercial in response? Its all fair game.
Its like ford, Dodge, chevy, sierra, and toyota with their commercials. Its no different.
Disrespect said:
So all I am saying is that now that we agree that verizon is not doing anything legally wrong, morrally wrong? yes, demoralizing? I agree. but its all legal.
So all I am saying is that why not at&t just make a commercial in response? Its all fair game.
Its like ford, Dodge, chevy, sierra, and toyota with their commercials. Its no different.
The problem is that the Verizon commercial shows the AT&T customer completely unable to get online because no 3G- that's untrue and misleading!
Verizon is also making false claims about Sprint's 3G coverage as well, but Sprint cannot afford to make an issue of it since they roam heavily off of Big Red.
Ok can you verify, since you are SO behind this statement, that this is true in all of AT&T's coverage area? Remember that AT&T has had bandwidth issues with all the data use in markets that are not 3G. so if those reports are correct, then due to network issues, which we know they are there, this is not far fetched.
USCCFANINKS said:
"The problem is that the Verizon commercial shows the AT&T customer completely unable to get online because no 3G- that's untrue and misleading!"
Ok can you verify, since you are SO behind this statement, that this is true in all of AT&T's coverage area? Remember that AT&T has had bandwidth issues with all the data use in markets that are not 3G. so if those reports are correct, then due to network issues, which we know they are there, this is not far fetched.
The commercial isn't about bandwidth issues or network deficiencies, it's about COVERAGE. The commercial implies someone with an AT&T device will be unable to get online because they don't have 3G COVERAGE.
That said, ther ...
(continues)
You are speaking as an outsider and basing your information on how YOU interpret the intent ...
Facts aside, this is still a baseless lawsuit, the idea in advertising is to make yourselves more appealing then your competitor ...they did just that.
USCCFANINKS said:
Are you the advertising department for Verizon wireless? do you know for a fact what the intent was?
You are speaking as an outsider and basing your information on how YOU interpret the intent ...
Facts aside, this is still a baseless lawsuit, the idea in advertising is to make yourselves more appealing then your competitor ...they did just that.
Interpret? The commercial flat out says that you'll be out of touch if you're on AT&T's network. There's nothing to interpret, it's a baldface lie.
Am I missing something here?
Disrespect said:
OK so I saw the commercial again and it never insinuated that she has no coverage. It showed her at like a bench/bus stop looking sad, but it never showed screen shots of the phone nor its signal strength.
Am I missing something here?
Yes, the announcer in the commercial says, "if you wonder why your friends are out of touch, there's a map for that too." Lack of 3G doesn't cause someone to be "out of touch." Blatantly misleading.
Wow! Very arrogant statement. Obviously there are people who live in those other areas as well. Alltel made a killing leveraging those areas. It was their business strategy to cover "rural" areas where the other providers chose not to build out. When I worked there, they would often trade with Verizon to get out of larger Metro areas with heavy competition to get into a "rural" area. Once Verizon gobbled them up---they had those areas covered. Your argument is typical that I often hear from Sprint and T-Mobile proponents. I suppose if one never travels and lives in those large, Metro areas the argument works. If not I guess it is SOL, huh?
Apparently you have to view the 3G Coverage state by state, because there is no link to do that for the National map. And if you look at it state by state, it looks no different than the VZW commercial that shows AT&T's 3G coverage.
All they did was hide the map inside many links and zoom levels.
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer »
zoom in and select the 'show 3G coverage' button vs a 'city by city' list ?
This forum is closed.