This boggles my mind
I do not mean to come over here and start flaming. I am just INOCENTLY asking the following:
Why do you criticize Cingular for being the largest only from buying AT&T? You complain that their growth was not natural & claim that Verizon's growth was natural.
Verizons growth was not natural. Here in my local market (DENVER) they had a merger with AirTouch. Verizon was not ever a glimmer in anyones eye before that.
This was the same with other companies also. I think that the only company that was an ORIGNAL carrier, for the 80's, was AT&T. Verizon came into existence the same way as Cingular, T-Mobile & other various carriers.
Please do not hate me for this post, it is just an observation.
Why do you criticize Cingular for being the largest only from buying AT&T? You complain that their growth was not natural & claim that Verizon's growth was natural.
Verizons growth was not natural. Here in my local market (DENVER) they had a merger with AirTouch. Verizon was not ever a glimmer in anyones eye before that.
This was the same with other companies also. I think that the only company that was an ORIGNAL carrier, for the 80's, was AT&T. Verizon came into existence the same way as Cingular, T-Mobile & other various carriers.
Please do not hate me for this post, it is just an observation.
...
I know your post is not directed to me, but I will try to attempt to answer your question. VZW didn't DIRECTLY become #1 by adding customers and towers, they worked at it. Cingular become #1 in customer base instanteously because of the merger. So, Cingular becoming #1 is directly correlated to ATT merger and VZW's success has an indirect correlation to its many mergers.
...
But the thing i asked is why do people complain about the growth not being natural. Verizons growth was not natural. They gained a large customer base the same way Cingular did... Through mergers. You can not dispute this FACT. You just said so yourself.
So, Cingular becoming #1 is directly correlated to ATT merger and VZW's success has an indirect correlation to its many mergers.At&t just happened to be a very LARGE merger. Yes, Verizon had many LITTLE mergers... but a merger is a merger is a merger.
...
Also... by your standard, VZW is just as guilty of the same thing
Or... they are even worse, since they had to merge with MANY companies to gain that customer base. Its like the pot calling the kettle black or throwing stones in glass houses.
VZW's success has an indirect correlation to its many mergers.
Or... they are even worse, since they had to merge with MANY companies to gain that customer base. Its like the pot calling the kettle black or throwing stones in glass houses.
...
Maybe not. Since the Verizon merger which made Verizon a 25 million customer company Verizon has added 20 million customers through their own marketing efforts. Another way to say it is 20 million people have voluntarily chosen Verizon. Cingular has grown more by buying other carriers than their own marketing efforts so it can be said that 21 million people chose ATTWS but ended up with Cingular and 7 million people chose Ameritech but ended up with Cingular and 2 million chose Pactel but ended up with Cingular. More of a question of how many people actually chose Cingular.
Now in all fairness, Verizon has had about 4 years to add those 20 million customers and the new Cingular has only had about 6 months. as the big dog on the block. Proba...
(continues)
Now in all fairness, Verizon has had about 4 years to add those 20 million customers and the new Cingular has only had about 6 months. as the big dog on the block. Proba...
(continues)
...
Way to put it. The fact is that VZW had a great quarter and beat all predictions! VZW was prfitable, reduced churn and added more customers. VZW is keeping more customers and adding more, seems like that is the key to success. Cingular seems to take the Texas approach and thinks that they have just branded 21 million head of cattle from the ATT buyout and will be the best because they have more headcount!
...
bigdaddyjay said:
Cingular seems to take the Texas approach and thinks that they have just branded 21 million head of cattle from the ATT buyout and will be the best because they have more headcount!
How is it different? See the June 30, 2000 entry.
http://www.verizonwireless.com/aboutus/milestones.shtml »
Thanks to texaswireless for the link
...
Never denied that but look around January 2001 and SBC and BellSouth were ready to crush VZW with their brainchild Cingular Wireless. Cingular never caught on so they had to take 21 million ATT customers hostage against their will in order to be number 1.
This my friends is the Texas arrogance of Ed Whitacre and crew at SBC.
From what is going on it doesn't appear that having 50.4 million customers makes you the best wireless carrier. Cingy still has a higher churn rate, higher cash expense per customer, lower cash flow margin, ARPU that is trending downward and is adding less customers than VZW. But hey, it only cost 41 billion to say they are number 1!
Think what Verizon Wireless would be like if they spent half of wh...
(continues)
This my friends is the Texas arrogance of Ed Whitacre and crew at SBC.
From what is going on it doesn't appear that having 50.4 million customers makes you the best wireless carrier. Cingy still has a higher churn rate, higher cash expense per customer, lower cash flow margin, ARPU that is trending downward and is adding less customers than VZW. But hey, it only cost 41 billion to say they are number 1!
Think what Verizon Wireless would be like if they spent half of wh...
(continues)
...
Yeah, it would be tough for Cingy to grow much through further mergers, wouldn't it? T-Mobile doesn't appear to be for sale (and its hard to imagine the antitrust folks okaying a 2nd merger for Cingy that large), and the regional GSM players seem to be quite small compared to the CDMA ones (Alltell, US Cellular).
...
In all fairness to Cingular we should wait at least one customer cycle (18 to 24 month period) before we judge them. My thinking is they will continue to have high churn and will add fewer customers than Verizon. Let their new management have an effect before we make judgments.
...
Actually Pactel became Airtouch which merged/aquired with several others (big others) to become Verizon.
Pacific Bell Wireless, Cellular One, Ameritech, Bell South, SWB Wireless, Nevada Bell Wireless, Houston Cellular and (damn if I forget the eighth one) were all owned by two companies, Bell South and SBC. They merged them under one banner.
Now Verizon goes this way
http://www.verizonwireless.com/aboutus/milestones.shtml »
Does any of this matter. NO!
Pacific Bell Wireless, Cellular One, Ameritech, Bell South, SWB Wireless, Nevada Bell Wireless, Houston Cellular and (damn if I forget the eighth one) were all owned by two companies, Bell South and SBC. They merged them under one banner.
Now Verizon goes this way
http://www.verizonwireless.com/aboutus/milestones.shtml »
Does any of this matter. NO!
...
My bad on the Pactel/ Pacific Bell Wireless thing. You're right it really doesn't matter. The carriers have the customer base that they have.
None of this boasting/taunting does anything to serve any customers, it just gives us all a warped sense of satisfaction.
None of this boasting/taunting does anything to serve any customers, it just gives us all a warped sense of satisfaction.
...
schnozejt said:
I know your post is not directed to me, but I will try to attempt to answer your question. VZW didn't DIRECTLY become #1 by adding customers and towers, they worked at it. Cingular become #1 in customer base instanteously because of the merger. So, Cingular becoming #1 is directly correlated to ATT merger and VZW's success has an indirect correlation to its many mergers.
Wait a minute.
Didn't Verizon become number one instantaneously as well?
ATT was number one until Verizon was formed. Verizon has had the marketing power of claiming number one for a few years now.
Cingular is a younger company than Verizon and has accomplished much since it's birth.
...
Not really, Cingular only added around 4.5 million customers from January 2001 until October 2004 when they bought another 21 million customers that didn't want to be Cingular customers.
True VZW was formed and was bigger than ATT but ATT and Cingular couldn't keep up with the growth that VZW displayed while they were number one and number one is only an Alltel or U.S. Cellular buyout away for Verizon if they wnt to take the easy way back to the top.
True VZW was formed and was bigger than ATT but ATT and Cingular couldn't keep up with the growth that VZW displayed while they were number one and number one is only an Alltel or U.S. Cellular buyout away for Verizon if they wnt to take the easy way back to the top.
...
bigdaddyjay said:
Not really, Cingular only added around 4.5 million customers from January 2001 until October 2004 when they bought another 21 million customers that didn't want to be Cingular customers.
True VZW was formed and was bigger than ATT but ATT and Cingular couldn't keep up with the growth that VZW displayed while they were number one and number one is only an Alltel or U.S. Cellular buyout away for Verizon if they wnt to take the easy way back to the top.
Well, your statements are sort of true. You are just missing the fact that Cingular became number one through good business sense and now they are number one. The only way that Verizon will become number one anytime soon, is if someone a...
(continues)
...
That is a strong statement. The fact is that Cingular racked up over 41 billion to get to 50 million customers and still has two networks to integrate while VZW continues building out the nations most reliable network. You had better hope this isn't the start of a trend over at Cingular or their will be more layoffs and some seriously pissed higher ups at Bell South and SBC.
...
It is easy to understand how this boggles your mind and it isn't the lack of air in Denver.
Verizon Wireless was formed in April 2000. They were formed by combining Airtouch, Bell Atlantic, Ameritech Cellular/GTE Wireless and Primeco. By July of 2000 VZW had 24.5-25 million customers.
Cingular was formed by combining the wireless assets of SBC and Bell South interests. In January 2001 they had 20.2 million customers.
By the time October 2004 rolled around Cingular only grew to just under 25 million customers and Verizon was at over 41 million customers! Neither Cingular or Verizon made any large takeovers of smaller cell companies until the Cingular/ATT merger was approve in October 2004.
If you do the math you will s...
(continues)
Verizon Wireless was formed in April 2000. They were formed by combining Airtouch, Bell Atlantic, Ameritech Cellular/GTE Wireless and Primeco. By July of 2000 VZW had 24.5-25 million customers.
Cingular was formed by combining the wireless assets of SBC and Bell South interests. In January 2001 they had 20.2 million customers.
By the time October 2004 rolled around Cingular only grew to just under 25 million customers and Verizon was at over 41 million customers! Neither Cingular or Verizon made any large takeovers of smaller cell companies until the Cingular/ATT merger was approve in October 2004.
If you do the math you will s...
(continues)
...
