Top message: Verizon restrictions! by phonetech2000
Replying to: Re: Cingular by burger_with_fries81
Unfortunately, you fit that description more than the person to whom your remark was directed since you clearly haven't done even a modicum of research on this issue. To illustrate my point I have included a link (below) to a Boston Globe article which highlights the fact that Cingular had little or no evidence to support its advertising claim (if you doubt the article's credibility, it also makes mention of the fact that neither VZW nor Sprint have any hard evidence to support their advertising claims either).
To drive this point home to you and make it clear that there is indeed some chicanery going on here, Cingular cited data from a 2004 report compiled by Telephia, but has REFUSED to specify any data in the report AND HAVE REFUSED TO RELEASE THE REPORT.
Finally, regarding VZW "inability to counter" Cingular's claim, you should note that Cingular is BEING SUED by two separate entities already. In light of that, why would VZW even bother to get involved?
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2 ... »
Hey dumbass. IF the company is so disreputable and easily discredited, wouldnt VzW address that?
If Cingular were to publish findings from a company saying Cingy is the most awsomest carrier EVER, and Verizon stood by and twiddled their thumbs, how do you think the public (without a carrier bias) would take it? Who cares whether or not its true. VzW's inability to counter with anything even remotely effective tells me something....
No replies to this message