Verizon Sues Sprint Over Interconnection Charges

Haha VZW is suing because they are in more debt than Sprint and need the cash to make thier payments. VZW is just impatient, Sprint may want to check and recheck the charges to make sure they are only paying what is owed. 👀

Do you have ANY numbers to back up the claim that VZW is in more debt that Sprint? Sprint is and has been bleeding money and customers since the acquisition of Nextel (smart move, eh?)

Facts are facts. Whether you are on the VZW or Sprint side of the fence, Sprint has a debt to pay. It's not about who's service or plan are better. Sprint has to pay their bills like the rest of us. You think Sprint would hesitate to cut you off if you don't pay your bill??

Granted, VZW has a lot of operating debt, but it's very managable and pretty normal amongst enterprises.

And VZW isn't loosing money. They are making money. As tnt2k1 states, debt is not a factor. Not paying the debt is.

Yea facts are facts....facts are you need to google up that vzw is in fact in debt. they're selling stocks to try to come up with the cash for the spectrum.

Of course they are in debt. You missed the point of the previous post. Most large corporations carry a huge amount of debt and selling stock to raise money for expansion and growth is very common place. Verizon can have lots of debt and still pay it's bills and be profitable. Sprint seeming cannot.

Facts are facts but the fact that VZW carries debt is not in question or the subject of the post. Sprint NOT paying their debts is. Even if VZW were in trouble it wouldn't take away the FACT that Sprint owes them a butt load of money and are being deadbeats in not paying.

Are you Sprint boys so fanatical that you don't think they shouldn't have to pay their bills? How long do you think Sprint would let your ride without paying your bill be...
(continues)

We're not saying they shouldn't pay but how do you know what sprint's take on the argument is? YOU DON'T! What if Verizon breached the contract and Sprint said We're not paying because of your error? I find it hard to believe that Sprint would just up and not pay for no reason.

Syph3r said:
We're not saying they shouldn't pay but how do you know what sprint's take on the argument is? YOU DON'T! What if Verizon breached the contract and Sprint said We're not paying because of your error? I find it hard to believe that Sprint would just up and not pay for no reason.

Find it hard to believe do some research. Verizon is not the only company they have tried to stiff. There are many other compnies it has stiffed and it reflects it on it's credit. GOOGLE it!!!

Syph3r ... I understand what you are saying. It's hard to imagine for an enterprise like Sprint to completely ignore a debt that massive without an explaination.

But as JJay mentioned, this isn't the first time Sprint did this.

And, as far as I know, Sprint has made no comment on why they haven't paid the bill. According to an article I read, they have IGNORED Verizon's request for payment. If they did have an issue with the bill you'd at least think they'd tell Verizon what it is.

Syph3r, why are you taking it so personally about Sprint not paying their debts? And with literally hundreds of millions of dollars in losses and hundreds of thousands of lost customers, why are you so surprised?

I just think people are too quick to judge. If anyone has noticed sprint has a new CEO they fired all the old Executives and is Revamping there CS by opening more call centers in the US rather than India. Introducing better plans and cooler phones. Yet people still think its the same old sprint and its not!

Personally, I wasn't discussing anything but the fact that Sprint is potentially jeopardizing it's coverage to it's customers by not paying it's roaming partner. Seems like before they pay millions rolling out a new ad campaign they should pay off an extremely past due debt to avoid even further negative publicity.

Doesn't that prove to be counter productive in trying to rebuild your image?

By not responding with this issue I think Sprint is up to something. Dan Hesse is not going to sacrifice anymore of Sprint's reputation. (if there's still anything left)

Nextel9 said:
By not responding with this issue I think Sprint is up to something. Dan Hesse is not going to sacrifice anymore of Sprint's reputation. (if there's still anything left)

I agree.

Verizon is already 0-1 battling Sprint (then just Nextel) with their failed PTT launch and preemptive lawsuit they filed back in 2003 that got overturned and their ads pulled that falsely claimed that Verizon PTT was faster than Nextel's.

VZW is NOT selling stock, their parent company, verizon communications (wireline) is. VZW is privatly owned. i mean with facts being facts and all, i figured we should get a few simples ones straight. selling stock to raise capital is hardly the same thing as what sprint is going thru.

Best said by carmodboy99

"To answer your question...

March 7, 2008

When Sprint and Nextel merged, the company had a $70 billion market cap. Today, it has a market cap of about $20 billion, plus about $20 billion in net debt.

http://www.thedeal.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=we ... »

Sad numbers for sure, but as you can see theyre not as deep in as Verizon... Which by the way, as of July 19, 2007 $12 billion of that $31b belonged solely to VZW!

theres your supporting article for that one...

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/vodafone-wants-v ... »
"

now im not sying im the smartest person in the world, nor trying to bash anyone else.. and maybe i ready the article wrong, but if sprint/nextel is $20 billion in debt, and vzw is $12 billion, how is vzw worse off then sprint?

oh i'm not denying that sprint needs to pay up, but why in the hell would vzw trust sprint to pay up millions on time. it's funny how they can shut off a subscriber's line for going over by 25 cents for example but they can't respect verizon by paying them on time. 😕

Verizon Wireless has successfully operated since 2000 increasing profits and customers with an industry leading churn rate and a high ARPU. Until this point, they have not been a publicly traded company, nor have they needed to be. Why is it that the minute they decide to sell stock they must be hurting and in danger of going bankrupt? Most of the major carriers sell stock; ATT being one. Yes, VZW owes money for the 700mhz auction. They are taking the necessary steps to ensure they have the cash flow they need to pay the piper AND keep the business running as usual. By taking Sprint to court, VZW is being smart. They are calling in outstanding debts. It appears that Sprint is a deadbeat that can't pay its debts.

Well said VZWrube. Verizon Wireless is the most pofitable wireless US company just thier operating cash flow is 26 billion. Verizon their parent company is just looking for different ways to pay the auction. They can put it down as capitol expendeture, pay it with their operating cash flow or make people that owe them money so that inturn they dont have to put it down on debt.

VZWrube said:
Verizon Wireless has successfully operated since 2000 increasing profits and customers with an industry leading churn rate and a high ARPU. Until this point, they have not been a publicly traded company, nor have they needed to be. Why is it that the minute they decide to sell stock they must be hurting and in danger of going bankrupt? Most of the major carriers sell stock; ATT being one. Yes, VZW owes money for the 700mhz auction. They are taking the necessary steps to ensure they have the cash flow they need to pay the piper AND keep the business running as usual. By taking Sprint to court, VZW is being smart. They are calling in outstanding debts. It appears that Sprint is a deadbeat that can't pa

...
(continues)

has anything been proven yet? I think not, dont say things without proof, not everything you read is true. Open your mind please and stop beleiving everything that you read. Wait til verizon wins the claim then make your statements of hatred for sprint