Sprint Officializes ETF Policy

Yep, identical.

Perhaps in your area, Verizon service is superior, but in my experience over the past eight years that hasn't been the case. Granted, I've always lived in or near fairly major cities, but that's most people, isn't it? I occasionally travel for business, and have never had any issues, except for one hotel room in Fort Worth, Texas.

For what I have now, I would pay more than $800 more to have the exact same thing with Verizon over the course of a 2 year agreement.
In my case, that would be throwing money away.

I think about half the population lives in cities. The other half are in rural area. Sprint I'm sure is good in the cities, but what about the other half of the population. Or what about the people that lives in the city but travels to rural areas to visit family or for work? Just take a look at the diference in EVDO on the networks. Sprint covers the large cities and not a mile outside. Verizon has almost their whole network EVDO now. There are several states that are 100% covered with EVDO on Verizons network.

All I can tell ya is that I like about 30 mins outside of Philadelphia and my coverage is superb. I used to live an hour from Orlando and I had no problems either. That was before RevA though so I can't speak to that. I also get excellent service in the suburbs of Baltimore and a bit north of NYC.

Obviously you should get what works for you best, but to say the coverage is "horrid" as a whole is just wrong. Sorry.

what maps are you looking at???

ROFL. VZwinagent, are you kidding? Don't know what planet you're crawling on.. but here on earth Sprint's service is anything but horrid. Due to the roaming agreements between VZ and Sprint, the coverage is nearly identical in most high population areas, as well as rural.

That is a very false statement. In an area where Verizon and Sprint both offer service, Sprint does not roam on Verizon. It doesn't matter how bad the Sprint service is, they will not use Verizon if it's one of their markets. A Sprint customer would only roam on Verizon in an area where Verizon sells service and Sprint does not.

The point being made is for example:

Where I live I have my choice of 5 carriers. I chose Sprint. Most of the time I am always in Sprint's home area. If I happen to go out of their calling area, I roam on Verizon's or Alltel's and never pay a roaming fee. So I have service no matter where I go and pay less.

That I can understand. If you go outside of Sprint's coverage, then you will roam on another network. My experience is that Verizons coverage, in my area, is by far more superior to Sprints. I've even heard people say that Verizons service overall works better then Sprint, even when Sprint does work.

It depends on the demographics of tower location, traffic congestion, Etc. I actually have both carriers. Sprint by default for me and the company I work for issues Verizon. I have found both very competitive and the experience is great. I give it to Verizon for overall home coverage but for practical use and data access, Sprint's broadband believe it or not is more consistant and noticably faster thanks to Sprints higher frequency. I have noticed that Verizon even where there is supposed to be 3G, it is spotty and sometimes non existent. But overall both companies are closer than most would think and each has their advantages. I like the savings I get with Sprint. I have 5 lines for the same price as 2-3 on other carriers. Our nights also s...
(continues)

"I've even heard people say" I love that. What a great point to an educated argument. 🙄 I hear people say things all the time, and then I look up the answer if I want to argue it.

Sorry, man. That is just not accurate. Here in Philly, where both are offered, I have roamed on VZW.

How do I know this? One time while roaming, I tried to call customer service and got Verizon!

This statement is so false, you sound pretty stupid making it. It is to the advantage of Verizon and Sprint to have roaming agreements where both carriers are present, that way you can have excellent coverage in areas where both carriers exist. Its in those areas (both ways) where one carrier may not exist where they companies charge each other exorbitant fees to roam on each others networks.

Then Verizon's coverage is also horrid or they don't honor their roaming agreements. So either they suck as a wireless providor or they have no integrity (which is the case) when it comes to allowing Sprint customers to use their network. Where I am the coverage is about on par between the two with an edge to Verizon in the real rural areas.

It's not Verizon's fault. Sprint would be stupid to pay Verizon to roam on their network in an area where they (Sprint) also offer service. If they did do that, that would just show you how bad Sprints own network is.

So a network that drops fewer calls, has fewer delayed messages, faster data speeds and more Rev A coverage is a bad network?
I have sold Verizon and Sprint, I have had Verizon and Sprint. Let me tell you Sprint has superior sound and more reliable coverage on their footprint.
Verizon handset quality is so bad it is scandalous. They also (like AT&T) charge way too much for what you get.
You Verizon people are so sold on your network that you pay no attention to the crappy phones. You also have to spend more money on advertising than anyone else in order to keep growing. I'm sorry but when the law passes that all of a carrier's network must be made available and the coverage is a non issue people won't pay exorbitant prices for a phone th...
(continues)

I am curious. What is this law you are talking about and when does it go into effect?

T-Mobile does a similar proration to sprint.