They didn't for the same reason just mentioned... Indeed, on paper buying Alltel would've been perfect because of technology. However, there would have been quite a bit of divestiture which would've been like buying subscribers only, no spectrum. The problem w/ Alltel, is the rates each other charge for sharing capacity. That's why if you roam on Alltel as a Verizon sub your data side doesn't work. This in the end could bite all of them in the rear. Alltel is banking on no one going to NYC, this is turn is why most of the carriers added that 'no more than 50% roaming clause' into their TOC...

MY CIRCLER MINUTES IS A LIE AND NIGHTS AND WEEKENDS ALSO A LIE

DONT TRUST ALLTEL THEY ARE A WANNABE VERIZON
THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE AND THAT ONE IS .....VERIZON WIRELESS OH YES

I'm going to take a stab and say you work for verizon.

How could my circle be a lie? It is probably the biggest reason that people are switching over. I have Verizon right now, but if some new phones don't come out soon I am going to switch. I am looking for a non-flip phone and the selection is awful at Verizon. Not much better at Alltel, but there is one I am interested in. I am going to do a shared plan, which is a better deal as well.

If you are leaving Verizon, go with Sprint. Sprint and Verizon are the only worthy carriers.

You have absolutely no idea what you talking about.

In my opinion the bottom line is Alltel seems to have better pricing and a slightly better selection of phones. As far as service goes I can't vouch first hand for them but I am in the greater Cleveland area and a few of my friends have Alltel and are very happy.

QB1800 said:
In my opinion the bottom line is Alltel seems to have better pricing and a slightly better selection of phones. As far as service goes I can't vouch first hand for them but I am in the greater Cleveland area and a few of my friends have Alltel and are very happy.

I wouldn't take into question (and haven't) the quality of service that Alltel provides. Even the worst of larger carriers does a reasonable job considering how technically complicated it is to make cellular, roaming, handoffs, authentication etc..actually work. Alltel provides service where they feel they need and in a manner that gives them some level of financial benefit. As noted before, they do fine business with other carriers ...
(continues)

Your not taking into account the capacity issue. VZW might have a thousand sites in NYC. Because it needs that many sites to handle the calls, not because it is covering a thousand sites worth of land. That is on reason why Alltel is able to have fewer sites while still covering more area. 10-15 million customers on as it was said before 10 thousand sites(not sure how accurate that is. Or 50-60 million customers on 20-25 thousand sites?

Another reason for the larger coverage is the fact that VZW holds many more PCS licenses then Alltel (because they want more capacity). PCS (1900) inherently travels less distance from the tower then cellular (800)....the claim is not superfluous in the least when considering these things.

If capacity were the issue, that would be one thing, however, if you make the claim of the largest geographical carrier, ought not you have solid coverage within that area.

I understand capacity and that more urban/populated areas require greater density. Very true, the greater the capacity usage the smaller 'circle/hexagon' or square milage a tower actuall covers and thus the need for a dense network in urban areas. I'm with you on that.

However, capacity does not translate to the claim that Alltel makes. Going on the assumed 10,000 towers, how many actual square miles does that cover? On average, a digital cell tower covers 10 square miles if not diminished by capacity (which is the point you were making). If all digital, that would ...
(continues)

But they do cover the areas well, why do you think they still have customers and are growing? They are not just saying from here to here is alltel's network. They had a independent firm judge it. Verizon's network is not as large as Alltel's, if it was and Verizon or anyone else knew it they would sue Alltel for the claim. They have had a lot of time and they still haven't, because they know. They made the largest claim a long time ago.

A lot of the areas Alltel serves are rural and require less maintenance and upgrading for capacity, etc the list goes on. VZW (most areas), Cingular (most areas), and Sprint (all areas because they are PCS only) all have to cover only the populace in an area and not the whole license (as required by the FC...
(continues)

Iguess my question would, since I've provided enumerated data for my position and relied, til now, on your assertion that they do well; what is it that proves your assertion that they have good coverage in that area. Where are the majority of subs for Alltel located. Are they specifically rural or do they also comprise the larger cities within their native network. I honestly don't know and thus why I ask, My suspicion is that instead targeting Chicago, for instance, they may target Pensecola. Still pop rich but less of a target for a national. It's a strategy of scale.

I don't think that Alltel displays its native coverage honestly to reflect where actual coverage is located but reflects it in black form. As pointed out in my last post, ...
(continues)

yup, The thing I don't understand is this and maybe you know truck? Does alltel have some more agreements with some smaller regional carriers or do they just allow all analog towers off network. I guess the question is why is there map a little bigger than Verizon?

They have agreements with USCC, VZW, Sprint, Unicel, the main Canadian providers (athough it is pay roam), nTelos (i'm not 100 percent about that one), and many many other smaller providers. But there are a few (not many though) that do not have an agreement with Alltel. So in other words, they have an agreement with everyone they free roam on. There are SIDs that are neg'd in the PRL.

Oddly, myself and Yahoo Tech beg to differ.

Sprint can cover the most people on their home network. As it stands with advertising laws, you cannot post coverage numbers on your website if it includes roaming partners.

http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/null/3554 »

Largest physical network should obtain more than a mere 3rd of the us population.

You gotta remember, these are NATIONAL numbers. If Alltel wishes to compete with the national carreirs...they better begin rolling out network coverage in the larger cities...where they DONT offer service. Hence, Alltel is merely a REGIONAL carrier.

Yahoo tech has been proven to be an unreliable source of information at the least. They do not know what they are talking about and I have had to correct them many times in the past (which they actually have changed it) they get the simplest terms wrong. It is also a BLOG, which has no credibility.

"Sprint can cover the most people on their home network. As it stands with advertising laws, you cannot post coverage numbers on your website if it includes roaming partners."

They have stated many times in their commercials they cover 295 million with roaming agreements, and they say the largest voice calling network because of that.

You people are so blinded by you "love" for these carriers you cannot understand facts. Alltel has the ...
(continues)

themps, while you may argue that, my posts previously in this thread have specifically refuted the Alltel claims and with good reason. I would not bla,e it on 'caarier love' but of a claim that is greater than can be backed up other than to make a claim that does not comport with the expectation it sets; that due to Alltel's native network claim, does not provide a materially better or more expanded experience than the claim suggests against other carriers. It's a matter of miles and physical ability that Alltel cannot overcome the distance they claim to cover.

The numbers presented are not actual. Alltel covers much more then 210,000 sq miles. Even if they had that the FCC would have revoked there cellular licenses by now. Okay for a layman's point of view since people are not listening to a very sound argument....here is the licensed areas....

http://alltel.com/corporate/media/downloads/usmaphir ... »

With exception to some areas of Montana, Nevada, and some other isolated areas (which you can see on their actual coverage map with roaming partners. The licenses are covered with usable signal. It is fairly close to the actual coverage, now compare that to the other carriers. It might not be 5 "bars" everywhere, but it is at least 1-2 in extreme rural areas. That is why Alltel is different th...
(continues)

Laymans point of view? It's not overly important but you shouldn't state such a thing without knowing whom you might be saying that to and what their knowledge base is.

Second, I've given substantial numbers to verify what it is that I'm stating, you gave me a link to a map that is on the Endgadget article and then told me that they cover more than 210,000 sq miles.

Ok, explain how they exceed the physical ability of 10,000 towers since that is the reasonable known amount of their indigenously owned sites? You did speak of capacity but still, an Anaglog tower can hit 20/21 sq miles and a digital can hot about 10 sq miles under optimum conditions. Digital even in the non-PCS bands is good for an average of 6 sq miles.

You said that, ...
(continues)

They have more then 10k towers, numbers don't mean anything unless there is a legitimate source that is current....I would also like to point out that engadgenet article and the Yahoo blog is poorly done and not scientific in the least. If you are using the states in the list you are including all the water in those states as well. Which would make the amount significantly smaller.

Here is an example. The state of Michigan is roughly 58k sq miles of land. Alltel has licenses in about 30k-40k sq miles of the state, the coverage even in the most remote areas has signal. There are a few places because of weak signal/interference that the signal is zero. This is usually literally in the middle of nowhere where people might not ...
(continues)

Also, I didn't say they covered the whole thing. I said they covered most.