AT&T/USCC Deal Complete

FYI....under the terms of the contract they have up to 1 year to complete the transition.......However, I doubt it will take that long, but don't look for a GSM overlay very quickly either.

 

parthery-- What does the "re-branding" and "re-launching" exactly entail? Also, will the US Cellular customers be grandfathered into their old plans?

 

1.) I've been in AT&T sites, and I've been in U S Cellular sites, there is a difference, one does routine maintenance, and one doesn't in most markets. One has techs putting out fires, one doesn't. I don't need to tell you which is which.

2.) There has to be a port defined to gateway AT&T's SMS through U S Cellular's SMS server to deliver those messages, not too unusual.....will happen eventually

3.) There will have to be transport back to an existing GSM switch, or build a new one in that region to allow GSM to come online (not compatible with the Nortel switch loads running now)

4.) As far as upgrading to AT&T's standard, what is that? You must work for AT&T, right?



So many hours....So little caffeine........

 

Huh? When I lived in Gainesville and had USCC I coulds send SMS. I think they may have only had one-way SMS, so you couldn't reply to a message quite as fast, but they still offered text messaging.

 

Yeah, my girlfriend lives in Valdosta, Georgia, and her dad has been a US Cellular customer since the day they opened their doors. She has USCC, too, and we TXT message each other all the time. Until I got the .2F update for my v60i on Verizon, hers was even a lot faster than mine.

 

I once sent SMS on USCC Knoxville back when I had AT&T -- although it is possible that I wasn't really on USCC Knoxville but was on AT&T and my phone still showed "roam", or the phone locked onto AT&T just long enough to send the SMS.

-SC

 

AT&T needs to train USCC personnel how to be paranoid about AT&T phones and not to accept unlocked phones from anyone and never, under any circumstances give out an unlock code.

 

shouldn't be too hard, uscc's policy forbids the activation of non-uscc phones on uscc's network, it's not a paranoia thing, it's to prevent customer's from bringing a crappy phone, then blaming their problems on uscc, when it's the phone's fault

Keep the Faith,

Lance

 

Has USCC recently changed it policy? In Florida my wife and I were using two AT&T (they had the ATT logo on them) TDMA phones (Ericsson LX18) on USCC for a while.

 

that policy is effective 7/15/03, helps make the customer experience better by prevent roaming issues and the resulting billing issues that result from a phone pulling another carriers prl/irdb, plus it makes my job as a csr easier by not having to deal with those issue and reduces the amount of people calling in to the call center, making the wait times less

Keep the Faith,

Lance

 

Their own phones can turn out to be crappy as well so I don't see how forbidding unlocked phones is helping them in any way. As long as they download the correct OTA to the unlocked phone (which they have to do to their own phones anyway) there should not be any reason for it to malfunction or roam where it is not supposed to unless the phone is actually defective. But then again, if it is a defective phone, their own branded phones can be just as defective and have the same issues.

I strongly sustain that this policy has nothing to do with network reliability, customer service or quality control issues. They have this policy only for two reasons: (1) to make more money by forcing us to buy their own phones and this way lock us in a contract, and (2), because their branded phones have many features locked out that they don't want us to access in order to limit the service we pay for and to charge separately for those locked features. No GSM carriers anywhere else in the world do this. This is why I admire the freedom that T-Mobile and Cingular give their customers.

 

while it's true that our own phones can turn out to be crappy (the moto v120 is a perfect example), if we test the phones first, we're better able to anticipate what problems can arise...if, for example, someone brings a T720 (widely regarding as one of the worst moto phones ever) on our network, and has problems with it, what's the first thing that's going thru their mind (not everyone is as knowledgeable about cell phones as we are...hell, probably 80% of the customers i talk to wouldn't know what brand their phone was if it wasn't printed on the faceplate)...it's our fault...we can't control the customer, but if we can ensure the phone itself is decent quality, that's one less thing the customer has to worry about, and one less problem we have to field...is uscc in it for the money? ultimitely, yes, after all, they are a business...but uscc is far from the only carrier that locks features out of phones...att and sprint are notorious for this...isn't it the case that on spcs, you have to do sms thru their web? what's that all about? and how many posts here and on hofo have you seen about customers complaining because they have to pay to receive text spam on other carriers? uscc doesn't charge for incoming sms or ld (roaming or not), and we're working on agreements which would ensure sms works the same while roaming as it does on our network...and, as far as actually locking features on our phones, the only one i'm aware of at the moment is the browser on the 3586i...yes, there's a lot to be said about the freedoms you mentioned, but when it all comes down to it, if your phone doesn't work as a phone, all that other stuff doesn't matter, because, at that point, what you have is an expensive, high-tech, paperweight...besides, how many people do you know that go in and get the "free" phone? and how many times do they then complain that it's a POS? since our churn rate leads the industry at 1.7% (industry average: 2.7%, t-mo/nextel/cingular is something like 5%), i'd say that having to buy one of our phones is not that big an issue with most of our customers...besides, we will still activate a used phone, as long as it was previously on our network...so, if you see that kyocera 7135 phone for $150 on eBay (not likely, but just as an example)...

Keep the Faith,

Lance

 

I agree that a phone is a phone is a phone, 1000 of the same phones may have 10 or 20 with some problem, so, is not allowing one on your network because it's not a U S Cellular sold phone going to fix that? I think not, neither is it going to fix the bad phones that you give to customers out of your bulk lot. You see, I don't remember anybody telling me recently that U S Cellular tested EVERY phone before it was sold. I don't think the box has been opened since it was taken of the pallet. You want to make your customers feel better, give them better phone options, not take our POS for free or pay $300 for this top of the line model. Remember, at the end of the day, no matter what anyone else thinks, the customer is STILL ALWAYS RIGHT. At least, that's the way we USED to do business.......My how times have changed.....Oh, and if I'm paying for it, that does make me the customer......right?

 

That's correct. The same 6360 that AT&T sells is the same that any other company sells. When a carrier tests a phone model, they test a few units just to see how that particular phone works in the network prior to release it. They don't go around testing their entire inventory. So it makes no difference to use a phone directly from AT&T or one that was acquired unlocked from another carrier because either one has gone through the same quality control procedures. I can understand they don't want to accept a model they have never offered such as the Motorola C331t or the Nokia 6340i because those may have not passed their tests. However, a phone model that they have approved, sold and that is perfectly compatible and passed their tests, they should have no reason to deny it just because it doesn't have their ESN.

Just one minor correction: T-Mobile, Nextel and Cingular churn rates are near industry average of about 2.7% give or take a few decimals. It is not 5%. Of course, larger carriers with millions more customers will logically have more chances of a higher churn than a small regional carrier because there is more movement of customers in and out of the company.

 

Bobolito - can we get a forum for just the Switching and Network Operations guys to vent?

 

We only request new forums when a particular subtopic becomes popular enough to justify the creation of a separate forum for it. The Ringtones forum came about because requests for ringtones were very popular and were overtaking the original category of the forum they were in. At this time and in the future, Network Ops people should find the Wireless Network Technologies forum suitable for their posting needs.

 

tearsonurcheek, here are the churn numbers for 2Q'03:

Nextel 1.6%
Dobson 1.6%
Verizon 1.7%
U.S. Cellular 1.7%
Centennial 1.7%
AT&T 2.2%
Sprint 2.4%
Alltel 2.45%
Cingular 2.5%
T-Mobile 2.96%

 

sorry if i was unclear earlier, but that is what i was referring to...while a 6360 is a 6360 is a 6360, a phone that has not been tested/has not completed testing (i.e. vx-6000), or a phone that FAILED testing (i.e. T720) is a completely different matter, but even if it is a 6360 that is locked to another carrier, then that can hamper our ability to load the proper prl/irdb on the phone...as we all know, not everyone knows how to properly unlock a phone, so i would imagine that (though i can't be sure, nor as an employee, recommend this) if you have, for example, an unlocked 6360, and you are in a tdma market, then it MIGHT be possible to convince them to let you use it...however, if you are in a cdma market, even though the tdma towers are still active (like here), you will not be able to activate ANY tdma phone (pls note, we are not forcing current customers to upgrade unless they are renewing a contract or buying a new phone)

Keep the Faith,

Lance