Cingular - another opinion

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <DqKdnb_9gsyZ_nrfRVn-pQ@giganews.com>, hotel@jay.com says...
> Hello Jud,
>
> The Cingular store on Preston Rd will not. That is, if you are a former
> ATTWS customer (but now fully under contract to Cingular) on a family plan.
> That's what the manager said. If one phone breaks, you must move all 3
> family members to a new, two year Cingular contract.
>
> > Cingular will sell you a phone for full price without extending the
> > contract.
> > --

Oops--I didn't catch the ATTWS part. That may be another whole picture.
I'm sure they're trying to encourage ATTWS folks to move to a Cingular
plan.

Couple of things. AFAIK they still have 1 year contracts if you ask.
Also, is there some major reason NOT to take the contract? The last
time I saw the early termination chart the *maximum* payoff charge was
just under $300 and rapidly dropped during the first year--long before
the contract was out it was at $50. If you purchased the phone(s) at
full price you would pay as much or more than the most you MIGHT pay if
you wanted out early. It doesn't sound like it's worth the hassle.

Cingular is getting a lot of bashing on this group lately but for every
complainer there are thousands that have not had a speck of problems--or
like me, have had excellent service when there was a problem.
--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Jud Hardcastle wrote:

>
> Oops--I didn't catch the ATTWS part.

that's because he never mentinoed it until now.


E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

===============================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <jackru$$ell2@notmail.com>
* Newsgroup: alt.cellular.cingular
* Reply to: All; "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
* Date:Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:31:54 -0500
* Subj: Re: Cingular - another opinion
=====================================================

IB>Jack D. Russell, Sr. wrote:

>>>> It IS true. I've verified this. Anyone can walk into a
>>>> Cingular store and see it for themselves.


>> Ridiculous. Go right on believing that and the rest of us will
>> go right on buying our phones from CW, sans contracts.

IB>Uhm, I was agreeing with you...

Uhm, I know that. Look at the headers to my reply again. 😉

--
Jack

 

[bbb]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Thank you very much for seeing my way Isaiah --- and agreeing that Cingular
is engaging in restrictive trade practices. However, we'll save that for
another thread.



"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:11efjjqrvr60c51@corp.supernews.com...
> BBB wrote:
>> Hello Jud,
>>
>> The Cingular store on Preston Rd will not. That is, if you are a former
>> ATTWS customer (but now fully under contract to Cingular) on a family
>> plan. That's what the manager said. If one phone breaks, you must move
>> all 3 family members to a new, two year Cingular contract.
>
> AH! Now the truth comes out. BBB, people will believe you when you tell
> the WHOLE story, not just a tiny portion of skewed to fit your warped
> reality.
>
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[bbb]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Anyway, so much for the cut throat business of wireless phone service.






"Jud Hardcastle" <I5i5changethistodash5rbo@xemaps.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d515ed87ee659e09898ba@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net...
> In article <DqKdnb_9gsyZ_nrfRVn-pQ@giganews.com>, hotel@jay.com says...
>> Hello Jud,
>>
>> The Cingular store on Preston Rd will not. That is, if you are a former
>> ATTWS customer (but now fully under contract to Cingular) on a family
>> plan.
>> That's what the manager said. If one phone breaks, you must move all 3
>> family members to a new, two year Cingular contract.
>>
>> > Cingular will sell you a phone for full price without extending the
>> > contract.
>> > --
>
> Oops--I didn't catch the ATTWS part. That may be another whole picture.
> I'm sure they're trying to encourage ATTWS folks to move to a Cingular
> plan.
>
> Couple of things. AFAIK they still have 1 year contracts if you ask.
> Also, is there some major reason NOT to take the contract? The last
> time I saw the early termination chart the *maximum* payoff charge was
> just under $300 and rapidly dropped during the first year--long before
> the contract was out it was at $50. If you purchased the phone(s) at
> full price you would pay as much or more than the most you MIGHT pay if
> you wanted out early. It doesn't sound like it's worth the hassle.
>
> Cingular is getting a lot of bashing on this group lately but for every
> complainer there are thousands that have not had a speck of problems--or
> like me, have had excellent service when there was a problem.
> --
> Jud
> Dallas TX USA

 

[bbb]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

This is what I don't understand. When Cingular bought ATTWS, Cingular
assumed all of ATTWS's contracts. I'm as bound to Cingular as I was to
ATTWS (or at least I was before Cingular screwed me). Why all the fuss?

Currently, Cingular is providing inferior customer service to its
pre-merger/purchase ATTWS customers compared to pre-merger/purchase
Cingular customers. (I don't exactly know how the ATTWS/Cingular transaction
was structured, merger, purchase, whatever.) Given this, one could argue
that Cingular is in breach of its contract, at least to yours truely. One
could also argue that Cingular is engaging in restrictive trade practices in
violation of many proactive state consumer laws.

On the other hand, one can simply buy a new phone at www.cellhut.com, which
is what I did.




"Tony Clark" <curiousgeorge1964@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fYMFe.5089$0C.3982@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote in message
> news😱sKdnVhzMLFJ-XrfRVn-qw@giganews.com...
> SNIP
>
>>>
>>> And by the way: I'm not sure how tings are done where you are, but I
>>> just visited in the local stores in Central NJ, and they DO allow people
>>> to buy phones without plan committments. Each phone in the store has a
>>> two year contract price, and a "without committment" price listed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>
> I think part of the confusion is that many of the responders are not
> getting the fact that you are currently an ATTWS customer who wants new
> phones and a family share plan. I believe that part of the problem is that
> Cingular doesn't want you to stay on the ATT side of the house and is
> probably incenting it's dealers to move people over. They are treating
> these people as if they are brand new customers, I know because I switched
> over about a year ago. Since you are a brand new customer they want a
> commitment. If you already had a plan with Cingular I believe it would be
> rather easy to acquire a new phone without extending your existing
> contract (or renewing a former contract). You would, however, pay a
> premium price to do that.
>
> My question to you is would the lower cost of the phones justify a 1 or 2
> year commitment? Realistically are you going to change service providers
> in that time frame?
>
> TC
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

BBB wrote:
> Thank you very much for seeing my way Isaiah --- and agreeing that Cingular
> is engaging in restrictive trade practices.

I did no such thing.

--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:03:43 -0500, "BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>This is what I don't understand. When Cingular bought ATTWS, Cingular
>assumed all of ATTWS's contracts. I'm as bound to Cingular as I was to
>ATTWS (or at least I was before Cingular screwed me). Why all the fuss?

I would think if you want to break your ATTWS contract since they sold
out to Cingular that would be pretty straightforward. You didn't
agree to deal with Cingular, did you?

If I had a contract with someone and they tried to sell *me* I would
argue that is invalid. I am completely in control of whom I deal
with.

Maybe I have a grudge against Cingular which is why I wasn't dealing
with them before. They could never enforce such a contract unless I
agree.

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:38:12 GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com"
<steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>I would think if you want to break your ATTWS contract since they sold
>out to Cingular that would be pretty straightforward. You didn't
>agree to deal with Cingular, did you?
>
>If I had a contract with someone and they tried to sell *me* I would
>argue that is invalid. I am completely in control of whom I deal
>with.

It doesn't matter what *you* think! When a company takes over
another company they assume everything including contracts and debts.
If cingular refused to honor the contract you had with AT&T Wireless
you would have cause for legally breaking any contract you had. If
they refused to honor terms of the contract you would have legitimate
reason to break a contract. A legitimate reason isn't simply "I don't
like cingular and didn't agree to have them take over my contract
terms."
- -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

It *is* true, for *anyone*.

p.s. Please don't switch posting styles (top vs bottom) in mid-thread -- it's
confusing, and considered a bit rude. Thanks.

In <TpSdnQa-p-pp_XrfRVn-1g@giganews.com> on Wed, 27 Jul 2005 05:24:46 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>No it's not true---not if you are a former ATTWS customer and on a family
>plan.
>
>
>"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
>news:11eb36160dtg59f@corp.supernews.com...
>> BBB wrote:
>>> Simply not true.
>>
>> It IS true. I've verified this. Anyone can walk into a Cingular store
>> and see it for themselves.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <P0dGe.6033$p%3.32203@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> In <TpSdnQa-p-pp_XrfRVn-1g@giganews.com> on Wed, 27 Jul 2005 05:24:46 -0500,
> "BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:
>
> >No it's not true---not if you are a former ATTWS customer and on a family
> >plan.
> >
> >
> >"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> >news:11eb36160dtg59f@corp.supernews.com...
> >> BBB wrote:
> >>> Simply not true.
> >>
> >> It IS true. I've verified this. Anyone can walk into a Cingular store
> >> and see it for themselves.
>
> It *is* true, for *anyone*.
>
> p.s. Please don't switch posting styles (top vs bottom) in mid-thread -- it's
> confusing, and considered a bit rude. Thanks.

Why not?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <1OqdncLN1JNWWHXfRVn-2g@giganews.com> on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 06:47:17 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>Anyway, so much for the cut throat business of wireless phone service.

It anything but a "cut throat business" -- it's an extraordinary value.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <DqKdnb_9gsyZ_nrfRVn-pQ@giganews.com> on Wed, 27 Jul 2005 05:33:35 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>The Cingular store on Preston Rd will not. That is, if you are a former
>ATTWS customer (but now fully under contract to Cingular) on a family plan.
>That's what the manager said. If one phone breaks, you must move all 3
>family members to a new, two year Cingular contract.

Ah, now you tell us. Had you been posting in alt.cellular.attws this would
have been more clear.

Cingular will sell *anyone* a new Cingular (orange) handset at the *regular*
price *without contract*. Your problem is that Cingular (orange) handsets
won't work on ATTWS (blue). So if you want to use a Cingular (orange)
handset, then you have to switch to Cingular (orange), and that does take a
minimum contract extension (either *one* year, less subsidy, or *two* years,
more subsidy). Cingular no longer sells ATTWS (blue) handsets because ATTWS
is no longer in business.

You can still get handsets that will work on ATTWS (blue), just not from
Cingular, either used ATTWS handsets (e.g., on eBay), or new unlocked handsets
with the appropriate bands (e.g., from independent dealers).

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <J_WdnXAKWJJxX3XfRVn-qQ@giganews.com> on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 06:35:02 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>Thank you very much for seeing my way Isaiah --- and agreeing that Cingular
>is engaging in restrictive trade practices. ...

How silly -- there's nothing at all restrictive about what Cingular is doing.
Verizon doesn't sell ATTWS handsets either -- is that restrictive? How about
Burger King? Where will it end? LOL

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <v0kde1903c131ufbdanaogjcnqffscfgn2@4ax.com> on Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:17:26
GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:54:53 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>Nonsense. Unlocked (unsubsidized) phones are freely available at competitive
>>prices from independent dealers.
>
>Hah. Where? I see unlocked phones at outlandish prices. They have a
>heck of a premium attached.

Nope. Your "outlandish" and "premium" is just the *real* price without the
contract subsidy.

>If you want to know how much a color cellphone is supposed to cost go
>look at Target at the prepaid phones. Little or no subsidy. $49.
>$99.

Actually there is a subsidy on prepaid phone packages.

>A far cry from the $399 price Sprint puts on many of their
>phones. Admittedly Sprint is the highest price IMHO.

This is the Cingular newsgroup. Could we please stay on topic?

The standard Cingular subsidy (exclusive of any promotions) is $50/year. This
a $49 phone on a two-year contract is $99 on a one-year contract or $149 if
purchased without contract. Not "outlandish" and no "premium."

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <osKdnVhzMLFJ-XrfRVn-qw@giganews.com> on Wed, 27 Jul 2005 05:41:18 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>Hello Isaiah,
>
>Thanks for making a trip to the Cingular store on my behalf. The stores
>here in Texas have the same "without commitment" price quoted as well.
>However, that invitation does not apply to a person who is already under a
>contract to Cingular and a former ATTWS customer.

Wrong. Nonsensical to boot. That "without commitment" price is available to
*anyone*. What you don't like is that Cingular only sells Cingular (orange)
phones (at any price) that won't work on your ATTWS (blue) service! In other
words, your problem is that ATTWS has ceased to exist. Imagine that.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <urudnRj75e44VHXfRVn-iQ@giganews.com> on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:03:43 -0500,
"BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:

>This is what I don't understand. When Cingular bought ATTWS, Cingular
>assumed all of ATTWS's contracts. I'm as bound to Cingular as I was to
>ATTWS (or at least I was before Cingular screwed me). Why all the fuss?

Because ATTWS has gone away (Cingular can't even use the name), and Cingular
wants to integrate the prior two separate networks into one new Cingular
network. Cingular is honoring your existing contract and service, but isn't
about to add to it, because that would be against its interests.

>Currently, Cingular is providing inferior customer service to its
>pre-merger/purchase ATTWS customers compared to pre-merger/purchase
>Cingular customers.

Nonsense -- ATTWS (blue) customers get the same customer service as Cingular
(orange) customers, arguably better customer service than before the merger.

>(I don't exactly know how the ATTWS/Cingular transaction
>was structured, merger, purchase, whatever.) Given this, one could argue
>that Cingular is in breach of its contract, at least to yours truely.

Nope. Or can you point to a specific term in your contract that obligates
Cingular to sell you whatever new equipment or service you want?

>One
>could also argue that Cingular is engaging in restrictive trade practices in
>violation of many proactive state consumer laws.

Such are argument would be very silly.

>On the other hand, one can simply buy a new phone at www.cellhut.com, which
>is what I did.

Good for you. Why then all the angst?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <XodGe.6039$p%3.32187@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> Nonsense -- ATTWS (blue) customers get the same customer service as Cingular
> (orange) customers, arguably better customer service than before the merger.

And arguably *worse* service, too.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <j9uhe1d9cfgmevcebvo2m9rcab0frksmpg@4ax.com> on Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:38:12
GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:03:43 -0500, "BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:
>
>>This is what I don't understand. When Cingular bought ATTWS, Cingular
>>assumed all of ATTWS's contracts. I'm as bound to Cingular as I was to
>>ATTWS (or at least I was before Cingular screwed me). Why all the fuss?
>
>I would think if you want to break your ATTWS contract since they sold
>out to Cingular that would be pretty straightforward.

Nope -- the contract is assignable.

>You didn't
>agree to deal with Cingular, did you?

Implicitly.

>If I had a contract with someone and they tried to sell *me* I would
>argue that is invalid. I am completely in control of whom I deal
>with.

Nope. I suggest you consult a qualified contract attorney.

>Maybe I have a grudge against Cingular which is why I wasn't dealing
>with them before. They could never enforce such a contract unless I
>agree.

You did agree.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:43:30 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>
>How silly -- there's nothing at all restrictive about what Cingular is doing.
>Verizon doesn't sell ATTWS handsets either -- is that restrictive? How about
>Burger King? Where will it end? LOL

Nope, and Motorola doesn't sell cingular handsets, nor verizon
handsets. The carriers control all the equipment nowadays, there is
little anyone can do about it, nothing on the CDMA carriers.

You can conceivably unlock and use any GSM handset but there is
little competition, not like there would be if we could buy from
whomever we want and use that handset on any compatible service.

Real competition would have a full selection of handsets with no
subsidy on the Walmart price roll back plan, bought by Walmart direct
from handset manufacturers, duking it out with no regard to service or
contracts. Target and Sears/Kmart likewise, running ads in the Sunday
paper with lower and lower prices caused by more competition.

Like in most other items you buy. Imagine how much tires would cost
if you had to buy Ford tires only from Ford?

This fake competition serves only to keep the prices artificially high
on the equipment AND the service.

It would be much better for the users for there to be real competition
on the equipment.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:03:43 -0500, "BBB" <hotel@jay.com> wrote:
>
>
>>This is what I don't understand. When Cingular bought ATTWS, Cingular
>>assumed all of ATTWS's contracts. I'm as bound to Cingular as I was to
>>ATTWS (or at least I was before Cingular screwed me). Why all the fuss?
>
>
> I would think if you want to break your ATTWS contract since they sold
> out to Cingular that would be pretty straightforward. You didn't
> agree to deal with Cingular, did you?

No, but an agreement was entered into where one entity would provide
service and you would pay for that service over a specified period. The
contract is assignable. As long as Cingular follows the terms of the
contract, the it's still valid and enforceable.

> If I had a contract with someone and they tried to sell *me* I would
> argue that is invalid. I am completely in control of whom I deal
> with.

You are UNTIL you agree to the assignability of a contract, which you
did when you entered into it with AT&T.

> Maybe I have a grudge against Cingular which is why I wasn't dealing
> with them before.

Then you shouldn't have entered into a contract whose liabilities can be
assigned to other companies. 😉



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <im6je19p6veokd64o6nmjtk2trg24h9ojo@4ax.com> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 03:11:22
GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:43:30 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>How silly -- there's nothing at all restrictive about what Cingular is doing.
>>Verizon doesn't sell ATTWS handsets either -- is that restrictive? How about
>>Burger King? Where will it end? LOL
>
>Nope, and Motorola doesn't sell cingular handsets, nor verizon
>handsets.

Actually Motorola did -- you could get the V551 direct from Motorola well
before it was available from Cingular. That was actually pretty unusual,
since most large consumer product companies don't sell direct to consumers --
they sell through dealers.

>The carriers control all the equipment nowadays, there is
>little anyone can do about it, nothing on the CDMA carriers.

On the contrary, phones are readily available through independent dealers.

For example, you can get an unlocked and unsubsidized Motorola RAZR V3 Phone
from Amazon.com, including an HS815 Bluetooth Headset, or the Samsung A670
(CDMA) without service plan, for $250.

> You can conceivably unlock and use any GSM handset but there is
>little competition, not like there would be if we could buy from
>whomever we want and use that handset on any compatible service.

There is actually lots of competition.

>Real competition would have a full selection of handsets with no
>subsidy on the Walmart price roll back plan, bought by Walmart direct
>from handset manufacturers, duking it out with no regard to service or
>contracts. Target and Sears/Kmart likewise, running ads in the Sunday
>paper with lower and lower prices caused by more competition.

If there was a big demand for that, then these companies would undoubtedly do
so. There isn't a big demand because most consumers in the USA prefer the
subsidy discount.

>Like in most other items you buy. Imagine how much tires would cost
>if you had to buy Ford tires only from Ford?

That's not the case in cellular.

>This fake competition serves only to keep the prices artificially high
>on the equipment AND the service.
>
>It would be much better for the users for there to be real competition
>on the equipment.

Nonsense.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <dcdli6$alr$5@blue.rahul.net> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:29:58 +0000 (UTC),
dold@XReXXCingu.usenet.us.com wrote:

>Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:

>> Then you shouldn't have entered into a contract whose liabilities can be
>> assigned to other companies. 😉
>
>I looked at my AT&T agreement for the boilerplate "successors and assigns",
>which I didn't find.

Neither needed nor applicable in this case, since it was a merger.

>I did find that they can make any change that they
>like, with thirty days notice, and that your continued use of the service is
>an acceptance of the change.

Yep.

>Maybe at the time of the buyout, there was a
>window where you could back out of the contract. Maybe not. ...

Not.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:28:39 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>The carriers control all the equipment nowadays, there is
>>little anyone can do about it, nothing on the CDMA carriers.
>
>On the contrary, phones are readily available through independent dealers.
Nope. Buy any CDMA phone that is not branded Sprint or Verizon, and
see if they will activate it. They won't.

The phones at independent dealers for GSM carriers are 99.999% branded
phones that they bought from the carriers. It's just pointless for
you to argue otherwise, you can't find hardly any at all. Maybe
..0001% of GSM phones are sold unlocked. 00% of CDMA phones.

Admittedly there are a few unlocked phones on the market for GSM. But
it's an insignificant percentage. Readily available? I think not.
Visit the first 10 (or every 10th) listing in your local phone book
for cellular dealers, it would surprise me if you could find any
unlocked phones in that sample. On ebay, yeah. That's about it
though.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote in
news😛06le19gouh52q4oguv65kjn86spj9qu3v@4ax.com:

>
> Admittedly there are a few unlocked phones on the market for GSM. But
> it's an insignificant percentage. Readily available? I think not.
> Visit the first 10 (or every 10th) listing in your local phone book
> for cellular dealers, it would surprise me if you could find any
> unlocked phones in that sample. On ebay, yeah. That's about it
> though.
>

Google "unlocked cell phones" and see how many entries you get.