Sprint takes some of AT&T Wireless' churn

[Paul]

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

From:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1860&ncid=1860&e=10&u=/cpress/20040420/ca_pr_on_tc/cingular_at_t_wireless

"I think Verizon took the lion's share of those customers," Comack
said. "I think Sprint was second in line and the rest went to the
rest."

 

[Guest]

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

A friend of mine just switched from ATTWS to Sprint PCS (and is happy so
far with the service and his Sanyo RL-7300). So there's at least one.
His number ported in an hour.

--
Frank Harris in San Francisco with an A620

 

[Guest]

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

In article <00md80hu72fol9vsu3c38teroevd5i2r6r@4ax.com>,
paul@wren.cc.kux.edu wrote:

> From:
>
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1860&ncid=1860&e=10&u=/cpress/
> 20040420/ca_pr_on_tc/cingular_at_t_wireless
>
> "I think Verizon took the lion's share of those customers," Comack
> said. "I think Sprint was second in line and the rest went to the
> rest."


Twould be nice to see a spread sheet of who lost what to whom.

Sprint hasn't even provided total numbers of gains and losses
from WLNP, in its 10K filing to the SEC.

 

[Guest]

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

"Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
news:rmarkoff-484925.15413921042004@news05.east.earthlink.net...
> In article <00md80hu72fol9vsu3c38teroevd5i2r6r@4ax.com>,
> paul@wren.cc.kux.edu wrote:
>
> > From:
> >
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1860&ncid=1860&e=10&u=/cpress/
> > 20040420/ca_pr_on_tc/cingular_at_t_wireless
> >
> > "I think Verizon took the lion's share of those customers," Comack
> > said. "I think Sprint was second in line and the rest went to the
> > rest."
>
>
> Twould be nice to see a spread sheet of who lost what to whom.
>
> Sprint hasn't even provided total numbers of gains and losses
> from WLNP, in its 10K filing to the SEC.

They aren't required to, yet you make it an argument that it's required ...
What a joke!

Bob