Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Cingular now PUSHing AT&T Wirelss phone sales

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 1:53:22 PM

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

AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.

New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month

It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
start selling Cingular plans. By Nov 16, on the web and in the stores
AT&T wireless was fully back in action; selling AT&T Wireless phones and
plans.

Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:

http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml

an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 5:18:53 PM

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

In article <jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

> AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>
> New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>
> It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
> start selling Cingular plans. By Nov 16, on the web and in the stores
> AT&T wireless was fully back in action; selling AT&T Wireless phones and
> plans.
>
> Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
> starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
>
> http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
>
> an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
> AT&T Wireless phones and plans.

Followup. It's a $19.95 plan thats almost impossible to pick on the
website. Include 45 local minutes, no mobile to mobile, no nights and
weekends, and no long distance, and no where is it indicated that it's
on special for $16.95, but it does require a 2 year contract, not
unreasonable given you can get a Sony T637 for FREE.

BAIT and SWITCH
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 6:56:33 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
2004 10:53:22 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.

Of course. As expected.

>New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>
>It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
>start selling Cingular plans. ...

Nope.

>Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
>starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
>
>http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
>
>an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
>AT&T Wireless phones and plans.

Yep. Both brands are still alive and well. Why does this upset you so much?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Related resources
December 2, 2004 6:56:34 PM

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

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:56:33 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>>an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
>>AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
>
>Yep. Both brands are still alive and well. Why does this upset you so much?

John -

If a person was to start as a new customer now, would it be better to
go with Cingular or AT&T? Or does it really make any difference at
this point? I notice the phones available from them are slightly
different. I am leaning toward the Motorola V551, and that seems to
be offered only by Cingular, but I realize it can be obtained from
other sources.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 7:05:03 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-5A06C5.08185302122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
2004 14:18:53 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>> Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
>> starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
>>
>> http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
>>
>> an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
>> AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
>
>Followup. It's a $19.95 plan thats almost impossible to pick on the
>website.

Actually dead easy for anyone of even average intelligence:
Learn More -> enter ZIP -> Learn about plans -> and there it is, at the top

>Include 45 local minutes, no mobile to mobile, no nights and
>weekends, and no long distance, and no where is it indicated that it's
>on special for $16.95, but it does require a 2 year contract, not
>unreasonable given you can get a Sony T637 for FREE.
>
>BAIT and SWITCH

Hardly.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 7:23:42 PM

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

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

In <dgfuq0ds4k8tgagctdaq85vtcrr1oeret5@4ax.com> on Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:12:47
-0700, Dick <LeadWinger> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:56:33 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>>an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
>>>AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
>>
>>Yep. Both brands are still alive and well. Why does this upset you so much?
>
>John -
>
>If a person was to start as a new customer now, would it be better to
>go with Cingular or AT&T? Or does it really make any difference at
>this point? I notice the phones available from them are slightly
>different.

It does make a difference, not only different phones (as you note), but also
different rate plans. Chose the rate plan and phone that works best for you.

>I am leaning toward the Motorola V551, and that seems to
>be offered only by Cingular, but I realize it can be obtained from
>other sources.

The V551 is a Cingular-branded phone so you'll want a Cingular rate plan.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
December 2, 2004 7:25:57 PM

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

I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run a
monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase the
service.

It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
information instead of Cingular bashing.
___________________
Ann
Motorola V551
iPAQ 4355
"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net...
> AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>
> New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>
> It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
> start selling Cingular plans. By Nov 16, on the web and in the stores
> AT&T wireless was fully back in action; selling AT&T Wireless phones and
> plans.
>
> Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
> starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
>
> http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
>
> an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
> AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 8:25:01 PM

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

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net...
> AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>
> New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>
> It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
> start selling Cingular plans.

They never said that they would stop selling AT&T- where is it stated that
AT&T would cease to exist on the 15th?

>By Nov 16, on the web and in the stores
> AT&T wireless was fully back in action; selling AT&T Wireless phones and
> plans.
>
> Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
> starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
>
> http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
>
> an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
> AT&T Wireless phones and plans.

And the problem with all that is.......?
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 10:01:51 PM

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

"Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message
news:41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
> I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
> dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
> reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run
> a monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase
> the service.
>
> It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
> information instead of Cingular bashing.
> ___________________
> Ann
> Motorola V551
> iPAQ 4355

I agree, Ann, tell it like it is.

bamp
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 11:34:09 PM

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

In article <P2Hrd.8974$_3.105847@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-5A06C5.08185302122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
> 2004 14:18:53 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <jzwick3-4ECB0D.04532102122004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
> > Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> Today a Cingular link on Yahoo Reuters News promotes Cingular Plans
> >> starting at $16.95, down from $19.95, and clicking on it take one to:
> >>
> >> http://www.attwireless.com/index_a.jhtml
> >>
> >> an AT&T Wireless web site, with a Cingular logo pasted on top, selling
> >> AT&T Wireless phones and plans.
> >
> >Followup. It's a $19.95 plan thats almost impossible to pick on the
> >website.
>
> Actually dead easy for anyone of even average intelligence:
> Learn More -> enter ZIP -> Learn about plans -> and there it is, at the top
>
> >Include 45 local minutes, no mobile to mobile, no nights and
> >weekends, and no long distance, and no where is it indicated that it's
> >on special for $16.95, but it does require a 2 year contract, not
> >unreasonable given you can get a Sony T637 for FREE.
> >
> >BAIT and SWITCH
>
> Hardly.

Exactly. Bait and Switch.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 2, 2004 11:54:30 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-74FFEB.14340902122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
2004 20:34:09 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <P2Hrd.8974$_3.105847@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> In <jzwick3-5A06C5.08185302122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
>> 2004 14:18:53 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>> >BAIT and SWITCH
>>
>> Hardly.
>
>Exactly. Bait and Switch.

Not true, no matter how many times you rant.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 2:15:45 AM

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

In article <41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>,
"Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote:

> I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
> dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
> reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run a
> monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase the
> service.
>
> It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
> information instead of Cingular bashing.

Why is it bashing to factually report a change in their links to web
sites. Youre the one who takes it as negative.

Too bad you spent so much on your phone and service that you have to
delude yourself that Cingular is perfect.

I like my Cingular phone and service, but will report on things as they
are, and not ignore the warts.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 2:21:55 AM

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

bamp wrote:
> "Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message
> news:41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
>
>>I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
>>dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
>>reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run
>>a monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase
>>the service.
>>
>>It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
>>information instead of Cingular bashing.
>>___________________
>>Ann
>>Motorola V551
>>iPAQ 4355
>
>
> I agree, Ann, tell it like it is.
>


Yea, a couple people here should be sent to their rooms without dinner,
and their phones.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 2:59:38 AM

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

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

In <jzwick3-5FDCC8.17154502122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
2004 23:15:45 GMT, FUDMEISTER Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>,
> "Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote:
>
>> I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
>> dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
>> reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run a
>> monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase the
>> service.
>>
>> It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
>> information instead of Cingular bashing.
>
>Why is it bashing

Because it is.

>to factually report a change in their links to web
>sites.

That's not what you're doing.

>Youre the one who takes it as negative.

"A rose by any other name..."

>Too bad you spent so much on your phone and service that you have to
>delude yourself that Cingular is perfect.

It's not perfect. Too bad you have so much hate that you have to keep
bashing.

>I like my Cingular phone and service, but will report on things as they
>are, and not ignore the warts.

Chicken Little keeps on going, and going, and going...

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 7:19:56 AM

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

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:53:22 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>
>New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>
>It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
>start selling Cingular plans.

It's supposed to end after December 31, not November 15.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 7:21:48 AM

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

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:15:45 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>Why is it bashing to factually report a change in their links to web
>sites. Youre the one who takes it as negative.

You're the one who claims it's a negative.
December 3, 2004 9:58:50 AM

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

TOP POSTERS UNITE!
;) 

Welcome to Usenet Ann - Where angry, bitter, anti-social techies
gather to interact w/o actually looking at each other!


"Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message news:<41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>...
> I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
> dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
> reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run a
> monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase the
> service.
>
> It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
> information instead of Cingular bashing.
> ___________________
> Ann
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 1:38:05 PM

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

In article <4eqvq0hsnff1sfblr32670l5969bfh88ts@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:15:45 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
> >Why is it bashing to factually report a change in their links to web
> >sites. Youre the one who takes it as negative.
>
> You're the one who claims it's a negative.

Well, some folks think Cingular is perfect. And still wont admit they
were wrong saying how simple it would be to integrate Cingular and ATTWS
"The Back Office software is the same" they claimed. But they wont
explain why it didnt happen on November 15 as promised.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 3, 2004 8:37:31 PM

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

In article <K%Nrd.9059$_3.106555@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-5FDCC8.17154502122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Thu, 02 Dec
> 2004 23:15:45 GMT, FUDMEISTER Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <41af8860$0$91006$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>,
> > "Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I've been reading this NG for a couple of weeks and can't tell why you
> >> dislike Cingular so much. You waste a lot of energy {for some unknown
> >> reason}bashing Cingular / AT&T ... why not give it a rest. They don't run
> >> a
> >> monopoly that I'm aware of which means you are not obligated to purchase
> >> the
> >> service.
> >>
> >> It would be great if Cingular customers could come here to share useful
> >> information instead of Cingular bashing.
> >
> >Why is it bashing
>
> Because it is.


Baloney. anything that doesnt rave about Cingular being perfect is
anathama to you. SORRY.
I will report the facts.

>
> >to factually report a change in their links to web
> >sites.
>
> That's not what you're doing.

It's exactly what I did.
>
> >Youre the one who takes it as negative.
>
> "A rose by any other name..."
>
> >Too bad you spent so much on your phone and service that you have to
> >delude yourself that Cingular is perfect.
>
> It's not perfect. Too bad you have so much hate that you have to keep
> bashing.
>

No hate, just an open mind, as opposed you the NAVAS Cingular is
perfect boring refrain.

> >I like my Cingular phone and service, but will report on things as they
> >are, and not ignore the warts.
>
> Chicken Little keeps on going, and going, and going...


Isnt that special. Mr. Perfect is into Chicken Little. But thats what
he calls JD Power reports of Cingular Customner Reports. Double Standard
by NAVAS.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 4, 2004 5:00:30 AM

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

On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:38:05 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>Well, some folks think Cingular is perfect. And still wont admit they
>were wrong saying how simple it would be to integrate Cingular and ATTWS
>"The Back Office software is the same" they claimed. But they wont
>explain why it didnt happen on November 15 as promised.

Could you please tell me how the back office software (which is what
they were making a claim about) is related to the signs on the stores
(which is what you're complaining about)?

Not that I think Cingular is perfect - I have a 40% problem-free
activation rate with them. 60% of the activations get screwed up. I
knew what to do today (after I talked to my rep), but I have no idea
how I'll be doing exactly the same things tomorrow.

But I can't see what back office software has to do with store signs.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 4, 2004 12:46:44 PM

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

In article <i962r0luo1rl5fn65tefccmdvp9hn0ld52@4ax.com>,
Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:38:05 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
> >Well, some folks think Cingular is perfect. And still wont admit they
> >were wrong saying how simple it would be to integrate Cingular and ATTWS
> >"The Back Office software is the same" they claimed. But they wont
> >explain why it didnt happen on November 15 as promised.
>
> Could you please tell me how the back office software (which is what
> they were making a claim about) is related to the signs on the stores
> (which is what you're complaining about)?
>
> Not that I think Cingular is perfect - I have a 40% problem-free
> activation rate with them. 60% of the activations get screwed up. I
> knew what to do today (after I talked to my rep), but I have no idea
> how I'll be doing exactly the same things tomorrow.
>
> But I can't see what back office software has to do with store signs.

Where are store signs mentioned in the snippet you clipped?

Store signs are related in Cingular being unprepared for the merger.
ATTWS stores here in Texas either have no Cingular sign, or a small
Canvas banner for Cingular, either way, driving by, one would never know
its now owned by Cingular, but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.

Cingular is unprepared for Network Merger and has no policy for
providing Sim upgrades that are required in many areas to take full
advantage of the merging Networks. You call 611 and they may not even
know what a Sim is, let alone the difference between at 32K and 64K.
Then ==> if <==
the call is escalated the supervisors/managers dont know either, but
they just state their guess with more confidence.

1. We don't have a policy on that yet.

2. You'll need a new sim. That will be $20.

2a. Go to a store and its $20 with your old sim in trade.

2b. You can keep your old sim it's yours.

3. You don't need a new sim.

Cingular is entitled to handle sims anyway they want. But it would be
nice if:

1. They had an announced policy.

2. The policy didn't conflict with the advertisements on TV:

3. CSRs were trained on the subject
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 4, 2004 6:15:25 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-A70BC5.04380403122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Fri, 03 Dec
2004 10:38:05 GMT, FUDMEISTER Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Well, some folks think Cingular is perfect. And still wont admit they
>were wrong saying how simple it would be to integrate Cingular and ATTWS
>"The Back Office software is the same" they claimed. But they wont
>explain why it didnt happen on November 15 as promised.

That wasn't any such promise.

Chicken Little just keeps on going, and going, and going...

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 4, 2004 6:16:28 PM

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

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

In <o9qvq0tqn3ok3utifldp6j7oherln974dr@4ax.com> on Fri, 03 Dec 2004 04:19:56
GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:53:22 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
>said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
>>AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>>
>>New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>>
>>It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
>>start selling Cingular plans.
>
>It's supposed to end after December 31, not November 15.

Where was that announced?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 4, 2004 7:24:33 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-95E2D1.03464304122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
2004 09:46:44 GMT, FUDMEISTER Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Store signs are related in Cingular being unprepared for the merger.
>ATTWS stores here in Texas either have no Cingular sign, or a small
>Canvas banner for Cingular, either way, driving by, one would never know
>its now owned by Cingular,

[yawn]

>but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
>Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.

You're fantasizing -- there was no such press release.

>Cingular is unprepared for Network Merger

Nonsense. Cingular is actually moving very quickly, and is already merging
customer support systems.

>and has no policy for
>providing Sim upgrades that are required in many areas to take full
>advantage of the merging Networks.

No such upgrade is required -- all Cingular subscribers can now roam freely on
ATTWS, and vice versa.

>You call 611 and they may not even
>know what a Sim is,

Nonsense.

>let alone the difference between at 32K and 64K.

It's irrelevant -- the new SIM only matters if you get a new phone with ENS.

>[SNIP remaining FUD]

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 12:12:32 AM

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

In article <5xlsd.9421$_3.110352@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-95E2D1.03464304122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
> 2004 09:46:44 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >Store signs are related in Cingular being unprepared for the merger.
> >ATTWS stores here in Texas either have no Cingular sign, or a small
> >Canvas banner for Cingular, either way, driving by, one would never know
> >its now owned by Cingular,
>
> [yawn]
>
> >but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
> >Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.
>
> You're fantasizing -- there was no such press release.

Again proof Navas doesn't know what he's talking about:

Here is the Nov. 16 story he says doesn't exist

<http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>

"Just three weeks after joining forces to become the biggest wireless
carrier in the U.S., Cingular Wireless and AT&T Wireless have --
overnight -- truly become one company by converting more than 1,000 AT&T
Wireless company-owned stores into Cingular Wireless stores. "

====
Let's see if FUDMEISTER Navas is man enough to apologize.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 12:12:33 AM

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

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-396000.15123004122004@news1.east.earthlink.net...
>
> Again proof Navas doesn't know what he's talking about:
>
> Here is the Nov. 16 story he says doesn't exist
>
> <http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
> UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
>
> "Just three weeks after joining forces to become the biggest wireless
> carrier in the U.S., Cingular Wireless and AT&T Wireless have --
> overnight -- truly become one company by converting more than 1,000 AT&T
> Wireless company-owned stores into Cingular Wireless stores. "
>
> ====
> Let's see if FUDMEISTER Navas is man enough to apologize.

But nowhere in your precious little article does it state that they will
stop selling the ATTW brand, and proves that you don't know what you are
talking about (yet again).

You're not even man enough to respond to the post- I won't hold my breath
for an apology.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 4:13:20 AM

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

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

In <jzwick3-396000.15123004122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
2004 21:12:32 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <5xlsd.9421$_3.110352@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> In <jzwick3-95E2D1.03464304122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
>> 2004 09:46:44 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>> >but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
>> >Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.
>>
>> You're fantasizing -- there was no such press release.
>
>Again proof Navas doesn't know what he's talking about:
>
>Here is the Nov. 16 story he says doesn't exist
>
><http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
>UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
>
> "Just three weeks after joining forces to become the biggest wireless
>carrier in the U.S., Cingular Wireless and AT&T Wireless have --
>overnight -- truly become one company by converting more than 1,000 AT&T
>Wireless company-owned stores into Cingular Wireless stores. "
>
>Let's see if FUDMEISTER Navas is man enough to apologize.

For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read these
things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that ATTWS
rate plans would no longer be offered.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 6:08:20 AM

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

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:46:44 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>In article <i962r0luo1rl5fn65tefccmdvp9hn0ld52@4ax.com>,
> Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:38:05 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
>> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>> >Well, some folks think Cingular is perfect. And still wont admit they
>> >were wrong saying how simple it would be to integrate Cingular and ATTWS
>> >"The Back Office software is the same" they claimed. But they wont
>> >explain why it didnt happen on November 15 as promised.

>> Could you please tell me how the back office software (which is what
>> they were making a claim about) is related to the signs on the stores
>> (which is what you're complaining about)?

>> Not that I think Cingular is perfect - I have a 40% problem-free
>> activation rate with them. 60% of the activations get screwed up. I
>> knew what to do today (after I talked to my rep), but I have no idea
>> how I'll be doing exactly the same things tomorrow.

>> But I can't see what back office software has to do with store signs.

>Where are store signs mentioned in the snippet you clipped?

If they're not in that snippet they don't count? You harped on the
signage for days.

>Store signs are related in Cingular being unprepared for the merger.

Says who? You? Who died and left you in charge of prioritizing the
switchover?

>ATTWS stores here in Texas either have no Cingular sign, or a small
>Canvas banner for Cingular, either way, driving by, one would never know
>its now owned by Cingular, but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
>Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.

And "despite" the publicly stated plan to keep selling AT&T till the
end of the year. Since the year hasn't ended, there's no reason for
them to not sell AT&T.

>Cingular is unprepared for Network Merger

Network merger doesn't take place in a week - or in a couple of years.
How long has it taken Verizon? Cingular never stated that the entire
network would be merged by November 15.

> and has no policy for
>providing Sim upgrades that are required in many areas to take full
>advantage of the merging Networks.

Sure they do. If you buy a phone that can handle a 64k SIM you get a
64k SIM in it. How many older phones can use a 64k SIM?

> You call 611 and they may not even know what a Sim is, let alone the difference between at 32K and 64K.

Call 911 and they don't either. Try calling someone who's supposed to
know.

>Then ==> if <==
>the call is escalated the supervisors/managers dont know either, but
>they just state their guess with more confidence.

>1. We don't have a policy on that yet.

>2. You'll need a new sim. That will be $20.

>2a. Go to a store and its $20 with your old sim in trade.

>2b. You can keep your old sim it's yours.

>3. You don't need a new sim.

>Cingular is entitled to handle sims anyway they want. But it would be
>nice if:

>1. They had an announced policy.

>2. The policy didn't conflict with the advertisements on TV:

>3. CSRs were trained on the subject

Since it's not a customer service issue, I'd put the blame on someone
other than CS. (Since the average customer wouldn't know to ask, and
the customer who WOULD know to ask should know not to call CS about
it, I'll leave it to you to name the guilty party.)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 6:09:11 AM

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

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 15:16:28 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>In <o9qvq0tqn3ok3utifldp6j7oherln974dr@4ax.com> on Fri, 03 Dec 2004 04:19:56
>GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:53:22 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
>>said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>>
>>>AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>>>
>>>New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>>>
>>>It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
>>>start selling Cingular plans.
>>
>>It's supposed to end after December 31, not November 15.
>
>Where was that announced?

No new AT&T sales after the end of the year. Since I don't watch TV,
I don't know what was announced on TV.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 7:18:25 AM

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

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:24:33 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>Nonsense. Cingular is actually moving very quickly, and is already merging
>customer support systems.

Has already merged. I did an AT&T SIM swap this morning with a
Cingular SIM swap rep.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 9:08:10 AM

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

In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-396000.15123004122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
> 2004 21:12:32 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <5xlsd.9421$_3.110352@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In <jzwick3-95E2D1.03464304122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sat, 04 Dec
> >> 2004 09:46:44 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> >but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite
> >> >Cingular press releases 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.
> >>
> >> You're fantasizing -- there was no such press release.
> >
> >Again proof Navas doesn't know what he's talking about:
> >
> >Here is the Nov. 16 story he says doesn't exist
> >
> ><http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
> >UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
> >
> > "Just three weeks after joining forces to become the biggest wireless
> >carrier in the U.S., Cingular Wireless and AT&T Wireless have --
> >overnight -- truly become one company by converting more than 1,000 AT&T
> >Wireless company-owned stores into Cingular Wireless stores. "
> >
> >Let's see if FUDMEISTER Navas is man enough to apologize.
>
> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read these
> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that ATTWS
> rate plans would no longer be offered.

Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.

<http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 6:58:13 PM

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

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

In <etu4r01hg6drqjah53d38ghectfgnpik8o@4ax.com> on Sun, 05 Dec 2004 03:09:11
GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 15:16:28 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
>>In <o9qvq0tqn3ok3utifldp6j7oherln974dr@4ax.com> on Fri, 03 Dec 2004 04:19:56
>>GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:53:22 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
>>>said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>>>
>>>>AT&T Wireless still ==> NOT <== integrated.
>>>>
>>>>New! Cellular plans for only $16.95 / month
>>>>
>>>>It was all supposed to end on Nov. 15; AT&T wireless was supposed to
>>>>start selling Cingular plans.
>>>
>>>It's supposed to end after December 31, not November 15.
>>
>>Where was that announced?
>
>No new AT&T sales after the end of the year.

So where was that announced?

>Since I don't watch TV,
>I don't know what was announced on TV.

???

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 7:03:07 PM

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

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

In <ot25r0tmle4mupa6srvs0ij862sm43ji28@4ax.com> on Sun, 05 Dec 2004 04:18:25
GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:24:33 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:
>
>>Nonsense. Cingular is actually moving very quickly, and is already merging
>>customer support systems.
>
>Has already merged. ...

I know -- my comment was meant to reflect the fact that some significant
glitches remain to be fixed; e.g., day before yesterday I was routed to the
ATTWS side of the house even though I'm a Cingular subscriber, because the
porting database hadn't been properly integrated, and many subscribers had
their voicemail waiting indicators stuck on.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 7:04:05 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-FDEE7B.00081005122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
2004 06:08:10 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read these
>> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
>> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that ATTWS
>> rate plans would no longer be offered.
>
>Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
>FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.

Only in your dreams, Jack. You're just making yourself look like an idiot.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 7:04:06 PM

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

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:VjGsd.9582$_3.112113@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-FDEE7B.00081005122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
> 2004 06:08:10 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> >> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read
these
> >> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
> >> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that
ATTWS
> >> rate plans would no longer be offered.
> >
> >Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
> >FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.
>
> Only in your dreams, Jack. You're just making yourself look like an
idiot.
>

You would expect different?
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 5, 2004 9:43:23 PM

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

In article <VjGsd.9582$_3.112113@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-FDEE7B.00081005122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
> 2004 06:08:10 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> >> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read these
> >> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
> >> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that ATTWS
> >> rate plans would no longer be offered.
> >
> >Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
> >FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.
>
> Only in your dreams, Jack. You're just making yourself look like an idiot.

Make sure you CUT the link out the reply so no one can see you are dead
wrong (as usual). Why are you afraid of people reading this press
release that you claimed didnt exist??



<http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>

Such a egotisitical maniac you are Navas.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 6, 2004 7:11:56 AM

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

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:58:13 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> said in alt.cellular.cingular:

>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>In <etu4r01hg6drqjah53d38ghectfgnpik8o@4ax.com> on Sun, 05 Dec 2004 03:09:11
>GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote:

>>>>It's supposed to end after December 31, not November 15.

>>>Where was that announced?

>>No new AT&T sales after the end of the year.

>So where was that announced?

>>Since I don't watch TV,
>>I don't know what was announced on TV.

>???

We got a notice from our master distributor. We won't get paid for
any new AT&T activations after 12/31/04.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 6, 2004 11:46:49 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-EDEB1D.12432305122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
2004 18:43:23 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <VjGsd.9582$_3.112113@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <jzwick3-FDEE7B.00081005122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
>> 2004 06:08:10 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
>> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read these
>> >> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
>> >> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that ATTWS
>> >> rate plans would no longer be offered.
>> >
>> >Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
>> >FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.
>>
>> Only in your dreams, Jack. You're just making yourself look like an idiot.
>
>Make sure you CUT the link out the reply so no one can see you are dead
>wrong (as usual). Why are you afraid of people reading this press
>release that you claimed didnt exist??

I'm not afraid of anything, and the link just serves to confirm what I've been
saying in any event.

><http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
>UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>

Here it is in short form for those having difficulty with the mangled URL you
keep posting: http://tinyurl.com/46ll2

>Such a egotisitical maniac you are Navas.

Only in your dreams, Chicken Little.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 7, 2004 8:42:39 AM

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

In article <Zy3td.9755$_3.114864@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-EDEB1D.12432305122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
> 2004 18:43:23 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <VjGsd.9582$_3.112113@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> >> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> >>
> >> In <jzwick3-FDEE7B.00081005122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Sun, 05 Dec
> >> 2004 06:08:10 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <Qgtsd.9498$_3.111290@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> >> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> For what? That story doesn't say what you claimed. Do you even read
> >> >> these
> >> >> things before posting them??? Do you enjoy making yourself look silly?
> >> >> The 'Cingular Experience' didn't mean (except to you of course) that
> >> >> ATTWS
> >> >> rate plans would no longer be offered.
> >> >
> >> >Caught with porof he was wrong, and won't admit it. READ THE STORY
> >> >FOLKS. And decide what a fool NAVAS is.
> >>
> >> Only in your dreams, Jack. You're just making yourself look like an
> >> idiot.
> >
> >Make sure you CUT the link out the reply so no one can see you are dead
> >wrong (as usual). Why are you afraid of people reading this press
> >release that you claimed didnt exist??
>
> I'm not afraid of anything, and the link just serves to confirm what I've
> been
> saying in any event.
>
> ><http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
> >UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
>
> Here it is in short form for those having difficulty with the mangled URL you
> keep posting: http://tinyurl.com/46ll2
>
> >Such a egotisitical maniac you are Navas.
>
> Only in your dreams, Chicken Little.

Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize. You said their was no
press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;
which 3 weeks later is STILL not the case, and there's the URL for the
press release. And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
plan? But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 7, 2004 8:52:56 AM

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

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

In <jzwick3-FCC4D7.23423806122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Tue, 07 Dec
2004 05:42:39 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize.

Actually I do. And you?

>You said their was no
>press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;

Nope. I said there was no press release as you claimed:

... but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite Cingular press releases
4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.

There were no such releases.

>... And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
>plan?

Well duh! ATTWS (not AT&T, not Cingular) stores sell ATTWS plans.

>But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
>didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
>and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.

No surprise to anyone but you -- that was the plan.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 7, 2004 2:24:07 PM

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

In article <Yybtd.9862$_3.116242@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-FCC4D7.23423806122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Tue, 07 Dec
> 2004 05:42:39 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize.
>
> Actually I do. And you?
>
> >You said their was no
> >press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;
>
> Nope. I said there was no press release as you claimed:
>
> ... but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite Cingular press releases
> 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.
>
> There were no such releases.
>
> >... And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
> >plan?
>
> Well duh! ATTWS (not AT&T, not Cingular) stores sell ATTWS plans.
>
> >But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
> >didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
> >and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.
>
> No surprise to anyone but you -- that was the plan.

ONCE AGAIN childish Navas falsly claims Cingular didnt announce ALL
ATTWS stores had become Cingular stores. And of course he cuts out the
link.

http://tinyurl.com/46ll2

or

<http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>

Navas, you've been shown to be a LIAR. Move on.


Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize. You said their was no
press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;
which 3 weeks later is STILL not the case, and there's the URL for the
press release. And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
plan? But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 7, 2004 5:51:37 PM

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

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

In <jzwick3-46A33C.05240707122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Tue, 07 Dec
2004 11:24:07 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <Yybtd.9862$_3.116242@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> In <jzwick3-FCC4D7.23423806122004@news1.east.earthlink.net> on Tue, 07 Dec
>> 2004 05:42:39 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You said their was no
>> >press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;
>>
>> Nope. I said there was no press release as you claimed:
>>
>> ... but it's still selling ATTWS plans despite Cingular press releases
>> 4 weeks ago saying that would stop Nov. 15.
>>
>> There were no such releases.
>>
>> >... And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
>> >plan?
>>
>> Well duh! ATTWS (not AT&T, not Cingular) stores sell ATTWS plans.
>>
>> >But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
>> >didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
>> >and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.
>>
>> No surprise to anyone but you -- that was the plan.
>
>ONCE AGAIN childish Navas falsly claims Cingular didnt announce ALL
>ATTWS stores had become Cingular stores.

Nope. No matter how many times you repeat it. What I actually said is,
"There were no such releases" saying that "selling ATTWS plans" "would stop
Nov. 15," as you claimed.

>And of course he cuts out the
>link.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/46ll2

LOL! I was the one that created and first posted that tinyurl. You really
are a piece of work.

>Navas, you've been shown to be a LIAR. Move on.

Chicken Little, you're shown yourself to be an childish idiot. Grow up and get
a life.

>Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize.

[shrug] I have nothing to apologize for.

>You said their was no
>press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15; ...

I said nothing of the kind.

>And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
>plan?

I didn't say that either. As quoted above, I said:

Well duh! ATTWS (not AT&T, not Cingular) stores sell ATTWS plans.

>But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
>didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
>and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.

Imagine that!

I urge you to seek professional help. Seriously.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
December 7, 2004 9:12:40 PM

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

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-46A33C.05240707122004@news1.east.earthlink.net...

>
> ONCE AGAIN childish Navas falsly claims Cingular didnt announce ALL
> ATTWS stores had become Cingular stores. And of course he cuts out the
> link.

That's not what he said- I guess the three years of second grade didn't help
you reading comprehension problem, did it?

>
> http://tinyurl.com/46ll2
>
> or
>
> <http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT...
> UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
>
> Navas, you've been shown to be a LIAR. Move on.

And that would make you what? King troll? A clueless idiot? Hot air
machine extraordinaire?

>
>
> Too bad you dont have the maturity to apologize. You said their was no
> press release about all AT&T stores becoming Cingular stores on Nov. 15;

That's not what he said- he choked on your LIE that it was announced that
ATTW plans would no longer be sold after 11/15, which you tried to back up
with the URL.

> which 3 weeks later is STILL not the case,

Yes it is.

>and there's the URL for the
> press release. And since when did a Cingular store ever sell an AT&T
> plan?

Since they bought ATTW and made them all Cingular stores- it would have
stupid to do it before then (but I guess you relate to stupid).

>But the "former" AT&T stores (that the press release you said
> didnt exist says were all made Cingular stores) still sell AT&T plans
> and phones. Go visit one in Texas and see.

And the problem with that is.......?

Don't worry, troll- I don't expect any answers. In fact, I find your lack
of backbone with my posts to be somewhat humorous. When was the last time
you had the nerve to answer one? Were you even a CIngular customer at the
time? Chicken Little is a very appropriate nickname, in more ways than one.
!