Canada dropped from America's Choice

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

Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@x-optonline-x.net> wrote:

> That's a show-stopper for me, as I make lots of calls to Canada. The rep
> suggested that I get the North America's Choice plan for (are you sitting
> down?) $25 per month MORE than I'm paying now! Yeah, I'd also get free
> roaming in Canada, but maybe I pay $25 per YEAR in roaming charges now.

You get Mexico too.

Canada was never a guarantee on America's Choice plans, and they never
advertised free calling to canada on any other plans other than National
Single-Rate with the Canada option, and now NA's Choice.

> plans still includes long distance to Canada. The brochure says it's 20
> cents per minute, but I didn't notice that until I left the store, so I
> didn't challenge him about that. It's nice to see that Verizon keeps its
> store employees up-to-date [sarcasm].

Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering whether it's
a fluke that some parts of the country did.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

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

"Bob Scheurle" <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message
news:siq7b0loluh0f5krnt7333a330t29b307u@4ax.com
>
> The store also had a desktop charger for my Kyocera 2235 on closeout
> for $2.97 (that's not a typo). Unfortunately, one of the electrical
> contacts was damaged so I didn't buy it. Also, I'm not sure if the
> phone will fit in the charger when the case is on. (Anyone know if
> it will?)
>
> Bob

I had to modify my case (a razor blade, flat elastic, needle and thread).
The bottom of the case and the phone make it too big to fit in the charger
base, but a little finagling makes it work really neat. I use MO with a USB
cable, a drill and a file let me make a hole in the bottom of the desktop
charger/base so it can be connected and charging while not in use.

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

Rich <mathwhiz@mathwhiz.org> wrote:
> Steven J Sobol wrote:
>> Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@x-optonline-x.net> wrote:
>>
> > Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering
> whether it's
>> a fluke that some parts of the country did.
>>
>
> I think this switch about the calling to Canada is being done for a
> similar reason as the switch of how checking your voicemail is billed.
> Some markets were one way and some were another.

I'm sure that's the reason. I'm just wondering if SoCal and the Northeast
were ever supposed to have it.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

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

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:XbadnaBvMt-dmindRVn-vA@lmi.net...
> Rich <mathwhiz@mathwhiz.org> wrote:
> > Steven J Sobol wrote:
> >> Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@x-optonline-x.net> wrote:
> >>
> > > Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering
> > whether it's
> >> a fluke that some parts of the country did.
> >>
> >
> > I think this switch about the calling to Canada is being done for a
> > similar reason as the switch of how checking your voicemail is billed.
> > Some markets were one way and some were another.
>
> I'm sure that's the reason. I'm just wondering if SoCal and the Northeast
> were ever supposed to have it.

IMHO, if you ever had free calling to Canada and haven't changed plans, you
still have free calling to Canada. My National Single Rate Plan out of
Atlanta has had it from the beginning about 4 or 5 years ago and I don't let
them change this plan in any way. BTW it also has calling from Canada.

Tom J

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

"Tom J" <tomj_ga@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:2higjcFdmbojU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
> news:XbadnaBvMt-dmindRVn-vA@lmi.net...
> > Rich <mathwhiz@mathwhiz.org> wrote:
> > > Steven J Sobol wrote:
> > >> Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@x-optonline-x.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > > > Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering
> > > whether it's
> > >> a fluke that some parts of the country did.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I think this switch about the calling to Canada is being done
for a
> > > similar reason as the switch of how checking your voicemail is
billed.
> > > Some markets were one way and some were another.
> >
> > I'm sure that's the reason. I'm just wondering if SoCal and the
Northeast
> > were ever supposed to have it.
>
> IMHO, if you ever had free calling to Canada and haven't changed
plans, you
> still have free calling to Canada. My National Single Rate Plan out
of
> Atlanta has had it from the beginning about 4 or 5 years ago and I
don't let
> them change this plan in any way. BTW it also has calling from
Canada.
>
> Tom J
>
>

Up here in New York I also get calling to Canada for free, however it
does run .69¢ a minute to call from Montreal to the states while
roaming. I also have the America's Choice Plan

Elector

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

On Tue, 25 May 2004 20:20:36 -0500, Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:
>Canada was never a guarantee on America's Choice plans, and they never
>advertised free calling to canada on any other plans other than National
>Single-Rate with the Canada option, and now NA's Choice.

Yes it was a guarantee in the northeast. The Verizon reps said distance
long distance to Canada was included. It was part of the plan.

>Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering whether it's
>a fluke that some parts of the country did.

You make it sound like it was a mistake. But someone at Verizon decided
that long distance to Canada should be included. And someone (else) at
Verizon decided that effective May 10 that long distance to Canada would
be 20 cents per minute, unless you wanted to pay an extra $20 per month.

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

On Wed, 26 May 2004 01:38:40 GMT, Rich <mathwhiz@mathwhiz.org> wrote:
>I think this switch about the calling to Canada is being done for a
>similar reason as the switch of how checking your voicemail is billed.
>Some markets were one way and some were another. As the standardize
>their billing systems, they are standardizing all these small little
>details.

No, it's being done so Verizon can make more money (which is their right
to do so). And having to spend an extra $240 per year to keep the same
capabilities is not a "small little detail". Oh, and make that $360/year
if you include the M2M minutes for secondary lines.

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

On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:16:17 GMT, "Elector" <elector@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Up here in New York I also get calling to Canada for free, however it
>does run .69¢ a minute to call from Montreal to the states while
>roaming. I also have the America's Choice Plan

Yup, that's right. And you'll keep that forever as long as you don't do
anything to your contract. However, that means you can't upgrade your
phone for a subsidized price or use the 'new every two' feature at all.
You may not even be able to increase your plan's minutes without losing
the long distance calling to Canada.

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

On Tue, 25 May 2004 21:35:05 -0700, "Peter Pan"
<Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>I had to modify my case (a razor blade, flat elastic, needle and thread).
>The bottom of the case and the phone make it too big to fit in the charger
>base, but a little finagling makes it work really neat.

Thanks for the info. Sounds like I'd be better off with a travel charger
instead of the desk charger.

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

"Bob Scheurle" <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message
news:8hscb0lejv258guqbccq49ikmjcor5pk39@4ax.com
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 21:35:05 -0700, "Peter Pan"
> <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I had to modify my case (a razor blade, flat elastic, needle and
>> thread). The bottom of the case and the phone make it too big to fit
>> in the charger base, but a little finagling makes it work really
>> neat.
>
> Thanks for the info. Sounds like I'd be better off with a travel
> charger instead of the desk charger.

It depends on your use. At the el cheapo price I got em at, (and the fact
that my memory is getting worse, and I kept forgetting where I put it), it
was nice to be able to have the phone in one specific place both at work and
at home, and since I play with computers, have the MO cable easy to connect
and use.

One other point. Phones use Lithium Ion batteries, NOT nicads! They do NOT
have to be completely discharged before charging. Many Many people think
they have to use em to discharge BEFORE recharging them. That is absolutely
not true at all. Your car battery constantly recharges every time you run
the engine, imagine if you had to let your car battery completely discharge
before you could use the car again. If the car battery is discharged, how
does it start the engine to recharge? Now it is a lead acid battery, but
like the lithium ion, it is *NOT* a nicad!

At any rate, sorry for the rant, I always keep my phone as charged as it can
be, and ready for mobile use. Knowing where it as, it being fully charged,
and in it's case, makes it very easy to lift out of the charger and clip it
on my belt, and walk out the door.

For those with the hands-free/charger cradle in the car, it's essentially
the same thing. It will almost always be fully charged.

There is one other neat thing, but you have to think about whether to keep
it charged or buy into the fully discharge/charge, and use it with Mobile
Office (or equivalent). Many phones will not charge with a travel charger as
fast as with a desk charger, and if you use the phone as a modem with MO (or
equivalent), you may actually use more power than a travel charger can
supply, while the desktop charger usually puts out more power and can charge
the phone while it is being used.

Like I said, it depends on what you want to use it for, but I think it is
hysterical that people think Lithium Ion batteries are the same as NiCads,
and treat them as if they were Nicads when they are not.

This long diatribe was basically to say that for my use (connect to the
internet via MO), a travel charger is not powerful enuf, and the desk
charger is a necessity to be able to both connect and charge at the same
time.

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

Bob Scheurle wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 20:20:36 -0500, Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering whether it's
>>a fluke that some parts of the country did.
>
>
> You make it sound like it was a mistake. But someone at Verizon decided
> that long distance to Canada should be included. And someone (else) at
> Verizon decided that effective May 10 that long distance to Canada would
> be 20 c?Pá per minute, unless you wanted to pay an extra $20 per month.
>

Someone at Verizon may have decided to include calling to Canada, but if
they did, they only made that decision for certain markets. It could be
that the inclusion of long distance to Canada was a carry over from
whichever company it was in that market before Verizon. And now Verizon
has decided to standardize all their markets instead of having seperate
rules for each market. Since I've never had long distance to Canada
included in my plan (Michigan market). So if someone at Verizon did
decide that long distance to Canada should be included, they forgot to
tell their Michigan market.

Rich

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

Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@x-optonline-x.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 20:20:36 -0500, Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
> wrote:
>>Canada was never a guarantee on America's Choice plans, and they never
>>advertised free calling to canada on any other plans other than National
>>Single-Rate with the Canada option, and now NA's Choice.
>
> Yes it was a guarantee in the northeast. The Verizon reps said distance
> long distance to Canada was included. It was part of the plan.
>
>>Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering whether it's
>>a fluke that some parts of the country did.
>
> You make it sound like it was a mistake. But someone at Verizon decided
> that long distance to Canada should be included. And someone (else) at
> Verizon decided that effective May 10 that long distance to Canada would
> be 20 cents per minute, unless you wanted to pay an extra $20 per month.

So what is the logic of having free Canada calling in the northeast but not
in Ohio/Michigan? That market also borders Canada; in fact, I could walk 5
minutes from my old house to Lake Erie, get in a rowboat and row for twenty
miles and be in Canada. But I could not call Canada without paying long-
distance. Yet I can here in Southern California.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

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

Rich <mathwhiz@mathwhiz.org> wrote:
> Someone at Verizon may have decided to include calling to Canada, but if
> they did, they only made that decision for certain markets. It could be
> that the inclusion of long distance to Canada was a carry over from
> whichever company it was in that market before Verizon.

Nope.

New York/Northeast, former Bell Titanic Mobile, has it.
Ohio/Michigan, former AirTouch, doesn't.
Southern California, former AirTouch, does.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

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

> Canada was never a guarantee on America's Choice plans, and they never
> advertised free calling to canada on any other plans other than National
> Single-Rate with the Canada option, and now NA's Choice.
>
> Most markets didn't get free calling to Canada. I'm wondering whether it's
> a fluke that some parts of the country did.



South has always gotten free calls to Canada on AC plans until the recent
change. It wasn't advertised on ads, etc but stores did use it as a selling
point, as they were instructed to.


KC

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

On Fri, 28 May 2004 10:04:24 -0500, Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:
>So what is the logic of having free Canada calling in the northeast but not
>in Ohio/Michigan? That market also borders Canada; in fact, I could walk 5
>minutes from my old house to Lake Erie, get in a rowboat and row for twenty
>miles and be in Canada. But I could not call Canada without paying long-
>distance. Yet I can here in Southern California.

I didn't say there was any logic to it. I'm just pointing out that
taking advantage of the 'new every two' feature means I'll lose my long
distance calling to Canada.

The bottom line is that keeping all of my current plan features with a
new contract requires me to spend an extra $35 per month!

Since the cell phone companies seem to like to lock people into contracts
(especially now that the phone numbers are portable), I think I'll write
to Verizon Wireless and tell them why I'm not renewing my contract.
Maybe they'll rethink this 64% stealth price increase.

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

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:XrGdnYWFfaZlySrdRVn-uw@lmi.net...

<Snip>
> So what is the logic of having free Canada calling in the northeast
but not
> in Ohio/Michigan? That market also borders Canada; in fact, I could
walk 5
> minutes from my old house to Lake Erie, get in a rowboat and row for
twenty
> miles and be in Canada. But I could not call Canada without paying
long-
> distance. Yet I can here in Southern California.
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP:
0xE3AE35ED
> Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
sjsobol@JustThe.net
> Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service:
http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
> "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush
out and buy
> slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows
98/2000/2003

Steve: I know why. It was because you could get there in a row boat so
did not need to have long distance to Canada. ha ha
I have to drive 2 hours to get there!

Elector

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

Bob Scheurle <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message news:<hcscb0dgjvjtj4bj3hjf9nfrhploqar16c@4ax.com>...
> On Wed, 26 May 2004 10:16:17 GMT, "Elector" <elector@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >Up here in New York I also get calling to Canada for free, however it
> >does run .69¢ a minute to call from Montreal to the states while
> >roaming. I also have the America's Choice Plan
>
> Yup, that's right. And you'll keep that forever as long as you don't do
> anything to your contract. However, that means you can't upgrade your
> phone for a subsidized price or use the 'new every two' feature at all.
> You may not even be able to increase your plan's minutes without losing
> the long distance calling to Canada.


ARe you positive that just getting an equipment upgrade will change
the contract terms--In the past, it would just extend the term of the
original contact ( but may have changed ??)

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

Recently I specifically asked several Verizon Wireless employees if new
every two forced you to switch to an active contract and they all said no.
It only extends your contract commitment date.

I have not actually tried this and verified it. YMMV

-Eric

"Bob Scheurle" <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message
news:gvqfb0huejnj7rkqjaho56b2hsh1957oi4@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 28 May 2004 10:04:24 -0500, Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
> wrote:
> >So what is the logic of having free Canada calling in the northeast but
not
> >in Ohio/Michigan? That market also borders Canada; in fact, I could walk
5
> >minutes from my old house to Lake Erie, get in a rowboat and row for
twenty
> >miles and be in Canada. But I could not call Canada without paying long-
> >distance. Yet I can here in Southern California.
>
> I didn't say there was any logic to it. I'm just pointing out that
> taking advantage of the 'new every two' feature means I'll lose my long
> distance calling to Canada.
>
> The bottom line is that keeping all of my current plan features with a
> new contract requires me to spend an extra $35 per month!
>
> Since the cell phone companies seem to like to lock people into contracts
> (especially now that the phone numbers are portable), I think I'll write
> to Verizon Wireless and tell them why I'm not renewing my contract.
> Maybe they'll rethink this 64% stealth price increase.
>

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

I recently emailed Verizon with that very same question, and they
answered by saying you "may" have to switch to a currently offerred
plan. That seems to say to me you have a better chance face-to-face
with a rep in a Verizon store.

"Eric Rosenberry" <erics@R3MOVErosenberry.org> wrote in
news:g-2dnURKS6ZLTyfd4p2dnA@comcast.com:

> Recently I specifically asked several Verizon Wireless employees if
> new every two forced you to switch to an active contract and they all
> said no. It only extends your contract commitment date.
>
> I have not actually tried this and verified it. YMMV
>
> -Eric
>
> "Bob Scheurle" <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message
> news:gvqfb0huejnj7rkqjaho56b2hsh1957oi4@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 28 May 2004 10:04:24 -0500, Steven J Sobol
>> <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>> >So what is the logic of having free Canada calling in the northeast
>> >but
> not
>> >in Ohio/Michigan? That market also borders Canada; in fact, I could
>> >walk
> 5
>> >minutes from my old house to Lake Erie, get in a rowboat and row for
> twenty
>> >miles and be in Canada. But I could not call Canada without paying
>> >long- distance. Yet I can here in Southern California.
>>
>> I didn't say there was any logic to it. I'm just pointing out that
>> taking advantage of the 'new every two' feature means I'll lose my
>> long distance calling to Canada.
>>
>> The bottom line is that keeping all of my current plan features with
>> a new contract requires me to spend an extra $35 per month!
>>
>> Since the cell phone companies seem to like to lock people into
>> contracts (especially now that the phone numbers are portable), I
>> think I'll write to Verizon Wireless and tell them why I'm not
>> renewing my contract. Maybe they'll rethink this 64% stealth price
>> increase.

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

Mitchell Regenbogen wrote:
> I recently emailed Verizon with that very same question, and they
> answered by saying you "may" have to switch to a currently offerred
> plan. That seems to say to me you have a better chance face-to-face
> with a rep in a Verizon store.
>
> "Eric Rosenberry" <erics@R3MOVErosenberry.org> wrote in
> news:g-2dnURKS6ZLTyfd4p2dnA@comcast.com:
>
>> Recently I specifically asked several Verizon Wireless employees if
>> new every two forced you to switch to an active contract and they all
>> said no. It only extends your contract commitment date.
>>
This doesn't sound right to me. I recently got a new phone on new-every-two
and was able to extend my contract without giving up Single Rate West, a
long obsolete plan. I keep SRW because it has a grandfathered 8:00pm start
time for off-peak. If that feature could follow me to AC, I'd switch
immediately.

--
Slobby Don

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

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 01:53:03 GMT, "Slobby Don" <reply@thru.ng> wrote:
>This doesn't sound right to me. I recently got a new phone on new-every-two
>and was able to extend my contract without giving up Single Rate West, a
>long obsolete plan. I keep SRW because it has a grandfathered 8:00pm start
>time for off-peak. If that feature could follow me to AC, I'd switch
>immediately.

Two *611 reps told me I'd have to switch to a current plan with current
promotions if I wanted a phone under 'new-every-two'.

I have a brochure about upgrading phones within the last two months of
the contract (not specifically new-every-two), and it explicitly says you
need to get a new contract with a current plan, and you may lose some of
your old promotions.

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

Bob Scheurle wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 01:53:03 GMT, "Slobby Don" <reply@thru.ng> wrote:
>> I keep SRW because it has a
>> grandfathered 8:00pm start time for off-peak. If that feature could
>> follow me to AC, I'd switch immediately.
>
> Two *611 reps told me I'd have to switch to a current plan with current
> promotions if I wanted a phone under 'new-every-two'.
>
> I have a brochure about upgrading phones within the last two months of
> the contract (not specifically new-every-two), and it explicitly says you
> need to get a new contract with a current plan, and you may lose some of
> your old promotions.

Maybe that's the difference. My account was out of contract. I talked to
several reps and none disputed the fact that I could keep my SRW. I am in
San Diego.

--
Slobby Don