Comments on: FCC fines Sprint Nextel, Alltel, US Cellular for failing to meet E911 requirements in 2005 http://www.intomobile.com/2007/09/06/fcc-fines-sprint-nextel-alltel-us-cellular-for-failing-to-meet-e911-requirements-in-2005.html Cell Phone News, Information, and Analysis Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:11:30 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Adam Brown http://www.intomobile.com/2007/09/06/fcc-fines-sprint-nextel-alltel-us-cellular-for-failing-to-meet-e911-requirements-in-2005.html/comment-page-1/#comment-42738 Adam Brown Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:29:17 +0000 http://www.intomobile.com/2007/09/06/fcc-fines-sprint-nextel-alltel-us-cellular-for-failing-to-meet-e911-requirements-in-2005.html#comment-42738 I would be surprised if Sprint has a strong future due to some basic business practices of theirs. Like many of the other huge wireless corporations, Sprint insists on locking people into long contracts. If Sprint was confident in their offerings they wouldn't try to lock people into staying with them. My company is in Austin, TX and Sprint insisted that they have excellent coverage and could provide us the GPS tracking that we needed. We got over a dozen phones and two high-speed data cards. Since we started service, we have had terrible coverage, text messages take up to 12 hours to reach the recipients, and the high-speed data cards have never worked. The GPS tracking was a joke and NOT what they showed to us. We have talked to the sales people, tech support, corporate, and have never gotten a response. Recently they have raised the text messaging rates even though we were under contract. What is the purpose of a contract if the company can change the rates but won't let the consumer out of the contract? People are starting to wise up about Sprints deceptive practices and how cellphone contracts do not benefit the consumer, only the vendor. All they do is lock you into service that doesn't work. Adam Brown Longhorn Services - longhorn-services.com I would be surprised if Sprint has a strong future due to some basic business practices of theirs. Like many of the other huge wireless corporations, Sprint insists on locking people into long contracts. If Sprint was confident in their offerings they wouldn’t try to lock people into staying with them.

My company is in Austin, TX and Sprint insisted that they have excellent coverage and could provide us the GPS tracking that we needed. We got over a dozen phones and two high-speed data cards. Since we started service, we have had terrible coverage, text messages take up to 12 hours to reach the recipients, and the high-speed data cards have never worked. The GPS tracking was a joke and NOT what they showed to us.

We have talked to the sales people, tech support, corporate, and have never gotten a response. Recently they have raised the text messaging rates even though we were under contract.

What is the purpose of a contract if the company can change the rates but won’t let the consumer out of the contract?

People are starting to wise up about Sprints deceptive practices and how cellphone contracts do not benefit the consumer, only the vendor. All they do is lock you into service that doesn’t work.

Adam Brown

Longhorn Services – longhorn-services.com

]]>