T-Mobile Tops Customer Care Survey

[Kris Kumar]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.rcrnews.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=19109' target='_blank'>http://www.rcrnews.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=19109</a><br /><br /></div><i>"T-Mobile was the clear leader in this most recent report, achieving a significantly lower frustration level than the other companies," said Peter U. Leppik, chief executive officer of VocaLabs, which conducted the survey. "While T-Mobile’s automation rate was a little lower than Verizon, T-Mobile ranked highest in caller satisfaction and call completion."</i><br /><br />Many a times in the CDMA vs GSM <a href="http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5984">debates</a> on our site, readers have pointed out that the service cost and the customer support ranks among the biggest reasons for selecting or staying with a carrier. We know that T-Mobile (GSM based) offers one of the best rates, especially the data rates. And according to this survey conducted by VocaLabs, T-Mobile beat Verizon (CDMA) to take the top spot in customer care. I wonder if Verizon took a hit because of the frustrated Samsung i600 <a href="http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5892">users.</a> ;-) Cingular came in third, followed by AT&T Wireless and Sprint PCS. The survey didn't include Nextel and surprised that AT&T finished above Sprint PCS. As a T-Mobile customer, I have been very pleased with the customer care I have received. But would be a <i>satisfied</i> customer only when T-Mobile launches one of the Smartphones.

[lurch]

Cingular is all I've used, but I've never had a problem with them, and if I have I can't remember, which is a good thing...

So tell me, I think Cingular is best because AFAIK they have the best coverage nationwide (speaking in US terms, obviously). I like T-Mobile's data rate, obviously, BUT, what is the coverage comparison like? Do other carriers have as good or better coverage than Cingular? This is important to me now because my contract is up early next year, and I will be upgrading to an MPx220 but want to use the contract renewal to get the subsidized price. Should I switch providers or stay with Cingular?

Thanks!

[aristoBrat]

http://www.t-mobile.com/company/pressroom/pressrelease100.asp
"Consumers will be the real winners from this agreement," stated Robert Dotson, CEO and President of T-Mobile USA. "With this agreement, our customers can be confident they will continue to enjoy the reliable, high quality service currently provided by our world class network in California and Nevada without interruption. Also, the nationwide reciprocal roaming agreement ensures that our customers will have access to the nationwide networks of T-Mobile USA and Cingular, providing them with the greatest possible coverage."
Looks like T-Mobile and Cingular will be able to roam on each others networks, so coverage would be the same, no?

[Kris Kumar]

http://www.t-mobile.com/company/pressroom/pressrelease100.asp
"Consumers will be the real winners from this agreement," stated Robert Dotson, CEO and President of T-Mobile USA. "With this agreement, our customers can be confident they will continue to enjoy the reliable, high quality service currently provided by our world class network in California and Nevada without interruption. Also, the nationwide reciprocal roaming agreement ensures that our customers will have access to the nationwide networks of T-Mobile USA and Cingular, providing them with the greatest possible coverage."
Looks like T-Mobile and Cingular will be able to roam on each others networks, so coverage would be the same, no?

Yes.

I have T-Mobile, and I can roam on Cingular and also AT&T networks. The only sad part. When on AT&T network I cannot access GPRS. On Cingular however I can access GPRS.

[Kris Kumar]

Cingular is all I've used, but I've never had a problem with them, and if I have I can't remember, which is a good thing...

So tell me, I think Cingular is best because AFAIK they have the best coverage nationwide (speaking in US terms, obviously). I like T-Mobile's data rate, obviously, BUT, what is the coverage comparison like? Do other carriers have as good or better coverage than Cingular? This is important to me now because my contract is up early next year, and I will be upgrading to an MPx220 but want to use the contract renewal to get the subsidized price. Should I switch providers or stay with Cingular?

Thanks!

Cingular and AT&T will have one advantage over T-Mobile in the future. They will have technological edge. They are planning on deploying 850Mhz networks while T-Mobile is planning to stay on 1900Mhz. 850Mhz offers longer range and also significantly improved reception inside the buildings.

It remains to be seen how T-Mobile will react when Cingular and AT&T officially merge. Cutting costs is not always easy, and will not work well if the competitor charges a little more but offers stronger network and signal.

The key factor that will help you to make an easy decision is the Data Plan. Do you need it or not? If you need data access on the Smartphone, then switching to T-Mobile makes sense. Otherwise stick with Cingular if you find its reception or signal strength okay.

[aristoBrat]

850Mhz offers longer range and also significantly improved reception inside the buildings.
From what I've read, RF from a properly deployed 1900mhz network penetrates buildings as easily as 850mhz.

Granted, a "properly deployed" 1900mhz network would require more towers than 850mhz, but either frequency could be implemented half-assed enough that I don't think it's always a true statement to say "850mhz has a technological edge", especially seeing as how AT&T's managed to wingnut their network so far. :D

[Kris Kumar]

850Mhz offers longer range and also significantly improved reception inside the buildings.
From what I've read, RF from a properly deployed 1900mhz network penetrates buildings as easily as 850mhz.

Granted, a "properly deployed" 1900mhz network would require more towers than 850mhz, but either frequency could be implemented half-assed enough that I don't think it's always a true statement to say "850mhz has a technological edge", especially seeing as how AT&T's managed to wingnut their network so far. :D

You have a good point. And have to admit I was being a bit dramatic with the 'technological edge'. :-)

[lurch]

The key factor that will help you to make an easy decision is the Data Plan. Do you need it or not? If you need data access on the Smartphone, then switching to T-Mobile makes sense. Otherwise stick with Cingular if you find its reception or signal strength okay.

Not to get too far off, but one thing I've been confused on (and hopefully you can explain to me) is the T-Mobile data plan. I've seen it where you pay $20/month for data, but lots of people say unlimited data transfer is free with T-Mobile? Is that the WAP access? And if so, it seems like the WAP access is limited to certain websites/services. I.e. can I surf the web from my phone to any site I want, or is that restricted, and can I check my POP3 email with the WAP access? Or do I need the $20/month plan for that? And what exactly is the difference between the two?

I really really appreciate any guidance/help on this!!! :) I get confused so easily...... :D
THANKS!

[arnage2]

ive grown tired of nextel. Yes, the calls are clear, but there's other problems.
1. how many times do my calls need to be dropped due to a phone error?
2. how come when im siting down, and the phone is still, signal jumps from full to none. then full, then none.
3. Their phones are outdated. No camera (yet), no smartphone (yet), no bluetooth, no alternate phone manufactures.
4. phones are way way too expensive. Take the i730 for an example. its essentially a moto V60 or T720, only $50-100 more. The camera phone i860 that debutes in a month or 2, is late, and will probebly cost over $400-500. (when some LG camera phones can be had for under $100) The nextel i930 smartphone will not have bluetooth, will be over a year late, and will probebly cost well over $500-650. (even with a service agreement)

Nextel calls them selves a business phone provider, yes it does have the direct connect feature, but business men want speedy wireless web (greater than its pathetic 9.6k-56k speed), and many want smartphones or pda phones.

I heard that Att has terrible customer service, but they let you use almost any gsm phone. XDA2 & 3, and european smartphones, long before some other carriers.

[Kris Kumar]

Not to get too far off, but one thing I've been confused on (and hopefully you can explain to me) is the T-Mobile data plan. I've seen it where you pay $20/month for data, but lots of people say unlimited data transfer is free with T-Mobile? Is that the WAP access? And if so, it seems like the WAP access is limited to certain websites/services. I.e. can I surf the web from my phone to any site I want, or is that restricted, and can I check my POP3 email with the WAP access? Or do I need the $20/month plan for that? And what exactly is the difference between the two?

I really really appreciate any guidance/help on this!!! :) I get confused so easily...... :D
THANKS!

Not sure if you have seen this post (http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6029) or not.

Theoretically T-Mobile has 2 Data Plans.
1. $4.99
Unlimited, WAP based, and you can access only HTTP sites, POP3/IMAP/SMTP mails.
No HTTPS or FTP or VPN etc.

2. $19.99
Unlimited, Access to all sites and ports. Nothing blocked.

Though in reality, they have been playing with their network configuration recently, and have (I believe) accidently enabled acces to all ports/sites on the $4.99 plan and also according to some for free.

[lurch]

Great! Thanks Kris!

I hadn't seen that post -- I thought I'd done an unsuccessful search here a while back, but probably it was my bad searching that prevented me from finding it.

Thanks for all the help!! I'm thinking I might wait and switch over to T-Mobile completely when my plan is up. Hmmmmmmmm.... but that would mean waiting even longer for the new phone. We shall see... we shall see.

Thanks again!

[ShivShanks]

850Mhz offers longer range and also significantly improved reception inside the buildings.
From what I've read, RF from a properly deployed 1900mhz network penetrates buildings as easily as 850mhz.

Granted, a "properly deployed" 1900mhz network would require more towers than 850mhz, but either frequency could be implemented half-assed enough that I don't think it's always a true statement to say "850mhz has a technological edge", especially seeing as how AT&T's managed to wingnut their network so far. :D

You have a good point. And have to admit I was being a bit dramatic with the 'technological edge'. :-)

I didn't want to jump into this discussion but again some misinformation needs to be clarified so thats why.

Actually it is true that lower frequencies have better penetration in buildings as per basic communications theory. So yes it does have an 'edge'. As for what reason it has an edge you can decide for yourself but it is basic physics. Why do you think lesser towers are required with 800MHz frequency? For the simple reason that as function of the higher wavelength the range, power and penetration into another mass is better with lower frequencies. Anyone who tells you otherwise is misinformed.

The reason AT&T botched up was because they couldn't/didn't switch all their 850 MHz towers on since their TDMA infrastructure was still using the 800 MHz bands. So most of their GSM towers were in fact 1900 MHz band only at that time. Ironically it is their lack of turning on the 800 MHz band towers that led to them having such a bad reputation.

Its really funny to see T-Mobile being rated so high here. Sure they have cheap plans and cheap data rates but no one who really knows the wireless industry considers T-Mobile to be good coverage wise. So yes if you don't care about good coverage all over the country and are happy with T-Mobile's rates, data plans and customer service then thats quite fine. But good coverage it will not give you.

Just compare the coverage area of T-Mobile -
http://www.mountainwireless.com/tmnat3.gif

versus that of Verizon -
http://www.mountainwireless.com/americas_choice.gif

BTW T-Mobile cannot take full advantage of the other GSM carriers coverage area since they do not support 850 MHz. And the vast majority of coverage being built up in the US for large areas is using 850 MHz. So T-Mobile is always going to be stuck with the lowest coverage of all the operators in the US. The 850 MHz GSM guys can at least theoretically catch up with the CDMA guys. But 1900 MHz only GSM doesn't have a bright future IMHO.

[Kris Kumar]

Its really funny to see T-Mobile being rated so high here. Sure they have cheap plans and cheap data rates but no one who really knows the wireless industry considers T-Mobile to be good coverage wise. So yes if you don't care about good coverage all over the country and are happy with T-Mobile's rates, data plans and customer service then thats quite fine. But good coverage it will not give you.

Hey ShivShanks, thanks for dropping in.

Thanks for supporting the 850Mhz point.

And as a payback :-) I will support your point. I also was surprised at T-Mobile being rated high. The only conclusion I can make is that folks in US don't travel much out of their home town, so as long as they stay close to the base and get really good rates and good customer support, they are happy.

Is that the formula to success in the US carrier market?

As for T-Mobile being stuck on 1900Mhz. Why wouldn't they want to switch to 850Mhz. I don't know much about the tech aspect, but maybe T-Mobile is waiting for a viable 3G option. Why tear down the current networks when it has to be done in a year's time or so.

Also they have roaming agreements with AT&T and Cingular. Which means I as a T-Mobile customer can make use of the competitor's networks, where T-Mobile does not have signal.

I also see the GSM carriers in US cooperating. Just like GSM carriers do it around the world. So as long as they wisely pick and choose the cities & towns without overlapping, I am sure they can provide the customers with a good coverage.

If Verizon wants to kill the GSM growth in US. It must act now and offer competing rates. Giving too much time will only enable the GSM carriers to solidify their positions. Or maybe VZ is not lowering the rates, because then it might be seen as a monopolistic act.

[ShivShanks]

The only conclusion I can make is that folks in US don't travel much out of their home town, so as long as they stay close to the base and get really good rates and good customer support, they are happy.


I disagree. The numbers here may not be relective of the wider US market. Some people here might only be thinking of the cheap data rates by T-Mobile to use with a Smartphone. The general US market trend is shown by customer additions numbers which I showed. And it is quite clear where the market is going as per that. I also disagree that Americans don't travel much. In fact Americans love to travel in thier cars and road trips etc. And then coverage matters. You don't want to be stuck with no coverage while on a road trip or travelling to some other place. It could be possible that people who have voted for T-Mobile here don't travel much. BTW T-Mobile also has one of the highest churn rates among mobile operators. That seems to indicate that people drawn in by cheap rates leave after some time when they realise that coverage isn't great. OTOH Verizon has the lowest churn rate which indicates Americans aren't stupid and value being able to get a signal more than cheap rates. You don't need to be yakking on your cell phone all the time. You can usually get access to land lines very easily most of the times and at home and office I have no reason to use my cell phone for long and can tell people to call back on the land line.


Is that the formula to success in the US carrier market?


I don't think so in the long term. They also haven't presented any roadmap for a 3G expansion.


As for T-Mobile being stuck on 1900Mhz. Why wouldn't they want to switch to 850Mhz. I don't know much about the tech aspect, but maybe T-Mobile is waiting for a viable 3G option. Why tear down the current networks when it has to be done in a year's time or so.


They cannot for the simple reason that they don't own any spectrum in the 800 MHz band. And there is none left there to dole out to anyone else (see the 800 MHz FCC relocation plan problem link w.r.t Nextel and the Public Service Agencies that I posted). So there is no question of them being able to tear down their network or anything. Also and they aren't selling any 850 MHz phones so far. They haven't presented any future plans for how they are going to improve things. Why do you think they offer plans for so cheap. That is their only USP.


Also they have roaming agreements with AT&T and Cingular. Which means I as a T-Mobile customer can make use of the competitor's networks, where T-Mobile does not have signal.


You can only make use of other carriers 1900 MHz coverage which sucks (why do you think AT&T GSM sucked?). Both AT&T and Cingular are going in for 850 MHz in a big way. That is the only way they can compete. But that means little for T-Mobile people.


I also see the GSM carriers in US cooperating. Just like GSM carriers do it around the world. So as long as they wisely pick and choose the cities & towns without overlapping, I am sure they can provide the customers with a good coverage.


Errr ... Cooperate how? They still SIM lock their phones and don't want you to take them over to a competitor. You only get great deals if you sign up for a phone from them. AT&T m-mode doesn't work with other GSM folks etc etc. Whatever cooperation happens is due to the bare minimum that GSM mandates and even there they impede by things such as SIM locks. I haven't seen any evidence of this cooperation that you mention. Roaming agreements aren't evidence of cooperation. There are roaming agreements between CDMA carriers also.


If Verizon wants to kill the GSM growth in US. It must act now and offer competing rates. Giving too much time will only enable the GSM carriers to solidify their positions. Or maybe VZ is not lowering the rates, because then it might be seen as a monopolistic act.

Verizon feels that it doesn't need to do anything more than what it is doing. After all they are adding customers by the bucketloads and their churn is the lowest so why should they care. They feel their superior service is worth the extra money and quite a few people seem to think the same way. BTW Verizon's churn is 1.7% per month compared to around 3% for others (incl. T-Mobile). Now take that with huge numbers that Verizon is adding every quarter and you'll truly realise what position they are in. Not only are they adding the most customers but much much more of them stay with them after the end of their contracts. No wonder they don't feel they need to do more. Sure us Smartphone wannabe's don't like some of their rates and plans. But the vast majority of the normal phone users can see and appreciate Verizon's offering.

[Kris Kumar]

As for T-Mobile being stuck on 1900Mhz. Why wouldn't they want to switch to 850Mhz. I don't know much about the tech aspect, but maybe T-Mobile is waiting for a viable 3G option. Why tear down the current networks when it has to be done in a year's time or so.


They cannot for the simple reason that they don't own any spectrum in the 800 MHz band. And there is none left there to dole out to anyone else (see the 800 MHz FCC relocation plan problem link w.r.t Nextel and the Public Service Agencies that I posted). So there is no question of them being able to tear down their network or anything. Also and they aren't selling any 850 MHz phones so far. They haven't presented any future plans for how they are going to improve things. Why do you think they offer plans for so cheap. That is their only USP.

Hmm...didn't know that T-Mobile is stuck in a corner when it comes to future expansion. But can't they keep putting 1900Mhz towers and build their network?

No wonder they are offering lower rates.


Also they have roaming agreements with AT&T and Cingular. Which means I as a T-Mobile customer can make use of the competitor's networks, where T-Mobile does not have signal.


You can only make use of other carriers 1900 MHz coverage which sucks (why do you think AT&T GSM sucked?). Both AT&T and Cingular are going in for 850 MHz in a big way. That is the only way they can compete. But that means little for T-Mobile people.

I thought if I had a Quad band phone then I would be able to roam on AT&T and Cingular networks. As long as they don't shut the door on T-Mobile, I was hoping to be able to roam on their networks.

I also see the GSM carriers in US cooperating. Just like GSM carriers do it around the world. So as long as they wisely pick and choose the cities & towns without overlapping, I am sure they can provide the customers with a good coverage.


Errr ... Cooperate how? They still SIM lock their phones and don't want you to take them over to a competitor. You only get great deals if you sign up for a phone from them. AT&T m-mode doesn't work with other GSM folks etc etc. Whatever cooperation happens is due to the bare minimum that GSM mandates and even there they impede by things such as SIM locks. I haven't seen any evidence of this cooperation that you mention. Roaming agreements aren't evidence of cooperation. There are roaming agreements between CDMA carriers also.

SIM is locked. True. But as long as carriers have roaming agreements, we can roam inspite of the SIM lock. SIM lock would only prevent me from buying a cheap phone on one network and then leaving for another network with lower rates. SIM lock will not prevent roaming because for roaming I dont have to replace the SIM.

[Kris Kumar]

I disagree. The numbers here may not be relective of the wider US market.

I agree and I disagree. :-)

I disagree because I think that in the future, data rates will matter as much as voice rates. Everyone would feel the need to have data plan. So I feel that the SmartphoneThoughts.com readership represents the future trend for the US market. ;-)

[Ed Hansberry]

T-Mobile rocks for me, and I had NO problem roaming (GPRS mainly) in Brazil last month. pulled down about 5MB... no clue what my bill will be. :-O

[aristoBrat]

For a company doing so wrong by some here, T-Mobile seems to be doing quite well. ;)

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040812/125243_1.html


T-Mobile USA Reports Second Quarter 2004 Results
Thursday August 12, 5:00 am ET

BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 12, 2004--T-Mobile USA, Inc.:
1.092 million new net customers added in Q2 2004
New net customers totaled 2.27 million during the first half of 2004, up from 1.53 million for the first half of 2003
Customer base currently at 15.4 million, compared to 11.4 million mid year 2003, an increase of 4 million for the 12 months
$717 million in Operating Income Before Depreciation and Amortization (OIBDA) in Q2 2004, up 46% from Q1 2004

1.092 million new net customers is second only to Verizon. Again. ;)
1130 new towers in Q2, which makes 1900 new towers so far this year.

[ShivShanks]

For a company doing so wrong by some here, T-Mobile seems to be doing quite well. ;)

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040812/125243_1.html

1.092 million new net customers is second only to Verizon. Again. ;)
1130 new towers in Q2, which makes 1900 new towers so far this year.

Those are nice numbers (but see my qualifications later on). And BTW I didn't say that they are doing anything wrong per se. It's just that in some areas they don't seem to have much of a choice (850 MHz spectrum) and in some areas they aren't doing anything (3G). By virtue of the choices they've made they have some disadvantages which so far they are glossing over with cheap rates but that isn't long term winning strategy IMHO. So its not that they are doing anything bad, but that they don't seem to be doing a whole lot of good for the future, for whatever reasons.

As for the numbers, you are have to take it in the context of churn. (Churn is the number of customers leaving the service) T-Mobile's churn is still a high 2.8%. Whereas Verizon's is only 1.7% (those are monthly figures since contracts expire every month). Verizon added about 1.5 million customers. You do the math based on those churn %ages and at the end of the year Verizon has double the number of remaining customers as compared to T-Mobile. Puts quite a different picture on the figures doesn't it?

A bucket filled with the same amount of water as another but with a much bigger leaking hole can't quite match.

[aristoBrat]

A bucket filled with the same amount of water as another but with a much bigger leaking hole can't quite match.
VZW's churn is 1.7%
1.7% of 40.4 million customers = 686,800 customers lost

T-Mobile's churn is 2.8%
2.8% of 15.4 million customers = 431,200 customers lost

It seems to me that VZW's bucket is leaking more water.

Considering that VZW sells service in 4 states that T-Mobile doesn't, I'm surprised that they're only 500,000 new subscribers ahead.

[ShivShanks]

A bucket filled with the same amount of water as another but with a much bigger leaking hole can't quite match.
VZW's churn is 1.7%
1.7% of 40.4 million customers = 686,800 customers lost

T-Mobile's churn is 2.8%
2.8% of 15.4 million customers = 431,200 customers lost

It seems to me that VZW's bucket is leaking more water.

Considering that VZW sells service in 4 states that T-Mobile doesn't, I'm surprised that they're only 500,000 new subscribers ahead.

We are talking about new customers. You need to look at new customers left after one year since churn figures affect them much more (not customers who have already stayed after one contract expiration, since for them churn is much lower)

So of the new customers added -

(1.7*12)% of 1.5*4 million customers leave by the end of the year giving:
4,776,000 of those customers still left with VZW.

(2.8*12)% of 1*4 million customers leave by the end of the year giving:
2,656,000 of those customers still left with T-Mobile.

*12 since churn is monthy and *4 since growth figures are quarterly

Therefore Verizon is adding much more customers per year than T-Mobile and that is the figure that ultimately matters.

BTW even going by your figures 686K in 40M is much lower %age wise than 431K in 15.4M. T-Mobile is actually leaking more water relatively speaking since they have a smaller bucket. The Verizon bucket is getting filled up much faster relatively speaking.

[Mike Temporale]

My head is starting to spin.... :wink: :lol:

[aristoBrat]

LOL :D