Verizon Going To "Focus On Data" In 2003

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.com.com/2100-1033-985771.html?tag=fd_nbs_comm' target='_blank'>http://news.com.com/2100-1033-98577...tag=fd_nbs_comm</a><br /><br /></div>"Verizon Wireless will focus this year on increasing revenue from the side of its business that doesn't involve voice calls, the chief executive of parent company Verizon Communications said Monday. 'We are really going to focus on data' in 2003, CEO Ivan Seidenberg told analysts attending Monday's Merrill Lynch Global Communications Conference. Verizon Wireless, which has 32.5 million subscribers, is a joint venture between Verizon Communications and U.K.-based wireless carrier Vodafone."<br /><br />Let's hope that means more than just a camera phone, which is all this article talks about. Verizon is becoming more and more conspicuous as the wireless provider without all the "cool gadgets", excepting a few color BREW-enabled phones. I wouldn't care, but Verizon has superior coverage than any competitor in the NY metro area.

[Bob Anderson]

As a CDMA 1xRTT user of Verizon right now, the only comment I can say is I hope "increasing revenue" doesn't mean a rate increase! $99 a month for unlimited use is fine, Thank-You!

The lack of cool phones/gadgets is extremely painful. While I enjoy the best coverage, my friends keep dangling their T68s in front of me... c'mon Verizon... let's get some bluetooth models rolling, PLEASE!

[Ed Hansberry]

I am a T-Mobile user right now and their coverage isn't what I'd like it to be. Give me a CDMA based bluetooth phone, and I can see making the switch. :)

[RobertCF]

Verizon is horrible. They could care less about their customers, and their infrastructure is indicative of their smooth-brained approach to technology. The bottom line is the bottom line to them. Unless you are in a large metropolis, they don't care if you have to use a string and two cups to communicate. No one will ever convince me that they are worth giving a second chance to. Any company that tells me I'm not important enough to bother with can lump it.

[cgavula]

I also have had nothing but problems with Verizon. Their support was terrible and their coverage isn't very good in a lot of major markets, including the one I live in. Also with the rest of the world on or moving toward GSM/GPRS I wouldn't invest any more money in a provider that wasn't heading that way like Verizon.

--Chris

[Janak Parekh]

Verizon is horrible. They could care less about their customers, and their infrastructure is indicative of their smooth-brained approach to technology.
Maybe in your area, but not in the Northeast. Here, Verizon is a successor to Bell Atlantic Mobile, which has the largest, best digital network.

FWIW, all cell phone companies appear "not to care". That's not how it works -- it's just difficult to cover the entire country. In any case, from a coverage standpoint Verizon and AT&T are by far the biggest cell providers in the US. They may have lousy coverage in your area.

Also with the rest of the world on or moving toward GSM/GPRS I wouldn't invest any more money in a provider that wasn't heading that way like Verizon.
The market isn't as simple as that. If you want to be really precise, the whole world is ultimately moving to CDMA (two variants: cdma2000 and WCDMA). Current trends indicate that Verizon/Sprint will hit true 3G via cdma2000 well before WCDMA is widely deployed, because the migration path is simpler.

--janak

[dh]

Verizon is horrible. They could care less about their customers, and their infrastructure is indicative of their smooth-brained approach to technology.
Maybe in your area, but not in the Northeast. Here, Verizon is a successor to Bell Atlantic Mobile, which has the largest, best digital network.

FWIW, all cell phone companies appear "not to care". That's not how it works -- it's just difficult to cover the entire country. In any case, from a coverage standpoint Verizon and AT&T are by far the biggest cell providers in the US. They may have lousy coverage in your area.

Also with the rest of the world on or moving toward GSM/GPRS I wouldn't invest any more money in a provider that wasn't heading that way like Verizon.
The market isn't as simple as that. If you want to be really precise, the whole world is ultimately moving to CDMA (two variants: cdma2000 and WCDMA). Current trends indicate that Verizon/Sprint will hit true 3G via cdma2000 well before WCDMA is widely deployed, because the migration path is simpler.

--janak

You might have seen an article a week or so ago in Fortune about the fact that Qualcomm find themselves in a win-win situation with the new 3G networks.

As Janak mentions the GSM companies are moving towards a flavor of CDMA, WCDMA which is covered by Qualcomm patents. They also have cdma2000 covered as well. As well as having patented the technology, Qualcomm are also the biggest maker of CDMA chipsets for phones and devices.

It's interesting that CDMA missed out on most of the world markets initially but is going to end up as the dominant technology.

I also agree with the comments that Verizon has the best coverage, certainly in the North East. They could certainly use some new phones though. The GSM people (T-Mobile, ATTWS) have the best range of BT phones for PDA use.

Must admit, the Sprint $10.00/month unlimited data deal is hard to beat!

[Janak Parekh]

As Janak mentions the GSM companies are moving towards a flavor of CDMA, WCDMA which is covered by Qualcomm patents.
It's worth pointing out, though, that the royalties for WCDMA will be much less than cdma2000, which is a completely Qualcomm-based solution. On the other hand, Qualcomm has already developed dual-mode cdma2000/WCDMA chipsets which might enable a true world phone.

They could certainly use some new phones though. The GSM people (T-Mobile, ATTWS) have the best range of BT phones for PDA use.
Indeed, and that's why I gave up Verizon and am currently with T-Mobile. I miss the coverage though.

--janak

[Bob Anderson]

Verizon is horrible. They could care less about their customers, and their infrastructure is indicative of their smooth-brained approach to technology. ...
Any company that tells me I'm not important enough to bother with can lump it.

Well, as for their customer service, yeah, you are right... they don't seem to care and their billing has had major problems (from my vantage point, anyway)... They haven't come right out and said they don't care about my business, but that type of comment coming from them doesn't surprise me either.

Unfortunately, their coverage in the Pac NW is unmatched, in my opinion, and I really don't have any choice... now if the FCC would get off their duffs and force the "Number Portability" rules, well, then I'd have the lever I'm looking for to speak to them with my wallet (without disrupting my life in the process!) Not amazingly the cellular companies know this and they keep asking for extensions for exactly that reason!

[bdegroodt]

Verizon is horrible. They could care less about their customers, and their infrastructure is indicative of their smooth-brained approach to technology. The bottom line is the bottom line to them. Unless you are in a large metropolis, they don't care if you have to use a string and two cups to communicate. No one will ever convince me that they are worth giving a second chance to. Any company that tells me I'm not important enough to bother with can lump it.

I don't doubt you may have had problems with Verizon. I'd say any company with 52.3 million customers is bound to have a fleet of disgruntled cusomters. I will say though, from experience, on Sept 13th 2001, I had to drive back from Baltimore to California. I had a GSM phone and my roadmate had a tri-mode Verizon phone. He got to make calls...I got to play with the radio for most of the trip. In major metro, yes I had signal. Outside of that, he got the signal far more than I.

I also have a couple of associates that use the Verizon network here in NYC and I swear they sound as good as a land line most times.

[Janak Parekh]

I'd say any company with 52.3 million customers is bound to have a fleet of disgruntled cusomters.
To be more precise, pick any wireless company and I'll find you as many complaints as you want. Not to diminish the complains, which I'd agree are legitimate -- it's just that there's no "right" choice in this department.

--janak