backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by TO.. on Nov 6 at 10:48 AM

AT&T has had enough of Verizon's commercials.

Early last month, Verizon began assaulting AT&T with new commercials which were an interesting twist on the AT&T-backed iPhone "There's a app for that" commercials. Verizon turned the ads around to point out all of the holes in AT&T's 3G coverage and numerous dropped calls that have been reported with the service.

The Verizon commercials came right on the heels of reports that a 30 percent dropped call rate in New York City for the iPhone was considered "normal".

It was only a matter of time, but it appears that AT&T has had enough of Verizon's commercials which mock its 3G coverage in the United States. According to the Wall Street Journal, AT&T is going after Verizon with a lawsuit.

AT&T noted the following according to Engadget:

In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn't offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T's wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive.

According to the WSJ, AT&T had complained to Verizon about the appearance of a lack of coverage in large parts of the U.S. in the ads, but the changes Verizon made to its spots weren't enough for AT&T, hence the lawsuit.

For its part in the matter, Verizon spokesman Jim Gerace responded, “Our ads clearly explain that non-3G coverage is available elsewhere. I think it's interesting that AT&T's chose to focus on the white areas and not the blues area of their map. We think it calls into question their own fastest 3G claim as the map clearly shows where 3G doesn't exist."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By agentcooper on 11/3/2009 10:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
I live in the Bay Area, Oakland exactly. I work in Berkeley. AT&T absolutely blows here. When I type in my address on the AT&T coverage locator it says I'm in the 3G and strong reception area. Ha! I'm lucky if I can get a signal at home. Work is spotty - one room great, the next room no service.

I'll be switching back to Verizon as soon as I'm able to.


RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By mikeyD95125 on 11/4/2009 12:44:43 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah I live in San Jose. Somehow AT&T manages to mess this part of the Bay Area up to. My friends get dropped calls frequently. I live half a mile from a tower in a completely suburban area and my whole block is somehow a dead zone. I'm not sure how they cannot provide coverage to a fairly dense, flat, suburban city. It seems like the ideal place to setup a network. At least Verizon has figured it out.


By Alexstarfire on 11/4/2009 3:21:54 AM , Rating: 2
I can't say much about San Jose today, but I didn't have a problem with AT&T/Cingular when I was there in '04.


"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki