Really getting frustrated with USCC

**kleake** · 06-06-2012, 06:10 PM

Been with them for over 15 years. Just upgraded phones, but noticed the next elgible date was 21 months and some days away. When I called, they said they just changed it from 18 month upgrades to 22 months. The belief points bump that up,,,, but why give us belief points, then take away 4 months worth of them. The belief plans would have made my bill go up the first time around so I didn't change. the second time around they actually saved me about $3 per month, but I lost 3Gig worth of data on my 2 lines. They have also changed the 30 test drive of a new device down to 15 days. I am having GPS issues, noticed the S3 coming soon, but they won't extend my 30 days any longer, even if there is issues with the phone. Does 15 years with them not mean anything anymore? I realize they are falling in line with other carriers with pricing and such, but then, why would we stay with them? I used to brag about being with them and how good everything was,,, I am losing the ability to do that and becoming more frustrated when being a long time customer doesn't matter to them any more.

**JKooL18** · 06-07-2012, 10:32 AM

USCC is looking at companies like Verizon and AT&T and wondering "how can we be more like them?" However, they're forgetting that while Verizon and AT&T are more expensive, they also offer the newest phones at better prices, national coverage with faster 3g speeds, an an LTE network that covers more than random farm towns in flyover states, and the iPhone.

I'm chomping at the bit to get out of USCC and on to a true 4G network somewhere. I couldn't imagine why anyone would switch to or stay with USCC unless they can't get coverage with anyone else, or they only use dumbphones.

**fraydog** · 06-07-2012, 10:42 AM

I mentioned this on another thread, but I would think a LTE partnership with AT&T and USCC would be advisable at this point for both companies.

**JKooL18** · 06-07-2012, 03:09 PM

That's a great idea, I have no idea how it would work in the "real world" or the logistics behind it. But why don't companies band together to create some interoperability?

**msird** · 06-07-2012, 06:49 PM

USC cant get new customers so they have to figure out ways to gouge there existing ones.

**freibrauer** · 06-07-2012, 11:01 PM

ATT is being sued by C-Spire because ATT created Band Class 17? C-Spire and USCC ran tests on ATT's spectrum and supposedly the tests provide ATT's reasoning for needing their own proprietary Band Class based on interference issues was false. Something tells me if ATT is trying to keep other providers off their LTE chips and make it harder for other providers to get LTE chips by making manufactures make multiple chips for the same Bands that ATT wont agree to an LTE roaming agreement that is in any way feasible for USCC.

Originally Posted by fraydog

I mentioned this on another thread, but I would think a LTE partnership with AT&T and USCC would be advisable at this point for both companies.

**freibrauer** · 06-07-2012, 11:03 PM

Technically not true. Their new activations were up 7% last quarter, they can get new customers, they just lost more than they gained.

Originally Posted by msird

USC cant get new customers so they have to figure out ways to gouge there existing ones.

**fraydog** · 06-07-2012, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by freibrauer

ATT is being sued by C-Spire because ATT created Band Class 17? C-Spire and USCC ran tests on ATT's spectrum and supposedly the tests provide ATT's reasoning for needing their own proprietary Band Class based on interference issues was false. Something tells me if ATT is trying to keep other providers off their LTE chips and make it harder for other providers to get LTE chips by making manufactures make multiple chips for the same Bands that ATT wont agree to an LTE roaming agreement that is in any way feasible for USCC.

USCC isn't big enough of a fish to hurt AT&T if they tried. I don't see what AT&T is afraid of. They need something on the rural side to share. They don't have the continuous 700 Verizon does. It would be a big help for AT&T in some weak AT&T areas.

**freibrauer** · 06-07-2012, 11:13 PM

I don't think ATT is worried about USCC itself. The move hurts all regional providers though that have their own spectrum. It hurts C-Spire, US Cellular, NTelos, Cox Communications. Anyone that owns lower 700 is hurt by this. It doesn't hurt ATT per say, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't do it to give them an advantage over carriers that normally benefit from ATT's poor rural coverage. Maybe ATT really thought there were interference issues but USCC isn't even the company sueing ATT over this, it's the even smaller C-Spire. ATT's spectrum should work on USCC and other regional providers chips, but it wont because ATT created a custom Band Class. Either ATT's tests were totally different from the recent tests run by the rual providers, or ATT is trying to pinch the smaller carriers out.

I would love to see the deal made but based on the fact that ATT has built it's own proprietary Band Class that seems highly unlikely. I can't see ATT offering remotely acceptable terms if they are creating their own classes.

Originally Posted by fraydog

USCC isn't big enough of a fish to hurt AT&T if they tried. I don't see what AT&T is afraid of. They need something on the rural side to share. They don't have the continuous 700 Verizon does. It would be a big help for AT&T in some weak AT&T areas.

**msird** · 06-08-2012, 06:31 AM

Taking away the "faster upgrade" benefit will not help the loss and most likely hurt the gain.

Originally Posted by freibrauer

Technically not true. Their new activations were up 7% last quarter, they can get new customers, they just lost more than they gained.

**ilvla2** · 06-08-2012, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by freibrauer

ATT's poor rural coverage

AT&T (formerly AT&T Affiliate Edge Wireless in our market) has good coverage here, and we're about as rural as the come. Actually, they have good coverage in a lot of rural areas, it's carriers like T-Mobile and Sprint that often ignore rural markets.

**TGIMerv** · 06-10-2012, 08:16 PM

I too WAS frustrated. No phones, nothing to run on their LTE network, other than a year old 1ghz Charge.
I switched to Verizon 2 weeks ago. Love it, well only time will tell, but it's OK. Razr Maxx is a screamer, both on the 4G LTE network and the phone it's self. SOLID! Price is comparable, maybe not quite the perks, but............... What's it all about, the phones and the service. Rest of my family is still at USCC, they have great SGS2 phones, just not the 4G. The real deal breaker for me was, we had 3 SGS2's, not a one of them the GPS worked on. BTW the GPS doesn't work on theirs either, they don't care, I did.

**freibrauer** · 06-10-2012, 11:23 PM

True but that wasn't entirely USCC's fault. As far as the GPS... it was a problem on my Sprint friends as well. Do you know if it works well on the Nexus?

Originally Posted by TGIMerv

I too WAS frustrated. No phones, nothing to run on their LTE network, other than a year old 1ghz Charge.
I switched to Verizon 2 weeks ago. Love it, well only time will tell, but it's OK. Razr Maxx is a screamer, both on the 4G LTE network and the phone it's self. SOLID! Price is comparable, maybe not quite the perks, but............... What's it all about, the phones and the service. Rest of my family is still at USCC, they have great SGS2 phones, just not the 4G. The real deal breaker for me was, we had 3 SGS2's, not a one of them the GPS worked on. BTW the GPS doesn't work on theirs either, they don't care, I did.