Verizon CEO thinks it's unreasonable to expect your cellphone to work at home

Could someone at Verizon keep CEO Ivan Seidenberg away from the press? We'll let that fact that he ridiculed municipal WiFi slide, since he's just protecting his turf (even if he did call it "one of the dumbest ideas" he's ever heard), but whining about Verizon Wireless customers who complain about the quality of their cellphone service is pretty weak. In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle he asks, "Why in the world would you think your (cell) phone would work in your house? The customer has come to expect so much." We can understand his frustration, since perfect coverage is impossible, and it's no fun dealing with people who expect to get four bars in their basement, but, um, maybe, just maybe it's because over the past year we've been exposed to an endless barrage of "Can you hear me now?" ads touting Verizon's superior coverage? Saying that it's not Verizon's responsibility to release detailed coverage maps stats about how well your service works inside homes isn't exactly helping your case, either.

[Drew @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Posted Apr 17, 2005, 4:22 PM ET by Troy

Yes, I do expect it to work in my home, but I guess I'm spoiled to my Sprint phone, which has 4 bars on it, as I type this at my desk at "HOME".

It works so well, that I turned off the land line last month...

_____________________________________

I am glad your Sprint phone works since 95% of its network is piggybacked off of Verizon... hmm, ironic isn't it?

[Drew @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

42. Posted Apr 18, 2005, 2:18 AM ET by Sfumato

Private industry is the vastly superior way to provide national infrastructure? That's such a naive corporate popularized myth. Phones are a great example - the government put land lines everywhere and they work reliably everywhere to this day.
_______________________________________________

So is that why Mink,LA just got landline phones in their town two months ago?

[Thought @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

sfumato: since when did the govt lay the landlline phone lines? I thought that was AT and T...the Bell companies...

Nice historical revisionism, though...

As for govt, consider how inefficiently and poorly they do just about everything: the education system, Medicare, Social Security, etc... Why in the world would we want govt to handle WiFi?

As for the cell phone companies, they haven't done so bad, considering how far they've come in less than about 20 years...

Even in the example you cite...building roads...the govt handles that poorly. Every building project they run inevitably comes in over budget and late on the schedule...contrast that with the way that private industries get things built.

Govt. represents the greater aggregation of power with the lesser accountability...that spells trouble for consumers.

[Connie @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

What Seidenberg failed to mention is that subscribers - both individual and business - have options to enable wireless coverage where their cell phones and wireless devices are used most � indoors. No matter how good the outdoor macro network coverage is, indoor coverage is always going to be an issue due to building materials and location - it's just not RF friendly. This issue will become more prevelant especially as more Americans "cut the cord" and go completely wireless. If wireless carriers are counting on this cutting the cord trend to continue, coverage at home will have to be addressed. More than price or functionality, coverage is subscribers want � and they aren�t always getting it.

Despite Seidenberg's comments, carriers like Verizon Wireless ARE working with vendors that specialize in indoor coverage to ensure their customers to have coverage where they use their wireless devices the most � at home and at work. Carriers can�t afford to provide coverage in every home across America, but consumers and enterprises are now realizing there are carrier-approved solutions available that they can purchase to improve their indoor wireless coverage problems and maximize their wireless service plan.

[Jeremy Fleming @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

In the "Can you hear me now" ads he is never inside he is always outside. However, my phone no matter where I'm at drops, and so do all my friends who just bought new phones. I also upgraded the software, drop. I never had this problem when they were Airtouch. I call this AOL syndrome. They are simply to big. They can't handle the work load. Sprint has vastly improved, thus more customers, hence purchasing Nextel...Verizon if you can hear me now, stop working for me, Now THAT would be better.

[Telc Oanalyst @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Verizon wireless typifies the worst monopolistic-like attitude of all the wireless service providers, they were started and currently are run by those used to having a monopoly in the local fixed line market - like Seidenberg. They are good at dealing with politicians and pr - but not innovation. In fact innovative monopoly would be an oxymoron.

The cell phone market however is NOT a monopoly. In fact other service providers view wifi differently and actually plan to roll out WIFI phones for the home because it does not make economic sense for them to build coverage in those areas. Verizon has many fixed lines, so of course their Verizon Wireless subsidiary is not going to innovate so that the # of fixed line subs falls. For the wireless service providers that arent part of a local fixed line monopoly (not Cingular/T, Verizon) the fixed line is actually the target.

Lack of innovation is what strangles all industries and men like Seidenberg will never create any breakthrough technologies, or shareholder value. They will only nickel and dime their customes and protect their existing turf as much as possible. These companies should be penalized by the FCC for their tactics, but unfortunately they control the FCC to a large degree.
Q - Who wrote the Telecom Act of 1996?
A - Seidenberg

[hwapper @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

I despise Verizon. I don't care what the servey says, their customer service is attrocious.

[VASpider @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

You are a moron with Ivan. Europe's landmass is so much smaller than the US. So it's easier for them to get their customers better coverage maps.
----

Is that why T-Mobile, a European-owned company, seems to have mastered the idea of providing detailed coverage maps on their website?

When I worked for Cingular, we had one of those tools; we were able to use it for customers but customers did not have direct access to it and we were forbidden to use it. It worked exactly -- exactly -- as Rich described it and was, in fact, the /same exact tool used by our field engineering department/.

You may not be a moron, but you're extremely ill-informed if you think that tools like these don't /already exist./ They do, and they're out there, and one American company has already made that tool freely available to its customers. It's just that a lot of companies are blustering because they don't want customers to see what their "big happy floofy blanket of coverage" /really/ looks like.

[VASpider @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

We were forbidden to allow customers to use it. Overediting is not my friend.

[Jennifer @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

This statement is being quoted out of context. I might suggest requesting the entire interview from the Chronicle. Mr. Seidenberg was speaking rhetorically about the initial purpose of cellular service. It was originally designed to provide "mobile" use. So he rhetorically asked why anyone would expect it to work in their homes. He went on to elaborate that because of this shift in customer expectation, we have spent much time/money on building up our network and coverage in order to provide a better product. Don't believe everything you read.

[troy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

My wife switched to my cell carrier because her phone didn't work in our new house.

[Robbie @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Ha, I have Cingular 4 bars in my basement sometimes 5!

[Peter La Puma @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

I was in florida for 3 mons during the hurricanes - 2004. Verizon cell phone coverage is problematic in many areas of the state, lots of dropped calls and roaming. Why would I expect cell phone service in my home? 1) I work at home, 2) I don't have a land line, 3)I make most of my calls from home. 4) Cell service is expensive it should work anywhere.
Mr. Seidenberg's comment's illustrates how cell companies really think about their customers, " were always working for you" and "can you here me now". Oh yeah, I love this one as an employee, " our employees are our greatest asset". Type I hate verizon in google or other SE and see the how much Verizon is disliked.

[swan @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

2hwapper - i agree with u

[Andy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Verizon wireless customer service sucks big time!!!
They lied flat on my face. They activated my new phone on the 7th (day of shipping), I got it on 11th and activated it on the 16th. They are charging me from the 8th to the 21nd (their billing cycle....! Why can't I get billed for monthly charges from the day i activated? On top of that they lied saying my minutes used between 8/8 and 8/21 were reset....which they didn't...So now I am pushed to use 450 minutes from 8/8-9/21? DO you think that's fair...?

[JON C @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Verizon they never stop scamming you
29 September, 2005

Verizon Wireless Services provides people with customer service that is below "Consumer Friendly" - they provide horrible service and lie to its customers

Can you hear me now? We wish Verizon Wireless did but unfortunately that?s not the case. At Verizon Wireless, they strive to destroy people?s lives and peoples credit reporting scores, that?s why looking for a cellular provider may be beneficial if you want to have a provider you can count on.. Hundreds of people a day report that Verizon Wireless has messed up on their bills, have charged them for services not received and have been charge disconnect fees when they were advised by the customer service associates this would not occur. Many people also have reported that their credit ratings have gone down simply because Verizon has reported they charged off their accounts When infact that never really occurred.

In a recent conversation Elizabeth Sturgis, Executive relations for VERIZON WIRELESS clearly stated that once an account has bee ?charged off" and is placed on your credit report you will have to wait 7 years for it to be removed... "Even if you pay off a charged off account, we legally can not remove it from your credit report" she stated via phone and in a letter. Other executives at Verizon Wireless like Mr. Scharnikow is not consumer friendly and insisted that if you owe a debt regardless of how much it is (Even if its $1.00) it will be placed on someone?s credit bureau report and wont be removed.

We have finally found a website doing something about peoples problems with Verizon Wireless. VerizonWirelessEatspoop.com (AKA: VerizonSuxs.com) has a complaint section on his website where people can report his/her problems. He also has a store front and posts his own problems he has encountered.

For more information on this website please visit one of the following links:

http://www.VerizonSuxs.com
or
http://www.VerizonWirelessEatspoop.com


#### article could be found at #####
http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200509/1127937157.html

[Tania Brown @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Verizon - why would they care if their customers' cellphones work? They have absolutely no reluctance to set collection agencies onto their customers because they bill them in error for nights, weekends and in-network calls. Then over a year later, when credits are finally issued, they issue to the wrong account, but not before demanding that the customer pay $250+ in advance to clear that overdue balance, billed in error, and they won't call off the collection agencies until you do. Verizon, customers are you best asset, and you should treat them as such. Yellow post-its stuck to letters of complaint and returned to the customer is hardly a professional way to deal with your customers.

[Kathy Mack @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

Verizon takes the cake. I have been asking for an upgrade from 1.5Mbps/384Kbps to 3Mbps/768Kbps for the last year. Verizon keeps giving me the same dumb answer shich is talk to technical support and technical support keeps sending me back to billing. Qwest has now increased their DSL speed to 5Mbps/895Kbps. Whe is Verizon going to wake up? Now I know why. They have an idiot for a CEO.

[David @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

As a Verizon customer, I'm pissed at this. Verizon has great coverage, and boasts it too. My cellphone works in my house and that's a good thing, cuz if it didn't, I'd switch. The lack of care in this statement makes me want to switch. In the end, I guess the network speaks for itself though... I'd rather have a bad CEO and a good network rather than the other way around.

[LCQ @ Dec 19th 2005 12:13AM]

dumbass

[Amy @ Dec 25th 2005 12:11PM]

Hahaha... Let me point out why their commercials might be sending out the wrong message... or rather, the right one:

When do you usually say 'can you hear me now?'

When you can't get reception.....

And we don't hear what the person on the other end says to the Verizon guy, so how do we know he's not going all over the world to try and get one lousy bar so his friend can hear him? The 'good' could be sarcastic.

Anyway, that's just my crazy theory of the day...

[Cindy @ Jan 4th 2006 10:01AM]

My mother in NJ (almost 80 years old) has Verizon landline service. She's had no phone over the holidays - 10 days now - no dial tone at the outside junction box. Verizon has missed 3 appts to fix the problem - I've called for supervisors, called Ivan Seidenberg's office (you get his assistant/secretary Judy's voicemail) - but no returned calls and no humans. Really shocking. Have filed complaints with FCC and Public Utilities Commission.