Why Is Sprint So Much Cheaper?

[olds]

And do they suck?
Also, is there an independent body that shows coverage maps for the different carriers?

 

[Narmer]

They don't suck at all. But their prices are low because they used to suck and their attrition rate was very high. Now, Sprint customers get the best of both worlds, at least I do. Great service at great prices.

 

[MJinZ]

Sprint is better than Verizon.

But their phones still suck.

 

[Soccerman06]

Sprint is better than Verizon.

But their phones still suck.

Evo > all

 

[shortylickens]

Sprint is better than Verizon.

But their phones still suck.

How?
Customer service?
I've been fucked over multiple times with Sprint but never Verizon.
Coverage?
They are both CDMA so in theory I should be able to hop on eithers network with a CDMA phone. It doesnt always work like that in real life though. And actual Sprint coverage is much worse than Verizons.
Costs?
I wont argue that, but based on the times I've been fucked over and the above mentioned coverage issue, I think its better to pay slightly more and get good customer service and reliable data speeds and so forth.

And Narmer was correct. They are much better than they have been in the past but they still need very competitive prices to stay in business.

 

[Fingolfin269]

OP that question is one that haunts me every time I consider changing to another carrier. I'd end up paying ~$50 more per month to get a plan similar to my Sprint plan on either ATT or Verizon. With Sprint now having the EVO as well as arguably the best of the Galaxy S phones I just don't see a point in switching.

Hell, if those phones didn't exist I'm not rich enough to rationalize paying an extra $600/year due to switching.

 

[Fingolfin269]

How?
Customer service?
I've been fucked over multiple times with Sprint but never Verizon.
Coverage?
They are both CDMA so in theory I should be able to hop on eithers network with a CDMA phone. It doesnt always work like that in real life though. And actual Sprint coverage is much worse than Verizons.
Costs?
I wont argue that, but based on the times I've been fucked over and the above mentioned coverage issue, I think its better to pay slightly more and get good customer service and reliable data speeds and so forth.

And Narmer was correct. They are much better than they have been in the past but they still need very competitive prices to stay in business.

I was fucked over by Verizon before moving to Sprint. Funny world we live in. By the way, I did hear/read that Sprint's CS used to be awful but is apparently much much better. I've never had to deal with them in my 5 years of being a customer so I can't really offer an opinion on the current state of Sprint CS though.

 

[MJinZ]

Evo > all

LOL. HTC phones <<<<<<<<<<< ALL

 

[shortylickens]

OP that question is one that haunts me every time I consider changing to another carrier. I'd end up paying ~$50 more per month to get a plan similar to my Sprint plan on either ATT or Verizon. With Sprint now having the EVO as well as arguably the best of the Galaxy S phones I just don't see a point in switching.

Hell, if those phones didn't exist I'm not rich enough to rationalize paying an extra $600/year due to switching.

Smart thing to do is try a new phone a month in advance of losing your old one. Make use of that 2-4 week grace period. Spend some time playing with it. Dont be committed if you dont have to be. I've done that about 6 times in the past two years and have been grateful for it. Learned a few things like even though T-mobile is nice to deal with, their spotty coverage (especially 3G) is bad enough that I cant appreciate their reasonable prices and quality customer service. I learned AT&T has darn nice phones, but is otherwise a pain to deal with.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Well it only took less than 10 posts for us to go from talking about Sprint to talking about HTC. You should be proud Olds.

 

[MJinZ]

How?
Customer service?
I've been fucked over multiple times with Sprint but never Verizon.
Coverage?
They are both CDMA so in theory I should be able to hop on eithers network with a CDMA phone. It doesnt always work like that in real life though. And actual Sprint coverage is much worse than Verizons.
Costs?
I wont argue that, but based on the times I've been fucked over and the above mentioned coverage issue, I think its better to pay slightly more and get good customer service and reliable data speeds and so forth.

And Narmer was correct. They are much better than they have been in the past but they still need very competitive prices to stay in business.

I don't know, you must be an old person to have experienced poor Sprint CS. I started during the SERO era, and they were fine (dedicated SERO line of support, no machines or menus)

I have not seen my Verizon phone roam on Sprint. Same location in my office would have full 3G on my Sprint Blackberry and 1X on my Droid.

Sprint roams on Verizon when needed, even for data (1XRTT) in a pinch.

 

[Fingolfin269]

You must be an old person? Like older than 23 years old?

 

[MJinZ]

You must be an old person? Like older than 23 years old?

Exaaaactly. ^_^

 

[Chapbass]

Honestly, I'll probably never move to sprint. As someone who supports businesses with their smartphones, I make on average 10-15 calls to carriers a day (if you include locals). Sprints service has been by FAR the worst, in fact all 3 of the longest calls I've made have been to Sprint. I'm sure theyre fine for very basic issues, but whenever I've had any need to call them, I've been cold transferred many times, including one call in which I was transferred 11 times. Thats right, 11, and I'm not exaggerating. I can't remember anymore what it was about, but I know it WASN'T something super extravagant.

Yes, I know that its just "my one experience", but as someone who deals with carriers quite a bit, I honestly hate calling them. VZW has been the best, then TMobile (but TBH I don't call them as much), then AT&T, then Sprint (if we're only talking about the major players).

my .02.

 

[olds]

Well it only took less than 10 posts for us to go from talking about Sprint to talking about HTC. You should be proud Olds.

I actually want an HTC phone. We currently have Verizon. But we don't have data plans at this time. That's going to make our phone bill jump so I am curious about Sprint and the EVO...

 

[Fingolfin269]

By the way, here is a coverage map site I found. Not sure if it is what you're looking for though.

http://www.deadcellzones.com/coveragemaps.html

 

[boomhower]

I have Sprint and am very satisfied with them. Is Verizon better? Yes, I think so. Are they 40&#37; better?(The difference in my base bill outside of any discounts) No, I don't think so. Sprints phones aren't that bad anymore. Bold, EVO, soon-to-be Epic is a pretty good line-up.

 

[randomlinh]

perception. and the fact sprint doesn't have as good of coverage as verizon or att really.

but I live in an area where it works well, and it'll hop on verizon when I am struggling (for when I'm not in the area). tho, depends on the phone on how well roaming works.

I'm happy to save the extra $60-80/mo on my family plan given the data costs

 

[corkyg]

The basic reason for Sprint being cheaper (currently) is that they are actively trying to gain market share.

I have been on Sprint for over 10 years - no complaints at all. I get good coverage everywhere I go - California, Oregon, NY, VA, and points in between.

My main use is their aircard (currently Sierra 777). I have tried AT&T, and they really suck. Verizon probably has better coverage - but Sprint's Connection Manager is outstanding.

 

[Jadow]

have had sprint for years, no problems

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Ive been on Tmobile for as long as I can remember and the best thing they have is CS. Hands down. Their service is ok but never had to use their 3G.

ATT has horrible CS everytime Ive had to deal with them. They are just pricks and assholes on the phone.

Im thinking of switching to sprint right now because I can get an Evo and a plan for only $60 bucks a month with my dad's employee discount. I was considering Verizon as well but I'd have to pay 30 bucks more..

 

[shortylickens]

I don't know, you must be an old person to have experienced poor Sprint CS. I started during the SERO era, and they were fine (dedicated SERO line of support, no machines or menus)

I have not seen my Verizon phone roam on Sprint. Same location in my office would have full 3G on my Sprint Blackberry and 1X on my Droid.

Sprint roams on Verizon when needed, even for data (1XRTT) in a pinch.

I was 29 and 30 the times I tried to deal with them. And that was last year and this year.
The most recent time I didnt like the phone and turned it in and cancelled service. They refused to acknowledge it and I ended up having to pay a termination fee and 3 months service, which I did not use

 

[MrX8503]

IMO, I think Sprint has the best combination of network coverage and cost.

Verizon has the best network, but they're also the most expensive. If you like the EVO, there's nothing better than an HTC smartphone combined with the Sprint Network.

In other words, Sprint does not suck, I would say its one of the top network providers.

 

[Fox5]

Sprint and tmobile are cheaper because they have the smallest subscriber base, and the smallest networks. Also, att and verizon have the prime frequency real estate, and use the 850mhz band, while tmobile and sprint use much higher frequencies. This means att/verizon have better coverage with fewer towers, and the best building penetration. The downside is there are issues with att or verizon oversaturating an area with towers, making it harder for the other to get permits to build, while tmo and sprint dont have to worry. Tmo and sprint also have the fastest networks atm.

Att recently switched its 2g network entirely over to its 1900(? something around that) in order to free up space for 3g phones on the 850mhz band. This means people with older phones/weak 3g/tmo roaming on att have weaker signal now.

Not sure about sprint, but tmo is most focused on the east coast, so thats where they provide the best coverage. Both tmo and sprint target almost exclusively major metropolitan areas.

I personally use tmo prepaid, but I live in a heavily populated east coast area and don't make many calls. Service is pretty good, and I use skype plus wifi when indoors anyway. I almost always have 3 or 3.5g outside or at home, barely get signal in big buildings, and frequently drop to 2g on highways located away from population areas.

 

[tatteredpotato]

If you have extra cash, go for VZW... the network is better. If you're on a budget so Sprint. Sprint still has good coverage, but VZW has better rural area coverage.