Metro's network coverage isn't the issue -- most people don't travel enough to care about roaming charges when they're off of Metro's network, and for me personally most of my travel is to other Metro cities (so no roaming charges even when I do travel). The supposed advantages aren't really advantages when you actually stop and think about it. The only people who are willing to pay for $99/mo or more for unlimited service are either doing a LOT of travel to rural areas, minor cities, or the few major cities Metro doesn't support ... or they've got their head buried in the status-symbol sand and aren't looking for actual deals.
Further, as Metro expands (and they are), Helio and Sprint will have to compete with Metro's prices, whether they like it or not. If Sprint, for example, wants to stop hemorrhaging customers, they have to make sure that their urban customers aren't seeing Metro as a more attractive service (because it unquestionably is).
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
john @ Feb 4th 2008 1:03PM
No, I'm not kidding.
Metro's network coverage isn't the issue -- most people don't travel enough to care about roaming charges when they're off of Metro's network, and for me personally most of my travel is to other Metro cities (so no roaming charges even when I do travel). The supposed advantages aren't really advantages when you actually stop and think about it. The only people who are willing to pay for $99/mo or more for unlimited service are either doing a LOT of travel to rural areas, minor cities, or the few major cities Metro doesn't support ... or they've got their head buried in the status-symbol sand and aren't looking for actual deals.
Further, as Metro expands (and they are), Helio and Sprint will have to compete with Metro's prices, whether they like it or not. If Sprint, for example, wants to stop hemorrhaging customers, they have to make sure that their urban customers aren't seeing Metro as a more attractive service (because it unquestionably is).