AT&T Doesn't Work In Area It Advertises
AT&T has a new campaign advertises how it "works in more places like," and then lists a fictional place that's a mashup of three cities. The ads are appearing in the tunnels and trains of Washington DC Metro, a real place, where AT&T really doesn't work. Only Verizon works down there. Commenter XianZomby writes, "I think before ATT works on getting their wireless network in places that don't exist, they should focus on getting their cell phones to work in places where they advertise cell phone service."
(Photo: Robert Dubois)
This is a test using rich text formatting and html links. It's the generic "company" ad that should appear on all posts with the Company category if they don't have an ad attached to a specific company.
Post a comment
Comments:
*irrelevant
They little phrase means nothing. That's why AT&T uses it. Same thing in Canada, her Rogers (AT&T here) says that it's has the best network in Canada, which is bull. GSM in North America has less coverage and antennas then CDMA. But once again, it's a meaningless phrase. So other companies cannot sue them.
You should talk about the "CHI" part in the ad's city mashup. A Fisher Price walkie-talkie has better coverage in Chicago than AT&T.
What a ridiculous post.
I saw an ad for a movie in the subway today. Does that mean that they are going to show it there? Of course not.
Well here on long island att works in places that verizon doesnt. So i wouldnt bash just att.
Is there a reason why Verizon is the only provider that works in the Metro? Why can't T-Mobile or AT&T or Cingular?
(Of course, the question is really, "Why can't any cell phone company work -- period. But for this moment, let's just stick with the Metro question. Because seriously: bugs.)
@Maude Buttons: I think they got an exclusive contract with the DC metro to provide cell service in exchange for building an emergency radio system for the subway while they were building their cell system. They also pay Metro a percent of their profits from cell phone usage.
Verizon paidbribed metro to let them have exclusive coverage in the tunnels. AT&T works whenever the metro is aboveground and in some underground(but not deep) stations. TMobile works only aboveground, and Sprint shows "roaming" but there is no service. Verizon advertises in such a way that it looks like all of their services work in the tunnel, but only voice works, and not well.
How much longer until the Verizon exclusivity contract is up in the DC metro?
Just the smug ads are enough for me.
I've had friends get sprint calls down there, but not as reliably as verizon which isn't exactly super either. Nice people only use texts anyhoo and those will send when you hit an above ground area.
Funny. Verizon does the same thing... sort-of. I see FiOS advertisements on TV and along the streets and yet know damn good and well I can't get it.
I think Congress was recently looking at the Verizon exclusivity contract but of course opted not to do anything about it for now (that, seriously, is just off the top of my head).
You are correct: voice works, data does not. Blackberry addicts (like myself) are SOL.
Do cell phones work in NYC subways?
@ErnieMcCracken: Not yet, praise Jeebus! They're considering a proposal to install whatever to make the subways cell-accessible, but I sincerely hope it never happens. Commuting is stressful enough without 2/3 of the people yammering loudly into phones.
I was wondering about t.v. ads that I kept seeing for Sonic (fast food pretending to be old fashioned drive in) every other day for months. Not that I eat fast food, but I was perplexed by the ads running in an area where they had no locations. I even went on the sonic web site to find the closest location which was 500+ miles away. As an aside, yes I am a bit too curious for my own good. Anywho, I totally came across a random sonic about 10 minutes away from my house. Its seems a shame that sonic paid all kinds of money for ads and never mentioned their new location (I assume that was the reason for all the t.v. spots) on any of those ads, it seems a waste of ad money
So far everyone I know with an iphone and at&t says the service is awful.
Am I the only one that thought this campaign was so awful it MUST be a parody by a competitor?
I mean, AT&T/Cingular already is known for having such lousy coverage that their recent "best coverage" campaign was thoroughly mocked and debunked.
And now, they've responded by... telling us how much great coverage they have in areas with made-up names?
It's just begging for a response campaign. BEGGING.
Man, if I were Verizon Wireless or T-Mobile, you know what I'd do? I'd buy two billboards in a row. In the first billboard, I'd put up the actual AT&T ad, untouched. "AT&T works in more places like Chilondoscow."
In the second: "T-Mobile, on the other hand, works in more places like Chicago, London, and Moscow."
@Beerad: Ever ride on a line that goes above ground in the outer boroughs? Boy, that's fun. 50 people yelling variations of "Hey, I'm on the train. The train just came out of the tunnel. I'll be home in 5 minutes. Loveyoubye!" is quite something.
Also, signals come in decently in some areas that are just below street level (i.e. 6 at Bleecker St).
AT&T gives me UMTS and HSDPA, T-Mobile wont. NUFF SAID.
This ad campaign is so annoying and self-serving. First time you see it, it's a 4 out of 10 on creativity. After that, you get the idea and am I the only one who isn't going to spend any brain power trying to figure out words in an ad? Hopefully is on its death-bed, along with Comcast's version of it for their Triple-Play offer.
Actually, Sprint works quite well in the DC Metro as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't more about how the ad industry sells markets than where mobile phone companies work.
Bah. Here in China cellphones WILL work on the subway. I'd be pissed if it didn't (I read RSS feeds when I'm bored). Sucks for America.
Supposedly wrapped up in all the other brew-ha-ha currently before the D.C. metro (fare hikes, purple line, etc.), they were trying to get/pondering allowing other cellular providers to install antennas in the tunnels.
To summarize: kind of a dumb post, but yes oddly ironic, and likely to be totally not-ironic eventually.
Can they get it to work in Sanf#c
Seriously, dropped calls and half coversations?
Ever since Cingular went away reception has been horrible.
KP
PS Sorry for the french bit above.
My comment seems lost in the submit process but the jist was San effing Diego.
Nah, the best one is an AT&T store in Tampa where they truly DO NOT have service. Instead, the store has a small repeater on the roof which makes sure all of the phones show 5 bars inside the store. Go outside about 50 feet away from the store and you've got no service.
DisneyMobile has announced that they are shutting down US services 12/31/2007. When we went to Disney World (Florida)this past summer, the DisneyMobile service did not work in parts of the park. I was told by DisneyMobile that it was because 'Disney does not want towers in their parks, so coverage was not complete'. No wonder they are shutting down.
@FLConsumer: Sounds like the AT&T kiosk rep at my local mall who seemed to ignore me when I told him that I didn't consider AT&T for my new cell service because I had been tired of my bosses calling me when they couldn't call each other on Cingular.
Goddamn! Ive been pissed about their commercials for a couple months. I switched from ATT to Tmobile because I could not for the life of me get decent cell reception in my dorm room, and would barely keep it around campus in Flagstaff, one of their new advertised cities. I worked for about a month with them trying to find what they or I could do. New Phone, New SIM card, nothing changed significantly, so I left. Then the commercial came out, and now my old phone appears to work, just enough time into my Tmobile contract to not be able to cancel. The service wasnt too good. The lady on the phone told me that the maps they have (online) show I have full reception. I told her the maps are designed to show that, but what my phone shows and how many calls I keep dont reflect that. Too bad Apple and ATT are together on the iPhone, its a nice phone, but im not going back to ATT
@spinachdip: Yeah, I used to commute on the B train from Brooklyn, and as soon as the train hit the Manhattan Bridge everyone would whip out their cell phones for the 40 seconds or whatever of talk time. Irritating.
I've also seen billboards saying that it works in Japaridelphia (Japan, Paris, Philly). To my knowledge, no US GSM cell phone will work on Japan's network. Who's wrong, me or AT&T's marketing department?
Blame this one on WMATA (the agency that runs the Metro). Rather than allow both GSM and CDMA infrastructure to be installed to benefit consumers, they have a sweetheart deal with Verizon to provide exclusive cell service (for which Verizon pays significantly). AT&T, TMobile, and Sprint have tried to get non-exclusive access to no avail.
Moscow isn't in the Southern Hemisphere...
They should get it to work in AK where they advertise heavily too.
@Jay Levitt, you could not be more correct!
Oh and another thing, I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND WHY COMPANIES CHOOSE TO MAKE THEIR CUSTOMERS HATE THEM. and they choose too.
My parents once signed up for ATT DSL. We got the stuff, set it up, it wouldn't work. So we called tech support, went back and forth with them over 3 days. Finally a manager called them to say that ATT doesn't serve our area. Nice.
@Maude Buttons: Yes. Verizon has a contract with the federal government. Federal employees get discounted Verizon service, and are thus able to do work/be in contact while on mass transit.
This has to be one of the most boneheaded advertising campaigns I've ever seen... the problem is that on a subconscious level, people will accept it without questioning on a very basic level what AT&T is actually saying. "AT&T works in more places". ... than what? Other carriers? Not having a Cell phone? A can and string? The beauty of the statement is that because it is so purposely vague, it requires no evidence whatsoever to back it up. They leave it up to the consumer to fill in the gap of what the "more" actually is.
The whole thing is disingenuous at best.
Yes, Sprint does work quite well in the Metro. It's roaming but for my plan that is free. I believe the Metro is going to make their tunnels all access at some point.
Virginiabelle, a federal employee can get a discount on their personal service for Sprint and AT&T too (in fact, most companies offer their employees discounts for personal mobile phone contracts).
Doesn't work at my house or in my neighborhood, and I live in the middle of a sizable metro area. Many fruitless phone calls to "customer service" -- e.g., "Our technicians say coverage in your area is adequate." So I refused to talk to them anymore, and started complaining to regulatory/consumer agencies. After almost four months, they let me out of my contract early without a termination fee. I now have Alltel, which does work here.
"More bars in more places," my @$$...
My problem with the campaign is that every location is a city except in Asia, where it's a country:
China, London, Moscow
Japan, Paris, Philadelphia
Be consistent, dammit!
Totes irrelevent. There have been cell phone ads in subways for years.