National T.V. watchdog asks Sprint Nextel to stop making "most dependable" claim on ads

National T.V. watchdog asks Sprint Nextel to stop making
What is the best way to measure the reliability of a cellular company? According to the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business, having the fewest dropped or blocked calls makes you the most dependable cellular company. That is why the national T.V. watchdog is agreeing with Verizon that Sprint Nextel should not run ads claiming to be "America's most dependable 3G network." Tests run by research company Nielsen-the same company that television networks use to compare viewership numbers during primetime-reveal that the nation's largest cellular operator indeed has the fewest blocked or dropped calls. Sprint responded by saying that reviewers should look at more than one test in case results are skewed by bad weather or a faulty cell tower. For its part, Sprint is appealing to the National Advertising Review Board and stands by its claim. Can't we all just get along?

source: Yahoo



1. DonLouie

Posts: 594; Member since: Dec 22, 2008

I was waiting on this to get some pub other than phonescoop and engadgetmobile. The say 3G, when did one survey invalidate ads?

49. rhomaion

Posts: 187; Member since: Sep 23, 2009

I had Verizon for years and then teased myself to try a smartphone on Sprint and now I will never go back. They make you think they have the best 3G network when in reality everyone is too scared to pay the cancellation fee and try something different. I have never had service remotely as good with Verizon as I do now with Sprint. SPRINT FTW!

2. dbdanny89

Posts: 13; Member since: Nov 10, 2009

I work for Sprint and let me tell ya, it's coverage has gotten a lot better. Yea, sure there will be places where coverage is poor but with Sprint is already upgrading to the 4G Network, it's coverage will surpass the other companies. I say, let them go ahead and say that they have network" and let the people decide.

6. Mateo8326

Posts: 472; Member since: Jul 15, 2009

You gotta have 4g tower for 4g to work well, and i don't think there are that many here in the U.S yet so 4g isn't really something to talk about yet, especially if only one carrier has it, sprint may be on top in Europe when they have 4g for a couple of years now but 4g isn't really gonna help you guys right now.

17. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

ummm mateo? where is sprint in europe.. and where are these 4g towers in europe? lol? do you know at all about what your yackin about, or do u just assume. ha sprints "4g" (it means 4th generation, nothing to do with speed!!) is based on wimax (wide area hotspot basically) in a partnership with clearwire. Its not really all that much faster than current 3g speeds. so, sprint usng a "4g" logo just means theyve moved to a different generation of technology. Tmobile is introducing 21/mb/s "3g" which is faster than sprints "4g". And Verizon is introducing LTE which is what most concider "4g" because its 100-150mb/s and is the new cell standard that every company minus sprint is going to eventually. like normal, sprint likes to shoot themselves in the foot. lol

20. IHatePhones

Posts: 99; Member since: Aug 12, 2009

Not much faster that current 3g speeds? 3g caps at about 3.1Mbps Down while WiMax caps at around 13Mbps... And Sprint is looking toward LTE for business customers or so I've read. Soooo yeah, do you know at all what YOU'RE yackin about?

25. black_geek

Posts: 2; Member since: Nov 25, 2009

you really dont know what you are talking about Sprint own 51% of the shares of Clear so they have 4G in most markets now

27. VDubb

Posts: 49; Member since: Dec 04, 2008

You're an idiot remixfa. First, don't quote PER CHANNEL speeds. Not only is 21Mbps possible in ideal conditions (meaning real-world speeds are much less), those speeds are divided upon multiple users within that channel. Second, retard, LTE or WiMAX (in their current implementation) isn't considered 4G by the International Telecommunication Union, which means Verizon isn't implementing a true 4G solution currently (nor is Sprint). They will, however, be able to upgrade their networks to eventually to the 4G solution which is LTE-Advanced and WiMAX Release 2. Moving back to HSPA+ vs. WiMAX, WiMAX Release 1 has a potential of 144Mbps peak per channel, which, IMO, is higher than 21Mbps. That's why with multiple users (and considering real-world conditions), people get between 5Mbps to 10Mbps using WiMAX. When HSPA+ releases, expect between 1-5Mbps for users (vs. 700Kbps - 2Mbps for most 3G solutions now). Do us all a favor next time and instead of mindless bashing like a retard, you actually do some damn research. - VDubb

34. stuntz

Posts: 178; Member since: Dec 19, 2008


36. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

wow, exept your bashing.. and wrong. lol. real world wimax is RIGHT NOW because we are talking RIGHT NOW after all, not 3 iterations down the road, is not that much faster than 3g hspa. the 21mb/s wasnt talkin about wimax, thats the speeds that tmobile is launching under hspa+. thats right now. Right now.. 21mb/s is faster than anything sprints "4g" network can pull. LTE REAL WORLD is 100-150mb/s in testing.... right now. and black_geek, ownership in a company has NOTHING to do with tech rollout. omg. Unless they just launched another city, its pretty much ONLY in the Baltimore/DC area for sprint 4g.. nowhere else. Vodaphone has a 51% stake in VZW, but you dont get free local calling in the EU do u? lol.

37. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

find this article. sprint has said publicly many times they have no interest in LTE. they are sticking with wimax. they wont have both, theres no point in having competing technologies because it doubles your cost for nothing. everyone has announced an LTE roadmap but sprint.

40. bokfu74

Posts: 10; Member since: Feb 12, 2009

Gotta go with VDubb on this. Remixfa you are incorrect. Sprint HAS stated they are investigating possible use of LTE in the future. They said point blank that they are considering all options but have WiMAX NOW. And wrong, its not just Baltimore...unless you're 12 months behind. You forgot about Portland, Chicago, Philadelphia, Greensboro, Raleigh, Charlotte, Midgeville, Wichita Falls, Waco, San Antonio, Kileen, Austin, Amarillo, Corpus Christi, Dallas, Fort Worth, Abileen, Midland, Odessa, Lubbock, Portland, Salem, Boise, Bellingham, Las Vegas and that doesn't count the metro areas in soft launch. Failed research again. And TiMo has there spot but speed isn't it. Unfortunately your idea that they will roll out 21mb/s 3g is clearly a pipe dream. I've had Sprint for 10 years. I even worked for them for a while. No one could be more upset with what has happened to the company. But at least get your facts straight. How can you say REAL WORLD and then say "in testing"? WiMAX can throughput speeds near100MB/s testing. But real world users can expect 4-6mb/s. And honestly, we won't know what we have till its here. Advances are made so fast that determining what technology will dominate is futile. With as data hungry as we are now, it would seem that there is a market for all of these wonderful new technologies. I think the competition is healthy. And yes 4G does have to do with speed. What the hell kind of company would invest in a new slower technology. We are all now dumber for having read your comment. Are you really laughing out loud when you write "lol"...thats just wierd.

50. rhomaion

Posts: 187; Member since: Sep 23, 2009

4G will never be in a phone for at least another 100 years jack ass so does it really matter? And if you think I'm kidding just go look it up. How long 4G is intended to drain a laptop battery let alone a cell phone battery is a incredibly small amount of time. 4G will only be good for usb modems and maybe wireless routers to replace what we use for home internet service now like dsl or cable.

60. CRICKETownz

Posts: 980; Member since: Oct 24, 2009

O'Doyle Rules!

70. dubracer223

Posts: 46; Member since: Mar 16, 2009

epic burn

3. Kain125

Posts: 18; Member since: Sep 13, 2009

It a subjective thing. Its not something to be sued over

24. htc_prep

Posts: 303; Member since: Oct 09, 2009

completely correct. every company in every market buffs them self up and looks shiny to get people to try their product. but these companies arent selling tiaras, in the case of the wireless industry there truly isnt a need to make all these extravagant claims and downing other carriers. theres always going to be a customer base for cell companies. every one needs a cell phone. if a customer leaves a company and goes to the next eventually that next company will piss the customer off and they will move to the next. and so on. since theres only 4 major carriers. eventually they will come back. and its not because of a "most reliable" claim.

4. demonpr

Posts: 3; Member since: Nov 24, 2009

i work with verizon and what si with vzw its crying about everything itsn almos looking like att and how the tried to sue vzw

7. Mateo8326

Posts: 472; Member since: Jul 15, 2009

ATT crying about verizon, now verizon crying about sprint, next spring will be crying about Tmobile over something stupid lol. The companys need to just sing stand in a circle and sing "Kumbiya" b/c this is getting ridiculous

10. killtomorrow515

Posts: 6; Member since: Nov 25, 2009

double post

41. bokfu74

Posts: 10; Member since: Feb 12, 2009

I agree. The only one that is dumb is Sprint (my carrier).When Z was making claims that they had the largest 3G network Sprint did nothing even though its 3G network was much bigger. Now they are getting called on ads. Quite frankly, they are in a hole because they can't advertise worth a crap. Palm Pre ads. What the hell was that? If management can't get a handle on internal communication and get in touch, or at LEAST start making smart business moves, a company with a lot of good (albeit currently wasted and mismanaged) technology could go under. I don't like the crying either...but it is effective. And I'd like to think (as a 10 year Sprint customer) that Sprint was taking the high road. But in reality the management was just too clueless and stupid.

61. CRICKETownz

Posts: 980; Member since: Oct 24, 2009

I don't think anyone will be cryin anything over T-Mobile. T-Mobile is like a one night stand...30 seconds and it's already forgotten.

71. dubracer223

Posts: 46; Member since: Mar 16, 2009

well someone needs to cater to people who cant afford some of the other more expensive carriers right? tmobile fills that void i suppose.

5. mr. anderson

Posts: 92; Member since: Apr 16, 2009

3g has nothing to do with calls, this isnt gsm

9. Mateo8326

Posts: 472; Member since: Jul 15, 2009

thank you that what i been telling people, these people are clueless sometimes

8. som

Posts: 768; Member since: Nov 10, 2009

Sprint must give up on cell phone business if it keep lossing customers and profit. Sprint may need a Government loan to survive.

18. cellhead unregistered

They already tried that last spring....and were rebuffed! LOL.

11. killtomorrow515

Posts: 6; Member since: Nov 25, 2009

nevermind...double post

12. DonLouie

Posts: 594; Member since: Dec 22, 2008

One survey is call to bring down an ad, gimmeabreak

13. DonLouie

Posts: 594; Member since: Dec 22, 2008

Is this payback for them having to take down those ptt spots? The spots have had that tag line for a year

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.