Verizon trolls T-Mobile in its backfired #NeverSettleforVerizon campaign

Verizon trolls T-Mobile in its backfired #NeverSettleforVerizon campaign
As the saying goes, turnabout is fair play. T-Mobile may have single-handedly transformed the American wireless landscape, but to-date, significant parts of the industry remain the same.

While T-Mobile has clawed its way into an impossible-to-ignore position of growth, Verizon and AT&T are the two big boys on the block, and Sprint is still considered the third largest carrier. That is just the way it is, for now anyway.

Team Magenta’s outspoken CEO, John Legere, talks a big game, and rightly so. Sometimes though, even the best of us get a little too big for our britches. While T-Mobile’s growth is expected to overtake Sprint (eventually), Legere has been setting his sights on AT&T and Verizon.

That is no small feat, and even two years ago at CES 2013, Legere admitted that Verizon’s network was a winner. Verizon certainly does cost more than its competition, but for the money, you pretty much have coverage everywhere, and Big Red’s customers know it.

That is why it was somewhat amusing to see T-Mobile’s latest social media campaign to turn Verizon’s #NeverSettle on its head and into #NeverSettleforVerizon hit a wall, hard. Verizon’s customers made their feelings clear as part of the campaign, and Big Red did its part too.

T-Mobile has been doing commendable work on its network and coverage. However, let us be frank, it does not currently hold a candle next to Verizon. Yes, T-Mobile’s data speeds with its LTE coverage in the cities is very good, but that LTE coverage drops quickly in many markets. It is, as Verizon aptly pointed out, like taking half an umbrella out in a rain storm.

That is not to say T-Mobile does not have big plans. Indeed, as noted earlier this year at Deutsche Telekom’s Capital Markets conference, T-Mobile is well on the way to expanding its coverage. It remains to be seen how overall capacity will shake out, but we think Team Magenta's umbrella will be quite a bit bigger by Christmas.

Is it a knock-out smack-down? Not really, but every now and then the truth trumps the rhetoric.

source: Verizon (Twitter)



2. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

Brilliant response by Verizon. Yeah, T-Mobile is cheaper, but their coverage still just doesn't compare. At least when Verizon takes on other carriers they typically have the facts to back them up.

3. ojdidit84

Posts: 462; Member since: Jul 16, 2011

Meh... They do use outdated maps and metrics in their ads though. I left VZW for TMo back in Feb of last year and the only time that I miss VZW is when I'm way out in the boonies where NO ONE gets any service and VZW gets service on that one patch of a side road you just happen to be driving down. At least in my area anyway. Now if I lived in another area of the country where coverage wasn't as great, I'd definitely have stuck w/ VZW.

5. SuperAndroidEvo

Posts: 4888; Member since: Apr 15, 2011

Sniggly you nailed it. Even in areas where both are strong, Verizon still has more bars. It's simple to me, people always want more for a cheaper price, & frankly that's not going to happen. Yes Verizon is more expensive, (not by SO much) but you get the BEST there is in the US. T-Mobile is cheaper, but you get WAY less than the best. It's good to see Verizon answer with facts because Verizon has been quiet for too long. The Sleeping Giant has been woken up! lol +1

19. iamdh4

Posts: 1; Member since: May 15, 2015

"not by SO much" ?? I don't even want to think about what my overages would be this month if I were on Verizon. I'm at 155GB of data and still have a few days left in this billing cycle. Before you go and claim I must be tethering. None of that is tethering. Streaming HD movies (Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime), 1440p /4k content on YouTube, Skype / Viber video calls. It adds up very quickly. My LTE Connection is typicly faster than any WIFI I'm in the vecinity of. Including my home ATT U-Verse internet. So I'm on mobile data 90%+ of the time. I agree coverage could be better, but they are working on it. Even for a small metro area where I live (population of 120k), the coverage is pretty good.

25. Motionless

Posts: 12; Member since: Dec 02, 2014

155Gigs... All i can say is Damn.

24. SOTechy

Posts: 8; Member since: Feb 02, 2015

i have really bad history when It comes to phone carriers :(

4. theguy2345

Posts: 1216; Member since: Jun 24, 2014

Here in New Jersey, my T-Mo coverage is wonderful. I barely ever have no signal. I don't even live in an urban area.

7. jerzyiroc

Posts: 36; Member since: Sep 16, 2014

Same. I moved from Jersey City to Woodbridge and was worried that my coverage and speeds would go down. It's been great so far. I travel all over NJ and eastern PA for work and there are times where my speeds are better than my Verizon Note work phone.

9. theguy2345

Posts: 1216; Member since: Jun 24, 2014

Well I live by the Jersey shore (near sandy hook), and I go all the time to north Jersey and NYC and never lose coverage. Even if you look at their coverage map, they almost have the entire NJ

33. ozgur781sen

Posts: 37; Member since: Mar 11, 2015

They covered 90% of Delaware :)

10. JoeJoe1

Posts: 5; Member since: Mar 27, 2015

alot of truck drivers complain that they dont have coverage in smalll and its highway's such as utah,colorado etc.... this is where Verizon win's as far as network coverage goes Verizon has the extra cash to make their network a winner because of their Landlines same thing goes for att but then again att sucks

11. JunitoNH

Posts: 1946; Member since: Feb 15, 2012

It would had been more believable, if they had gone after AT&T or Sprint. You main brainwash the young people, whom only rely on data, but for the business person, and/or travelers, we know who has the best, and most reliable network. Believe me, I can't stand those money hungry____, but I'm realistic.

12. JoeJoe1

Posts: 5; Member since: Mar 27, 2015

because no 1 cares about att and sprint...Verizon and att knows this perfectly well this is why they took out unlimited data in order to make extreme profit's Verizon is perfect for those in the middle of no where and how many people from big cities are going to travel from their home area to some where in the country People Love UnLimited Data its perfect for those travel by road....imagine youre on a bus,train want to use to Netflix youtube,amazon video with Verizon and Att along with Sprint your going to use it with Fear because it consumes lots of data for a 5 min clip on youtube imagine watching netflix movie for 2 hours? That's like 2-4Gb's of data alone This is where Tmobile Wins (for those who are on the UNLIMITED LTE PLAN) for the first 2 lines being $100 That's hell of a deal If Verizon Att want to play nice let them cap TEXTING then Data since all of you TEXT non stop all the time and causing accidents all the time if Verizon and Att care they would have by now but they don't because Texting doesnt really cost anything compared to Data Puting profits first before safety

13. downphoenix

Posts: 3165; Member since: Jun 19, 2010

Sorry Legere, but you clearly barked up the wrong tree here. #neversettleforverizon is a huge fail of a hashtag. Verizon may be more expensive, but there prices lately have been pretty damn competitive (not much higher than ATT or Sprint, and in some situations cheaper than them even) and they have the coverage chops to back up the slightly higher price.

14. DigitalBoy05

Posts: 280; Member since: Jun 04, 2011

To be fair they wouldn't have dropped their prices if it wasn't for Tmobile.

15. Augustine

Posts: 1043; Member since: Sep 28, 2013

I'm skeptic, but could the adage that whether they speak ill or well of a business, it's good business?

16. rha600

Posts: 5; Member since: May 04, 2015

I worked for T-Mobile. Here is what they are doing, and what the problem is for them. John is looking to do one thing, and one thing only. Sell the company. There is no secret that DT wants out of the US market and they've made it very clear they want to sell. John is buying customers left and right (which even the CEO of DT says is not sustainable) in hopes of selling the comnpany before the cat is out of the bag that the company is bleeding money. By having more suscibers and by being the #3 carrier, he sells the company for more, and he makes more on his nearly 300K shares of stock. The problem T-mobile has, and the reason they will never compete with VZW or AT&T is that they treat their employees like crap. They are paid far less than the industry standard and they are worked more. Field techs are responsible for 70-75 cell sites when, again, industry standard is 35-40 tops. Where does this leave them? They employees don't care. They come in, they do what they HAVE to and they go home. There is no pride, there is no efford to go the extra mile, and in the end the customer is the one who suffers when cell sites are left down or calls won't complete. An example of this is Comcast. The reason most people hate comcast is they pay out the nose and get crap for service. Comcast is notorious for treating it's employees like crap and therefore, again, they don't care. Half of the country is covered by T-mobiles "partners" not the actual T-mobile network. I know for a fact that resellers like walmart have already complained about issues in their network.

23. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

This happens in all business. And even if the CEO was doing it for his own gain, the customer is reaping the rewards. I haven't seen them responsible for that many cell sites and the turn around time for service requests are usually 24-72hrs with very few going past that. Half the country may be covered in partners, but at the same time, 90% of the populace is under a Tmobile true tower. So sure it sucks for the 10% or that truck driver that has 50MB of roaming data for free per month. But no one is stopping them from going elsewhere. In fact Tmobile reps are the only ones I have seen that have those 'honest' conversation when a service simply wont work for them.

26. SirStephenH

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 24, 2015

Partner coverage and roaming coverage are two different things and if this other guy truly worked for T-Mobile he would know that. Partner coverage is provided by companies that T-Mobile owns a stake in and/or leases spectrum to. Partner coverage is provided unrestricted (no roaming caps, etc) and is treated by devices no differently than if you were on T-Mobile's native network. Roaming coverage is provided by companies through roaming agreements and are subject to roaming caps. An example of a partner provider would be iWireless which T-Mobile owns a majority stake in, leases spectrum to, and provides T-Mobile customers with unrestricted coverage throughout Iowa. An example of a roaming provider would be AT&T which provides capped coverage to basically everywhere there's not native or partner coverage. T-Mobile clearly differentiates between native, partner, and roaming coverage on their maps and only includes native coverage in their plans to hit 300 PoPs by EoY 2015. Half of T-Mobile's coverage most definitely DOES NOT consist of partner coverage, it's no more than 10%.

29. JGuinan007

Posts: 699; Member since: May 19, 2011

Why don't you organize a tech union so companies like tmobile and comcast cant treat you like crap and you can collectively bargain for better working conditions

32. rha600

Posts: 5; Member since: May 04, 2015

Because unions are for lazy people who want to get paid to not work and typically cause more problems than they fix. That is a dumb suggestion.

31. rha600

Posts: 5; Member since: May 04, 2015

South Florida field techs are responsible for over 70 cells sites each. I have personally seen sites down for days or had severe calling issues for far more than 24 hours. SIR, it's good to see you can read and comprehend. I never mentioned roaming, but since you mentioned it, a roaming PARTNER is used in many parts of the country. However it doesn't matter if the PARTNER is for roaming or for leasing spectrum to, Tmobile still does not directly control that network and it's far more than 10%.

17. aahmed215

Posts: 169; Member since: Jun 18, 2012

I currently have Verizon and AT&T, but my contracts are up. I'm thinking of switching to T-Mobile very soon and buying the S6. I have a test device with T-mobile right now and it's doing better than AT&T, but not as strong as Verizon at my house. It's still good enough in my area and the other benefits of T-Mobile just make it an easy decision right now.... 1. Free WiFi Calling 2. Unlimited music streaming on LTE 3. 4.5 GB of data per month per phone on LTE and unlimited on 2G 4. Data Stash 5. About $60 cheaper for a family plan of 4 phones compared to Verizon 6. Free and Unlimited international data & text 7. Free in-flight texting with Gogo

27. SirStephenH

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 24, 2015

We did the test drive before we switched too and the iPhone 5s didn't do T-Mobile's network any justice. It still wasn't too bad and talking to people we knew with T-Mobile really helped us with the switch although giving us an Android device so we could map with Sensorly would have made the decision way easier. When we switched we all bought Android devices and the speeds and coverage was sooo much better than with that iCrap. Just a heads up. The iPhone 5s doesn't support band 12 (700Mhz; helps indoor coverage and fills dead spots outdoors) so if you're in an area where band 12 has been deployed then the iP5s won't provide you with the full coverage available (another reason to provide Android as a choice). This didn't effect our test drive though as only band 4 had been deployed in our area.

18. skymitch89

Posts: 1453; Member since: Nov 05, 2010

On Verizon, I pay just over $93 per month. That is with 3GB of data and 1 smartphone (on 2yr contract). When I switched, T-Mobile would've cost me almost $110 per month for the 3GB data & phone I wanted. I found it logical to switch to the lower costing carrier that had better coverage. Where I live, T-Mobile & Verizon have about the same data speeds, so that didn't really matter.

22. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

What phone is that? Currently you can get tmo unlimited and tethering for 80, if you pay 0 down for a say 700 phone,you pay 29 extra. Though that same phone would probably be 300+contract. Now that 29 extra is 16 extra and you are paying the same for Verizon, with a data plan you won't get with Verizon. Now if you don't need unlimited highspeed take 20off. Don't put a down payment and you are still Less than Verizon.

28. SirStephenH

Posts: 4; Member since: Jan 24, 2015

Huh?! A 3GB plan with data stash (AKA rollover data; AKA you don't use it, you don't lose it), no data overages due to unlimited "2G" data (speeds drop to 128Kbps after hitting your 3GB data allotment), unlimited music streaming, free international texting and calling in over 120 countries, free texting on airplains, free WiFi calling, and unlimited domestic texting and calling is only $60 per month with T-Mobile. A $700 phone would be ~$29 per month. That's only $89 per month!!! You'd have to be talking about the unlimited plan to hit that mythological $110 mark or perhaps including ONE TIME fees such as device sales taxes (paid up front) and the SIM card.

20. genkidama20

Posts: 52; Member since: Feb 10, 2012

I've been with T-Mo for the past year our in the boonies and I do miss the great VZW coverage at times. But, we dropped from $240 to $180 on our family plan. So, it's totally worth it.

21. steven24

Posts: 1; Member since: May 15, 2015

rootmetrics Enough Said. you want facts these guys have the whole Truth and nothing but the truth.

30. PaulRivers

Posts: 11; Member since: Jan 22, 2010

"However, let us be frank, it does not currently hold a candle next to Verizon." Every time someone write "frank" "honest" "tell you the truth" etc, seems like they always follow it up with complete b.s. I live in Minneapolis, Mn, and I had Verizon for 10 years. Was really tired of Verizon's shoddy indoor coverage here. My dads place, my cousin's last apt, the grocery store I always went to (that was fun when my date I was meeting was pissed at me because Verizon's "amazing" coverage had me with no service and I didn't even know she called), my doctor's office, and the last straw was my new apt - Verizon used it's low frequency spectrum not to improve coverage, but to cheap out and build it's towers as far apart as possible. My new apt was the last straw, and I tried all the carriers. Guess who gets indoor signal everywhere around town? TMobile. Verizon had told me several time "we don't guarantee coverage inside your home". Verizon has sat on it's ass for all the important features it should have had first. Last to get a network extender. They still don't have wifi calling. Last to implement improved voice quality. Remember when Verizon actively disabled bluetooth file transfer so you had to pay them 10 cents to get at your own photos you took with your phone? Notice how you still have to neurotically monitor your data so you don't go over your limit? Yeah, if I was a trucker regularly travelling on highways between states, I'd probably have Verizon. But being that I just want my phone to work in my apt, and indoors around town, I have TMobile.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

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.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless