PDA

View Full Version : A good laugh at Radio Shack today...


nobodybutme
June 29th 03, 12:29 AM
A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new activation
price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer service.
Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer. Quite
a scene...

Carl.
June 29th 03, 01:09 AM
"nobodybutme" > wrote in message
s.com...
> A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
> understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new
activation
> price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer
service.
> Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer.
Quite
> a scene...

Lucky devil, you. I love to watch such things! My two favorite classes of
angry customers are angry hicks that get all red-faced and the supposedly
upper-class former yuppies that get all mad because the red carpet isn't
there for them.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

billy mcpherson
June 29th 03, 02:38 AM
I have a special plate, but drive a piece of ****. I just think it's nifty.
Who cares? It's only a few extra dollars per year to make it say whatever
you want.

David L. Holiman
June 29th 03, 03:24 AM
Feverish wrote:
> Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot, and
> go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.
>

*That* is fine...I'm referring to the Cadillac Escalades and Lincoln
Navigators that will never see a spec of off-road travel whatsoever.
The owners just buy into the latest fad for nothing else than to one-up
their buddies. *That* is pathetic.

--
David Holiman
KD5YDU

A+, CCNA, MCP
Network and Systems Administrator

My "from" and "reply-to" addresses are spam traps.
Please use my real e-mail for personal correspondance: holliwood <at>
netzero <dot> net

Brad
June 29th 03, 04:02 AM
My guess would be.. if they just sell the damn things to anyone who wants to
buy them (at the activation price), they'd make more money in the long run.
Dunno, I could be wrong.. just seems silly.


"nobodybutme" > wrote in message
s.com...
> A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
> understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new
activation
> price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer
service.
> Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer.
Quite
> a scene...
>
>

Chuck P Adams
June 29th 03, 11:07 AM
>From: "Feverish"
>Date: 6/28/2003 9:58 PM Eastern

>My wife's SUV's license plate
>says what it does because I got it for her

Does it say "D-Cups" ?

> plate
>actually serves as advertising for my business.

Massage parlor?

>Oh yes, the SUV thing. Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot, and
>go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.

Yes, that big SUV comes in handy for the 3 bottles of wine and the golf bag.


> And don't quote the gas mileage thing, because that's a lot of
>crock.

12 M.P.G.... I guess it is a load of crock.


>As far as my
>car goes, its one of the safest on the road,

For you.. What about the poor car you hit with a mother and her kids in it?

>Les R
>The pro

What a ass

Rich Cacace
June 29th 03, 12:03 PM
I'm a T-Mobil customer. If they wouldn't give me a new phone at the intro.
price & would just cancel my service & start new again. I don't use my
allotted minutes anyway I've got nothing to lose - T-Mobil didn't offer me a
thing to keep me as a customer - other than the telephone number what else
have I got to lose? I don't have a business to worry about either.


"nobodybutme" > wrote in message
s.com...
> A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
> understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new
activation
> price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer
service.
> Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer.
Quite
> a scene...
>
>

Roy N.
June 29th 03, 08:55 PM
I second that!!!

"billy mcpherson" > wrote in message
...
> I have a special plate, but drive a piece of ****. I just think it's
nifty.
> Who cares? It's only a few extra dollars per year to make it say whatever
> you want.
>
>

Roy N.
June 29th 03, 09:05 PM
If you're in the middle of a contract, you may have to pay an early
termination fee to start anew.

"Rich Cacace" <richcacace-REMOVE TO > wrote in message
. net...
> I'm a T-Mobil customer. If they wouldn't give me a new phone at the
intro.
> price & would just cancel my service & start new again. I don't use my
> allotted minutes anyway I've got nothing to lose - T-Mobil didn't offer me
a
> thing to keep me as a customer - other than the telephone number what else
> have I got to lose? I don't have a business to worry about either.

billy mcpherson
June 29th 03, 11:39 PM
Very well said. I refuse to drive an SUV myself, but I understand that yes,
some people need them. It's the people who live in the suburbs and drive
them 10 miles a day to work on level, paved streets while hauling no more
than groceries or the occasional group of small children that really **** me
off. That's why they invented the minivan.

Carl.
June 29th 03, 11:44 PM
"billy mcpherson" > wrote in message
...
> Very well said. I refuse to drive an SUV myself, but I understand that
yes,
> some people need them. It's the people who live in the suburbs and drive
> them 10 miles a day to work on level, paved streets while hauling no more
> than groceries or the occasional group of small children that really ****
me
> off. That's why they invented the minivan.

Or a wagon.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

Jerome Zelinske
June 30th 03, 03:05 AM
And I have seen a lot of special plates in the format of AANAAA
also. I don't have a ticket myself, but if I did, I might get a plate
like that.


David L. Holiman wrote:
> Carl. wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> ...and the supposedly
>> upper-class former yuppies that get all mad because the red carpet isn't
>> there for them.
>>
>>
>
> That's when I tell them to get over it and themselves. Also, has anyone
> ever noticed how the really obnoxious drivers have "customized" license
> plates, such as their name, on their SUV? Note I DID say "SUV" and not
> car or truck, because the rich people seem to have an SUV fetish. They
> think they're SOO special that they simply can't have a "regular" plate
> like everyone else and HAVE to have their own special plate. Pathetic...
>

John Richards
June 30th 03, 03:44 AM
> As far as my
> car goes, its one of the safest on the road, its comfortable, and it gets
> good gas mileage.

So NHTSA is lying when they publish statistics indicating that SUVs are
much more prone to rollover accidents then a sedan type car?

billy mcpherson
June 30th 03, 04:03 AM
> Which is OK until you need to go up a hill when it's fully loaded with
your
> kids, the neighbor kids, and all their stuff...

We went camping in Colorado with Boy Scouts with my dad's minivan about 6
years ago... we were towing a trailer, the van was filled with scouts, and
we still made it up the hills fine. We were near the mountains, so it was a
hilly ride indeed. Maybe you've just had ****ty minivans.

David L. Holiman
June 30th 03, 04:31 AM
Jerome Zelinske wrote:
> And I have seen a lot of special plates in the format of AANAAA
> also. I don't have a ticket myself, but if I did, I might get a plate
> like that.
>

I am actually planning on getting my call sign on a license plate. That
is perfectly OK because you earned the right to have that special
license plate. I actually put a little work into studying for my ticket
and, dare I say, deserve to have a little something to show off on my
regular pick-up truck.

--
David Holiman
KD5YDU

A+, CCNA, MCP
Network and Systems Administrator

My "from" and "reply-to" addresses are spam traps.
Please use my real e-mail for personal correspondance: holliwood <at>
netzero <dot> net

Carl.
June 30th 03, 04:41 AM
"John Richards" > wrote in message
.com...
> > As far as my
> > car goes, its one of the safest on the road, its comfortable, and it
gets
> > good gas mileage.
>
> So NHTSA is lying when they publish statistics indicating that SUVs are
> much more prone to rollover accidents then a sedan type car?

I would suppose that it depends on the SUV and what car you compare it to.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

Cruz Gracia
June 30th 03, 05:14 AM
Oh yes.....I so wish to drive a minivan. My
25-year-old-no-soccer-mom-wife-no-kids ass would really get chicks with a
Dodge Caravan. Because hey....I want to save the planet that's already
messed up by Corporate America and it's anti-environmental laws to protect
them. LOL.....I got my laugh for the night. Thank you

"billy mcpherson" > wrote in message
...
> Very well said. I refuse to drive an SUV myself, but I understand that
yes,
> some people need them. It's the people who live in the suburbs and drive
> them 10 miles a day to work on level, paved streets while hauling no more
> than groceries or the occasional group of small children that really ****
me
> off. That's why they invented the minivan.
>
>

Feverish
June 30th 03, 07:52 AM
And who says I didn't take that into consideration???

--
Les R
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
All Outgoing Mail Certified by NAV
"Roy N." > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Feverish" > wrote in message
> news:DJrLa.83925$%[email protected]
> > crock. The difference in gas mileage accounts for about 200 gal per
year,
> > while not a trifling amount, it wont change the world either. As far as
> my
> > car goes, its one of the safest on the road, its comfortable, and it
gets
> > good gas mileage.
>
> You think 200 gal/year multiplied by the thousuands upon thousands of
SUV's
> will not affect the world??? And we're not talking one year here, we're
> talking 10-20 years per vehicle. When the original owner is done with it
> someone else will be driving it and destroying our planet with it for many
> many more years.
>
> As to the safety factor, is this thing safe for you or safe for all the
> other people you may collide with? Big difference.
>
> If you NEED an SUV that's one thing (and it sounds like maybe you do), but
> to trivialize the environmental & societal consequences of your SUV is the
> pinnacle of arrogance.
>
> I'm in the market for an SUV myself because my work necessitates it.
> However, two VERY important considerations for me are gas consumption and
> crash compatiblity. If I HAVE to get an SUV I want to make sure that I am
> conscientious about my decision and buy one that minimizes the impact on
my
> planet and my neighbors.
>
>

Feverish
June 30th 03, 07:58 AM
--
Les R
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
All Outgoing Mail Certified by NAV
"Chuck P Adams" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Feverish"
> >Date: 6/28/2003 9:58 PM Eastern
>
> >My wife's SUV's license plate
> >says what it does because I got it for her
>
> Does it say "D-Cups" ?
NO.
>
> > plate
> >actually serves as advertising for my business.
>
> Massage parlor?
Wrong again
>
> >Oh yes, the SUV thing. Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot,
and
> >go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.
>
> Yes, that big SUV comes in handy for the 3 bottles of wine and the golf
bag.
3 growing boys, cub scout dens, little league teams.
>
>
> > And don't quote the gas mileage thing, because that's a lot of
> >crock.
>
> 12 M.P.G.... I guess it is a load of crock.
Closer to 15 city, Haven't done any real long distance driving yet, only had
it a month. I'll let you know when my wife getsd back from her trip to Ohio.
( about 1800 miles away.)
>
>
> >As far as my
> >car goes, its one of the safest on the road,
>
> For you.. What about the poor car you hit with a mother and her kids in
it?
That wasn't me. That was some redneck, beer guzzling, jerk from Syracuse.
>

> >The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
>
What an asshole you are. Guess no one plucked you out of the gene pool
before it was too late. Eat my SUV dust tree hugger!



>
>

Brad Willet
June 30th 03, 01:20 PM
> The biggest vehicle I've ever owned was a Pontiac Grand-Am. I currently
> drive a Mini-Cooper. So your SUV is not safe for me. There has to be a
> reasonable size-compatibility among vehicles on the road. It is dangerous
> for small and normal-sized cars to share the road with Hummer 2's and Chevy
> Suburbans.

I hate to fuel the fire, but if you are concerned about your own
personal safety then why buy such a small car? It's called the freedom
to buy what you want. You could have spent the same money and bought a
pickup truck. Not that I'm blasting you for owning a Mini, hell, I've
owned two Honda CRXs. My point is that you had the choice to buy the
small car, and because you made that choice you can't just go and say
that nobody else can drive a bigger car.

I now have an Avalanche, and while I sometimes wish I had another CRX,
it's just not safe. I wouldn't want my wife-to-be to drive one. And it
has been really nice to be able to gut my bathroom and haul the stuff to
the dump. And to be able to help move someone this weekend. And to be
able to bring two couches to the garage sale. And... etc.



[posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

msrandall
June 30th 03, 03:11 PM
Question how did the radio shack post get to cars vs. suvs vs. mini
vans???

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

Roy N.
June 30th 03, 04:15 PM
I didn't say that you didn't take those things into consideration.

However, you seemed to trivialize the fact that you were consuming 200/gal a
year. I wanted to point out that this is not trivial.

And I wanted to make the point that SUV "safety" is very relative. A lot of
people don't think about that. And a lot of people don't realize that SUVs
are among the most dangerous vehicles for the occupants as well as
collidee's (sorry for making up a word there).

"Feverish" > wrote in message
news:XcRLa.84392$%[email protected]
> And who says I didn't take that into consideration???
>
> --
> Les R
> The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
> All Outgoing Mail Certified by NAV
> "Roy N." > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > "Feverish" > wrote in message
> > news:DJrLa.83925$%[email protected]
> > > crock. The difference in gas mileage accounts for about 200 gal per
> year,
> > > while not a trifling amount, it wont change the world either. As far
as
> > my
> > > car goes, its one of the safest on the road, its comfortable, and it
> gets
> > > good gas mileage.
> >
> > You think 200 gal/year multiplied by the thousuands upon thousands of
> SUV's
> > will not affect the world??? And we're not talking one year here, we're
> > talking 10-20 years per vehicle. When the original owner is done with it
> > someone else will be driving it and destroying our planet with it for
many
> > many more years.
> >
> > As to the safety factor, is this thing safe for you or safe for all the
> > other people you may collide with? Big difference.
> >
> > If you NEED an SUV that's one thing (and it sounds like maybe you do),
but
> > to trivialize the environmental & societal consequences of your SUV is
the
> > pinnacle of arrogance.
> >
> > I'm in the market for an SUV myself because my work necessitates it.
> > However, two VERY important considerations for me are gas consumption
and
> > crash compatiblity. If I HAVE to get an SUV I want to make sure that I
am
> > conscientious about my decision and buy one that minimizes the impact on
> my
> > planet and my neighbors.
> >
> >
>
>

Roy N.
June 30th 03, 04:15 PM
Sounds like you're a real catch!

How do you fight the "chicks" off?????


"Cruz Gracia" > wrote in message
. net...
> Oh yes.....I so wish to drive a minivan. My
> 25-year-old-no-soccer-mom-wife-no-kids ass would really get chicks with a
> Dodge Caravan. Because hey....I want to save the planet that's already
> messed up by Corporate America and it's anti-environmental laws to protect
> them. LOL.....I got my laugh for the night. Thank you

Roy N.
June 30th 03, 04:15 PM
I'm not picking at you Feverish, but "crossover vehicle" is very abused by
the automotive industry. It covers everything from Acura MDX's and Volvo
CX90's on the large side, to Infinity FX45's on the small side, to station
wagons like the Infiniti IS300 SportCross (Infiniti can call it whatever
they like, but it IS a staion wagon).

For the record, the SUVs I'm looking at also fall into the "crossover"
category but I find the term rather useless these days. Before there was
such a behemoth as an Excursion, all of today's crossovers would have just
been considered an SUV. Now any car-based SUV in the mid-size category
somehow qualifies as crossover.

"Feverish" > wrote in message
news:alRLa.84396$%[email protected]
> Technically I have what would better be described as a CUV. ( Crossover
> Utility Vehicle.) Not as big as an Escalade, Navigator/Expedition or
> Suburban.
>

Isaiah Beard
June 30th 03, 04:33 PM
"billy mcpherson" > wrote in message
...
> I have a special plate, but drive a piece of ****. I just think it's
nifty.
> Who cares? It's only a few extra dollars per year to make it say whatever
> you want.


True, if they want to fork over a few more bucks to the state so that their
plates look cute, then let them... that's a few bucks less I'll have to pay
in the long run.

Of course the huge Hummer Monstrosity attached to such plates, I WILL take
an issue with...

Isaiah Beard
June 30th 03, 04:39 PM
"Feverish" > wrote in message
news:DJrLa.83925$%[email protected]
> Oh yes, the SUV thing. Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot,
and
> go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.

Oh, I'm sure most of us can agree with this. The SUVers that annoy me are
those DON'T need it, and buy the vehicle just because they like to show off
that they're driving a big honkin' vehicle that could flatten any other car
out there on the road with the driver barely feeling a bump. I mean, does
anyone in the US *REALLY* need a Hummer H2? how many of those drivers
actually intend on taking those beasts out to go sloluming out in the sand
pits, or using it to cross a shallow body of water, as was the original
intent of the Humvee design?

Isaiah Beard
June 30th 03, 04:42 PM
"Brad" > wrote in message
news:%[email protected]
> My guess would be.. if they just sell the damn things to anyone who wants
to
> buy them (at the activation price), they'd make more money in the long
run.

No, not really... Someone has to pay for that phone you got for next to
nothing. Usually, Sprint's eating up the cost. And if existing customers
decided to buy new phones every two or three months or so at the activation
price, Sprint would never recoup their losses.

Michael Lynch
June 30th 03, 07:19 PM
"Roy N." > wrote in message
news:WOYLa.67906$3d.304[email protected]
<>
> This was never a problem until Detroit lost its compass. There must be
crash
> compatibility standards. You don't have the freedom to buy an 18 wheeler
> and drive it around town.

Oh, but you do. You ought to come down here to AZ in the winter: snow-bird
season. You'll get to watch (in horror) the over-70 crowd piloting
18-wheeler-sized RVs (with half the RVs *towing* an SUV, and possibly a boat
too). These folks went straight from the Oldsmobile to the
quasi-behemoth-train (with no special license required!). Absurd, if you ask
me.

And to make this post somewhat on-topic, they often use their mobile phones
while driving (as if just driving wasn't hard enough).


--
Mike Lynch

Carl.
June 30th 03, 08:41 PM
"Isaiah Beard" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Feverish" > wrote in message
> news:DJrLa.83925$%[email protected]
> > Oh yes, the SUV thing. Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot,
> and
> > go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.
>
> Oh, I'm sure most of us can agree with this. The SUVers that annoy me are
> those DON'T need it, and buy the vehicle just because they like to show
off
> that they're driving a big honkin' vehicle that could flatten any other
car
> out there on the road with the driver barely feeling a bump. I mean, does
> anyone in the US *REALLY* need a Hummer H2? how many of those drivers
> actually intend on taking those beasts out to go sloluming out in the sand
> pits, or using it to cross a shallow body of water, as was the original
> intent of the Humvee design?

OTOH, the thing with a Hummer is if you want to buy an off-road vehicle, you
might as well actually buy one (ie, a Hummer), not some large wannabe thing
that LOOKS like an off-road vehicle (hence the new term SUV) but is actually
a POS yuppy-can.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

nogoer
June 30th 03, 09:00 PM
billy mcpherson wrote:
> *Very well said. I refuse to drive an SUV myself, but I understand
> that yes,
> some people need them. It's the people who live in the suburbs and
> drive
> them 10 miles a day to work on level, paved streets while hauling no
> more
> than groceries or the occasional group of small children that really
> **** me
> off. That's why they invented the minivan. *

My finacee drives an suv 10 miles to work. Minivans are UGLY! The suv
may never go off road but i feel much better knowing in snow she has a
better chance of getting home safer because of the 4 whell drive.

Stupid comments make stupid people.

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

Isaiah Beard
June 30th 03, 09:30 PM
> OTOH, the thing with a Hummer is if you want to buy an off-road vehicle,
you
> might as well actually buy one (ie, a Hummer), not some large wannabe
thing
> that LOOKS like an off-road vehicle (hence the new term SUV) but is
actually
> a POS yuppy-can.


Oh, I'm sure. However I would confidently bet a fair amount of money that
90% of the H2's being sold aren't going to leave pavement. And I'm 100%
certain that the the driver of the gold-trimmed H2 that left a good helping
of its gold-trim paint on my Pontiac as it tried to fit in a parking stall
next to my car, struck my front quarter panel, and then quickly trundled out
of the lot without so much as a "sorry" doesn't have any near term
off-roading plans, either. :)

Carl.
June 30th 03, 09:40 PM
"nogoer" > wrote in message
...
> Stupid comments make stupid people.

Is your life story really necessary?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

TCS
June 30th 03, 10:35 PM
<html><input type crash></html>
begin
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 18:19:27 GMT, Michael Lynch > wrote:
>
> "Roy N." > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
><>
>> This was never a problem until Detroit lost its compass. There must be
> crash
>> compatibility standards. You don't have the freedom to buy an 18 wheeler
>> and drive it around town.
>
> Oh, but you do. You ought to come down here to AZ in the winter: snow-bird
> season. You'll get to watch (in horror) the over-70 crowd piloting
> 18-wheeler-sized RVs (with half the RVs *towing* an SUV, and possibly a boat
> too). These folks went straight from the Oldsmobile to the
> quasi-behemoth-train (with no special license required!). Absurd, if you ask
> me.

Or visit colorado in the winter sometime. 95% of vehicles that go sailing
off road in a snowstorm are four wheel drive.

Jerome Zelinske
July 1st 03, 12:59 AM
And Sprint PCS not paying us for the difference between what we
paid for the phone and what the customer paid for the phone will make us
more money how?! For that matter the same thing goes for verizon.


Brad wrote:
> My guess would be.. if they just sell the damn things to anyone who wants to
> buy them (at the activation price), they'd make more money in the long run.
> Dunno, I could be wrong.. just seems silly.
>
>
> "nobodybutme" > wrote in message
> s.com...
>
>>A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
>>understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new
>
> activation
>
>>price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer
>
> service.
>
>>Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer.
>
> Quite
>
>>a scene...
>>
>>
>
>
>

Feverish
July 1st 03, 01:20 AM
Excellent point about the snowbirds.

--
Les R
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
All Outgoing Mail Certified by NAV
"Michael Lynch" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Roy N." > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> <>
> > This was never a problem until Detroit lost its compass. There must be
> crash
> > compatibility standards. You don't have the freedom to buy an 18 wheeler
> > and drive it around town.
>
> Oh, but you do. You ought to come down here to AZ in the winter: snow-bird
> season. You'll get to watch (in horror) the over-70 crowd piloting
> 18-wheeler-sized RVs (with half the RVs *towing* an SUV, and possibly a
boat
> too). These folks went straight from the Oldsmobile to the
> quasi-behemoth-train (with no special license required!). Absurd, if you
ask
> me.
>
> And to make this post somewhat on-topic, they often use their mobile
phones
> while driving (as if just driving wasn't hard enough).
>
>
> --
> Mike Lynch
>
>

Feverish
July 1st 03, 01:40 AM
"norelpref" > wrote in message ...
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 18:58:34 -0700, "Feverish"
> > wrote:
>
> >Be careful with making broad generalizations.
>
> Please do the same..
>
> >I can afford the SUV so why should I
> >compromise?
>
> What compromise are you refering too?

SUV (or in my case "CUV") vs Minivan
> >
> >car goes, its one of the safest on the road
>
> By what standards? I hate to get in a ****ing match over a personall
> opinion but big large cars are generally safer when the accident
> involves hitting a smaller car but the "safer" part ends there and
> they are in no way shape or form safer for any other instance. Big
> large SUV's DO NOT HANDLE well and no where near the handling of a
> car. A 4500+ lb vehicle with a higher center of gravity is
> inherently less stable, has higher stopping distances and can not make
> quick responsive turns without the increased risk of rolling over.
> A perfect example is the Ford Explorer thing with the popping tires.
> In a car, a flat tire would not have been an issue. In an SUV it was
> a big issue. Drive that SUV into the median trying to avoid a deer
> and see what happens. You can NOT claim they are safer without looking
> at all possible situations. Same with winter driving. That SUV with
> high ground clearence may go fine in the snow but when it comes time
> to stop it will be far less controllable then a car under the same
> conditions. 4x4 has nothing to do with your braking. This safer
> concept is a very big misconception and there is no way around these
> facts.

NTSB found that the Volve XC90 is the "safest" in its class. This has to do with headon collisions, rollovers, etc. Not vs. a smaller car. XC90 handles more like a car because it is based on a car's platform/chasis, not a truck chasis like so many American SUV's (not that Volvo isn't American since it is owned by Ford.)

> I am not against SUV at all, just people who make generalizations and
> don't understand the pluses and minuses of what they are driving.

One cannot enter in to this thread (not directed at you in particular) with out making some generalizations pro or con. The generalization that started this all was that SUV drivers are wealthy, obnoxious, self centered etc. See below, italics mine.
>>That's when I tell them to get over it and themselves. Also, has anyone
ever noticed how the really obnoxious drivers have "customized" license
plates, such as their name, on their SUV? Note I DID say "SUV" and not
car or truck, because the rich people seem to have an SUV fetish. They
think they're SOO special that they simply can't have a "regular" plate
like everyone else and HAVE to have their own special plate. Pathetic...<<

Feverish
July 1st 03, 01:43 AM
Found out something interesting today, Qwest will credit you if you have a
good customer rating. After 4 years I can get a new phone at new plan
rates, or transfer my existing service to a family member at considerably
better per month rates. I found this out ONLY because I called to cancel my
account today, to make the switch to Sprint because of its nationwide plan.

--
Les R
The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
All Outgoing Mail Certified by NAV
"Anonymous" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> >No, not really... Someone has to pay for that phone you got for next to
> >nothing. Usually, Sprint's eating up the cost. And if existing
customers
> >decided to buy new phones every two or three months or so at the
activation
> >price, Sprint would never recoup their losses.
>
> Every three months is extreme. They should certainly let existing
customers buy new phones at the
> activiation price at the end of their contract.
>
> Othewise, customers will simply get a phone with another carrier at the
activation price (and now
> they can take their number with them). I'm sure people on $75/month +
plans more than pay for
> their phones in a few of months. If Sprint let's these people walk, then
that stock price is going
> to stay around $5/share, if not got lower.
>
> A certain amount of promotion and luring of new customers is
understandable, but Sprint really,
> really needs to concentrate on existing customer retention. This should be
priority #1. Not only is
> it more profitable, but the reputation will carry forward, and marketing
costs and churn will
> decrease.
>
> If an existing customer goes elswehere for six months, and then signs back
up with Sprint getting a
> (probably new, better, and more costly) phone discount - all Sprint has
done is lost six months of
> customer revenue. They haven't saved themselves a thin dime, and they
haven't "recouped" a damn
> thing.
>
> Customer retention, customer retention, customer retention. It's
reflected in the shareprice.
> Every Sprint employee should have "Customer Retention" tatooed on their
foreheads so that they
> learn the key to becoming #1 in this competitive industry.
>

Michael Lynch
July 1st 03, 03:01 AM
"Steven J. Sobol" > wrote in message
...
> From Feverish ):
> > Didn't mean to imply you were picking on me.
> > CUV's drive more like cars irrespective of their size because they are
based
> > on an Auto platform rather than a truck platform,
>
> Huh?
>
> I know for a fact that the Expedition my mother used to drive is built
> on a Ford F250 chassis, and that the Excursion was built on a Ford
> Econoline full-sized van chassis.

And this, folks, is what happens when autos are discussed in a cell-phone
news group. ^_^

The Expedition was built on an F-150 chassis till the 2003 model-year. It
now uses a different chassis (but I suspect it'll be the same as the
upcoming newly-redesigned 2004 F-150s).

And "Econoline?" What the heck were you smoking? The Excursion uses Ford's
Super Duty pickup truck chassis.


--
Mike Lynch

Roy N.
July 1st 03, 04:44 AM
Here's another person willing to destroy the planet and endanger is
neighbors because of pure VANITY.

Find a minivan you like or get a 4WD that doesn't cause so many problems.
There are plenty of cars with 4WD that do not unneccesarily endanger the
planet or human beings.

You are a good example of a stupid person making a stuped comment. Extract
your cranium from your rectum and open your eyes. The world does NOT revolve
around you.

"nogoer" > wrote in message
...
>
> My finacee drives an suv 10 miles to work. Minivans are UGLY! The suv
> may never go off road but i feel much better knowing in snow she has a
> better chance of getting home safer because of the 4 whell drive.
>
> Stupid comments make stupid people.
>
> --
> Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
> Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap
>

Roy N.
July 1st 03, 04:53 AM
LOL!!!!

"Michael Lynch" > wrote in message
...
> "Steven J. Sobol" > wrote in message
> ...
> > From Feverish ):
> > > Didn't mean to imply you were picking on me.
> > > CUV's drive more like cars irrespective of their size because they are
> based
> > > on an Auto platform rather than a truck platform,
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > I know for a fact that the Expedition my mother used to drive is built
> > on a Ford F250 chassis, and that the Excursion was built on a Ford
> > Econoline full-sized van chassis.
>
> And this, folks, is what happens when autos are discussed in a cell-phone
> news group. ^_^
>
> The Expedition was built on an F-150 chassis till the 2003 model-year. It
> now uses a different chassis (but I suspect it'll be the same as the
> upcoming newly-redesigned 2004 F-150s).
>
> And "Econoline?" What the heck were you smoking? The Excursion uses Ford's
> Super Duty pickup truck chassis.
>
>
> --
> Mike Lynch
>
>

Roy N.
July 1st 03, 05:03 AM
I believe Sprint pays dealers a hefty chunk of change if the user remains on
the plan for three months. Also, margins on accessories are like 90%.


"starwars" > wrote in message
elinux.net...
> >And Sprint PCS not paying us for the difference between what we
> >paid for the phone and what the customer paid for the phone will make us
> >more money how?! For that matter the same thing goes for verizon.
>
> Sprint doesn't pay you the difference?
>
> Why in the heck are you even a Sprint dealer? You must take a bath
financially everytime you sign
> up a new customer, since you are selling phones for less than you paid for
them, and Sprint does
> not re-imburse you.
>
> You actually signed on to such an agreement? Why?
>

Bill T
July 1st 03, 05:20 AM
> > Oh yes, the SUV thing. Well I have three growing boys, we travel a lot,
> and
> > go camping frequently. In short we utilize the full vehicle.
>
> Oh, I'm sure most of us can agree with this. The SUVers that annoy me are
> those DON'T need it, and buy the vehicle just because they like to show
off
> that they're driving a big honkin' vehicle that could flatten any other
car
> out there on the road with the driver barely feeling a bump. I mean, does
> anyone in the US *REALLY* need a Hummer H2? how many of those drivers
> actually intend on taking those beasts out to go sloluming out in the sand
> pits, or using it to cross a shallow body of water, as was the original
> intent of the Humvee design?


Well, we got here a driver with *3* growing boys, an obvious indication for
a SUV. AND, he travels a lot! Plus..he camps!! A trifecta !!!

Geez H FKing C.

It's useless to argue. We will just have to bring the force of the Supreme
Court on their pointy little SUV ears (tragedy of the Commons and all
that ).

Hell, I may have to get a Hummer 2, or a Sherman tank, just for self
defence.


Bill

Carl.
July 1st 03, 06:25 AM
"starwars" > wrote in message
elinux.net...
> >And Sprint PCS not paying us for the difference between what we
> >paid for the phone and what the customer paid for the phone will make us
> >more money how?! For that matter the same thing goes for verizon.
>
> Sprint doesn't pay you the difference?
>
> Why in the heck are you even a Sprint dealer? You must take a bath
financially everytime you sign
> up a new customer, since you are selling phones for less than you paid for
them, and Sprint does
> not re-imburse you.
>
> You actually signed on to such an agreement? Why?

Sprint pays if the customer is a new sign-up. If the customer is not,
Sprint does not.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/26/2003

John Richards
July 1st 03, 03:38 PM
> My finacee drives an suv 10 miles to work. Minivans are UGLY! The suv
> may never go off road but i feel much better knowing in snow she has a
> better chance of getting home safer because of the 4 whell drive.

Just how does the 4 "whell" drive make it safer for your "finacee"?
Most people commute on streets and highways that don't require 4WD.

Mark L
July 1st 03, 11:07 PM
"Carl." > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Oh, and the people whining about how they are free to buy any vehicle can
> kiss my tailpipe. We're talking about driving on roads built with public
> money, so no you CAN'T do whatever you want.

If they are public roads, then it would stand to reason that I *own* part of
that road, and therefore should be able to drive what I want on said road,
no?

Oh, by the way, I also enjoy driving two-stroke powered machines like
snowmobiles, go-karts, and motorcycles. How do you like them apples?

Mark

Donkey Agony
July 1st 03, 11:11 PM
David L. Holiman wrote:

> That's when I tell them to get over it and themselves. Also, has
> anyone ever noticed how the really obnoxious drivers have
> "customized" license plates, such as their name, on their SUV? Note
> I DID say "SUV" and not car or truck, because the rich people seem to
> have an SUV fetish. They think they're SOO special that they simply
> can't have a "regular" plate like everyone else and HAVE to have
> their own special plate. Pathetic...

My Subaru Outback sedan, which (though just barely) qualifies as an SUV
since it has all-wheel-drive, has custom license plates, so you'd
probably think I'm a real creep. Except mine says "XML" -- which is not
my name nor that of my dog. Makes it real easy when you're on a trip
and you're in the motel lobby -- no more running out to your car because
you can't remember "ZQ35G4X" or some such. BTW, arrogance is unbecoming
of anyone, whether they happen to drive an SUV, or rail against their
owners. At least IMNSHO (the "NSH" part is apparently obligatory,
since I drive an SUV). ...

--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

Carl.
July 1st 03, 11:24 PM
"Mark L" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Carl." > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > Oh, and the people whining about how they are free to buy any vehicle
can
> > kiss my tailpipe. We're talking about driving on roads built with
public
> > money, so no you CAN'T do whatever you want.
>
> If they are public roads, then it would stand to reason that I *own* part
of
> that road, and therefore should be able to drive what I want on said road,
> no?
>
> Oh, by the way, I also enjoy driving two-stroke powered machines like
> snowmobiles, go-karts, and motorcycles. How do you like them apples?

You drive a snowmobile and a go-kart on the road?

BTW, just because you own part of it doesn't make it all yours. Everyone
using the road must abide by the rules agreed upon by society. Tough luck
for you. Not because you have to obey the law, but because you are a fool.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 6/25/2003

Mark L
July 2nd 03, 12:33 AM
"Carl." > wrote in message
. ..

> You drive a snowmobile and a go-kart on the road?

No, I don't drive them on the road. But they are big-bad-earth-polluting
machines that should also be banned, right? Although, technology is
improving in this area and there are now four-stroke machines in their first
years of existence (specifically talking about snowmmobiles here). I'll be
glad to own one when they can be purchased at a better price.

> BTW, just because you own part of it doesn't make it all yours. Everyone
> using the road must abide by the rules agreed upon by society.

I happen to agree with you. It's not all mine, but part of it is. If I
choose to drive a SUV, that is within my legal right, as directed by the
society that you refer to.

> Tough luck for you. Not because you have to obey the law, but because you
are a fool.

Um, not sure what the objective of that statement was. What part of my post
makes me a fool?

Mark

Isaiah Beard
July 2nd 03, 03:36 PM
"Mark L" > wrote in message
. ..

> If they are public roads, then it would stand to reason that I *own* part
of
> that road, and therefore should be able to drive what I want on said road,
> no?

You could argue that. But every state pretty much follows the doctrine that
while everyone who pays their taxes does in fact own the road (unless it's a
toll road), the ability to drive on it IS still a privilege, not a right.

halo17x
July 2nd 03, 08:54 PM
>If they are public roads, then it would stand to reason that I >*own*
part of
>that road, and therefore should be able to drive what I want on >said
road,
>no?

No offense to you at all in particular, but this is the kind of
attitude that creates road rage. Countless times I've seen a normal
person trying to merge into another lane and the person who is in that
lane and a a bit behind speeds up and not lets the other person merge
in. That's what "own part of the road" gives you.

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

Mark L
July 3rd 03, 04:43 AM
"halo17x" > wrote in message
...
> No offense to you at all in particular, but this is the kind of
> attitude that creates road rage. Countless times I've seen a normal
> person trying to merge into another lane and the person who is in that
> lane and a a bit behind speeds up and not lets the other person merge
> in. That's what "own part of the road" gives you.


No offense taken halo, but you are applying what I said and reapplying it to
a different, though, related problem.

My post:
>
> >If they are public roads, then it would stand to reason that I >*own*
> part of
> >that road, and therefore should be able to drive what I want on >said
> road,
> >no?
>
I was attempting to partially play the role of devil's advocate and
partially serious. But in my post I was talking about WHAT I could drive on
the road, not which particular PART I thought I could drive on. At any
rate, I think there is too much grand standing on the part of a lot of SUV
owners, and a lot of whining on the part of non-SUV owners. It's American,
and the great thing about this country, if everyone coooperates, is that you
can have your cake and eat it too. This topic has been beaten down rather
quickly, but I think people can have their SUV's if they want, and consumers
as a whole are demanding better gas milage and safety features, which
ultimately is what the SUV haters want.. better gas saving features and
better safety.

Mark

gmp029
July 3rd 03, 05:39 AM
my 92 oldsmobile cutlass ciera gets 24 mpg (mostly highway) and my boss
drives a jeep grand cherokee and almost whacked my beloved olds once
because we were both making left hand turns and he was supposed to turn
into one lane and I another, but he decided to turn into mine... i've
noticed that SUV's tend to do this to me alot at that intersection...
wow that was a random post...
anyways, yea stupid people in stores can be funny to watch as long as
ur not the CS rep who is taking care of said person!

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

Wirefree
July 4th 03, 12:43 PM
The interstates were built to facilitate the movement of the millitary
in defence of this country. The federal government can close any part
of it to public access at any time if the need arises.

--
Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap

Roy N.
July 5th 03, 07:49 PM
This is a great example of why this country is so F'd up. Between psychos
like this guy and the 50% illiteracy rate in this country we are all doomed.


"starwars" > wrote in message
elinux.net...
>
> >Are you kidding me? Where do you people come up with this garbage?
>
> Brain cells and neuro-chemicals.
>
> >You think you own the road because a few of your tax dollars helped pay
for
> >it and maintain it?
>
> Yep. That's why the roads are called "public". I own them, you own them,
every taxpayer owns
> them ...
>
> >Heck, even if you don't ever plan on owning a car, the
> >fact that roads exists is a benefit to you.
>
> Some more than others.
>
> >Otherwise how would your mail be delivered?
>
> Ethernet Cable.
>
> Seriously, included in the price of postage. The companies and people who
use the roads should
> pay for them. Post office doesn't deliver mail for free.
>
> > How would there be any commerce for the products you use to be
manufactured, delivered, etc.
>
> The companies producing and receiving the goods would pay usage fees which
would pay for whatever
> roads they used. I don't buy airplanes, or pay the runway fees and
takeoff/departure fees for
> UPS or FedEx. They include that in what they charge to the customer.
>
> >Where did you get the crack you are smoking?
>
> From the top drawer of your dresser.
>
> >The road is something that would be useless without strict rules and the
> >government will dictate those rules in a manner that they determint to be
in
> >the best interest of everyone.
>
> True. But nobody should be forced to pay for something - and then be told
that it is a
> "priviledge" when they attempt to use it. Is it a "privilege" for me to
eat the loaf of bread I
> buy from the grocery store? You say yes, I say no ... I guess we'll have
to agree to disagree.
>
> Oh, and seeing how we are on crack, here is a tip from a crackhead: Not
everything the goverment
> does is "in the best interest of everyone". Usually it is in the best
interest of a particular
> special interest group, in the interest of monied or influential group,
it raises revenue for
> the governnment, or for 100 other reasons wholly unrelated to the "best
interests of everyone".
>
> > Thus, we have speed limits, helmet laws, seatbelt laws, etc.
>
> All which are pretty silly, IMHO.
>
> That's for revenue, not concern of safety. Otherwise, why would they fine
you for risking your
> own safety? Wouldn't they hold your hand and offer counseling instead?
Is an $80 ticket going
> to change someone's lifestyle? You can't protect people from themselves.
If they don't want to
> wear helmets or seatbelts ... well, they take that risk. It's probably
more dangrous to eat at
> McDonald's 5 days out the week than not wear a seatbelt, but there is no
law against that. Same
> for rock climbing, and walking through the South Bronx alone with $100,000
worth of jewelry. No
> laws against that either, but not incredibly smart. It's all about the
$$$
>
> Ah, as for speeding, if you get on any major freeway and find even one
person driving at or below
> the speed limit - you've basically found something as rare as a unicorn.
It's more hazardous to
> drive less than 5 miles per hour over the speed limit, because you will
impede traffic and create
> more hazards than you solve. It's simple reality. Speeding tickets are
just another form of
> tax. They just pick cars out at random (inusrance rates for red cars are
higher than others
> because they chosen more often for tickets due to the eye-catching colors
..... safety????). LOL.
> Surely you jest.
>
> They should be patrolling the roads and concentrating on people driving
recklessly and dangrously
> .. but instead, they pull over John and Jane Doe who ware just going with
the flow of traffic.
> They are never around when that asshole is on your bumper flashing his
lights, or when that car
> weaves right in front of you without signalling - they are too busy
collecting taxes.
>
> >it can legislate their use just as it legislates everything else that
happens on the roads.
>
> It will legislate whatever will make it the most money. Oh, and you still
own the roads.
>
> >You do NOT own the road anymore than you own the courthouse that your tax
dollars went to build
> >and maintain.
>
> I do own that courthouse. And so do you. We all own it. And you have a
right to go to it ...
> if you want to. It's not a priviledge to file a lawsuit. It is a right.
You may not win, but
> your ability to seek a legal remedy is most certainly a right.
>
>
> >Sheesh people, get a clue!
>
> Baaaahhhhh says the brainwashed sheep.
>
> "The best interest of everyone", ROFLMAO!!!!
>

Isaiah Beard
July 7th 03, 03:12 PM
"Anonymous" > wrote in message
news:[email protected] rd.de...

> The state tries to sell the public what they think the public will buy.
Kind of like our
> "democracy" where we have a choice of two people who basically have the
same views.

Right, here we go with government conspiracy theories and armchair
politicking. Before Godwin's Law demonstrates itself, I'm going ot recuse
myself from this thread.

Carl.
July 7th 03, 04:55 PM
"Isaiah Beard" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Anonymous" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected] rd.de...
>
> > The state tries to sell the public what they think the public will buy.
> Kind of like our
> > "democracy" where we have a choice of two people who basically have the
> same views.
>
> Right, here we go with government conspiracy theories and armchair
> politicking. Before Godwin's Law demonstrates itself, I'm going ot recuse
> myself from this thread.

Sure, go ahead and give up like Hitler did!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/4/2003

Roy N.
July 8th 03, 03:31 AM
My point wasn't that illiterate people are stupid. My point is that there is
a problem when this country fails at something so basic as giving people the
basic skills to read and write. It is not good when half our population can
do neither.

I'm glad to hear your friend is doing so well financially. But don't you
think he would be better off, in the long run, if he was able to read and
write? I mean, how does he select investment vehicles? How does he put his
money to work so that his children can have a better education than he did?
How does he select the best long distance plan, or even best cell phone if
he can't read?

My point is that illiteracy is bad, not that illiterate people are bad.

"davebug" > wrote in message
...
>
> "This is a great example of why this country is so F'd up. Between
> psychos
> like this guy and the 50% illiteracy rate in this country we are all
> doomed."
>
> While first of all some of you people need to do some research before
> you open your yaps. one of those people that fall into your 50%
> illiteracy rate provide a service you could not be without im sure. A
> good work buddy of mine who is also an ironworker is one of them. we
> builld the building you work in, the bridges you cross the parapit
> walls that save you from going over the edge. He is one of the nicest
> guys you will ever meet and will give you the shirt off his back. But
> dont get the stereo type that all construction workers are not smart,
> because thats not true either my self and my 2 brothers who are also
> ironworkers have all scored over 145 on IQ tests. Just another thing
> to think about that buddy who cant read or hardly sign his name makes
> $50k + a year and will retire when he is 48. I think the current
> pension is $55,400 a year with an anuity cash out of about $250k and
> great ben. i dont pay a single $ out of my pocket medical. So that guy
> who cant read whith the best pesion in the US just might be doing
> better than you. I'll be sure to wave as i go by this winter when your
> in the ditch, oh and last year i think i pulled over 10 cars and 1
> police car back on to the road with my jeep.
>
> --
> Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
> Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap
>

David J. Zera
July 9th 03, 02:25 AM
Rich,

I believe that T-mobile requires you to be with out service with them for
over 90 days to qualify as a new customer.

D ZERA
"Rich Cacace" <richcacace-REMOVE TO > wrote in message
. net...
> I'm a T-Mobil customer. If they wouldn't give me a new phone at the
intro.
> price & would just cancel my service & start new again. I don't use my
> allotted minutes anyway I've got nothing to lose - T-Mobil didn't offer me
a
> thing to keep me as a customer - other than the telephone number what else
> have I got to lose? I don't have a business to worry about either.
>
>
> "nobodybutme" > wrote in message
> s.com...
> > A young couple claiming to be existing Sprint customers just couldn't
> > understand why Radio Shack wouldn't sell them a phone at the new
> activation
> > price. Hubby was on his cell ranting and raving at Sprint customer
> service.
> > Wifey was yelling at the clerks. They weren't taking no for an answer.
> Quite
> > a scene...
> >
> >
>
>

Google