waywith said:
The articles are interesting, but my complaint is they don't rate enough handsets (only 24). Also, it's tough for me to believe that there weren't enough US Cellular customers in Chicago for them to have been included in the survey in that city. In the local CBS station's survey a few weeks ago, US Cellular came out very well, equal to or better than Verizon.

Sort of the point I made in my response to this exact post in the Sprint Forum. It's an interesting read...but people tend to take this magazine's information as gospel. 39,000 responses doesn't nearly speak for the 142 milliion cellular service subscribers (and that's just covering the big boys) we have in this country.

I know the standings have changed a bit but last time around Consumer Reports only rated the top 6 carriers nationwide- USCC was #8 then.

f38urry said:
The survey was taken only of subscribers to ConsumerReports.org. They didn't solicit responses from subscribers to the print version of the publication. Had they done that, they would have had an even more gigantic sampling, probably with very similar results.

Although I am not privy to the details of the survey, I surmise that it was either an online questionnaire via a link at their website, or it was emailed to all online subscribers.

The demographics were probably of an educated, technically aware, over age 21, sampling of the general population. I'd think that there would be a similar demographic for Cosmopolitan and Car & Driver.

His point is that the sample is skewed. And everyone...
(continues)

muchdrama:

I cannot agree with you, schnozejt stated:

"Back to the point, this study reviews experiences of 39,000 CONSUMER REPORTS subscribers. Does anyone see a problem on WHO is studied? By reviewing this specific demographic the study became tilted towards VZW."

The CR survey sampled 39,000 subscribers of ALL national wireless company service providers. How can anyone come to a conclusion such as the one stated above? Where's the tilt or how can you or he come to a conclusion that "the sample is skewed"? Please provide your rationale after you have read the specific CR article.

f38urry said:
muchdrama:

I cannot agree with you, schnozejt stated:

"Back to the point, this study reviews experiences of 39,000 CONSUMER REPORTS subscribers. Does anyone see a problem on WHO is studied? By reviewing this specific demographic the study became tilted towards VZW."

The CR survey sampled 39,000 subscribers of ALL national wireless company service providers. How can anyone come to a conclusion such as the one stated above? Where's the tilt or how can you or he come to a conclusion that "the sample is skewed"? Please provide your rationale after you have read the specific CR article.

I read the article. And my rationale is this: 39,000 people in...
(continues)

muchdrama:

I believe that you should do some reading about how polls and surveys are conducted. Here is a bi tfor your information. You can find vast volumes of similar material to read.

One key question faced by Gallup statisticians: how many interviews does it take to provide an adequate cross-section of Americans? The answer is, not many -- that is, if the respondents to be interviewed are selected entirely at random, giving every adult American an equal probability of falling into the sample. The current US adult population in the continental United States is 187 million. The typical sample size for a Gallup poll which is designed to represent this general population is 1,000 national adults.

The actual number of people wh ...
(continues)

f38urry said:
muchdrama:

I believe that you should do some reading about how polls and surveys are conducted. Here is a bi tfor your information. You can find vast volumes of similar material to read.

One key question faced by Gallup statisticians: how many interviews does it take to provide an adequate cross-section of Americans? The answer is, not many -- that is, if the respondents to be interviewed are selected entirely at random, giving every adult American an equal probability of falling into the sample. The current US adult population in the continental United States is 187 million. The typical sample size for a Gallup poll which is designed to represent this general population is 1,000 national adults.

...
(continues)

You can knock the Consumer's Report poll all day, but its findings are highly respected among consumers and will be a big selling point for Verizon. Whether their findings are accurate or not (assuming, even, that there is such a thing as a way to measure accuracy in such matters) is irrelevant.

muchdrama:

Try Bush versus Kerry, and try to open your eyes to reality.

Read and learn.

f38urry, I agree with you on the value of the Consumer Reports article, but that is no reason to get snippy. MuchD is entitled to his opinion.

Mea culpa.

Glad you see that. Messages presented politely are usually more likely to be heard out, assuming an adult audience.

But you also have to understand, furry, this is one of those (rare) issues where it really doesn't matter what the reps think. The mag is called Consumer Reports, and right now hundreds of thousands of consumers are reading it or browsing it on the web, and are being by it to whatever extent.

Therefore, you really don't have to spend a lot of time trying to argue all reps into accepting the results, and its somewhat futile to do so anyways, as it was predictable at the outset that reps of the carriers that did well in the survey were likely to accept the results no matter what, and reps of the low-scoring carriers...
(continues)

with some notable, non-party-line exceptions (muchdrama, speck).

It's delightful to be recognized for my non-conformist views.

IMO, non-conformity, unless done solely for effect, is generally one of the signs of an advanced mind.

The easy, non-challenging mental path is usually to accept the party-line at face-value at every turn, without examining it whatsoever ☹️

BetterThanJake said:
IMO, non-conformity, unless done solely for effect, is generally one of the signs of an advanced mind.

The easy, non-challenging mental path is usually to accept the party-line at face-value at every turn, without examining it whatsoever ☹️

I think that's why clinton was so popular. he was conservaitive in areas and progressive in others.

f38urry said:
muchdrama:

Try Bush versus Kerry, and try to open your eyes to reality.

Read and learn.

My point is that these polls/surveys are not always accurate. THAT's my point.

muchdrama said:

f38urry said:
muchdrama:

Try Bush versus Kerry, and try to open your eyes to reality.

Read and learn.

My point is that these polls/surveys are not always accurate. THAT's my point.

you could also say Bush versus Clinton. The polls said Clinton should have lost. The same thing happened with Nixon versus Kennedy. Once again I will say it. I think polls are done more to form an opinion than to actually get an opinion.

PhoenixAshes said:

muchdrama said:

f38urry said:
muchdrama:

Try Bush versus Kerry, and try to open your eyes to reality.

Read and learn.

My point is that these polls/surveys are not always accurate. THAT's my point.

you could also say Bush versus Clinton. The polls said Clinton should have lost. The same thing happened with Nixon versus Kennedy. Once again I will say it. I think polls are done more to form an opinion than to actually get an opinion.

Or to get any kind of accurate result. Go Dewey!

PhoenixAshes said:
you could also say Bush versus Clinton. The polls said Clinton should have lost. The same thing happened with Nixon versus Kennedy. Once again I will say it. I think polls are done more to form an opinion than to actually get an opinion.

Actually, Bush Sr.'s own internal polls showed, a few days before the election, that he was going to lose for certain, and that there was no way out of it. This was recounted by Mary Matalin, one of his senior campaign advisors, in an interview. She was trying to make some sort of point about how 'brave' he was in the final few days of the '92 campaign, in the face of certain defeat.

Far as Nixon-Kennedy goes, don't know thats really a fair point, consi...
(continues)

BetterThanJake said:

PhoenixAshes said:
you could also say Bush versus Clinton. The polls said Clinton should have lost. The same thing happened with Nixon versus Kennedy. Once again I will say it. I think polls are done more to form an opinion than to actually get an opinion.

Actually, Bush Sr.'s own internal polls showed, a few days before the election, that he was going to lose for certain, and that there was no way out of it. This was recounted by Mary Matalin, one of his senior campaign advisors, in an interview. She was trying to make some sort of point about how 'brave' he was in the final few days of the '92 campaign, in the face of certain defeat.

Far as Nixon-Kennedy goes, do

...
(continues)

If the final polls in illinois in 1960 had nixon leading kennedy by greater than the margin of error of the polls of that time, then you have a point. However, I don't have access to that info, and simple google searches aren't yielding much 'cept this link

http://www.leinsdorf.com/1960polls.htm »

(not that I'm trying hard- I'm currently sick at home with a pretty vicious flu).

If you can find some concrete info regarding this, please toss a link. But also realize that even if that was the case, survey and polling science is bound to have progressed some since 1960.

Sorry, man, i don't have a link. I am bored however so i may look it up. I do remember that Nixon and the republicans made a big nasty stink over illinois because he was "supposed" to win there. in 1960, illinois was the nations "florida". in the end, nixon conceeded to save face. It helped him because he later won the office.

Cool. Although technically, Illinois is not "Florida 1960". Kennedy won by 84 electoral votes, so even if Illinois had swung to Nixon, he still would've lost.

That said, anything that even looks like voter fraud should always be looked at under a microscope, regardless of whether it can swing an election or not.

MuchD, much as I hate to disagree with you in any way, statistical science seems to agree that you can, with some degree of confidence, use a sample size of far less than 100% and still get accurate results, within a certain percentage margin of error.

For example, in political campaigns, such as the recent presidential election, 100 million plus likely voters were routinely represented by around 1,000 polled voters, and mostly accurately too. Its all in how you do the poll/survey, and its easy to screw it up admittedly, but yeah, you can certainly get good results from surveys that don't poll every single person.

That said, I haven't seen the Consumer Reports methodology. It could be bad. But the sample size isn't.

Its just you.

f38urry, I don't have the CR article yet. What were the results?

Not accusing anyone of anything, but it seems reasonable to assume that at least some reps of the low-scoring companies would be more likely to dismiss the survey simply because their particular company didn't do well. Which is not to say that the survey is perfect, or that one cannot have legit beefs with it.

BetterThanJake:

I was hoping not to reveal the details until more folks read the complete three-page article. However, The "V" company was on top in every one of the seventeen markets surveyed. The "T" company came in second, and the rest were MUCH further back.

I would agree with the CR sample, much more than just a CR review. 39,000 replies is a killer survey. 50 states of results is something someone would want to look at, even if you disagree with the end result. When was the last time Cingular or Verizon or whoever asked you your opinion of their service? Ever? Remember getting bothered several times daily by "surveys" you hung up on?

Some posters already have their minds made up about the sample and it appears no one has actually read the survey.

Some reps here have only dealt with customers for a few years or less, yet THEIR opinion is Gospel? Based on what, what undoubtedly is less than 39,000 customer interactions??? Readers are supposed to believe you? Lighten up folks, you might f...
(continues)

No it's not just me... almost every person who has responded to these multiple threads have said the same thing... the survey is flawed.

PhoenixAshes (Cain?):

Please read my Monday, January 3, 6:21 PM response to muchdrama. No, the survey is not flawed. The uninformed may consider it so, only because they know little about sample sizes. Just do the reading. Gallup, Harris, and the other pollsters typically poll fewer than 1,000 people for statistically significant results.

Correct me if i'm wrong though... Isn't the theory behind polls... Always hypothetical?

Though it's true they present an insight and sometimes a remarkable accuracy on things... They are just estimates... I understand where the rebuttle to the poll comes from and even understand the theory itself... Nevertheless though... Both sides are arguing about a hypothetical survey which bears no concrete evidence...

Agreed, it's a well written article and a MUST read if you're in the industry... but... It's still... just a survey... not a passage from the wireless bible...

If the survey is so skewed, explain to me why VZW is adding customers at a rate that exceeds both Cingular and Sprint combined. This does after all reflect the outcome of the survey. Maybe these numbers are somehow skewed as well? Reality is hard for some to accept but eventually will hit them right up side the head 😲

I never said it was skewed... I was referring to how pationate both side were arguing over the reliability of a poll... I was stating that it was just a poll and nobody should have gotten so high strung over the credibility of it...

There was really no need to get arrogant... I do not belittle VZW in any way and have never removed credit towards them that has been due...

However, the relevance of your post to mine is lost... 🙄