Verizon tells AT&T, “The truth hurts”
Verizon’s commercials ridiculing AT&T’s 3G coverage may have sparked a lawsuit, but the company stands by the campaign saying the, “ads are true and the truth hurts.”
It all started with Verizon’s ad with the slogan, “There’s a map for that.” At the end of the ad, Verizon shows a map of their 3G coverage area alongside one of AT&T’s 3G coverage.
The ad prompted AT&T to cry foul on the basis that the company provides expansive 2G network coverage in addition to 3G. AT&T claims the ads are misleading people into believing that the company doesn’t provide any coverage over much of the country.
So AT&T filed a lawsuit and a request for an emergency injunction against Verizon continuing to run the ads. However Verizon hasn’t back down under these legal threats.
Here’s what Verizon told the court in its response to AT&T’s claims:
AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts… AT&T now is attempting to silence Verizon’s ads that include maps graphically depicting the geographic reach of AT&T’s 3G network as compared to Verizon’s own 3G network because AT&T does not like the truthful picture painted by that comparison.
Ouch. So not only is Verizon standing by the integrity of its advertising campaign, its basically calling the lawsuit filed by AT&T nothing but sour grapes.
Verizon later goes on to ridicule AT&T’s request for an emergency injunction:
AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon’s side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T’s confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business, and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly. AT&T may not like the message that the ads send, but this Court should reject its efforts to silence the messenger.
We couldn’t agree more. So how many of you AT&T customers jumped ship for Droid or Verizon’s more reliability voice and data network?
Related Posts:
November 17th, 2009
The unfortunate part of this for ATT is that even in the areas they DO have really good 3G coverage, they’ve oversold the service due to that popularity of the iPhone and EVERYONE with a 3G device suffers due to the inefficiency of iPhone 3 data usage. The “real web” is nice and all, but it’s a HUGE hog of network bandwidth, and ATT’s network currently can’t keep up with demand.
Hey, if Verizon had the iPhone first rather than ATT, I have no doubt the tables would be turned right now and ATT would be putting out ads touting the “speed” of their 3G network over Verizon oversaturated with iPhone’s. If DROID really gains in market share, I’ve no doubt Verizon’s network will soon be struggling with some of the same issues ATT has right now. Android’s browser is just as inefficent over a mobile wireless network as is iPhone, so hopefully Verizon is beefing up EV-DO infrastructure to keep up. Sprint WOULD be having similar issues right now if the Pre had taken off, but it didn’t. And TMO’s 3G could soon be similarly suffering if the new BlackBerry 9700 (the first BlackBerry with TMO 3G data) is as hot a seller as many expected it to be.
So, yeah, Verizon is right. Sour grapes ATT. Reap what you sow.
November 17th, 2009
Not only is Verizon better in 3G service, Verizon also has much better voice coverage. My brother in law has at&t and cannot use its “service” in areas where Verizon works great there.
Both are modern phones. I suspect that it is due to the GSM technology that at&t uses with GSM’s “patchwork” coverage that seemingly only covers major metro areas and major highways and little beyond that.
Georgia is the glaring example, go south into Georgia and East of Interstate 75, there is solid “white”.
There are large patches of “white” (no coverage) in at&t’s own coverage maps from Virginia into West Virginia, Kentucky, parts of Tennessee, Ohio, Pennsylvania, NY State, Georgia, Missouri, Arkansas and more than half the State of California has no GSM coverage.
Don’t take my word for it, look for yourself.
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=voice
Contrast that to Verizon which uses CDMA and it is solid coverage not just major highways and metro areas…but everywhere.
Our contract was up with Verizon and we looked at other plans from other carriers. We are sticking with Verizon. Maybe someday at&t will catch up….
January 31st, 2011
Thank you! You often write really fascinating posts. You enhanced my mood.