Okay, I can more see your point now. The only thing I can really say is about, well how you put it “they got caught when they accidentally allowed SERO plan holders to activate Instinct”.

If Sprint did make a mistake at some point whether advertising, sales staff, corporate, etc. and they discovered that they would be loosing money with a SERO customer having an Instinct, what should they do? I know that especially with large corporations we think we can demand this or that, and claim false advertising, etc, etc. Hell I do it myself. But seriously how far do they have to go to fulfill the mistakes? Usually it is a refund or something similar, correct? As of right now what are they offering?

And those of you on SERO, I would understand that you would be unhappy about being misled or felt excited only to be left down but would you expect a company to pick up a portion of your tab and loose money just for your service? This really reminds me of how my 3 year old acts if we talk about going to the park and it rains. I understand that it is very different especially because it involves your time, gas, patience. All in all, we can’t just demand that we deserve everything, or can we?

With unlimited messaging now a part of SERO, there is no valid technical reason why Instinct would not “fully work” on SERO. In fact, we proved that it would when they were activated.

This is merely a financial ploy to prevent SERO plan holders from using Instinct. And, they got caught when they accidentally allowed SERO plan holders to activate Instinct, providing technical proof that it would “fully work”.

I suspect that is the main reason why we cannot get any comment about Sprint kicking SERO owners off of Instinct. Anything they say (without changing policy) would just dig a deeper hole.

I thought I was semi-clear, first, I didn’t really know the background behind the issue. I was stating that Sprint’s corporate offices passed down the memo that SERO plans would ultimately not work but if the customers choose so, they could purchase the phone with a requirement that they change plans within x amount of days. Not all of the Sprint store sales employees passed the information down to the customers. So, whether Sprint’s corporate offices should have known that it wouldn’t work OR the sales staff aren’t the brightest bunch, Sprint IS to blame.
All I was doing was breaking it apart just a bit. I do that when people start to think that issues like this are some evil scheme… Kind of like the dude who posted under yours with his “go after these individuals” like it was some conspiracy against them.

Oh well, it really is like I said though, which one sucks the least..?

SHOULD BE

in regard to

*******************

That sucks that Sprint has decided to hide it and actually go after these individuals (how many?) unless they don’t want to set a precedent that others will use as leverage to get it on their SERO plan as did others.

What I could say is a problem is that they left it up to their sales staff to communicate this. Perhaps they could have known a problem would have occurred. As for their plan requirement in general, why would they sell a phone, advertise all the features it could have, then let it go on plans that only allow talk or text..? That is the kind of $*&# everyone used to complain about. False advertising, etc…

And a quick note about picking a carrier. The main thing is, “WHO SUCKS THE LEAST”! Then it is, “who sucks the least in your area” mixed with a “what phone do I like the most”. Many people base their selection off of customer support. That is as dumb as watching a horible movie released by say Sony Entertainment then choosing never to watch a movie produced by them again. Oh, and telling all of your friends and family what horrible movies they make. Well that’s not fair, let’s make it 3 or 4 of the movies released by Sony Entertainment. BUT to make it totally fair, lets put out every single movie released AND the person is picking the movies with a blind fold. THAT would be a similar situation.

With love and doubt,
Zac