Talk:Metro by T-Mobile

t-Mobile metro bowling ball

ball   Curtis

Untitled

MetroPCS does provide WAP internet on all current models, & html internet on select phones. Also all current plans automatically come with mobile internet included. Al.mymetropcs (talk)MetroPCS Rep

Customer Service

"Also, it is near impossible to reach a customer service representative without going to a store as the support phones are handled by computer operators." is false and should be removed unless there are any objections.

Thank you for that edit.

Why remove it? It IS near impossible to reach a customer service representative, and it's very frustrating.

A MetroPCS customer

== RE: When you call customer service and need help, try saying "Something else" at the prompt, and they'll push you through to an operator. Also, if you call in to the activation line, people answer in a matter of seconds.

You could also try calling a store directly or visiting one. The CSRs are there to help. After making this edit I called the sevice number (1-888-8metro8). Upon hearing the prompt, I said "something else", and it took me 2 1/2 minutes to get someone. I would say that's not too bad...

• • RE: Actually I am a metroPCS customer, and even though they have a voice recognition answering system you do not have to say "something else" or "I need something else". After it prompts you to enter or say your phone number after dialing 1-888-8metro8 you can press "7" and you will be automatically connected with a customer service representative within minutes. (R3445v 00:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC))

MetroPCS Customer #2

I have been a customer for almost 2 years. This is one of the most frustrating billers. They have an interesting business model...accept money only, no customer service. the customer service is completely dead ended. Just transferred back to Verizon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.206.159 (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

MetroPCS Rep #1 Been working for MetroPCS for a while now, and have never used the 1-888-8metro8 number, but know that it can take a while to get through, and once you do and they can't help you anymore over the phone, they will ask you to stop by a store. But for what its worth, if you find a store with people that have worked there long enough, and know what they are doing we can help you with any questions that you may have, so once you find us, stick to us. Also the MetroPCS website has improved alot, it's worth a look through. For such a low monthly fee, I would think it would be worth dropping by a store when there are any questions. Al.mymetropcs (talk) Al MetroPCS Rep

"Original research" isn't allowed, but as a customer I can say it's sometimes difficult to get to a human, but not impossible. MetroPCS seems to be growing faster than it's ability to keep up with customer support demand. I think it's fair for the article to say something about possible difficulties in getting a human on the phone. Also I've noticed problems with the website, and at least one customer service person (live, in a store) confirmed that the level of service is sporadic. None of this can be printed in the article, but these are the "tones" that I think could fairly be included if a reliable source is found.Jonny Quick (talk) 14:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Nationwide Calling

By Zipexec Zipexec (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)....you still cannot call unlimited nationwide like their ads state...Hawaii and Alaska are not (according to MPCS) in our nation...you have to buy the most expensive plan and then add $5 more for international calls. But you can call parts of Mexico and Puerto Rico???? Not to mention that many 800 numbers do not work??? This is falsely advertised as an "unlimited nationwide network" for all plans and it's simply not true...

Al the Metro Guy So Metro covers all calls within the continental US & Puerto Rico. Yes Alaska and Hawaii are part of the US, but so is American Samoa, and US Virgin Islands, but all these places aren't covered on the basic plans. But my guess is the costs are pretty hefty for these calls, and to keep plans at such a low rate, these are one of the features removed

By Aerodrown I don't want to actually change the page, because I'm paranoid I'll screw something up, but I am a metroPCS employee and have a few corrections/ thoughts.

1. The areas we currently provide for are Atlanta, pretty much the entire peninsula of Florida (the actual markets are Miami, Lakeland, Orlando, and Tampa), Sacramento, San Francisco, Dallas, and Detroit, with set plans to open one in Los Angeles and New York, as well as tentative plans for Las Vegas. 2. The plans are, briefly, as follows (this is not an advert, simply a summation):

    U30 - unlimited local calling with no ability to add features
    U35 - unlimited local and long distance, with "ability" to add features
    U40 - unlimited local and long distance, with basic phone features and SMS (National)
    U45 - The U40 with SMS/MMS (Global), and unlimited web and mobile IM capabilities
    U50 - The U45 with unlimited email capabilities

3. Phones offered are by Audiovox/UTStarcom, Motorola, Nokia, LG, Sony, Samsung, and Kyocera 4. MetroPCS does, indeed, ofer a great deal of live customer support. I am a MPCS call center employee, and all it requires to speak to a representative is dialing the number, selecting english, and when the menu comes up just press 7. You may wait in queue for a few minutes, but we will answer your question to the best of our abilities. When you call, however, the call goes to one of several call centers, depending on how far in queue we are and how the ops decide to disperse them. You may get the Tijuana call center, which is hard to understand, but so long as you get a US call center you should get all teh help you need. (Note: randomly, i just decided to call the MPCS 888 number, and it took me 33 seconds to get someone on the phone, having never even called before, and not knowing anything about the automated system)

Unreferenced opinion and original research

The following its taken from the article. It's interesting, but cites no references and makes many claims. Please note, wikipedia is not a place to do original research (ie. you should not put your personal thoughts or experiences in here). Each fact or claim should be backed up with a reference. If someone can find references for all these statements (like news articles), it'd be great to put them back in the article. Please don't put this back in until references can be found. Thanks! Jumpfroggy 11:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

MetroPCS is very popular with the youth market, mostly due to the ease with which service can be obtained and lack of a required credit card or check. Any concern or question not addressed by the automated phone support line will eventually be switched to a live customer support line which will help with any problem that arise with the phone service. Live customer service representatives purport to have no authority to make any refunds for any reason, and will generally hang up on any customer with any type of complaint that might require more than a minute or two to address. Requesting a supervisor will result in either a long hold time, a redirect to the "supervisor's" voice mail (with no return call) or a hang up. Although the customer service representatives identify themselves by name and number, the numbers appear to be made up and a representative can not later be located or identified by the number he or she gave. Most problems will necessitate a visit to a MetroPCS corporate store, for which MetroPCS charges an additional fee (for instance bill payment is free online if you do not request a bill, but a copy of a bill costs two dollars, and paying the bill at the corporate store incurs a three dollar fee). Recently MetroPCS in Detroit has raised monthly rates a few cents each month and claimed this increase is due to "taxes increasing". When pressed they will admit the "tax" is the federally authorized expense recapture fee which MetroPCS charges its customers.‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› 

Coverage Area

I belive that we should add a "Coverage Area" section of the page. I don't want to do it because I may mess up the wikipedia page =p. Well anyways if you believe this is a good idea please reply, thank you. R3445v (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• • Agreed, and also afraid to make any edits on this page. Still working out my own kinks. Samuraidrive (talk) 14:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• • I could throw it up. Give me a couple of days, and I'll actually gather the correctly cited materials. Someone will have to stay on top of it though, as its always expanding. Florida just added Melbourne to Daytona Beach, for example. And lets hope that new spectrum auction they won means more markets in the near future. Shinrar (talk) 03:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Plans

The mathematical citations on the "Plans" part of this article are both incorrect and unnecessary. Incorrect because the activation fee is actually $15, not $25. Unnecessary because the fact that they don't have contracts is reason enough to explain the full price charged for the phones. The fact that you get your first month free and activation free is an explanation in itself of the savings incurred with a phone purchase. Any objections? Samuraidrive (talk) 14:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• • I agree with this completely. Paying for the phone at full price is due to the reason MetroPCS does not have contracts. Also, the free first month and activation. R3445v (talk) 06:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no "Plans" part of this article! Unfree (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Three years ago there was such a portion. It has since been removed. Cheers 69.155.81.39 (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

"coverage"

The coverage section should be fixed -- MetroPCS HOME coverage area includes only Atlanta, Florida, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Detroit/Grand Rapids, Boston/New York/Philadelphia, and Dallas/Fort Worth, as well as adjacent areas. Anything else would be considered "EXTENDED" coverage, available with specific plans or with an extra monthly fee. 76.112.125.229 (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

News Releasey

I this this article reads a lot like a news release and it seems that new additions to the article are making it more so--209.181.16.93 (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

It's a very unusual article to have this news-ticker style. Probably needs a rewrite.--Lester 00:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Whatever that style was, it's gone now. Unfree (talk) 17:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Metroweb

What the hell is this? wap? edge? 3g? shenenigans? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.198.28.100 (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Phone models

As it exists now, this article is little more than two long lists, of "current models" and "past models". Please, could somebody add "[hide]" buttons to these lists? Unfree (talk) 15:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Empty article

There's nothing here! It should be pointed out that MetroPCS doesn't allow its customers access to their account details without paying a fee. The business seems to be oriented towards directing customers to its stores, which are often overcrowded, and where store employees seem to have a lot of trouble dealing with whatever systems they have set up. Their voicemail system ties up customers' time and seems intentionally designed to make them give up. They provide an answering machine like service which also wastes a lot of time. The unlimited aspect of their plans seems to rely on most customers not using their phones often, in order to subsidize those who do. For example, I'm paying about $45 a month, but can't see what plan I'm on, or what I'm being billed for. I don't use my phone much. I can't call Alaska, where one of my friends lives. The coverage of Florida is supposed to be good, but I saw a map in a store which indicates that it's actually rather spotty. The only reason I like MetroPCS is that I've signed no contract, which to me gives it a great advantage over all the other companies. I tried accessing my account online, went through all the steps, including receiving a password via a text message on my phone, and when I tried logging on, the system complained that the username and password didn't match, though I'm quite sure they did. When I called 1-888-8METRO8, as a note at the bottom of the login page suggested, a lady said I couldn't access my account without signing up for an additional service. As things stand now, my bills are paid automatically out of my bank account, and the only way I have of knowing what they've charged is by examining my bank statement, long after the money's been paid out. Unfree (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Unfree, Wikipedia doesn't review a company, it tells people facts about it. Remember POV policy and the fact that a talk page is not for opinions on the article subject, but on the quality of the article. Thanks
AOC25 (talk) 22:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

AOC25, can you please explain WHY you want this article deleted rather than improved? You do not have consensus support for speedy deletion.

This article is 5 years old and has over 500 edits. I don't think speedy deletion makes any sense here.

Please use this talk page, and not commented text in the article to discuss. Thanks —fudoreaper (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion reply (Sorry it took so long)

I was a bit hasty because I was panicked: The article was written exactly like an advertisement, and had only one source, (which I put in) verifying the company's starting year. I was shocked, and not in a good way. I tried to start improving it with a few references, but soon realized it beyond my knowledge of the company to fix. I wanted it gone, since I was concerned that it would drive Wikipedia readers away. I tagged it with multiple issue and major rewrite templates just a few minutes ago, and I really, really hope someone will improve the article, and quick, since MetroPCS is a popular real-life subject, which some people will look up and go to Wikipedia for knowledge on. They will not find it and probably be quite angry at Wikipedia. I would like to know how it got to the state that it's in, since it was likely to be a slow, steady decline in quality. Thank you, and sorry.
—AOC25 (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

"Multiple issues" tagging

AOC25 has tagged the article as needing verification, being non-neutral, and being written as an advertisment.

AOC25, could you please provide some detail about the specific passages that strike you as problematic? I just don't see what you're seeing in this article. I see a short and obviously-incomplete article which does contain a reasonably well-sourced series of factual statements about the company, none of which are written in overblown terms or in an advertising style, and a section about their LTE service with quotations from some mostly-negative reviews.

It would help a great deal if you could give some detail about your objections. Which specific claims require verification? Which passages are non-neutral? Which statements sound like adverts to you?

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 23:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Having no response so far, I'm going to remove the tags that AOC25 added. AOC25, please feel free to add them back, I won't take it personally ;) But it would be very helpful if you could point out the specific passages that concern you. Thparkth (talk)

I reverted the removal of large-scale content

This article has very little content, and not many sources. So why would we remove most of what sourced content it has?. I reverted to the version before the content was removed. Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 03:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Why

Because, to be frank, the "sourced material" was nothing but advertising spam, and anyway was not much bigger than the better sourced (in terms of quality, not quantity) History section I added, which I believe every company article should have. I am not particularly knowledgeable about MetroPCS, and was hoping others could help. And if you are confused about which parts of the limited content on the page I dislike, I think it requires a complete rewrite, though not a speedy deletion, and I am sorry I added that. I still think it must be improved immediately, and the reverted content deleted. I am not trying to start an edit war, but I believe strongly the article desperately needs improvement. Viewing the rest of the talk page, I'd like to point out such things as the company's coverage or customer service are irrelevant, and things like the history and current status should be the primary objectives.
—AOC25 (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Among the material you deleted was discussion of MetroPCS's LTE service, which was sourced to reviews in two reliable sources. Both of them were critical of MetroPCS. Could you please explain how this could possibly be considered "advertising spam"?

Thparkth (talk) 11:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

IT DOESN'T MATTER, the content is still opinionated and irrelevant. And it does say in that section "but users requiring only basic needs may find the no-contract deal refreshing", and I urge you to look at the intro section. And please do not remove the expand template, the article needs it.
—AOC25 (talk) 04:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the "expand" tag - the article should contain much more information. But you are simply wrong if you believe that the current wording of the LTE section constitutes advertising in any way. Thparkth (talk) 01:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion request - advert tag

AOC25 has again tagged this article as an advertisement, without providing any explanation for doing so. I do not believe that this article as written could possibly be considered to be an advertisement for MetroPCS. I do not want to simply revert his tag again, as this could turn into a slow edit war, so I am requesting a third opinion on this matter.

Should this article be tagged as an advert? And if so, which are the troubling passages?

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 12:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

It does not read like an advertisement to me. I think the "MetroPCS's 4G/LTE Network" section comes across badly for them, which maybe the editor who tagged it thought was kind of an "anti-advertisement" of sorts. However, it's a legitimate review, and it's properly cited. If that's not the reason behind the tagging, than I'm at a loss as to what was.—Bark (talk) 16:46, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

T-Mobile buying?

I figure someone who pays more attention to this than I may want to look at http://www.tmonews.com/2012/05/deutsche-telekom-looking-to-purchase-metropcs-combine-with-t-mobile-usa/. Perhaps it warrants mentioning in the MetroPCS article, perhaps not.
LP-mn (talk) 03:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Something doesn't add up to me

I corrected an error in the article T-Mobile US which said that T-Mobile US owns the fourth and fifth largest cellular networks in the United States. Yet, on this article and the article U.S. Cellular they both mention owning the fifth largest cellular network in the U.S. So it seems to me like the sentence in the beginning paragraph is inaccurate. I don't know however how they rank, so I am requesting that someone please look into this and fix it. Jesant13 (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Reception and Criticism - needs a date

Makes the point that MetroPCS was measured to be (more or less) at 3G speeds due to infrastructure they were using. Due to the rapidly changing nature of technology, etc... this statement is meaningless unless it has a date to anchor it. Was this yesterday, last week, last month, last year, etc....? Jonny Quick (talk) 14:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MetroPCS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130512193219/http://www.metropcs.com/metro/aboutus/management.jsp to http://www.metropcs.com/metro/aboutus/management.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Metro by T-Mobile logo.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

bpopbryBold 2603:9008:1B00:280B:7CB5:75FD:FA61:C63D (talk) 09:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Wording of opening line

Is “formerly” or “formally” meant here? I suspect it’s more likely the former (pun maybe intended) than the latter, considering company history. I’ve seen many get tripped up by these near-homophones on the internet lately DougieUnFresh (talk) 13:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)