Agreed... I live in the same general vicinity in NJ as Alex and ATT service was pretty much non-existent anywhere there was no power from what I experienced. I have friends on Verizon to whom I've spoken and they didn't seem to notice as large of an impact at all on their cellular service.
-Vinny -----Original Message----- From: Alex Rubenstein [mailto:a...@corp.nac.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 9:39 AM To: 'na...@jima.tk'; 'nanog@nanog.org' Subject: Re: Sandy seen costing telco, cable hundreds of millions of dollars Probably ATT. Many areas of NJ had zero service from them for days. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jima <na...@jima.tk> To: nanog <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Wed Nov 07 09:32:25 2012 Subject: RE: Sandy seen costing telco, cable hundreds of millions of dollars On Tuesday, 2012-11-06, Frank Bulk wrote: > So which wireless carrier is bringing down the average to 81%? A quick skim of the article (again, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/01/storm-sandy-telecoms-idUSL1E8M1L9Z20121101 ) makes me suspect AT&T. They're mentioned twice in other context, but there's not a sites-online statistic for them. I suppose it's worth noting that this wouldn't be the first time they've caught flak for their (in)ability to cover NYC sufficiently. Jima
