Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
50ismygoal
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:41 am

Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by 50ismygoal » Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:31 am

Before I retired in 2017, I used Verizon Wireless. The service was flawless yet it was very expensive, but my employer paid for it.
As I approached retirement and the prospect of paying for my own service, I switched to Cricket Wireless, which I believe uses the AT&T network. The service is almost as good as Verizon, but there are some gaps near where I live that sometimes creates problems. Another annoyance is that I have to dial my local area code with each call, which is incredibly inconvenient when Googling a business and trying to click-to-call.
Total Wireless costs about the same as Cricket, and my understanding is they use the Verizon network. Has anyone used both services and would you care to comment on them?

bloom2708
Posts: 4903
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:08 pm
Location: Fargo, ND

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by bloom2708 » Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:37 pm

I have used both. We use Cricket. My parents have Total Wireless.

Total Wireless you add on tax to the plan.

I don’t know any cell phones where you can skip the area code.

Both websites are good. I have used the customer service for both.

If Verizon coverage is better for in your area, that would break the tie for me.
Last edited by bloom2708 on Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We are not here to please, but to provoke thoughtfulness." --Unknown Boglehead

michaeljc70
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by michaeljc70 » Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:47 pm

I haven't used Total Wireless. The only thing I would point out is they don't include taxes/fees in their plans while Cricket does. Keep that in mind when comparing. I know that on some providers I've used the taxes/fees were more than $10 a month. I'm using MintSim now. That is on T-mobile. I've been pretty happy with it ($250 for a year out the door, 5gb/mo).

boglemyinvestments
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:40 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by boglemyinvestments » Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:55 pm

How many lines are you needing along with how much minutes/txt/data?

For Verizon service I also recommend checking out Verizon Prepaid and Boom (Verizon MVNO).

If I remember right, buying Total Wireless refills from Callingmart gets around paying the taxes/fees. I know it does on Verizon Prepaid.

IowaFarmBoy
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 8:19 am

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by IowaFarmBoy » Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:37 pm

We're on Total Wireless and are pretty happy. No personal experience with Cricket but co-workers that have it are happy, especially with 4 lines. On TW, with the auto-refill discount, we are spending $64.xx for two lines. This is everything, including the fees. If I buy cards at Wal-Mart, we pay sales tax and don't get the 5% auto-refill discount. Callingmart avoids the sales tax but still misses the 5% discount. Auto refill is convenient.

Only downsides are that we can't roam and there are a few coverage gaps. Otherwise the Verizon coverage has been good. I an considering a switch to Xfinity Mobile if it looks like our data usage is low enough to save money with them. Also Verizon MVNO but they don't charge for the basic service if you have Comcast internet service - only charge a few dollars a month in taxes and fees and $12/gig for data.

50ismygoal
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:41 am

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by 50ismygoal » Sat Aug 18, 2018 2:54 pm

Thanks for the responses. I just need one line. As to area codes, when I had Verizon I only needed to use area codes for long-distance, whereas with Cricket I need to use the area code to call next door. I've also noticed that with Cricket I seem to use less data, even though I'm using my phone the same way.

User avatar
Steelersfan
Posts: 3537
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by Steelersfan » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:25 pm

I've been on Verizon Wireless for ten years on a couple different plans and four different phones I've always had to enter the area code no matter where I was calling.

Jack FFR1846
Posts: 7956
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:05 am

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by Jack FFR1846 » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:36 pm

Is there only one local area code for you? I'm not in a large city, but with all the cell phones can think of at least 3 area codes just in my town. Heck, there are 2 in my house.
Bogle: Smart Beta is stupid

50ismygoal
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:41 am

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by 50ismygoal » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:54 pm

I guess I've just been likely never to have to use area codes for local calling until switching to Cricket.

User avatar
Steelersfan
Posts: 3537
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by Steelersfan » Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:38 pm

Once you enter a person into your "Contacts" you never have to worry about area code or not.

Or remembering their phone number. :oops:

Momus
Posts: 532
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:23 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by Momus » Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:41 pm

Cricket or mint. No better deal around.

User avatar
sunny_socal
Posts: 1681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:22 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by sunny_socal » Sun Aug 19, 2018 7:54 am

I've been on Cricket for a long time. Tried Mint in an effort to save even more but ended up getting rid of it. The billing structure was strange, everyone had to have their own account. Went back to Cricket.

Now we're on the $100 plan, 4 lines of unlimited voice/text/data. Speed is capped at 3Mbps but this is fast enough for everything we need. The use case is google maps and occasional web surfing. (Expect to pay more for a 'better' service if you need Netflix on demand or anything like that.)

Coverage is ok, IMO it is better than T-mobile but worst than Verizon. For $100 it's certainly good enough.

donutholes
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:06 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by donutholes » Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:04 am

We live in a city where all the networks have pretty good coverage but I have rough coverage in my home. If you have marginal coverage in your home, the bigs will offer up devices to extend the coverage into your home usually for free. Cricket will not but now that they support wifi calling, I don't need those devices in my home anymore. So a while back I switched to Cricket's 4 lines $100 deal which uses ATT's network. I have a family of four and my wife and oldest daughter are demanding users and they never even noticed the change. I know networks matter in some areas but we have not noticed any real benefit to the Verizon plans that were more than double what we are paying today. We've traveled this summer and also not seen any problems with speed or coverage.

I'll continue to buy unlocked phones and can usually get 3+ years out of them and choose my provider by who's got the most bang for the buck. So +1 from me for Cricket.

michaeljc70
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Total Wireless v. Cricket Wireless

Post by michaeljc70 » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:11 am

donutholes wrote:
Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:04 am
We live in a city where all the networks have pretty good coverage but I have rough coverage in my home. If you have marginal coverage in your home, the bigs will offer up devices to extend the coverage into your home usually for free. Cricket will not but now that they support wifi calling, I don't need those devices in my home anymore. So a while back I switched to Cricket's 4 lines $100 deal which uses ATT's network. I have a family of four and my wife and oldest daughter are demanding users and they never even noticed the change. I know networks matter in some areas but we have not noticed any real benefit to the Verizon plans that were more than double what we are paying today. We've traveled this summer and also not seen any problems with speed or coverage.

I'll continue to buy unlocked phones and can usually get 3+ years out of them and choose my provider by who's got the most bang for the buck. So +1 from me for Cricket.
I had Cricket, but the coverage in my home was bad. Otherwise it worked well for me. I switched to Mint (T-mobile network) and it was much better for me at home. But these are probably more anomalies. I live in a very urban environment where there is generally good coverage from all the major carriers. I think with MVNOs the thing that can hit you is if you are by a high traffic "thing" (highway, airport, etc.), you may get throttled significantly during busy times on the network. Depending on the network and positioning of the towers and a building's materials, signal penetration into certain buildings can also vary.

Where I worked last was close to a major airport. I couldn't seem to get much more than .5 Mbps in my office (or even outside it). When I would go to lunch 6 blocks away, I could get 20-70Mbps. Could never figure it out. I was very disappointed that customer service told me my phone wasn't totally supported as an excuse. Their website said it was supported when I put in the MEID, but they pointed out there was an asterisk with all kinds of caveats. Of course, my phone works as a phone just doesn't work in 1000 places well and 1 place bad. On the other hand, when I had major carriers they don't do anything either (it is not like they are going to run out an build a tower for you).

Post Reply