A Headless Luke Wilson Disses Verizon in New Ad

What has happened to this poor mans head?

Is this some kind of subtle message? That Verizon needs to give Luke Wilson head?

I was on an 800 mile trip over the weekend. My phone reported the ATT Edge network the whole way but would only connect to the internet in the ONE town along the way that had 3G service. If Verizon weren't even worse #^(*^ than ATT I'd switch to them.

it was fun.

I think even this AD is a lie. AtT's networks blow. DSM phones in general always will. It's their largest flaw. Either you get a signal or you dont. The end

I think the point that the ad is trying to make is that with verizon Luke Wilson loads slower, so you don't get the same ammount of Luke within the same timeframe. If you are talking about THEORETICAL speeds, then yes, but real world testing shows that Verizons REAL WORLD speeds on their network is often times very close if not faster than AT&T's. So while they are able to claim that their network is faster due to theoretical maximums, the network still sucks and is still rated as one of thew worst. see the following: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/07/3g-speed-test/

AT&T ain't got game. This is just plain dumb. No statistical proof, they can say whatever they want. That's ads for you but still, anyone who would listen to this is missing at least half a brain.

of course their network is faster. They do not have as many customers and they do not have as much coverage. Hence the network will be faster. Not by much though.

If these two companies would take the hundreds of millions spent on advertising and simply put it into the network infrastructure they would have much better networks.
People may be stupid but as soon as they found that one network performed better they would move to it. Commercials not needed.

So... AT&T grants consumers a superior 3G experience... in the 4 cities, nationwide, that they actually cover...

No reichscythe, it doesn't include NYC. Apparently our 30% drop call rate and DL speeds slower than a 56k modem are "perfectly normal". A rep actually told me that when I called to complain...

So I can download Luke Wilson faster on AT&T than on Verizon...So what? What about my pr0n?!?

Apparently AT&T believes that we are headless as well.

and if you move that ATT download a little bit to the left you lose connection and the image. i would sacrifice a tiny bit of speed(literally just one second longer for the head?) for stability/coverage.

I've had enough of the Wilson brothers...

Anyone seen AT&T's ad where they show Luke Wilson reading off a list of Postcards from all the cities they are in? If you pay attention, 80% of those cities they list are MAJOR cities where every provider is available. So frankly, it's a mute point.

However, they did list one smaller city in particular that caught my attention. Bozeman, MT. I live there, and quite frankly, everyone here will tell you that AT&T is horrible in Montana (as a whole).

Verizon dominates the market in Montana. By a huge margin.

clever commercial

Everyone I know that works for ATT (besides Luke Wilson, admittedly) deplores their coverage. The usable coverage (especially for their Holy Grail iPhone) is just terrible. Then, you get to an area with good enough coverage (like San Francisco) and their network is crippled by all the people constantly downloading Miley Cyrus songs from iTunes, Fart Apps from the App Store, and running SKYPE to make a f$#@%! phone call.

Give me a break!

If AT&T's idea of a "better 3G experience" over Verizon is Luke Wilson's talking head, I think I'll have to pass on that.

I like the little footnote in the end "3G not available in all areas". Wasn't it the point of the Verizon advertising campaign in the first place...A little slower 3G everywhere is better then none....lol

What a waste of money on a bad ad campaign. And when you're part of a lame ad campaign that is arguing a weak point AND losing your side of the debate - As the Face of the Ad Campaign (being Luke Wilson) - it doesn't exactly make you look smart or witty in the public eye.

Luke should have done his HW before signing on to represent AT&T and do these ridiculous ads.

The problem is the phone, it's Luke. There seems to be a bit more of him to download these days.

Well, if you can't get a signal to download on "the fastest network" what's the point?

So your point is that you had steady coverage in a small, but heavily populated section of the country along the east coast? Gee, we were so wrong about AT&T's coverage.

Seriously though, I think you're missing the point.