Joe Maring / Android Authority

TL;DR

• In response to complaints from AT&T, the National Advertising Division has now reviewed the situation and has come to its own conclusion.
• The NAD found some T-Mobile claims about competitor price hikes and satellite coverage to be exaggerated or unsubstantiated, while others were reasonable and supported.
• Unsurprisingly, T-Mobile has clarified plans to appeal the decisions it disagrees with.

It’s no secret that AT&T and T-Mobile’s rivalry has intensified significantly over the last half year or so. AT&T not only unveiled an ad campaign around T-Mobile’s so-called Un-Truths late last year, but it also sued its rival over T-Mobile’s new Switching tool, and it even brought complaints of false advertising to the National Advertising Division (NAD). The NAD has now officially responded to the complaints, agreeing that T-Mobile might have gone a bit too far with some of its recent claims.

During the announcement of its new plans last year, T-Mobile claimed that AT&T and Verizon combined had raised prices ten times over the previous two years. The Un-Carrier also made several additional claims during this launch window regarding its rivals’ pricing behavior, its own satellite connectivity, and its track record on price increases.

Starting with the claim that AT&T and Verizon raised prices a dozen times, the watchdog determined that the assertion was exaggerated and could not be directly substantiated.

Some of the cited increases may have been fee hikes rather than base price changes, but that argument only holds if T-Mobile applies the same standard to itself. While T-Mobile stated that it raised plan pricing only once during the same period, a claim the NAD said was technically substantiated, that conclusion excludes the many fee increases T-Mobile has introduced, including one as recently as yesterday.

The NAD also took issue with how T-Mobile advertised its T-Sat service. Claims such as “No matter where you are, you will never miss a moment” and “if customers can see the sky, they are connected” imply near flawless coverage. As someone who has tested T-Sat, I can confirm that this does not reflect the real-world experience.

In practice, there are many areas where T-Mobile’s terrestrial signal is technically present but too weak to be usable. In those situations, there is no way to force T-Sat to activate, often leaving users stuck in a dead zone.

Finally, the NAD reviewed T-Mobile’s added value claims. While it agreed that the advertised $200 in added value per line was largely supported, it found that T-Mobile failed to clearly communicate how that value was calculated. The watchdog also concluded that T-Mobile lacked a reasonable basis for its claim that families of three would receive $600 in added value.

What does this report mean for T-Mobile exactly? Honestly, very little immediately. The NAD is a voluntary, self-regulatory watchdog without direct enforcement authority. Companies that ignore its findings may not face immediate legal consequences, but doing so can damage consumer trust and brand reputation.

T-Mobile has already taken some steps in response. AT&T had previously challenged T-Mobile’s “families can save 20%” advertising claim, and T-Mobile revised that messaging for compliance before the investigation concluded. The company has also indicated that it plans to appeal some of the adverse findings.

Ultimately, the NAD report is more of a nuisance than a serious threat for T-Mobile. That said, reputation matters more than ever in an increasingly competitive wireless market, making it important for the Un-Carrier to take the watchdog’s guidance seriously, especially if future appeals fail to overturn the findings.

Follow

Thank you for being part of our community. Read our Comment Policy before posting.