My phone number couldn't been ported out to Cricket Wireless

When I tried to transfer my number from Republic Wireless to Cricket Wireless, I got a warning notice, “Oops! We’re having trouble validating your number. Please try again.” Then I asked the representative. He told me my number registered as a landline so it couldn’t pass through their system.
I am not sure if Republic Wireless could help. Or maybe I could port my number somewhere else.

From https://freecarrierlookup.com/
Phone Number:
xxxxxxxx
Carrier:
Republic Wireless/Bandwidth.com (Sybase)
Is Wireless:
n

1 Like

This happens all the time. It’s Cricket’s problem; There are lots of threads here like this:

3 Likes

Republic is asked this question often enough to have created a support note on the subject: Why Can’t My Republic Wireless Telephone Number Transfer to Cricket? – Republic Help. @wuyil, if doing business with Cricket is sufficiently important to you, that’s the workaround.

3 Likes

I edited my original note, and my phone number was indentified as a non-wireless phone number from https://freecarrierlookup.com/ as well.

If you are moving to Cricket for better AT&T (Cricket works on their towers) you have a couple of other options. Depending on which phone you have now RW might be able to move you from using the Sprint towers to using the T-Mobile towers or visa-versa. Tell us which phone you have now and we can help you with that.

2 Likes

Republic numbers are VOIP, this must be the case for the Republic WiFi first VOIP/Cell Backup service
the FCC classify VOIP as a Wire-line/Land-line)
there nothing Republic can to to reclassify their numbers
Cricket has a policy to to take in Wire-line/Land line-numbers (there no technical reason for this policy as Wire-line numbers are transferable to mobile)
the workaround that @rolandh post is the way to move a Republic number to Cricket

1 Like

From the article, http://republic-wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Transferring_a_Republic_Number_to_a_Service_Provider_That_Refuses_Landlines
I have to switch to T-Mobile to make my phone number recognized as a wireless phone number. However, my phone number is restricted from number transfer according to T-Mobile.

Hi @wuyil,

I wrote the article you’re referencing. It doesn’t have to be T-Mobile, I used them in the article because in my experience they’re the most efficient of the big 4 carriers in transferring Republic (and other) numbers. It’s also possible to use AT&T, Verizon or Sprint, if T-Mobile isn’t able to transfer your number.

Before going to one of the others, however, may we know more about “restricted from number transfer”. Are they saying why? Might you be willing to share the first six digits of the number in question? To protect your privacy, please don’t share the entire number.

1 Like

Or most other low cost providers. If prepaid by month you could just use their service for part of month then port to Cricket.

In my experience adding another MVNO into the mix potentially complicates the number transfer process. More cooks in the kitchen is often not a good thing.

1 Like

T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon and Sprint are all cooks so not adding another.

Does Cricket discriminant against other low cost cooks/providers as they do with RW and make porting in an issue from the others?

Cricket will transfer in any number classified as wireless. Transferring a number from Republic to another MVNO to Cricket introduces an unnecessary intermediary into the process. Such an MVNO would be using one of the big 4 anyway.

I wrote the Wiki article with purpose. I selected T-Mobile as the best method because T-Mobile is, by far, the best of the big 4 at porting numbers. If T-Mobile won’t work for @wuyil, the next best thing is one of the remaining big 4. Actually, I’d skip AT&T and use Verizon or Sprint. Using another MVNO as an intermediate step is not best practice.

Republic seems to agree since the support note I linked both quotes and references the article I wrote.

2 Likes

Actually wrong. These are carriers. Everyone else is an MVNO. A transfer from Republic to one of the main carriers involves Republic, Bandwidth and the carrier. Going with and MVNO introduces a 4th company in to the mix.

1 Like

Using a provider other than as suggested in your article would not add or introduce another cook or intermediary to the process as you allude to. I’m not suggesting adding any thing to to the article to complicate it?

Obviously T-Mobile is your desired path as an intermediary. You obviously have more experience with porting numbers in/out from the majors/minors. There’s more than one way to skin a cat and yours seems to have worked well for others in the past. worked

Sorry but you’re wrong on this one. See @louisdi’s post. There’s a large difference between a carrier and a service provider (MVNO).

1 Like

Duh. Thanks anyway.

You’ll have ask rolandh for his definition of cook for our discussions.

The additional cook would be the additional MVNO, you’re suggesting introducing into the process. You’re confusing carriers with service providers. Bandwidth and the big 4 are carriers. All MVNO’s including Republic are service providers. They are not carriers.

1 Like

RW being the first and the one number is directly ported to the second one?

No confusion here about service providers.

I’ll try one final time. Cricket’s refusal requires introduction of one additional party. Best practice would look like this:

Republic -> Bandwidth -> T-Mobile (or another big 4 carrier) -> AT&T (Cricket’s carrier) -> Cricket.

What you suggest would look like this:

Republic -> Bandwidth -> MVNO -> that MVNO’s big 4 carrier -> AT&T -> (Cricket’s carrier) -> Cricket.

My way involves 5 parties (best that can be done) as it is. Introducing a sixth won’t help and might well hurt.

1 Like

Hi @wuyil

You sparked a greatly informative discussion on technical port paths. Learn something new everyday. :slightly_smiling_face:

Have you found a resolution path?.

2 Likes
Message an
Expert customer