Jump to content

Contributors to this blog

Sprint changes LTE device due date from Mid 2012 to Q3/Q4 2012 and controversy ensues

S4GRU

1,475 views

blog-0082766001329883873.jpgby Robert Herron
Sprint 4G Rollout Updates
Tuesday, December 6, 2011 - 1:28 PM MST

 

Yesterday, Sprint updated us all that we can expect devices in the 3rd and 4th Quarter of 2012. Previously, Sprint has used terminology that it expects to release LTE devices in Mid 2012. Of course, because something new was said, the blogosphere and message boards have gone bonkers exclaiming delays.

The big deal probably comes from the assumption that many folks have made that Sprint would release LTE devices around June 4th. Sprint never made such a claim. However, many wireless dorks jumped to the conclusion that Sprint would release a LTE device when countless numbers of Evo device holders start coming off contract.

The original Evo went on sale on June 4, 2010. And it's initial sales were a blockbuster success. The Evo sold millions of units, as well as the Epic that came out shortly afterward. And Sprint definitely is in a pickle if these device holders have no LTE device to upgrade to. Especially in Non-WiMax markets. It's going to have to start pumping out incentives to keep them.

Since many people assumed Sprint was trying to make this early June date, to hear 3rd Quarter sounds like a significant slip. However, Sprint has never said they would make June with LTE devices. Since October 7th, they have been a constant chorus saying the first LTE devices could be expected in Mid 2012. And that they would release approximately 15 LTE devices before the end of 2012.

When is Mid-2012, technically? The very middle of 2012 is July 1st. OK...so for the most part Sprint has been saying they will be releasing their LTE devices some time in the period in the rough proximity to July 1st.

Now Sprint is saying they are releasing their devices in the 3rd and 4th Quarter of 2012. And in another quote, they said they second half of 2012. I'm no calendar genius. But I know that the third quarter begins on July 1st. And the second half of 2012 begins on July 1st also. Is this really much of a deviation, if any? Sprint did not specifically say there was delays.

In further conversation about the subject, Sprint's Chief Financial Officer Joe Euteneuer said it’s likely that the LTE devices will be released in the third quarter. So even if it was the end of the third quarter, that's the second half of September. Nothing here to suggest the sky is falling, really. And a Sprint spokesperson even confirmed that Mr. Euteneuer's comments don't speak to any delay and are being misinterpreted.

And furthermore, even if Sprint is experiencing a delay, I hope it's for good reason. Like they now see it as important to make sure their initial devices support more than one LTE frequency. It would be tragic if Sprint's initial LTE devices only support LTE on 1900. If Sprint is wise, their LTE devices would be dual-band and support LTE on 800 and 1900 right from the gates. And it would be even better if they are LTE tri-band and support 2500 too. That way, new LTE devices will meet Sprint customer needs for years to come.

And if delaying the release of LTE devices by 30 to 45 days gets them to dual-band or tri-band LTE support, then it'll be worth the wait. And that's if there really is a delay occurring at all.

gallery_1_2_12584.jpg

Joe Euteneuer, Sprint Chief Financial Officer



0 Comments


Recommended Comments

There are no comments to display.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • The Wall Articles

  • Wall Comments

    • to me rural coverage matters most....because i like being able to make phone calls and send texts in remote areas of the country ...i dont care about speeds i just care about per square mile coverage and over all usability and reliability
    • Tell us how you really feel @MrZorbatron!

      I think that most cellular players exaggerate their coverage. Yes, I suspected a long time ago that T-Mobile was one of the most egregious. Now according to the merger presentation, they will end up with 85,000 macro sites. That will be enough to match the coverage of pretty much everybody.

      Like you, I appreciate not having dropped calls or undelivered texts. In my area on my T-Mobile MVNO, I don't get any but can't say it won't happen elsewhere. Once Charter offers service via their Verizon MVNO, I think I will move my 4 personal lines there. My business line will stay on Sprint/T-Mobile, well, because I can't control that.
    • I do not welcome any part of this.  I don't think T-Mobile really cares about doing anything they say they care about.  I have seen how truly bad their network is in the ways that matter for essential communication, and I want nothing to do with it.  Say what you want about Verizon, but the one thing they have in common with Sprint is that they have historically built out a solid network before trying to make it extremely fast.  I don't care about 50 Mbps to my phone.  I care about calls that don't get disconnected constantly.  I care about that stock trade getting through when I send it, even if carried by EVDO, because EVDO still gets it through. Sprint's "Outdoor coverage" maps might seem exaggerated to some, but T-Mobile's maps are a complete joke.  Maybe Michigan is a bubble, the only state where this is true, but it really is very true here.  T-Mobile is the network of dropped and undelivered calls, mysterious disconnection, and "call failed" error messages. If this goes through, look for me at the nearest Verizon store because price to me is absolutely irrelevant.  I see two things happening if this merger goes through:  1:  Sprint spectrum is used to bolster capacity at T-Mobile sites, and 2:  As much of the current Sprint network as possible goes away, even if it means losing sites that would provide valuable fill-in density.  I saw the latter happen with Sprint and Nextel, after they insisted that all Nextel sites that could serve to increase Sprint coverage would be used.  Similarly, there were locations T-Mobile could have used MetroPCS locations to improve their own coverage but didn't, even where it left holes in their network.
    • Not when Verizon just bought 1GHz of mmwave spectrum. Those were the policies of the past. If it does not get approved, it would the loss of jobs and the fact that it might not be good for consumers. Although when I look at the table on this page, comparing unlimited plans, it is already evident that the other three are not really competing and Sprint's lower prices are not working since they did not manage to steal anybody from the other other three. To me it is evident that were Sprint to remain independent they need massive investment in their network since competing on price is not enough anymore and low prices just deprive their network of investment.
    • And I would definitely say that merger probably or probably not won't be approved. If not I would have to say it would be on the grounds of cellular asset divestiture.
×