Jump to content

Sprint to expand to Montana using shut down CellularOne sites


Recommended Posts

Cellular One is shutting down service in Montana, and according to a letter it sent to customers in May, and will also shut down service in Wyoming as well. According to Gary Duncan, a spokesman for the Montana Public Service Commission, Cellular One will cease operations in the two states on Aug. 31.

 

Sprint spokeswoman Crystal Davis confirmed to FierceWireless that Sprint has purchased Cellular One's tower leasing rights in Montana, but she said Sprint has not purchased any of Cellular One's customers, spectrum or retail locations in the state. She declined to say how much the transaction is worth.

 

map.png

 

source: Hofo

 

Original Source: Fierce

  • Like 19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What spectrum holdings did Cellular One have?

This transaction involves no Chinook spectrum. Sprint does not need it.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Masa's plan for US domination are moving forward!

Domination? More like mitigation of roaming and satisfaction of PCS G block construction requirements.

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got that part, I was just curious what spectrum they did have...

PCS only.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting development out of the impending Cellular One (MTPCS) shutdown in MT and WY:

 

Cellular One has indicated it plans to cease offering wireless service in the states of Montana and Wyoming. Cellular One has advised its customers there to find an alternate provider before August 31, which is when it plans to halt operations. ... Sprint has assumed Cellular One's cell tower leasing rights, though it hasn't purchased any of Cellular One's spectrum, equipment, or customers.

 

FierceWireless adds:

 

Sprint spokeswoman Crystal Davis confirmed to FierceWireless that Sprint has purchased Cellular One's tower leasing rights in Montana, but she said Sprint has not purchased any of Cellular One's customers, spectrum or retail locations in the state. She declined to say how much the transaction is worth.

 

So that looks positive for some Sprint NV buildout in those two states in the not-too-distant future. Based on these maps it looks like the towers are mostly on I-15, I-90, and I-94 in Montana, with just a small dip into Wyoming.

 

It looks like MTPCS will be concentrating in the future on the Gulf Coast-area markets where it has 700 spectrum as part of Verizon's LTEiRA program.

 

(Oops, sorry I didn't see this thread was already in the NV forum. My bad.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Domination? More like mitigation of roaming and satisfaction of PCS G block construction requirements.

 

AJ

 

If they are going in this big in Montana...much bigger than just the build out requirements would necessitate...then can I start to get hopeful about Western South Dakota?  They don't have any CCA/RRPP members here.  And they do also have G Block Build Out Requirements here, and EBS Protection Sites.

 

C'mon, baby!  No Whammies!  No Whammies!  STOP!!!

 

Seriously though, this stokes my fire.  This is much bigger than I ever thought Sprint would do in Montana.  I was expecting just a site or two each in Billings, Great Falls, Missoula and Kalispell.  The old Sprint never would have done this.

 

Robert

  • Like 29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting development out of the impending Cellular One (MTPCS) shutdown in MT and WY:

 

 

FierceWireless adds:

 

 

So that looks positive for some Sprint NV buildout in those two states in the not-too-distant future. Based on these maps it looks like the towers are mostly on I-15, I-90, and I-94 in Montana, with just a small dip into Wyoming.

 

It looks like MTPCS will be concentrating in the future on the Gulf Coast-area markets where it has 700 spectrum as part of Verizon's LTEiRA program.

 

Topic merged.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are going in this big in Montana...much bigger than just the build out requirements would necessitate...then can I start to get hopeful about Western South Dakota?  They don't have any CCA/RRPP members here.  And they do also have G Block Build Out Requirements here, and EBS Protection Sites.

 

C'mon, baby!  No Whammies!  No Whammies!  STOP!!!

 

Seriously though, this stokes my fire.  This is much bigger than I ever though Sprint would do in Montana.  I was expecting just a site or two each in Billings, Great Falls, Missoula and Kalispell.  The old Sprint never would have done this.

 

Robert

 

Short of G-Block, does Sprint have any PCS holdings for the market?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No spectrum but tower rights? Does that mean that Sprint can take its time building out? I also hope that Cellular One had good tower spacing/placement. If nothing else I think Sprint should cover I-80 through Wyoming asap.

 

EDIT: I see now that these towers only cover a small part of northern Wyoming. Atleast they have the ability to cover a major part of I-90 in Montana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"Cellular One has sold its network and network-related assets in Montana and Wyoming to Sprint," McKoin said. "We can not comment on the value."

 

 

Looks like it's the network too.  Probably can fire up the existing network right away for Sprint customers and will just need to schedule the Network Vision conversions thereafter.

 

Robert

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the Cellular One map I would guess maybe between 3 and 5 dozen sites, possibly another 2 to 3 dozen if it includes lease rights to sites that where planned but never built....

 

What type of network did Cellular One run?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short of G-Block, does Sprint have any PCS holdings for the market?

 

Yeah, they have 15x15 PCS locally.  Also, they have 7x7 SMR.  And B41 EBS too, but no BRS.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like it's the network too.  Probably can fire up the existing network right away for Sprint customers and will just need to schedule the Network Vision conversions thereafter.

Robert

 

Then all the new subs there will complain "SPRINT FKEN SUCKS HERE EVEN WHEN THEY FIRED UP THE NEW NETWORK" because the vast majority of people who would likely sign up with Sprint in the area would know absolutely nothing about the transaction. 

 

Much better to convert everything to NV standards with backhaul before letting the public use it.

 

First impression matters a lot. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then all the new subs there will complain "SPRINT FKEN SUCKS HERE EVEN WHEN THEY FIRED UP THE NEW NETWORK" because the vast majority of people who would likely sign up with Sprint in the area would know absolutely nothing about the transaction. 

 

Much better to convert everything to NV standards with backhaul before letting the public use it.

 

First impression matters a lot. 

 

No need to sell service initially.  But might as well reduce your roaming costs to help pay for this.  Just supporting roaming Sprint subscribers travelling through the area, the existing network should perform just fine.  I'm not sure Sprint will ever put up brick and mortar stores in the area.

 

Robert

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to http://specmap.sequence-omega.net/, Sprint has the PCS B block. Apparently they subleased it (or at least some of it) to AT&T before, but that sublease has expired.

 

Yep, that license is free and clear for Sprint right now.  Sweeps on the spectrum analyzer confirm they are clear.  C'mon in Masa!

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • This has been approved.. https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/fcc-approves-t-mobiles-deal-to-purchase-mint-mobile/  
    • In the conference call they had two question on additional spectrum. One was the 800 spectrum. They are not certain what will happen, thus have not really put it into their plans either way (sale or no sale). They do have a reserve level. Nationwide 800Mhz is seen as great for new technologies which I presume is IOT or 5g slices.  T-Mobile did not bite on use of their c-band or DOD.  mmWave rapidly approaching deadlines not mentioned at all. FWA brushes on this as it deals with underutilized spectrum on a sector by sector basis.  They are willing to take more money to allow FWA to be mobile (think RV or camping). Unsure if this represents a higher priority, for example, FWA Mobile in RVs in Walmart parking lots working where mobile phones need all the capacity. In terms of FWA capacity, their offload strategy is fiber through joint ventures where T-Mobile does the marketing, sales, and customer support while the fiber company does the network planning and installation.  50%-50% financial split not being consolidated into their books. I think discussion of other spectrum would have diluted the fiber joint venture discussion. They do have a fund which one use is to purchase new spectrum. Sale of the 800Mhz would go into this. It should be noted that they continue to buy 2.5Ghz spectrum from schools etc to replace leases. They will have a conference this fall  to update their overall strategies. Other notes from the call are 75% of the phones on the network are 5g. About 85% of their sites have n41, n25, and n71, 90% 5g.  93% of traffic is on midband.  SA is also adding to their performance advantage, which they figure is still ahead of other carriers by two years. It took two weeks to put the auction 108 spectrum to use at their existing sites. Mention was also made that their site spacing was designed for midrange thus no gaps in n41 coverage, while competitors was designed for lowband thus toggles back and forth for n77 also with its shorter range.  
    • The manual network selection sounds like it isn't always scanning NR, hence Dish not showing up. Your easiest way to force Dish is going to be forcing the phone into NR-only mode (*#*#4636#*#* menu?), since rainbow sims don't support SA on T-Mobile.
    • "The company’s unique multi-layer approach to 5G, with dedicated standalone 5G deployed nationwide across 600MHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.5GHz delivers customers a consistently strong experience, with 85% of 5G traffic on sites with all three spectrum bands deployed." Meanwhile they are very close to a construction deadline June 1 for 850Mhz of mmWave in most of Ohio covering 27500-28350Mhz expiring 6/8/2028. No reported sightings.  Buildout notice issue sent by FCC in March 5, 2024 https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/letterPdf/LetterPdfController?licId=4019733&letterVersionId=178&autoLetterId=13060705&letterCode=CR&radioServiceCode=UU&op=LetterPdf&licSide=Y&archive=null&letterTo=L  No specific permits seen in a quick check of Columbus. They also have an additional 200Mhz covering at 24350-25450 Mhz and 24950-25050Mhz with no buildout date expiring 12/11/2029.
    • T-Mobile Delivers Industry-Leading Customer, Service Revenue and Profitability Growth in Q1 2024, and Raises 2024 Guidance https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-q1-2024-earnings — — — — — I find it funny that when they talk about their spectrum layers they're saying n71, n25, and n41. They're completely avoiding talking about mmWave.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...