Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[lilotimz]

How is it Verizon seems to be flying in small cells and sprint not so much? I know it's hard to say? Didn't sprint announce their plan first?

Vzw will announce their completion first and take the wind from sprints sails because sprint will be catching up again.... Smh it's the never ending battle

 

They've been doing site densification via new macro and small cells for over 3 years now. 

Verizon doesn't announce plans. They just DO IT. 

 

Notice how almost no one complains about congested and unusable Verizon LTE nowadays? 

[utiz4321]

They've been doing site densification via new macro and small cells for over 3 years now.

Verizon doesn't announce plans. They just DO IT.

 

Notice how almost no one complains about congested and unusable Verizon LTE nowadays?

Sprint is always playing catch up. It is there default setting.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[Paynefanbro]

Sprint is always playing catch up. It is there default setting.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

After WiMax was a failed bet, it's probably better that they're not pioneering much tech. They can't afford to take the risk anymore.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[lilotimz]

Sprint is always playing catch up. It is there default setting.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

 

Don't try to bait me. 

Edited July 11, 2016 by lilotimz

[utiz4321]

Don't try to bait me.

Wasn't. Since the failed Nextel merger they have been playing catch up.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[WillM]

How is it Verizon seems to be flying in small cells and sprint not so much? I know it's hard to say? Didn't sprint announce their plan first?

Vzw will announce their completion first and take the wind from sprints sails because sprint will be catching up again.... Smh it's the never ending battle

That's the difference between the two companies in a nutshell and is what drives a lot of Sprint subs crazy. It's what we all hoped would disappear with new ownership but at least here in NJ there has been next to zero densification.

[Paynefanbro]

And it begins again...

 

Can we stop the hate train before it gets out of hand?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[lilotimz]

Wasn't. Since the failed Nextel merger they have been playing catch up.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

 

My mistake. I did not notice the post before mine. 

[Hmight]

They've been doing site densification via new macro and small cells for over 3 years now. 

Verizon doesn't announce plans. They just DO IT. 

 

Notice how almost no one complains about congested and unusable Verizon LTE nowadays? 

This is the luxury of being the leader of the pack. Noone rarely questions what are you up to, as long as your network is rated above everyone else.  Sprint does not have the luxury to stay quiet.  Sprint has to let everyone know what they are doing for people to be comfortable with any progress being made.  If they don't announce any plans, people will write them off.  

 

Heck, people wrote off Sprint's plan even as they are announced. 

 

Anyways, the fact is Sprint has improved dramatically since 2014 is a testament of how far they have come. 

[kg4icg]

I hear plenty of complaints from people on Verizon, and it just ain't about cost either.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

[RAvirani]

They've been doing site densification via new macro and small cells for over 3 years now.

 

Verizon doesn't announce plans. They just DO IT.

 

Notice how almost no one complains about congested and unusable Verizon LTE nowadays?

 

I am staying at the JW Marriott in Las Vegas right now and I have a hell of a lot of complaints about unusable Verizon LTE where I am.

[greenbastard]

I am staying at the JW Marriott in Las Vegas right now and I have a hell of a lot of complaints about unusable Verizon LTE where I am.

It's still hard to deny that they have less congested sites than At&t, T-Mobile or Sprint. Verizon's aggressive pricing on data, superb nationwide spectrum holdings, and tight cell spacing throughout most major Metros make them hard to beat.

[S4GRU]

I hear plenty of complaints from people on Verizon, and it just ain't about cost either.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

Of all the places I've lived now, I can tell you Verizon is pretty underwhelming in Western Washington. My work phone is VZW, drives me bonkers. It is slow as often as Tmo or Sprint and they have the least density in a lot of places. They are far from perfect. Especially in the South Puget Sound.

 

So I agree with you, there. Not all Verizon customers are happy. I get into discussions all the time with Washingtonians who 'think' Verizon is the best because the ads and their friends tell them they are. But then you show them how AT&T, Tmo and Sprint have equal and often better coverage where they go and their heads explode. And then make them run a speed test. They are often living in 2012, and didn't know things changed since then.

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

[Paynefanbro]

Has anyone bothered making a price per gigabyte chart for each of the big 4 carriers? I just did with some free time and it seems to show that AT&T has objectively the worse plans out of them all. The only time they're prices are equal to or below Verizon is if you use between 0 and 5 gigabytes of data per month. Otherwise there seems to be no advantage.

No wonder they've been losing postpaid subscribers recently.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1h0VyA9ZigpXpGzOPo9b1Nrr4LoCqmASS6Hu8ne_sCAQ/edit?usp=sharing

 

EDIT: I tried to be as fair as possible and use tiered plans up until the point when they weren't available anymore and then it would switch to Unlimited for Sprint and T-Mobile. In the case of AT&T I didn't include the Unlimited Plan since it includes the stipulation that you have DirectTV service. If you do have Direct TV service however, the graph changes somewhat where for they become competitive with Sprint and T-Mobile at the super high data levels.

[NYC126]

My work phone on Verizon was on the 25gigs plan paying 240 dollars per month, now I will pay 135 for the 30gigs plan. I will pay less for more data than before. The Verizon higher data tiers are way cheaper than before.

[derrph]

My work phone on Verizon was on the 25gigs plan paying 240 dollars per month, now I will pay 135 for the 30gigs plan. I will pay less for more data than before. The Verizon higher data tiers are way cheaper than before.

Oh wow that's a big difference in price. I took a glance at their new plans and it does seem as though they are starting to become slightly cheaper along with the throttled data and carry over data as perks. Depending the circumstance are cheaper than AT&T.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

I would love to see those Verizon/Sprint porting ratios...

 

Marcelo spoke quite assertively about these metrics not too long ago in response to a Verizon executive: https://twitter.com/marceloclaure/status/751135579161571329

[RedSpark]

I wonder what's happening here with this:

 

Sprint, Ericsson mum as time apparently winds down on milestone network outsourcing pact

[derrph]

My work phone on Verizon was on the 25gigs plan paying 240 dollars per month, now I will pay 135 for the 30gigs plan. I will pay less for more data than before. The Verizon higher data tiers are way cheaper than before.

I think I'm going to try out Verizon. What I'm going to do is this, I'll open up a new line on my sprint account and out it on standby that way I don't lose my legacy plan and I'll port out my sprint number to Verizon and get on a cheap 2gb plan with the safety feature and use my unlocked 6s. I'll use it for at least 2 months. I just want to see what the big fuss is about them.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dkoellerwx]

Has anyone bothered making a price per gigabyte chart for each of the big 4 carriers? I just did with some free time and it seems to show that AT&T has objectively the worse plans out of them all. The only time they're prices are equal to or below Verizon is if you use between 0 and 5 gigabytes of data per month. Otherwise there seems to be no advantage.

 

No wonder they've been losing postpaid subscribers recently.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kptd8adjrlakr8f/Book4.xlsx?dl=0

 

 

EDIT: I tried to be as fair as possible and use tiered plans up until the point when they weren't available anymore and then it would switch to Unlimited for Sprint and T-Mobile. In the case of AT&T I didn't include the Unlimited Plan since it includes the stipulation that you have DirectTV service. If you do have Direct TV service however, the graph changes somewhat where for they become competitive with Sprint and T-Mobile at the super high data levels.

 

You might consider moving that to a Google Sheet in Drive? I think something happened when you tried to share it because none of the numbers make sense 

[Paynefanbro]

You might consider moving that to a Google Sheet in Drive? I think something happened when you tried to share it because none of the numbers make sense

Yeah I noticed that. I'll do that when I get home.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[Paynefanbro]

You might consider moving that to a Google Sheet in Drive? I think something happened when you tried to share it because none of the numbers make sense 

 

 

It's been edited. Naturally the lower tiers are more expensive per GB because although you are paying less, you are still paying a ton per gig. The prices don't really seem normal until you get past AT&T's weird 300MB tier. At that range, since they're the only one that offers that tier, they're the only one with a normal price at that amount. I debated taking out that data point for every other carrier and only leaving it for AT&T but I think it just shows how ridiculous that low of a data tier actually is.

 

Also the more data you opt for the lower the price/gig becomes which makes sense. Hopefully the numbers make sense now. If you need further explanation, I'm happy to do so.

[Dkoellerwx]

It's been edited. Naturally the lower tiers are more expensive per GB because although you are paying less, you are still paying a ton per gig. The prices don't really seem normal until you get past AT&T's weird 300MB tier. At that range, since they're the only one that offers that tier, they're the only one with a normal price at that amount. I debated taking out that data point for every other carrier and only leaving it for AT&T but I think it just shows how ridiculous that low of a data tier actually is.

 

Also the more data you opt for the lower the price/gig becomes which makes sense. Hopefully the numbers make sense now. If you need further explanation, I'm happy to do so.

 

Are you showing the $/GB? Because that's not really clear. That's probably why the numbers appear so confusing. 

[Paynefanbro]

Are you showing the $/GB? Because that's not really clear. That's probably why the numbers appear so confusing.

 

Yes I am. The reason why it seems confusing is because for each of the carriers there is no flat rate per gigabyte.

 

I put all of the carriers data tiers in order and the price per gig at each data tier using each carriers data. Obviously since every carrier doesn't use the same tiers, I had to fill in the blanks. To do so, I used the tier that was closest to that given data tier but was not less than it. For example Sprint does not have a 2GB data tier. However they do have a 3GB data tier at $30. As a result to calculate's Sprint's price per GB at 2GB I had to use the price at 3GB and divide that by 2, thus giving me $15.

 

Verizon goes up to 100GB in their plans and while T-Mobile and Sprint have Unlimited Data plans AT&T doesn't (unless you have DirectTV). I had to use overages for AT&T which meant another $15 per GB and then add that number to the $375 for the 50GB plan and then divide by the total number of GB.

[WiWavelength]

Verizon goes up to 100GB in their plans and while T-Mobile and Sprint have Unlimited Data plans AT&T doesn't (unless you have DirectTV). I had to use overages for AT&T which meant another $15 per GB and then add that number to the $375 for the 50GB plan and then divide by the total number of GB.

 

At the high end, do not use "unlimited" data for comparison -- because the cost per "unlimited" GB asymptotically approaches zero.  Instead, use the greatest common factor, which is 100 GB due to VZW.  Consider "unlimited" to be 100 GB.  Anyone who uses greater than 100 GB of mobile data should be smacked upside the head for being ridiculous.  And do not exclude the AT&T DirecTV "unlimited" data bundle -- if that is the least expensive way to obtain 100 GB, go with it.

 

AJ