Fierce has a poll posted... and is utilizing a bracket style contest to find out who their readers think is the most powerful person in the telecom industry. Between Marcelo and the pink clad Chihuahua of a man... I give it to Marcelo. I think the final winner should be Masa, it's is a name people know and will get to know more in the coming years worldwide. But for the current poll, it's an easy decision for me!
For Ericsson markets t-mobile uses what is known as AIR antenna units which have the radio unit integrated with the antenna. This type of setup significantly reduces signal loss from the radio to the antenna since they're both practically next to each other and not sepearated by coax jumper cables like that of a remote radio unit.
Basic Ericsson AIR21 setup
(Note typically there are 2 Ericsson AIR per sector)
Ericsson AIR21 + Band 12 700 mhz Equipment
Note the addition of a new low band 700 mhz capable antenna + Ericsson RRUS11 B12 (remote radio units) in addition to new TMA (tower mounted amplifiers) connected to the AIR antenna. The new Ericsson RRUS11 B12 + Antenna addition is for tmobiles band 12 700mhz (L700) deployment.
Credit for the photographs belong to whoever took it. You know who you are!
With the introduction of the new plans Sprint has announced. I told one of my friends about the $60 unlimited plan and she was shocked yet happy about it. She currently has T-Mobile and there has been times where my Sprint service has out performed her service even in the city with puling up information and out of town...well... you already know how that went. She was talking about switching and stuff but then she sent me a typical article bashing Sprint and I got irritated by it and I had to explain to her that Sprint is not bad at all. These articles are based on past experiences from 3+ years ago. I told her I'm pulling 60+ mbps on LTE but she's worried about Sprint being slow ( because of what she read). Guys give me some advice on persuading her to give Sprint a chance.
I feel like articles that are being posted is what keeps away customers. It makes no sense that T-Mobiles 2g network is not spoken about when they are in the news for changes to plans and such. But good ol Sprint makes changes and articles that get posted rips Sprint apart for filth.
Roger Cheng @cnet appears to have had the most fun out of this, it kind of wrote the story for him I guess, so there is that. Also, just noticed the extra title Q, that is gonna drive some people nuts today. Top lel.
Am I the only one that likes to look at Verizon's coverage comparison tool. I think it gives a good idea of a carrier's generalized coverage as far as those cities that have been announced. However, it takes a while for it to get updated. I look at Verizon's map and think, no one will ever build an LTE network of that size. When I look at T-Mobile, I see a spotty, spread out network. AT&T is also spotty with a few highways covered here and there. Sprint seems to be more put together as in even if it is spotty, they are in blobs rather than random remote areas.
I've also found a few places that Sprint has coverage in but not Verizon such as in southern Texas.
The other thing I found in his video presentation was the clear lack of anything "Sprint". John jabbed at AT&T and Verizon but nothing on or against Sprint. Also, I don't know if you guys noticed, but the word "Duopoly" is the power word of late and is being used with more frequency! (no pun intended).... I think it's about conditioning the FCC and DOJ by hearing it.
The DOJ reviews potential antitrust issues in mergers. The FCC is supposed to look at whether the merger is in the public interest, which includes reduced competition. So the FCC could reject the merger on the grounds that the reduced competition is not in the public interest. I do not, however, see Chairman Pai doing that because he is so pro-business.
From the FCC's FAQ about merger reviews: Q: What is the FCC’s public interest standard/test?
A: Under section 310(d) of the Communications Act, we determine whether a proposed transaction will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. First, we determine if the application complies with provisions of the Act and our Commission rules. If it does, then we consider whether granting the application could result in public interest harms by substantially frustrating or impairing the objectives or implementation of the Communications Act or related statutes. Competition, diversity, localism, and encouraging the provision of advanced services to all Americans are among the principle objectives of the Act. We also consider what potential public benefits might occur because of the transaction.
We balance the potential public interest harms against the potential benefits. The Applicants bear the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed transaction, on balance, will serve the public interest.
Before we jump to this conclusion we need to see sustained financial growth over a period of time and a much larger increase in net additions to the network. Sprint is still offering the best deals in wireless and their growth is lagging the competition. This is not sustainable over the long term. Honestly, I see a merger as inevitable as the larger providers will have much more flexible cash for network enhancements in the near future, which they can then leverage to gain more customers.