Jump to content
Nextel49

[Proposed] Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, dro1984 said:

For those of you thinking prices will stay the same or go down, please explain your thinking?  How?  How do you expect the network to grow or be updated at the current rates?  

I don't recall anyone saying they expect pricing to further reduce in either scenario...Sprint going alone nor a merger with Tmo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, dro1984 said:

 The focus is on a stronger combined company that can better utilize it's available resources and compete on the same turf as Verizon and AT &T .   

And in terms of this, TMobile already does on many fronts.  They constantly prove to be #1 in so many data tests. Verizon and TMobile are essentially #1/2 in terms of data speeds and they are the most constrained carriers in terms of spectrum. 

In terms of Coverage, TMobile continues to show us how they will be on par with VZW/AT&T soon and do continue to deliver with expanded coverage.

TMobile is well on its way without Sprint to be equal to VZW/AT&T.  So that is three strong nationwide carriers with Sprint still being a forth option if absolute total native coverage is less a concern.  They are well on their way to provide fast speeds within existing coverage areas.  Honestly, with a little stronger rural coverage and less dead zones TMobile will be the nations #2 carrier ahead of AT&T.

Edited by red_dog007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, red_dog007 said:

TMobile is well on its way without Sprint to be equal to VZW/AT&T.  They are well on their way to provide fast speeds within existing coverage areas.  Honestly, with a little stronger rural coverage and less dead zones TMobile will be the nations #2 carrier ahead of AT&T.

This is a reach. AT&T and Verizon still have twice as many customers as T-Mobile and even if they added 2 Million customers per quarter it would take 8 years before they got to VZ and AT&T's current size, assuming VZW or AT&T don't have any growth at all.

We can acknowledge T-Mobile's accomplishments without making it seem like they're nearly on par with the big two. In terms of data speed, sure. In terms of price, they're approaching it too. However, you won't be able to find the consistency of the duopoly's network nationwide on T-Mobile right now. That'll take quite a bit more infill sites. That's why given Sprint's "non-announcement" of 8K macro sites for expansion, I'm glad to see it's not a huge expansion because we know that they're going for reliability over square mileage.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Paynefanbro said:

This is a reach. AT&T and Verizon still have twice as many customers as T-Mobile and even if they added 2 Million customers per quarter it would take 8 years before they got to VZ and AT&T's current size, assuming VZW or AT&T don't have any growth at all.

We can acknowledge T-Mobile's accomplishments without making it seem like they're nearly on par with the big two. In terms of data speed, sure. In terms of price, they're approaching it too. However, you won't be able to find the consistency of the duopoly's network nationwide on T-Mobile right now. That'll take quite a bit more infill sites. That's why given Sprint's "non-announcement" of 8K macro sites for expansion, I'm glad to see it's not a huge expansion because we know that they're going for reliability over square mileage.

Nothing to do anything about number of customers...

How are they not on par with the big two?  TMobile is crushing it for data in all the major markets.  If TMobile can execute their 2017 coverage map goal, they will be on par with AT&T, which is considered to be in the same coverage league as VZW.  So yes, TMobile will be in this club come 2018.

https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/lte-comparison-map

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2017 at 4:58 PM, red_dog007 said:

Nothing to do anything about number of customers...

How are they not on par with the big two?  TMobile is crushing it for data in all the major markets.  If TMobile can execute their 2017 coverage map goal, they will be on par with AT&T, which is considered to be in the same coverage league as VZW.  So yes, TMobile will be in this club come 2018.

https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/lte-comparison-map

You literally said #2 carrier ahead of AT&T. They're #2 not because of network metrics but because of the amount of subscribers they have. Nationally, T-Mobile is still ranked last in terms of overall network performance because despite their square milage, they still lack in call and text reliability. There is zero doubt that they have one of, if not the fastest network in the country but that is far from the only metric to measure a network, even if it's the most important to you.

All you have to do is look at the recent reddit thread that suggested T-Mobile might stop their program that gives people those Cellspots to see that a lot of people were ready to switch because the only thing keeping them on was that device giving them service indoors. At least we know Sprint is going all in on the Magic Boxes and they treat it as a part of their network instead of as just another device.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

No. You are not based in reality if you think the wireless market is going to stagnate if Sprint and T-Mobile merge. 5g is coming and will be pushed by everyone in the market place. 

 

The question is weather you want it to follow the same pattern LTE did or not. Would you like the big two to deploy a really solid 5g network and the other two to deploy an uneven networks or 3 solid th networks? 

 

You anti-merger people dont understand the role capital intensive industries play in shaping such markets.  If a market is capital intensive it is more efficient with fewer players. Imgaine if the market still looked like it did in 2003, we would have plenty of players and regional plans with not even 3g deployed.

 

Sprint has 30 billion. They are able to increase CAPEX this year because they don't have much maturing this year.  This is not the case the next two years which means they are likely to starve their network again over that time. Mean while the big two aren't going to stand still. Sprint isn't growing top line income fast enough to make themselves viable on their own.  

 

 

I am 100% against this merger.  Sprint and Tmobile should remain separate to keep the competition at 4 players.  If currently there were 7 semi major players in the wireless industry, I would agree with you that consolidation of a few more players would be beneficial for the industry due to LTE and 5G going forward requiring high amounts of spectrum bandwidths.  However we are now down to 4 players which to me is already a good number to maintain nationally.  Comparing how it looked in 2003 doesn't matter back then because we didn't have LTE that required at least 5x5 , 10x10, 20x20 MHz bandwidth.

It would have sucked if we still have 7 major players in the 600 MHz auction with only 70 MHz available for purchase and each buying a nationwide 5x5 block of spectrum instead of fewer players buy a bigger chunk of spectrum to deploy larger bandwidths.

Sprint needs to be worrying about getting itself into gear and try to deploy its B41 LTE in small cells and densify its network instead of looking for a bailout in Tmobile to save them.  

  • Like 4
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ericdabbs said:

I am 100% against this merger.  Sprint and Tmobile should remain separate to keep the competition at 4 players.  If currently there were 7 semi major players in the wireless industry, I would agree with you that consolidation of a few more players would be beneficial for the industry due to LTE and 5G going forward requiring high amounts of spectrum bandwidths.  However we are now down to 4 players which to me is already a good number to maintain nationally.  Comparing how it looked in 2003 doesn't matter back then because we didn't have LTE that required at least 5x5 , 10x10, 20x20 MHz bandwidth.

It would have sucked if we still have 7 major players in the 600 MHz auction with only 70 MHz available for purchase and each buying a nationwide 5x5 block of spectrum instead of fewer players buy a bigger chunk of spectrum to deploy larger bandwidths.

Sprint needs to be worrying about getting itself into gear and try to deploy its B41 LTE in small cells and densify its network instead of looking for a bailout in Tmobile to save them.  

How do you know 4 in 2025 isnt going to be the same as 7 in 2017? These companies are looking at this everyday and the market, which is alot smarter than both of us, has been trying to get the national carriers down to three for a while now. 

 

The fact is for The two years after this one sprint is likily to cut capex drastically.  It is hard to see how they compete going forward.  Would it be better to take a 3 player market because of a merger or risk a 3 player market do to a bankruptcy? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ericdabbs said:

I am 100% against this merger.  Sprint and Tmobile should remain separate to keep the competition at 4 players.  If currently there were 7 semi major players in the wireless industry, I would agree with you that consolidation of a few more players would be beneficial for the industry due to LTE and 5G going forward requiring high amounts of spectrum bandwidths.  However we are now down to 4 players which to me is already a good number to maintain nationally.  Comparing how it looked in 2003 doesn't matter back then because we didn't have LTE that required at least 5x5 , 10x10, 20x20 MHz bandwidth.

It would have sucked if we still have 7 major players in the 600 MHz auction with only 70 MHz available for purchase and each buying a nationwide 5x5 block of spectrum instead of fewer players buy a bigger chunk of spectrum to deploy larger bandwidths.

Sprint needs to be worrying about getting itself into gear and try to deploy its B41 LTE in small cells and densify its network instead of looking for a bailout in Tmobile to save them.  

While as a greedy consumer you may want to keep them at 4 with a weak Sprint competing strictly on price because they cannot afford to  expand their network, as an objective observer you have to admit that this is a highly capital incentive industry and the more customers you can spread capex  over the better. I do believe that a third strong competitor will be better for consumers than two large ones and two weaker ones. A combined t-mobile/Sprint can compete on network quality and not just price

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree Red Dog!   Absolutely.    In many ways I feel that T-Mobile is showing Sprint that "you need to get off your *** and fix your network or you are going to get crushed." (if not by us, then by AT&T or Verizon)...  If you want to be a legit contender for a merger... get moving!       I think they are.   Masa has wanted it since the beginning... don't know what happened so quickly to make them act?  It's just good to see.      T Mobile is tearing it up and not sitting on it's heals.  They are already getting 600 MHz put in areas they can turn it on now... They are actually ahead of phone release!  

As far as prices and those concerned... I get the sense from some, that this whole thought of merging is just out of control like a spirit of doom.   Bills will rise unfairly... etc... it may not be said verbatim... but the feeling is there.    What I'm trying to say to those,  is: don't  panic... I think  the possibilities are endless, with all that spectrum and the determination to use it.   Did I say... The DETERMINATION to use it...    The capital to use it... 

I think the combination with it's Spectrum and depth...  will be a game changer.  I think "T-Mobint" will still be the disruptor.   I don't see them backing down in the fight with the big two....    I still  see unlimited in the cards... Time will tell.     

 

Edited by dro1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me...I believe unlimited and prices are the most at risk for a merger.  They will likely make promises to regulators not to scrap unlimited or raise price for one year.  They won't offer it initially when presenting  for approval.  But it will be one of the things they offer early to help anti-trust issues.  And if they get desperate, they'll offer more than a year.

I don't think prices will double overnight, or anything.    But Tmo cancelled unlimited before.  And it was only Sprint who held firm.  Not that Sprint is some holy protector of unlimited.  They did it only to differentiate and try to compete.  In a Triopoly world, if the new Tmo drops unlimited again, AT&T and VZW would follow suit quickly.  They can't wait to go back.  It will only be a mere Legere business decision to end unlimited in the USA.  Maybe forever.

I personally don't use much data anymore.  It's not a big deal to me, all things considered.  I like unlimited data because I hate constantly keeping track, and having to constantly meter my behavior over a remaining period.  I hate that.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

How do you know 4 in 2025 isnt going to be the same as 7 in 2017? These companies are looking at this everyday and the market, which is alot smarter than both of us, has been trying to get the national carriers down to three for a while now. 

 

The fact is for The two years after this one sprint is likily to cut capex drastically.  It is hard to see how they compete going forward.  Would it be better to take a 3 player market because of a merger or risk a 3 player market do to a bankruptcy? 

Why would u think that sprint will dramatically reduce capex?  Just continue to execute and people will move over to sprint.  I am pretty sure this latest move by verizon with the GoUnlimited plan to limit video to 480p and 600 kbps for hotspot for base unlimited plan is driving people away from verizon.  If sprint is truly expanding B41 to 3xCA with 4xCA and deploying massive small cells soon then eventually the root metrics will catch up.  To assume that 3 carriers is the only answer is crazy.  

Tmobile themselves have demonstrated it can single handingly draw customers away from the big 2 with their net adds.  Sprint just needs to copy those types of moves and offer deals to current customers.  I think a 2 lines for $60 deal for 55+ years old would be a fantastic program to draw customers even though people will ise workarounds to sign up for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ericdabbs said:

Why would u think that sprint will dramatically reduce capex?  Just continue to execute and people will move over to sprint.  I am pretty sure this latest move by verizon with the GoUnlimited plan to limit video to 480p and 600 kbps for hotspot for base unlimited plan is driving people away from verizon.  If sprint is truly expanding B41 to 3xCA with 4xCA and deploying massive small cells soon then eventually the root metrics will catch up.  To assume that 3 carriers is the only answer is crazy.  

Tmobile themselves have demonstrated it can single handingly draw customers away from the big 2 with their net adds.  Sprint just needs to copy those types of moves and offer deals to current customers.  I think a 2 lines for $60 deal for 55+ years old would be a fantastic program to draw customers even though people will ise workarounds to sign up for it.

it's not just Verizon that limits video to 480p. T-Mobile is also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ericdabbs said:

Why would u think that sprint will dramatically reduce capex?  Just continue to execute and people will move over to sprint.  I am pretty sure this latest move by verizon with the GoUnlimited plan to limit video to 480p and 600 kbps for hotspot for base unlimited plan is driving people away from verizon.  If sprint is truly expanding B41 to 3xCA with 4xCA and deploying massive small cells soon then eventually the root metrics will catch up.  To assume that 3 carriers is the only answer is crazy.  

Tmobile themselves have demonstrated it can single handingly draw customers away from the big 2 with their net adds.  Sprint just needs to copy those types of moves and offer deals to current customers.  I think a 2 lines for $60 deal for 55+ years old would be a fantastic program to draw customers even though people will ise workarounds to sign up for it.

Because Sprint has couple of substantial debt payments over the next couple of years and their cash flow is not healthy enough to make those payments and also maintain Capex. Unless they can reschedule their payments, those loom large in their financial picture.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sprint-m-a-tmobile-exclusive/exclusive-t-mobile-sprint-close-to-agreeing-deal-terms-sources-idUSKCN1BX1EK

“Japan’s SoftBank Group Corp (9984.T), which controls Sprint, will own 40 to 50 percent of the combined company, while T-Mobile majority owner Deutsche Telekom (DTEGn.DE) will own a majority stake, two of the sources said.”

“Once terms are finalized, due diligence by the two companies will follow and a deal is expected by the end of October, though talks may still fall through, the sources said.”

Legere as CEO....

Please don’t do this Sprint. Please.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who supports the merger hasnt been on a plane in the last 5 years

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

The fact is for The two years after this one sprint is likily to cut capex drastically.  It is hard to see how they compete going forward.  Would it be better to take a 3 player market because of a merger or risk a 3 player market do to a bankruptcy? 

Sprint's latest guidance for CapEx was to remain around $3.5 to $4 billion a year for the next 3 years (2017-2019). Can guidance change? Yes, and it has before with Sprint. That said, I'll take their guidance over speculation based on debt maturities.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jamesinclair said:

Anyone who supports the merger hasnt been on a plan in the last 5 years

WRONG!  ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How this effects the outcome of the T-Mobile / Sprint merger is anyone's guess, but the FCC recently determined that the U.S. Wireless Industry is finally competitive.

Quote

Some say the finding could spur merger activity while others say the FCC may want to maintain competition in the sector

Competition has officially returned to the U.S. wireless sector.

For the first time since 2009, the Federal Communications Commission has concluded there is "effective competition"
in the U.S. wireless market.

The agency is required by law to conduct an economic analysis of the sector. Starting in 2010, after years of major consolidation...

Can't post the whole article since it requires a subscription but it does say that the full (121 page) report will be voted on by FCC commissioners on Sep 26 before it's released.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-wireless-industry-is-finally-competitive-fcc-says-1505145979

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ericdabbs said:

Why would u think that sprint will dramatically reduce capex?  Just continue to execute and people will move over to sprint.  I am pretty sure this latest move by verizon with the GoUnlimited plan to limit video to 480p and 600 kbps for hotspot for base unlimited plan is driving people away from verizon.  If sprint is truly expanding B41 to 3xCA with 4xCA and deploying massive small cells soon then eventually the root metrics will catch up.  To assume that 3 carriers is the only answer is crazy.  

Tmobile themselves have demonstrated it can single handingly draw customers away from the big 2 with their net adds.  Sprint just needs to copy those types of moves and offer deals to current customers.  I think a 2 lines for $60 deal for 55+ years old would be a fantastic program to draw customers even though people will ise workarounds to sign up for it.

To me it isn't just about data speeds.  It is about reliability in the coverage area and the coverage area itself.  I get that most of the population lives in bigger cities and don't need true nationwide coverage, but for many it is a really big deal.  People travel, people move.  You want something that you know will just work pretty much anywhere.  I never understood this when I was initially with Sprint.  I just assumed that every carrier had large issues like this - but the truth is that both Verizon and AT&T cover so many more square miles with LTE (and usable at that) that it is truly ridiculous.

To me, that is where Sprint falls short and their future plans don't adequately address it.  Sure they are planning some native expansion, but nothing even remotely close to the other 3's coverage areas.  Small cells should help in large metros, but it doesn't solve the problem that many will be roaming or have a useless 1X or 3G signal many times when either commuting, traveling, or playing.  

I am probably in the minority here...  I get that data speeds mean a lot to many wireless enthusiasts, but I want is coverage - reliable coverage.  I want to know that I can get reliable calls everywhere.  That my texts will go out in a crowded mall or out at the lake.  I want adequate data speeds to at least surf the web when something pops in my head that I need to know right then and there - even if I am in the middle of nowhere.  I want to be able to stream music on my daily commute without minutes of silence.  

All of those things are possible with most of the other carriers without any extra thought having to be made.  With Sprint, I just can't say that.  

I know - I know.  So why am I with Sprint again?  The unlimited year is just too good to pass up for a new family with a young toddler trying to cut costs anywhere they can...  I can LIVE with the shortcomings when it is free - but I can't and won't when I am actually paying for it.

With that being said - I am neutral on this merger.  I think it would put things in better balance overall with the top 2, but I always think less competition is probably a bad thing down the road.  

/rant over.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A horizontal merger like this is good for one entity... Shareholders. 

Tens of thousands will potentially lose jobs, prices will go up, unlimited will go bye bye (unless you are willing to pay).

Dont forget how powerful the big 2 are in the US government. They will win major concessions in the merger too. 

Which is another point, the larger a company becomes the less responsive they are to the consumer because ppl become a statistic rather than valuable. Look at equifax's or Comcast's treatment of customers. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jones said:

A horizontal merger like this is good for one entity... Shareholders. 

Tens of thousands will potentially lose jobs, prices will go up, unlimited will go bye bye (unless you are willing to pay).

Dont forget how powerful the big 2 are in the US government. They will win major concessions in the merger too. 

Which is another point, the larger a company becomes the less responsive they are to the consumer because ppl become a statistic rather than valuable. Look at equifax's or Comcast's treatment of customers. 

So, none of the mergers in the 2000s was good for consumers? Sorry but that is nuts. Tell me how you even get to 3g with 7-8 players? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey after a merger T-Mobile will introduce the one plan including taxes and fees :  180 dollars per line nice. Unlimited will go bye bye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it looks like the merger might finally be agreed on, there are a few issues to consider, mainly voice integration. For example the AT&T/T-Mobile version of the iPhone 8 and 7 support the same LTE bands as the Sprint/Verizon ones but do not support CDMA. So they will not be able to take advantage of CDMA coverage where there is not WCDMA coverage. On the other hand 6s and 6 variants support CDMA. Conversely the Sprint and Verizon variants support WCDMA so Sprint   subscribers will be able to take advantage of expanded WCDMA coverage and simultaneous voice/data. Now I believe that integration will be on VOLTE. Data will be no problem and both sides will benefit from the each other's network especially if Sprint does not postpone network improvements once the merger is announced. I am looking forward to wider PCS channels as they do some spectrum horse trading.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr.Nuke said:

Sprint's latest guidance for CapEx was to remain around $3.5 to $4 billion a year for the next 3 years (2017-2019). Can guidance change? Yes, and it has before with Sprint. That said, I'll take their guidance over speculation based on debt maturities.

The have 8 billion in debt maturing over the next 3 years and have 7 billion in cash. If you can explain to me how the math works at their current free cash flow ill agree with you.  Otherwise, their guidance isnt worth much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, SprintNYC said:

Hey after a merger T-Mobile will introduce the one plan including taxes and fees :  180 dollars per line nice. Unlimited will go bye bye

No. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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


  • TAPATALK VERSION
    BACK ONLINE

  • PROGRESSIVE RAFFLE
    FOR AN iPHONE 8

    iphonexiphone8.jpg

    WHICH CAN PROGRESS TO AN iPHONE 8+ OR AN iPHONE X
    **or an Android device of equal or lesser value**

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Existing sites have all been upgraded, but the network around here was not designed to blanket LTE.  I recognize that the coverage maps often indicate that coverage is acceptable, but that just isn't the case.   Attaching a pic below that has a blue square.  Illinois Route 47.  Its not an interstate, but still a busy state highway.  This is an area where placement of one additional tower would ensure contiguous LTE coverage from Dwight down through Forrest.  It is equally as bad as you travel farther south on Route 47 south of Forrest.  Phones hang onto LTE for dear life, but drop down to 1x and 3g as the town of Strawn is approached.  From Strawn south nearly all the way to Gibson City is 3G or 1x. Site spacing is great for 1x voice coverage, but its just not there for full-time LTE coverage (no matter which band is being discussed.) Every time I'm in one of these areas, I'm reporting the issues in the Sprint Zone.  At one point in time Sprint was working with Illinois Valley Cellular through the Rural Roaming Partner deal - but I have yet to see any indication of connecting to IVC Equipment.  The partnership started in 2014, and it is now nearing the end of 2017, and I am fairly confident that IVC has not held up their end of the deal in moving their network to LTE.  All of that being said, it is not a big deal at this moment.  It will be a big deal at the point in time that a decision is made to shutter CDMA, if the holes are not fixed.     edit:  relevant to this thread - even a Sprint/Tmo merger would not fix this problem without filling in gaps.  
    • I don't think so... the radio in the S8 just performs way better in low signal based on my tests. My coworker did similar tests on a TMO V30 and has similar results as well. It might be a software issue with the phone...

      Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    • It is on the expansion map that was released recently... when I'm not sure. As far as I know it's still 3G up there... outside Marquette they added some unlimited US Cellular roaming based on the latest map update.

      Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    • Completely wrong thread or market but it looks like sprint plans to bring LTE to the upper peninsula aka Marquette MI. Can anyone confirms this ? I see some marginal activity in the Sensorly app


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Anything new to report about band 26 for SoCal or is this all a pipe dream hoping it gets cleared for rollout before 2027 ?


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×