Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/17/2018 in all areas

  1. 10 points
    I'm just going to drop this speed test I just took right here. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  2. 8 points
    So much juicy info in the Public Interest Statement that T-Mobile and Sprint put together for the FCC. Page 23 and 24 have some maps that show the projected extent of 5G coverage on both networks in 2024 if they were to go at it alone. Beware, the document is over 600 pages long so if anyone has free time and wants to go through the whole thing, please do! https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10618281006240/Public Interest Statement and Appendices A-J (Public Redacted) .pdf I'll keep editing as I find more cool stuff. Edits: I'm still reading but something to note is that on their own, it is expected that by 2021, Sprint will cover more POP's in high-speed 5G than T-Mobile. So while T-Mobile would have greater overall coverage by a long shot, Sprint would be capable of providing 153 Million POPs with speeds greater than 150Mbps compared to only 10 Million from T-Mobile.
  3. 8 points
    Anecdotal reply: I reactivated my Palm Pre over the weekend and have had no problems with EVDO around the KC metro. I'm going to carry it for a few weeks as my primary. #webosforever
  4. 7 points
    Few quick updates on the Seattle market: Verizon B5/B26 MFBI is now live in Seattle. Verizon is also replacing all of the antennas on many of their sites with new MIMO (and possibly NR-capable) antennas. It seems that in a large majority of these setups, only half of the ports are used—I think they will come back and hook up new RRUs (again maybe for NR) to these unused ports later. Verizon has historically had phenomenal site optimization and load balancing but not-so-great site density in my area, although recently, they have been closing that gap. Although they still seem to be avoiding using wooden utility poles as much as possible, they are colocating onto many existing macros and buildings as well as constructing their own towers. I think they will soon become a much stronger competitor to the other carriers in this market. All Sprint towers in the market that can support the weight are being upgraded to one hexadecaport antenna (4x4 800, 4x4 1900, 8x8 2500) and one 8T8R antenna (8x8 2500) per sector. Sites with weight limitations are also getting triband upgrades but with lower order MIMO. The common setups in order of weight are: A single hexadecaport antenna (4x4 800, 4x4 1900, 4x4 2500) per sector. A standard 6-port dual-band NV antenna (2x2 800, 4x4 1900) and a 10-port dual-band next-gen antenna (2x2 800, 8x8 2500) per sector. (This setup is quite rare). A single decaport triband antenna (2x2 800, 4x4 1900, 4x4 2500) per sector. I haven’t seen any L600 in the Seattle metro on T-Mobile yet. They largely seem to have stagnated over the last year or so. Many sites (probably 1/4 or 1/5) still don’t have L700, mostly sites on wooden utility poles or powerlines. I haven’t seen permits or anything to upgrade these sites... AT&T also seems to have largely stagnated in the Seattle market following their WCS rollout. That being said, their network is probably holding up the best in my immediate area. They have the best site density in my market and their 15x15 lowband and 20x20 midband is working out really great for them.
  5. 7 points
    Also we really need to stop acting like what is being said is new information. Marcelo says Sprint is going to need to spend $20-25 Billion over the next 4 years to build out 5G coverage to urban and suburban areas. Sprint already said they plan on spending $5-6Billion in capex per year going forward. Marcelo said Sprint doesn't have the spectrum to deploy 5G across its entire footprint and will be forced to stay within urban centers and their suburbs. We already knew that given how 2.5GHz propagates and that 5G deployment at least initially would focus on areas that would provide the largest return on investment. The only thing new is the that Marcelo is saying that he thinks this increased investment won't be enough to take on Verizon and AT&T. The information hasn't changed, only the tone. The change in tone is simply to sell the merger as a necessity.
  6. 7 points
    Good to see Sprint still investing on the network as planned, especially on Massive MIMO. Allocated a billion dollar purchase order on M-MIMO alone! Webcast of John Saw discussion with Well's Fargo. https://cc.talkpoint.com/well001/062118a_as/?entity=3_Y4ISKKL
  7. 6 points
    Top 2 results 15x15. Highest upload speeds I’ve ever gotten
  8. 5 points
    Here you go!! I am in Chicago until Monday, Let me know if you want to see anything else
  9. 5 points
    Verizon and At&t didnt participate in the 600 auction because they have plenty of low band to go around. Verizon has 1-2 layers of lowband b13 and b5. Att has 2-3 layers b5, b12/17 and b14. Sprint needed that lowband and would have drastically improved coverage and capacity for lowband. 3-5mhz of b26 that it's not even aggregated is not going to cut it. Sprint has lied before. Where is Gigabit LTE that they announced 16 months ago that was supposed to launch in 2017??? Why is Sprint all of a sudden really quiet about 4xCA that was supposed to launch?? Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  10. 5 points
    I haven't ready his testimony and probably won't have a chance to until late tonight or tomorrow, but much like the FCC document, why is this a surprise? Part of the sell job to the regulators and anyone like congress that could potentially step in the way of this is that Sprint (and T-Mobile makes the same argument themselves in their portion of the FCC filing as well) are in precarious position going forward with significant competitive disadvantages to AT&T and Verizon. Selling this, and specifically selling this angle is why Claure is no longer the CEO and why Combes and the rest of the executive team is on a cross country roadshow telling employees the exact opposite of what Claure is telling the regulators. It is all part of the dance.
  11. 5 points
    How to watch Sprint and T-Mobile execs pitch their merger to Congress on Wednesday https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/game-of-phones-examining-the-competitive-impact-of-the-t-mobile_sprint-transaction
  12. 5 points
  13. 5 points
  14. 5 points
    I read the portion of the filing that is being referenced in the article and it makes it seem as though both Sprint and T-Mobile are in a dire position. It's funny that despite all that has been stated, both carriers have 5G plans going out at least 6 years from now prepared already, should they be forced to operate separately. The main issue presented is that Sprint can't deploy 2.5GHz 5G in rural areas because they don't have the money to do so. The only way to get more money is to have more customers. Because of Sprint's poor network perception, the only way for Sprint to get new customers is to lower prices. And because of low prices, Sprint can't make as much money off of their customers so they're stuck in a loop. T-Mobile on the other hand has the money to build a broad 5G network over 600MHz, but they don't have the spectrum to provide 5G speeds like Sprint can. So they'll be able to claim the title of the largest 5G network by square mileage but with speeds that aren't much better than current LTE speeds. Sprint will a larger network capable of providing faster speeds. Basically, T-Mobile won't be able to compete effectively in the 5G space in terms of offering "true 5G experience" to their customers until they can get everyone off of LTE which isn't happening soon. The solution is that in merging, the New T-Mobile will be able to deploy 2.5GHz over a large area so that more people can have access to those higher speeds that they wouldn't get by 600MHz only or because of Sprint's smaller network.
  15. 5 points
    B41 speeds at Mayaguez Plaza 136Mbps faster than Liberty speeds at home...
  16. 4 points
    So I just stumbled across what appears to be a new Sprint mini macro or small cell in Lake City right by Columbia High School it is still under construction by Mobilitie and the site id listed on the pole is JA90XS054 pics here https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jhg5b5qfffimeoc/AAAnogePf_IEtZcie67spx7Ha?dl=0 EDIT: Just uploaded permit to the dropbox folder as well
  17. 4 points
    They are not saying two different things. They are saying two different parts of the same story. Combs: we are investing 5-7 billion in out network for the next two years. Marcelo: we are but it will not likily change the overall market and we wont gain significant scale out of the investment. Combs: we are building a a 5g network with deep spectrum assets. Marcelo: yes we are, but it will be limited geographically to major metros and it wont penetrate buildings for crap. See? Same story, just different parts.
  18. 4 points
  19. 4 points
    Interesting analysis over in Seeking Alpha. Sprint and T-Mobile Merger: The 12 points from the FCC Filing that signal merger approval and potential appreciation. TS
  20. 3 points
    This merger is also happening because of mismanagement by Marcelo, and as a Sprint shareholder, that makes me pretty upset. One thing I’ll never understand is why at his direction Sprint spent so much money on retail stores, whether it was the RadioShack deal or overhauling the retail stores themselves. Marcelo repeatedly said retail store distribution being lacking vs its competitors was an issue of concern.(https://www.wirelessweek.com/news/2017/06/sprint-ramps-distribution-push-adding-jobs-opening-60-new-stores-new-england) I disagree. Aside from the subpar state of the Network, the poorly functioning Sprint website should have been the primary issue of concern. If a retail store is dingy or outdated, that only affects the people who go to that store. However, if the Sprint website doesn’t work well, that can affect tens of millions of people, current and prospective customers alike. Same goes for a tower site, which can affect thousands or tends of thousands of people or more. Poor coverage at an airport can affect millions of customers on an annual basis alone. Marcelo had his priorities completely wrong on this and virtually all the money spent on physical retail should have been thrown into Network Capex... $200 Million for Tidal included.
  21. 3 points
    Intended Pun Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
  22. 3 points
    Those FCC docs are all in place to "sell" the idea of the merger. So you better believe they are over blowing all of Sprint's inadequacies (and T-mobile's for that matter) There's no question that they can both go at it alone (T-mobile especially) it would just not be nearly as fruitful from a business stand point.
  23. 3 points
    Trying to fuel the merger approval with these "excuses".
  24. 3 points
    I don't think you really understand what is happening here. Number one the current situation is not particularly competitive for At&t or Verizon. The two have the majority of the customers. This has really lead to two tier market. Tier one being for customers who have more money than sense and the other for more price. Both Sprint and Tmobile have been able to siphon some customers off of the big two however, at the current rate it would take more than five decades for either Sprint or Tmobile to pick up enough to gain any real competitive momentum. I am sure market forces would bankrupt one of them or even both before then. Remember Tmobile would have already been bankrupt if the parent company had not transferred piles of debt to themselves, invested heavily into network upgrades and increased holdings. Up until 2013 they were actively looking to unload their shares. Next for Verizon and at&t 5G has nothing to due with mobile internet and everything to do with fixed wireless. They intend to directly compete with comcast, charter and so on. So does new Tmobile, but they will also have mobile 5G. Verizon and at&t will have to compete on price on the wireless side. Another issue is Verizon has survived on the back of "Alpha" consumers. It will be hard to sell these consumers having second best and you can't win these customers on bundling and deals. Verizon has built everything on the reputation of being the very best. When evidence starts to show otherwise, the heat is on. Do you honestly think that either network alone would be able to knock Verizon off the top spot? At&t has no interest in the top spot and has diversified into a more profitable market. If there isn't a strong third player things could get real ugly. Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
  25. 3 points
    I fully expect prices to increase within 24 months after the merger is settled, and a stalemate between the big three. Alot of budget minded folks will turn to half-assed prepaid services with unreasonable limitations. I also fully expect a shit ton of new plans with lots of nonsense ways of overcharging us. With three huge competitors, all of similar size, why bother truly competing. Complacency will be the name of the game for quite some time.
×