Jump to content

T-Mobile CEO steps down abruptly


Rawvega

Recommended Posts

I guess his turnaround efforts were not good enough. That and the failed ATT merger meant his time was up.

 

If anyone should be fired for the failed merger, it is AT&T's Stephenson. However, I kind of like him where he is at. Because he is a complete idiot. I love his quotes how he is going to punish his subscribers for the failed merger. Priceless.

 

Robert

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many believe that Humm was brought in from parent Deutsche Telekom largely to sell off T-Mobile USA. I just tweeted a question, asking if the sudden resignation of Humm and the spectrum swap with VZW indicate a change in DT's long term strategy regarding T-Mobile USA.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone should be fired for the failed merger, it is AT&T's Stephenson. However, I kind of like him where he is at. Because he is a complete idiot. I love his quotes how he is going to punish his subscribers for the failed merger. Priceless.

 

Robert

 

It's only a matter of time before the shareholders find out how much of a crook he really is when the network starts to go to cr@p and they start pressuring him to step down or oust him in a boardroom coup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's only a matter of time before the shareholders find out how much of a crook he really is when the network starts to go to cr@p and they start pressuring him to step down or oust him in a boardroom coup.

 

I doubt it. Josh, what you have to understand is that many modern day shareholders do not care if the "network starts to go to cr@p." Purely profit focused shareholders want 1) to keep network CAPEX as low as possible 2) to remain competitive not through innovation or evolution but through coerced retention and 3) to limit competition and make subs feel as if they have no place else to go because they perceive that only AT&T offers the coverage they need, all of their friends/family are on AT&T, AT&T is the best carrier for iOS devices, or that other carriers are simply scary, unknown commodities, etc.

 

AJ

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 503ducati

Remember this gem?

 

 

T-Mobile USA chief (Humm) hopes to overtake Sprint by 2015 through organic growth.

 

 

 

 

T-Mobile

 

January 1st 2011 - 33.7 million total subscribers

 

March 31st 2012 - 33.4 million total subscribers

 

-300,000

 

 

Sprint

 

January 1st 2011 - 49.9 million total subscribers

 

March 31st 2012 - 56.1 million total subscribers

 

+6,200,000

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember this gem?

T-Mobile USA chief (Humm) hopes to overtake Sprint by 2015 through organic growth.

 

Careful. Think critically about the nature and timing of Humm's statement before you pillory him for it.

 

How much did the AT&T-T-Mobile merger negatively affect T-Mobile's growth? And how much did Sprint benefit from those who jumped ship or avoided T-Mobile to stay out of the mouth of AT&T?

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 503ducati

Careful. Think critically about the nature and timing of Humm's statement before you pillory him for it.

 

How much did the AT&T-T-Mobile merger negatively affect T-Mobile's growth? And how much did Sprint benefit from those who jumped ship or avoided T-Mobile to stay out of the mouth of AT&T?

 

AJ

His comical hype around mythical "organic growth" was something else. We haven't seen anything yet with T-Mobile postpaid loses. With pending LTE iPhone across VZW, AT&T, and Sprint's unlimited may push beyond the 1/2+ million postpaid loses per Qtr. for TMO. But more power to him, I wonder who he took an offer with?

Edited by 503ducati
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Careful. Think critically about the nature and timing of Humm's statement before you pillory him for it.

 

How much did the AT&T-T-Mobile merger negatively affect T-Mobile's growth? And how much did Sprint benefit from those who jumped ship or avoided T-Mobile to stay out of the mouth of AT&T?

 

AJ

 

I do not believe the merger had major of an effect on them as many believe. They lost most of their customers in q4 of 2011. I believe they lost 800k in that quarter. I believe prior to that they had actually had subscriber growth.

 

And while the merger officially failed in december. The writing was on the wall since q3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Careful. Think critically about the nature and timing of Humm's statement before you pillory him for it.

 

How much did the AT&T-T-Mobile merger negatively affect T-Mobile's growth? And how much did Sprint benefit from those who jumped ship or avoided T-Mobile to stay out of the mouth of AT&T?

 

AJ

 

Hindsight infers his statements were little more than positioning to fuel the potential buyers' lust or worry and increase the sale price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 503ducati

What's really startling:

 

December 31, 2008, T-Mobile USA had 32.8 million total subscribers.

March 31st, 2012, T-Mobile USA had 33.4 million total subscribers.

 

They are coming up on 4 years of no subscriber growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I doubt it. Josh, what you have to understand is that many modern day shareholders do not care if the "network starts to go to cr@p." Purely profit focused shareholders want 1) to keep network CAPEX as low as possible 2) to remain competitive not through innovation or evolution but through coerced retention and 3) to limit competition and make subs feel as if they have no place else to go because they perceive that only AT&T offers the coverage they need, all of their friends/family are on AT&T, AT&T is the best carrier for iOS devices, or that other carriers are simply scary, unknown commodities, etc.

 

AJ

 

I can't envision a scenario where purely profit shareholders are really happy with AT&T given the $4 billion loss on the failed T-Mobile merger. As far as network investment, AT&T is spending $21 billion this year and $95 billion the last five years on network upgrades, the problem is that they thought they could skate on investment after ATTWS/Cingular integration. AT&T had to spend way more due to the number of network integrations they have had. TDMA to GSM. Cingular/ATTWS merger. Jump from GSM to UMTS. Now from UMTS to LTE. Verizon and Sprint have both had an easier path with gentle upgrades on various revisions of the CDMA standard and now are in a better position to leap to LTE.

 

So yeah, I could see this guy being on the hot seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So yeah' date=' I could see this guy being on the hot seat.[/quote']

 

I'll bring the marshmallows.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

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

    • It’s a neat and seemingly valid / effective strategy that, at least from my understanding, is only really used by VZW
    • Those are usually left over from the initial AWS deployment, so all run B13/B66 with support for BC0/BC1 (although that’s been shut off on most sites). No NR. Sites with the later Ericsson radios got an OTA update and broadcast B2. On those sites, a B5 OTA update was also available (and tested), but ultimately rolled back. Putting up all that power/spectrum severely degraded the B13 output.  The site atop Crystal Mountain is another story and uses the same setup as the site on the ridge near Neilton. These antennas were selected for their vertical beamwidth. Most modern directional antennas have small vertical beamwidths and would require extreme downtilt to cover the road next to a steep ridge. Thus, they would have a severely limited coverage footprint beyond the road. Omnis can be a better choice in these instances, especially when there’s LoS to the coverage objective (since they’ll generally have lower gain figures). Omnis also don’t run in to the horizontal sector edge problem, which can be difficult to optimize for with directional antennas that have complex or irregular 3D gain profiles. That’s why on a lot of sites on mountains, you’ll see wider antennas used. For example, the Verizon site on Joyce Ridge has three sectors with 80-degree HBW antennas. 
    • Do you know what RAN is behind those Omni's? LTE (bands?) are they pushing any NR through them? Very curious   edit: I guess I could check cellmapper etc but you might know more nuance!
    • N41 here has been expanded from 140Mhz to 180Mhz.  Speeds seem the same so they just need to work on backhaul
    • I noticed today that T-mobile has shut of B41 LTE in the Louisville area and widened the 2nd n41 carrier to 80MHz. That just leaves them with 5x5 B12, 10x10 B2, and two 10x10 B66 carriers on LTE, everything else is in NR (besides their 2G network). They have 20x20 n71, 20x20 n25, 5x5 n25, and 180MHz n41. 
  • Recently Browsing

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