C Spire LTE

[4GHoward]

Why would they spend $60 Million (to use CS's numbers) in redundant coverage in the area, when they already have a mutually beneficial relationship with C Spire, including the possibility of LTE roaming? Also, C Spire would not welcome a competitor setting up shop all over their service area. C Spire and Sprint would have a completely different relationship if Sprint wanted to set up service side by side as a direct threat/competitor. This does not make sense at all.

 

Sprint wants to Network Host for other companies who need a fast deployed nation wide network. They are not looking for someone to regionally host them. This is so far out of bounds for their plans. It's not even on the radar.

 

Robert

 

So what is the point of having off-network roaming usage limits if Sprint won't expand? For example, Sprint doesn't want customers to be using another network just because their network is slower. I don't see a reason why Sprint should have all these off-network roaming usage limits if their network is slow in certain areas.

[S4GRU]

So what is the point of having off-network roaming usage limits if Sprint won't expand? For example, Sprint doesn't want customers to be using another network just because their network is slower. I don't see a reason why Sprint should have all these off-network roaming usage limits if their network is slow in certain areas.

 

This is a nonsensical argument. Sprint will only add service where they spend more in roaming fees to other carriers than they would if they just installed service themselves. Sprint is not in a pecker contest to see who's is bigger. They are not trying to have the biggest network. Sprint is in no position to add service anywhere right now. They are losing money. And riasing roaming limits has a direct impact on increasing roaming fees. That's not going to happen.

 

Sprint also does not move customers over to roaming because the network is slow. Sprint customers only roam when they do not have Sprint coverage.

 

Sprint will not be adding any significant native coverage before the conclusion of Network Vision with additional sites. They cannot afford to. The only additional sites you can expect are ones that pay for themselves because of roaming fees are excessive in the area.

 

No large U.S. carrier is actively expanding coverage now. It has been a long time since they have. AT&T and VZW only really expand coverage by buying out carriers.

 

Robert

[4GHoward]

This is a nonsensical argument. Sprint will only add service where they spend more in roaming fees to other carriers than they would if they just installed service themselves. Sprint is not in a pecker contest to see who's is bigger. They are not trying to have the biggest network. Sprint is in no position to add service anywhere right now. They are losing money. And riasing roaming limits has a direct impact on increasing roaming fees. That's not going to happen.

 

Sprint also does not move customers over to roaming because the network is slow. Sprint customers only roam when they do not have Sprint coverage.

 

Sprint will not be adding any significant native coverage before the conclusion of Network Vision with additional sites. They cannot afford to. The only additional sites you can expect are ones that pay for themselves because of roaming fees are excessive in the area.

 

Robert

 

It is almost like Clearwire Strategy where they are not going to expand their coverage, but instead they are just working on adding more capacity to existing towers.

[S4GRU]

It is almost like Clearwire Strategy where they are not going to expand their coverage, but instead they are just working on adding more capacity to existing towers.

 

I suppose. The biggest difference is that Clearwire only covers 70 cities and Sprint covers over 1,000. But I guess there are similarities.

 

Robert

[4GHoward]

I suppose. The biggest difference is that Clearwire only covers 70 cities and Sprint covers over 1,000. But I guess there are similarities.

 

Robert

 

What if Sprint still had a deal with LightSquared? Would it mean anything for Sprint about a coverage expansion?

[S4GRU]

What if Sprint still had a deal with LightSquared? Would it mean anything for Sprint about a coverage expansion?

 

No. LightSquared only initially planned to offer service over the Sprint footprint. There were discussions about long term expansion that Sprint was open to. However, those would have been funded by LightSqaured pumping in Billions of dollars to Sprint in hosting fees. But there would not have been expansion before 2015.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

What if Sprint still had a deal with LightSquared? Would it mean anything for Sprint about a coverage expansion?

 

No. Because LightSquared planned to piggyback on the Network Vision platform, Sprint's footprint would have dictated much, if not all of LightSquared's footprint. The idea that LightSquared was going to bring cheap, terrestrial based wireless broadband to many rural areas was a fantasy of LightSquared supporters. In truth, LightSquared was going to rely on satellite broadband to serve those largely rural areas.

 

If the general extent of Sprint coverage does not suit your needs (or your ego), then you would be wise to find a different carrier with coverage that does.

 

AJ

[4GHoward]

No. Because LightSquared planned to piggyback on the Network Vision platform, Sprint's footprint would have dictated much, if not all of LightSquared's footprint. The idea that LightSquared was going to bring cheap, terrestrial based wireless broadband to many rural areas was a fantasy of LightSquared supporters. In truth, LightSquared was going to rely on satellite broadband to serve those largely rural areas.

 

If the general extent of Sprint coverage does not suit your needs (or your ego), then you would be wise to find a different carrier with coverage that does.

 

AJ

 

Robert already answered the question in the above post.

[WiWavelength]

Robert already answered the question in the above post.

 

Yes, I can see that. I had already started writing my response when Robert posted his. Sometimes, that happens. Is that a problem?

 

AJ

[4GHoward]

Yes, I can see that. I had already started writing my response when Robert posted his. Sometimes, that happens. Is that a problem?

 

AJ

 

Not really.

[iansltx]

tl;dr: a bilateral roaming agreement between Sprint and C Spire for LTE in PCS would be advantageous to both parties. That's probably all that will ever happen...which is fine.

[WiWavelength]

tl;dr: a bilateral roaming agreement between Sprint and C Spire for LTE in PCS would be advantageous to both parties. That's probably all that will ever happen...which is fine.

 

Honestly, I am somewhat skeptical how much, if any LTE 1900 we will see from C Spire. LTE 2100+1700 (AWS), wherever possible, seems far more likely. And, ultimately, C Spire intends to utilize its Lower 700 MHz (band 12) spectrum for LTE.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

 

Honestly' date=' I am somewhat skeptical how much, if any LTE 1900 we will see from C Spire. LTE 2100+1700 (AWS), wherever possible, seems far more likely. And, ultimately, C Spire intends to utilize its Lower 700 MHz (band 12) spectrum for LTE.

 

AJ[/quote']

 

And this is the most important point of all. Thanks for bringing us back around AJ.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy S-III 32GB using Forum Runner

[4GHoward]

Honestly, I am somewhat skeptical how much, if any LTE 1900 we will see from C Spire. LTE 2100+1700 (AWS), wherever possible, seems far more likely. And, ultimately, C Spire intends to utilize its Lower 700 MHz (band 12) spectrum for LTE.

 

AJ

And this is the most important point of all. Thanks for bringing us back around AJ.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy S-III 32GB using Forum Runner

 

I thought C Spire is going to deploy LTE on its 1700 MHz AWS Spectrum and 1900 MHz PCS Spectrum before it deploys LTE on its 700 MHz LTE Spectrum. That is what my source say.

 

Source: http://www.fiercewir...trum/2012-07-06

[JeffDTD]

Ive long thought cspire may one day forge a relationship with sprint that looks like the prior alltel agreement, with some areas of their footprint reading as native sprint coverage... however, talk of any sprint or cspire customer ever getting to enjoy unlimited lte on the other carrier is nuts. Cspire has forced its customers into a " pay extra for streaming or get no upgrade discount" scenario and given the fact they will be bringing high speed internet access to very rural places, you can bet on the lte being metered or throttled. They will surely be a roaming customer of sprint's network outside of their footprint. In addition of that, I expect nothing.

 

300 mb of roaming on lte would be almost worthless, as stated.

 

Robert, a fraternity brother of mine is a senior network tech at cspire. Next time i have some face time with him, ill pick his brain

[WiWavelength]

I thought C Spire is going to deploy LTE on its 1700 MHz AWS Spectrum and 1900 MHz PCS Spectrum before it deploys LTE on its 700 MHz LTE Spectrum. That is what my source say.

 

Source: http://www.fiercewir...trum/2012-07-06

 

Did I say that C Spire would use none of its PCS 1900 MHz for LTE? Do you think that Fierce Wireless might generalize the details for a broader audience? Is it possible that I know more about C Spire's particular spectrum portfolio than Phil Goldstein does?

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

Robert' date=' a fraternity brother of mine is a senior network tech at cspire. Next time i have some face time with him, ill pick his brain[/quote']

 

That'd be great. Let me know what you find out.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner