Jump to content

Sprint primed for acquisitions


bigsnake49

Recommended Posts

Plus most of USCC's customers are contract customers vs the prepaid customers of Metro and Cricket. If I had to prioritize I would say go after USCC first, then Metro then Cricket, but I'm afraid that it will happen in the reverse order since Cricket owes Sprint money and has very low market value right now. It has relatively high debt load though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus most of USCC's customers are contract customers vs the prepaid customers of Metro and Cricket. If I had to prioritize I would say go after USCC first, then Metro then Cricket, but I'm afraid that it will happen in the reverse order since Cricket owes Sprint money and has very low market value right now. It has relatively high debt load though.

 

Agree. USCC has (hearsay of course) rebuffed prior attempted acquisitions. Regardless of quarters of net customer losses and debt, USCC is going to want to be paid a big premium on their value, I suspect. Sprint would basically have to convince them that "verizon wouldn't be able to get approval to buy you", I believe. The tone at Metro and Cricket always seems more dire and , raw customer numbers, a better deal anyway. Culture wise, USCC is the "verizon alternative" for its most loyal customers (in a network sense) and I'm sure a big chunk of those "Loyal Customers" have a lot in common with Sprint's legacy plan holders (cling to cheap plans, budget concerned). I'm curious to know how many of those 5.8 ish million customers are carrying a Smartphone. I think it would be harder to convince many USCC customers to carry Sprint phones and plans than it would be to convince Metro and Cricket customers to carry Virgin or Boost phones. What I'm saying is I bet Sprint would shed more USCC customers post acquisition than they would shed Metro and Cricket customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the same with Cspire here.... Cspire is the "alternative to Verizon" network wise and has convinced many of its loyal (budget crazed, mind you) users that "we are the only super rural option you can afford, sprint and tmobile are trash". Not only would Cspire want a wild premium on its value, but seeing the giant yellow logo erected on the stores would drive many of the hicks in these parts screaming and running, no matter what you told them the future coverage would be like.

 

ALTHOUGH, Sprint plans are now cheaper than theirs and Verizon's data share drives a hard bargain, I can't even convince my tech minded friend who is upset about the plan price increases to give any other carrier a shot "Cspire is da best network" is seared in their routine like sunday cookin'

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sprint were to acquire USCC it would be better from a brand perception point of view to create a super USCC that would incorporate rural USCC and Sprint properties into a wholly owned subsidiary. Give them some money as well and see if they can get Sprint (USCC) rural coverage expanded using the 800SMR spectrum. Sprint's coverage gets expanded and their roaming bill reduced. USCC knows how to run a rural network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't speak Spanish, but from what I gathered in the CC subtitles translated to ENG...looks like iDEN may be on the way out here in the US, but just coming into play in Mexico....

Anyone here know what's up in SA or what tech they are going with?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DjElGi3DT0

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

    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
    • I wouldn’t be shocked if it’s Verizon, too. In my area they have multiple nodes on the same block as full macro sites with mmWave, in direct line of sight. 
  • Recently Browsing

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