Jump to content

T-Mobile/MetroPCS Merger


marioc21

Recommended Posts

AJ, the difference I see here between TMo-PCS and Sprint-Nextel is that TMobile has a plan right out of the gate for integration: shut down MetroPCS's network within 2.5 years.

 

Those plans typically reflect best case scenarios. Tell you what, if the merger comes to fruition and NewCo shuts down MetroPCS' CDMA2000 assets in under the stated timeline, I will wear a chicken suit.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those plans typically reflect best case scenarios. Tell you what, if the merger comes to fruition and NewCo shuts down MetroPCS' CDMA2000 assets in under the stated timeline, I will wear a chicken suit.

 

AJ

 

Fair enough. Any idea of how long it took for Sprint to migrate Qwest users from Qwest's own network to Sprint's? Not sure what compatibility issues Qwest had though...did they run a CDMA network before they ended up as a Sprint MVNO?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those plans typically reflect best case scenarios. Tell you what, if the merger comes to fruition and NewCo shuts down MetroPCS' CDMA2000 assets in under the stated timeline, I will wear a chicken suit.

 

AJ

 

adult-animal-costumes-chicken-suit-costume-adult-funky-chicken-12184.jpg

 

AJ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. Any idea of how long it took for Sprint to migrate Qwest users from Qwest's own network to Sprint's? Not sure what compatibility issues Qwest had though...did they run a CDMA network before they ended up as a Sprint MVNO?

 

I'm pretty sure Qwest was also CDMA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

adult-animal-costumes-chicken-suit-costume-adult-funky-chicken-12184.jpg

 

AJ?

 

...as long as it is not a fried chicken suit. With Robert lurking around every corner in The Forums, that could be dangerous.

 

kramer-turkey.jpg

 

:P

 

AJ

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing crossing my mind after hearing the news that Sprint is counter offering, is why? What has changed between back then when the Sprint board denied Hesse's wish of buying MetroPCS and today that they are doing a counter offer?

 

Oh and can anyone do a map/graph of what it would look like if Sprint did take in MetroPCS or part of its PCS spectrum as Aj pointed out.

 

TS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing crossing my mind after hearing the news that Sprint is counter offering, is why? What has changed between back then when the Sprint board denied Hesse's wish of buying MetroPCS and today that they are doing a counter offer?

 

Oh and can anyone do a map/graph of what it would look like if Sprint did take in MetroPCS or part of its PCS spectrum as Aj pointed out.

 

TS

 

S Market Cap (stock price) and ease of bond issuing are much better now than the early part of this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the capacity advantage between four 5x5's and one 20x20 is not huge. The problem for Sprint is that they really don't have many places they can deploy four 5x5's. In those locations, they will heavily depend on Clearwire's LTE to carry tonnage. Which is not a bad position to be in at all. The big issue here isn't, "OMG, what about Sprint?" The big issue out there is, "OMG, what about AT&T?" Sprint's position is just fine in my estimation. Like Ian pointed out above.

 

Also, if memory serves, most of the people around here were happy when the MetroPCS/Sprint deal fell apart because the board rejected it. Especially our core members. The timing was bad for Sprint, but also PCS is nowhere near as good of a fit for Sprint as it is for Tmo.

 

 

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/262-sprint-tries-to-eat-metropcs/page__view__findpost__p__2848

Posted 25 February 2012 - 10:06 AM

This is the way I looked at it:

 

Advantages:

  • Sprint is actually really good running prepaid carriers (primarily boost and virgin). If I am not mistaken, all of Metro's customers can roam on sprint, so all of the handsets would merge wonderfully onto sprint. Adding ~10 million prepaid customers would be very easy and fit nicely into sprint's prepaid model.
  • Sprint doesn't need Metro's spectrum and could profit handsomely off of selling the AWS and 700MHz spectrum to AT&T (or leap).
  • With network vision and LTE going live, there will be extra capacity on CDMA voice/data channels - 10 million customers would help use that.

Disadvantages:

  • Sprint is finally gaining traction on actually fixing itself. They have a lot on their plate right now (network vision, iPhone, improving customer experience, etc).
  • Price. I think when the board looked at the proposed value of 10 million prepaid subs vs. the value of Sprint, it was a hard pill to swallow. If Sprint's stock price was in a different position, I think this would have gone differently.

 

I think that at the end of the day, the timing was just wrong.

 

 

Also, on a side note - isn't it cheaper to deploy larger carriers? Instead of having to buy four line cards and more radios, if you can deploy wider channels, less infrastructure costs, no?

 

5x5 or 20x20, who cares about top speed... but if you have to spend, say 10k per line card x 4 line cards or 10k for just one 20x20 line card (or maybe a small premium) - plus the electric costs - it makes way more sense to just throw out giant fat pipes.

 

Clearwire always seems to harp on the capex and opex benefits of fat pipes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hope that sprint is talking about a counter offer so that they will have a position to ask to buy out some of metro's PCS spectrum holdings... AKA the only reason they really considered buying them in the first place. Most of their PCS holdings are in 6 areas (California, Florida, Atlanta, Dallas, Detroit and Providence) so those are the only areas that sprint would even be interested in. If they could look like they could upset the deal in some way, t-mobile might be willing to sell them some spectrum in exchange for getting out of the way. Sprint would be wise to offer their network for metro customers while Newco converts the AWS spectrum, in exchange for some of the spectrum in the areas where they need it.

 

If sprint actually goes for leap or USCellular (which I would actually support, as they have more of what sprint wants) they could trade/sell additional AWS spectrum to Newco, making both companies stronger and strategically aligned with regards to spectrum assets. The better thing about leap and USC is that they have rural coverage, (or at least spectrum licenses) which would allow sprint to bolster its performance to better compete with the AT&T/VZW duopoly.... T-Mobile was primarily focused on urban areas anyway, so metro makes a much better fit for them.

 

I am not sure what they would want to do with the 700MHZ spectrum that USC has and is deploying LTE on right now. It would be great for the rural areas to use that lower frequency, but how much is that going to add to the cost of phones to connect to 700/800-850/1900/2600? Plus only having the capability to connect while in one of the old USC markets limits the benefits, unless sprint can buy up all the smaller local players across the country and have an almost nationwide footprint.

The real question is as robert mentions below, will sprint be able to offer great coverage at a great price and allow us to use our smartphones in the manner we want to. If the answer to all 3 of those questions is yes, sprint will not only survive, but thrive.

 

I think consumers are going to fatigue of faster and faster wireless once it becomes ubiquitous. Because all the carriers will have networks that meet or exceed their needs. Once networks are largely LTE deployed, they will stop caring about faster top end speed and start caring about density and coverage areas and expansion.

 

This is just completely my opinion. Verizon has been able to compete with EVDO 3G, even though their 3G is slower than Tmo and AT&T. Because that technology met their customers needs.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

O_O So it may be possible for Sprint to purchase both of them. What would be the pros and cons of this if it were to actually happen? I know these 3 carriers use PCS 1900, so it would benefit Sprint. Love to hear what others think of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think sprint should go with network vision and not complicating it by buying another company when sprint is already cash scrapped.

Sprint could wait till the merger is finalized because by that time, the hardest part of network vision will be over and they'll be in a better financial state (I think). They might be able to purchase both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint could wait till the merger is finalized because by that time, the hardest part of network vision will be over and they'll be in a better financial state (I think). Would be possible to buy them both.

Oops repost delete this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting development. May have nothing to do with this deal, may have everything...

 

Back in August it was reported that Sprint's top merger and acquisition executive was leaving the company September 30, 2012

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443991704577577492797892110.html

 

By ANTON TROIANOVSKI

 

The top mergers and acquisitions executive for Sprint Nextel Corp. S -2.12% is leaving the wireless carrier Sept. 30.

Keith Cowan, head of strategic planning for Sprint, had ruffled feathers on Wall Street and in the telecommunications industry with his tough dealmaking style in recent years.

 

Mr. Cowan is leaving to see to "civic and charitable and other obligations" in Atlanta, where he lives, and Chapel Hill, N.C., where he went to college, Sprint spokesman Bill White said.

"We are getting excellent shareholder support as we go through the turnaround, and Keith's departure is not related to third-party concerns," the spokesman said. He declined to make Mr. Cowan available for an interview.

 

Sprint, the third-largest wireless carrier in the United States, has struggled to compete in an industry increasingly dominated by cellphone giants Verizon Wireless and AT&T Inc. T +0.45% Last year, the company fought successfully against AT&T's attempted merger with No. 4 wireless carrier T-Mobile USA, a deal that collapsed amid regulatory pressure.

Sprint and Mr. Cowan have seen some of their own deals fail, including a plan to buy MetroPCS Communications Inc., PCS +3.68% a prepaid wireless carrier, that was shot down by Sprint's own board in February.

 

Now today it's announced that he's staying on until January 2, 2013.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/121004/s8-k_a.html

 

Form 8-K/A for SPRINT NEXTEL CORP

4-Oct-2012

Change in Directors or Principal Officers

 

 

Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.

 

(B) Sprint Nextel Corporation (the "Company") is filing this amendment to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 8, 2012, which reported that Keith O. Cowan, President, Strategic Planning and Corporate Initiatives would be leaving the Company effective September 30, 2012. Given Mr. Cowan's successor, Michael Schwartz, who is currently employed at Telesat Canada, cannot join the Company until January 2, 2013, on September 30, 2012, the Company's Chief Executive Officer decided that Mr. Cowan should remain with the Company until January 2, 2013. Mr. Schwartz's title will be Senior Vice President, Corporate and Business Development.

 

Now the reason for extending Cowan's stay seems perfectly plausible and innocuous on the surface, but it makes one wonder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may indicate something is up sooner than the close of the MetroPCS T-Mobile deal but nothing can get close to final by that time not sure what he does though

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 503ducati

The negativity taken towards sprint as a result of this merger is unwarranted.

 

Ill start worrying when tmobile has sufficient 3g coverage outside of metro areas.

 

Its as though everyone expects tmobile to have a magical network transformation and sprint to fail on everything it has planned. Its just unwarranted sour grapes. And "tmo guy" hates sprint? Who cares? Sprints the only reason tmobile brought back unlimited service. Sprint is the only reason anymobile calling exists, especially at tmobile.

"BOOM!"

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.fiercebro...-buy/2012-10-04

 

So Neville Ray, the CTO at T-Mobile USA, is elevated to rock star status now. He's done a great job on network modernization for TMo, no question. He has a pretty big challenge ahead of him, however.

 

Also, as far as Alltel goes, there's still six markets out there owned by ATNI (including where I live). Would Sprint be interested in buying those? It's mainly CLR spectrum, but Sprint also owns lots of spectrum without much coverage in those areas. If they combined they could be a very powerful adversary to Verizon in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting read in business week. Looks like Sprint and Tmobile have its challenges bringing Metro PCS into the fold:

 

http://www.businessw...nt-and-t-mobile

 

This is the syndicated version. To give friend of S4GRU Kevin Fitchard due credit, please read his original article at GigaOM:

 

http://gigaom.com/mobile/is-sprint-going-to-start-a-bidding-war-over-metropcs/

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.fiercebro...-buy/2012-10-04

 

So Neville Ray, the CTO at T-Mobile USA, is elevated to rock star status now. He's done a great job on network modernization for TMo, no question. He has a pretty big challenge ahead of him, however.

 

Also, as far as Alltel goes, there's still six markets out there owned by ATNI (including where I live). Would Sprint be interested in buying those? It's mainly CLR spectrum, but Sprint also owns lots of spectrum without much coverage in those areas. If they combined they could be a very powerful adversary to Verizon in this area.

 

From this article, sounds like Sprint might be looking to counter offer to stop T-mobile from offering 20x20 MHz LTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The negativity taken towards sprint as a result of this merger is unwarranted.

 

Ill start worrying when tmobile has sufficient 3g coverage outside of metro areas.

 

Its as though everyone expects tmobile to have a magical network transformation and sprint to fail on everything it has planned. Its just unwarranted sour grapes. And "tmo guy" hates sprint? Who cares? Sprints the only reason tmobile brought back unlimited service. Sprint is the only reason anymobile calling exists, especially at tmobile.

 

 

Lol, So true. Lets not forget that their Challenger Strategy looks eerily similar to Network Vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am working on an article about how Sprint could still benefit from the T-Mobile-MetroPCS merger. It should be up on The Wall within the next day. In the meantime, here is a sneak peek at part of the included graph:

 

iw2g5s.png

 

AJ

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I just read the back out fee that MetroPCS would pay is 150 Million. I think that the executive board would be all over that if Sprint came with a better offer. In fact if a better offer is on the table it is the boards obligation to to get the best deal for shareholders even if it costs 150 million to get there.

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

    • I've now seen how things work in Kobe, Hiroshima, and Osaka, as well as some areas south of Osaka (e.g. Wakayama, Kinokawa), and tried three more SIMs. The two physical SIMs (different branding for each) both use IIJ, which provides a Japanese IP address/routing on NTT, aleit LTE-only, so latency is ~45ms to Tokyo. The catch with NTT is that it uses two frequency bands (B42/3500 MHz LTE, n79/4900 MHz NR) that you're not going to get on an Android sold in the US, and I'm guessing that B42 would be helpful speed-wise on that network, as it doesn't have B41. I also found one place that doesn't have cell service: a vending machine in the back of the Osaka Castle tower. Or, rather, the B8/18/19 signal is weak enough there to be unusable. Going back to 5G for a moment, I saw a fair amount of Softbank n257 in Hiroshima, as well as in some train stations between Osaka and Kobe. 4x100 MHz bandwidth, anchored by B1/3/8, with speeds sometimes exceeding 400 Mbps on the US Mobile roaming eSIM. Not quite the speeds I've seen on mmW in the States, but I've probably been on mmW for more time over the past few days than I have in the US over the past year, so I'll take it. My fastest speed test was actually on SoftBank n77 though, with 100 MHz of that plus 10x10 B8 hitting ~700 Mbps down and ~80 Mbps up with ~100ms latency...on the roaming eSIM...on the 4th floor of the hotel near Shin-Kobe station. Guessing B8 was a DAS or small cell based on signal levels, and the n77 might have been (or was just a less-used sector of the site serving the train station). I'm now 99% sure that all three providers are running DSS on band 28, and I've seen 10x10 on similar frequencies from both NTT and SoftBank IIRC, on both LTE and 5G. I also picked up one more eSIM: my1010, which is different from 1010/csl used by US Mobile's eSIM unfortunately, as it's LTE-only. On the bright side, it's cheap (10GB/7 days is like $11, and 20GB for the same period would be around $15), and can use both KDDI and SoftBank LTE. It also egresses from Taiwan (Chunghwa Telecom), though latency isn't really any better than the Singapore based eSIMs. Tomorrow will include the most rural part of our journey, so we'll see how networks hold up there, and from tomorrow night on we'll be in Tokyo, so any further reports after that will be Tokyo-centric.
    • I think the push for them is adding US Mobile as a MVNO with a priority data plan.  Ultimately, making people more aware of priority would allow them (and other carriers) to differentiate themselves from MVNOs like Consumer Cellular that advertise the same coverage. n77 has dramatically reduced the need for priority service at Verizon where the mere functioning of your phone was in jeopardy a couple of years ago if you had a low priority plan like Red Pocket. Only have heard of problems with T-Mobile in parts of Los Angeles. AT&T fell in between. All had issues at large concerts and festivals, or sporting events if your carrier has no on-site rights. Edit: Dishes native 5g network has different issues: not enough sites, limited bandwidth. Higher priority would help a few. Truth is they can push phones to AT&T or T-Mobile.
    • Tracfone AT&T sims went from QCI 8 to 9 as well a couple years ago. I'm pretty neutral towards AT&T's turbo feature here, the only bad taste left was for those who had unadvertised QCI 7 a couple months ago moved down to 8. In my eyes it would have been a lot better for AT&T to include turbo in those Premium/Elite plans for free to keep them at QCI 7, while also introducing this turbo add on option for any other plans or devices. As it stands now only a handful of plans can add it, and only if you're using a device on a random list of devices AT&T considers to be 5G smartphones.
    • My Red Pocket AT&T GSMA account was dropped to QCI 9 about a year ago.  Most recently 8 for the last few years prior.  Voice remains at 5.
  • Recently Browsing

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