Sprint now offers shared, capped data plans for small business subs

[WiWavelength]

Let us hope that this evolves into a consumer plan offering, too. Unlimited data served a purpose in the past, but now it has grown dangerous due to advancing device capabilities that invite abuse and, ironically, "limited" because people increasingly want to use their data across multiple devices.

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/press-releases/sprint-shared-data-business

 

AJ

[tybo31316]

Seems like its a matter of time before similar plans trickle down to the regular subs. In which from a business stand point it makes a lot of sense. The plans brings in more revenue and keeps data use under control at the same time.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[wyattwalter]

All bad imo

[Bob Newhart]

Maybe this is the start. I think a graduated overage system, similar to how T-Mobile works could work better.

 

I know AJ seems to think that people shouldn't allowed to use data on phones or data on planes, even if we pay for it.

[JeffDTD]

Sprint is a value carrier. Can anyone provide feedback on how these business offerings compare to business offerings of other carriers?

 

I do not fear shared or limited data if sprint maintains a value proposition.

[peteyz24]

I dont fear limited data either, but i prefer not having to worry about it

[WiWavelength]

I know AJ seems to think that people shouldn't allowed to use data on phones or data on planes, even if we pay for it.

 

If you claim to state my position, please do not misrepresent it. Thanks.

 

Folks, try thinking about this parallel. At various times, several states have tried unlimited speed limits on certain highways. But those unlimited speed limits have never lasted very long. Now, why not?

 

AJ

[lynyrd65]

Let us hope that this evolves into a consumer plan offering, too. Unlimited data served a purpose in the past, but now it has grown dangerous due to advancing device capabilities that invite abuse and, ironically, "limited" because people increasingly want to use their data across multiple devices.

 

http://www.fiercewir...d-data-business

 

AJ

 

The day that happens is the day I switch to T-Mo bad coverage or not....

 

or figure out a way to keep unlimited through trickery. (I have my ways.....)

[lynyrd65]

If you claim to state my position, please do not misrepresent it. Thanks.

 

Folks, try thinking about this parallel. At various times, several states have tried unlimited speed limits on certain highways. But those unlimited speed limits have never lasted very long. Now, why not?

 

AJ

 

Not the same. These are usage, (gas), caps. I would not take issue with speed caps or priority based plans.

[WiWavelength]

The day that happens is the day I switch to T-Mo bad coverage or not....

 

or figure out a way to keep unlimited through trickery. (I have my ways.....)

 

If unlimited data is not sustainable on Sprint, then it likely will not be on T-Mobile either. So, you may not have a choice, and that is really the way it should be. Having one carrier sell something unsustainable just to keep its dwindling share of the marketplace is recipe for further consolidation.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

Not the same. These are usage, (gas), caps. I would not take issue with speed caps or priority based plans.

 

You are dodging the question. You do not get to undermine my analogy until you actually understand it.

 

AJ

[dedub]

Folks, try thinking about this parallel. At various times, several states have tried unlimited speed limits on certain highways. But those unlimited speed limits have never lasted very long. Now, why not?

 

Sorry but this is not parallel at all.

 

If you want parallel, it will not be speed limits, but how many miles you can travel on said highway.

[Fraydog]

It's simple supply and demand. There's always going to be a finite supply of spectrum. With that, how do you regulate that? Simple, like the rest of the economy, you regulate that with prices.

 

I'm on AJ's side on this.

[lynyrd65]

You are dodging the question. You do not get to undermine my analogy until you actually understand it.

 

AJ

 

Unlimited Car Speed = car crashes and jams

 

Unlimited Unthrottled Data = could be capacity strained and erratic as well

 

Limited Car Speed = regulated flow of traffic with less crashes and slow downs

 

Limited Data with overages = Same problem when customers are willing to pay for more data. The carrier just has more money in their pockets to also in theory purchase means to increase capacity.

 

Limited Data with Throttling = Unregulated and erratic problems still possible as customers use gobs of data at the beginning of their cycle but with throttling to regulated speeds the network becomes less capacity strained.

 

My Opinion - Unlimited data with priority = Higher paying high priority users pay more for capacity improvements and can occupy as many lanes as can be bought. Lower priority users can use whatever lanes are available without fear of passing a cap and getting charged.

 

Alternative - Unlimited data with rigid speed caps = Similar to above but can be guaranteed speeds for a price which also pays for increased capacity. The carrier determines the capacity and pricing needed to maintain capacity at those speeds for the given usage patterns in each category.

[digiblur]

I do admit one of the reasons I stayed with Sprint is the unlimited deal. I have enough crap to keep up with in life with already.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

[supert0nes]

I don't see T-Mobile running into capacity issues any time soon. They can probably keep unlimited going. I would probably switch if Sprint set it at anything less than 5GB.

[xcharles718]

I welcome this type of plan structure, but unlimited data should continue to be an option for those who need(or want) it. That's if this eventually comes to the consumer-side of things.

 

If necessary, raise the price of unlimited data, but if so, separate data allotments from the rest of the plan(Voice/Text) and make data plans optional on smartphones. Also, separate the separate the device subsidy from the plan(a la T-Mobile).

[bigsnake49]

I have stated my objection to GB based caps. I like speed based caps or even off peak/on peak pricing. Anything else is just gouging.

[JeffDTD]

The pricing on this is a little nutty. 20gb are $10 more on a verizon business plan. 40gb are $25 more.

 

maybe there are other perks sprint will put in place, but anyway... does this represent a cheaper entry point than sprints prior business offerings I wonder?

[WiWavelength]

Sorry but this is not parallel at all.

 

If you want parallel, it will not be speed limits, but how many miles you can travel on said highway.

 

No, it is a perfectly apt parallel, and you are not equipped to judge it -- you do not even know what it is until I have elaborated it. But you refuse to answer the question, so I guess I will have to turn it into a rhetorical question and answer it myself.

 

The reason why states that have tried to abolish highway speed limits have always reversed course is simple: human nature (or, at least, American human nature). Too many people have wild notions about what are "reasonable" speeds to drive and will travel at excessive speeds to the detriment of other drivers on the road. Human nature requires limits; otherwise, many of us will go to harmful extremes.

 

Wireless data usage is actually a quite similar situation. Given unlimited data, some think that 5 GB/month is unsustainable, while others see the word "unlimited" and think that 25 GB/month is perfectly "reasonable." And if anything, what is "reasonable" is even harder for people to judge because data usage is so intangible.

 

AJ

[tybo31316]

I personally don't have a problem with sprint going to tiered data as long as the pricing stays competitive and differentiate sprint from the big two. Seems like the only people that are afraid of sprint going to a tiered structure are those who abuse the network by tethering and using their sprint device as their home isp.

[xcharles718]

Well, as long as unlimited data is sustainable with our 'human nature', let it stay. If not, take action.

[Hamn2eggs]

The writing was already on the wall as Sprint began "aligning their business practices with [their] competition." Many may refuse to admit it, but those who have been with Sprint at least two years had to know/knew data caps were coming. Hesse said it himself; it was just that he nor anyone else knew when it would happen.

 

That being said, I can't see Sprint imposing data caps at the consumer level until after LTE is fully deployed. The inconsistent level of service won't allow it.

As it is, their small LTE footprint has consumers chomping at the bit for better 3G speeds where not covered by LTE. Add to that the $10/mo "premium" fee and nominally better pricing than Verizon (at least in the DC metro area), dwindling list of features that separate them from the VZN/ATT, etc, Sprint may as well toss in the towel as subscribers will flock to [perceptually] better alternatives.

[xcharles718]

Well, if we accept it, it will happen & will become the status-quo in this industry. If we become resistant to this change(which looks not to be the case after seeing ATT & VZW YoY subscriber gains), then the tides can change.

 

By any chance, does anyone have a link to that market subscriber percentages thread/post(s)?

[WiWavelength]

Well, as long as unlimited data is sustainable with our 'human nature', let it stay. If not, take action.

 

For currently realistic wireless networks, unlimited data is not sustainable with our "human nature," has not been for several years now, though not as long ago as Michael Jackson sang about it...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgmbYALa0no

 

AJ