Apparently sprint is only deploying LTE in small towns *INSERT SARCASTIC EMOTICON HERE*

[4ktvs]

Regarding VZW's LTE 750 density, it really sucks. I'm friends with a married couple, with <1 yr old VZ LTE phones, and neither can get LTE signal at all in most of my house.

 

I know it's only 1 example but I'm right next to a freeway and in a dense suburb; with T-Mobile AWS-only 14.4 Mbps phone, I get 3-6 mbps inside my house.

 

I seen this happen a few times in the city, they fixed most of the places over time but it still can be an issue.\

 

Also the verizon fan boy's have likely never seen a speed test like this one:

[maximus1987/lou99]

AT&T is upgrading Dyersburg, TN to LTE today.

 

That market was EDGE a year ago.

 

I think AT&T is finally starting to get serious about some of these rural markets they neglected.

 

That's only because they don't want to have a repeat of the "there's a map for that".

 

During the T-Mobile merger, it came out that they were considering not expanding LTE past 250 million.

 

http://www.broadband...5d840ff/DOC.pdf

 

It would've cost them $3.8billion to expand LTE from 80% to 97% (pg. 2, top) but they were willing to pay $39billion to buy T-Mobile and that somehow would've allowed them to expand LTE to 97% cheaper than the $3.8billion.

 

http://en.wikipedia....e_USA_by_AT%26T

reference 22

 

I'd like to see an AT&T commercial with those 6-yr olds: "So what's less: $3.8 or $39?"

 

The PDF is a good read, lots of information on LTE tower count, etc.

 

Some more usesful stats:

1) going from 80% to 97% pop coverage:

a) increases land coverage from 20% to 55 % (pg. 2, bottom)

b ) doubles cost per person compared to just 80% (pg. 3 top)