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

[WiWavelength]

The one time he actually leaves the SF Bay we took a trip to LA, and in the hotel his VZW LTE was cutting in and out while my Sprint LTE was stable and strong.

 

VZW has done a good job of brainwashing people that, if they ever venture more than a few miles from home, only VZW has them covered. And I do not mean that as a compliment to VZW's duplicitous marketing department, nor to consumers' general ignorance.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

Even AT&T's buildouts near where I live (St. Louis Metro) hit higher cell densities than VZW. Some of the rural places around me are getting LTE, which is nice. That has to be tempered by the slower speeds in the more congested places in the network. VZW is the coverage king where I live, no question, but Alltel (what's left of it) is pretty good, and all things considered, not enough people use them.

 

In places where everybody uses VZW, and they don't have LTE, like Chester, peak speeds on EV-DO are running at levels not better than EDGE. In Carbondale, where VZW has had LTE for nearly two years, LTE is running at 5-7 Mbps, which is about the same speeds that AT&T gets there on HSPA+, and EV-DO is nearly unusable.

 

I suspect VZW is deploying sites here to make their LTE footprint look larger for marketing reasons. Even the author conceded that Verizon Wireless's device locking policies, cost structure, and customer policies might be bad. Well, no s***. I could have also mentioned Verizon's only deploying 5000 AWS sites this year. What we don't know is how much extra deployment of 700 that VZW on EV-DO only sites in LTE areas VZW will do. Too bad none of the Fierce Wireless shills thought of asking Nikki Palmer that.

[NYCHitman1]

In the end, the problem lies largely with New Yorkers, who have an overinflated view of their self importance.

 

Hey now! Lol.

[twospirits]

I suggested no such thing, and asked not to be lectured because I fully understand the situation.

 

That doesnt mean its fair to blame the customer for not understanding the reasoning. When they see "LTE live in tinyville Texas!" and theyre sitting at Newark Airport without LTE, it doesnt seem to make sense.

 

In most industries, you start out in the most populated places. Hollywood doesnt launch their big blockbusters in Kansas and wait 5 months to get to Philly.

 

WE know that theres very little similarity between the cell phone industry and, well, most everything else. That doesnt mean the average person does.

 

If Sprint it's to blame, its for as you said, not providing proper education for customers. Ive never seen a commercial explaining NV or their LTE strategy, or some of the many reasons behind delays in some markets (ie, permits).

I do not think anyone is being lectured but rather trying to enlighten folks.

But the part you wrote (in red) has left me dumbfounded. You actually are comparing a massive system-wide upgrade deployment in a large city where permits are needed against a launch of a movie and its schedule release times. Wow

[briank86]

I do not think anyone is being lectured but rather trying to enlighten folks.

But the part you wrote (in red) has left me dumbfounded. You actually are comparing a massive system-wide upgrade deployment in a large city where permits are needed against a launch of a movie and its schedule release times. Wow

Some people still think that Sprint has a 4G switch at HQ that is used to launch a market. You can only lead the horse to the water.

[jamesinclair]

Why? I guarantee you that more people live and work in the Kansas market than do in Lower Manhattan. Plus, the Atlanta, Houston, San Antonio, DFW, and Chicago markets were also "lit up" in the same timeframe, and those are not small markets. In the end, the problem lies largely with New Yorkers, who have an overinflated view of their self importance.

 

AJ

 

I dont think so.

 

The population of the entire state of kansas is 2,885,905

 

Manhattan alone is 1,619,090. The day time population is much higher. Its also a big destination... tourists, business etc.

 

Now, I dont live in NYC, so im not talking about myself. I just feel that from a marketing perspective, it sort of makes sense to move the big markets first, to reach more people. IE, if permits and infrastructure werent an issue, it would be a no brainer to launch LTE in NYC and LA first. Obviously, we know that its not that easy. Fur casual cell phone user Joe? its not so obvious.

 

If were were talking about my personal experience?

 

I know a lot of pissed of people in Fresno. They bought a wimax device, while told 4G "will be here soon!" Then they updated to an LTE device (after 2 years)....and still no 4G. Thats a customer that could be on Sprint for 4+ years being told that 4G was "coming soon" and yet hadn't arrived. Remember, when they bought the 4G device, they were paying a $10 "4G fee" (since expanded to all data).

 

The failure on sprints part was not telling their associates to NOT create false expectations to seal a sale. The false expectations can and do result in customers not trusting sprint at all, under the assumption that the minimum wage no-nothing at a sprint affiliate store = sprint.

 

All Im saying is that its understandable that people are confused because Sprint has failed. Not failed at network deployment - theyre doing a good job - but at setting the proper expectations. Go ahead, call sprint right now and tell them youre concerned your data speed are slow. Doesnt matter where you are, youll be told "sorry sir, its network vision, your speed will be better than ever in a week!'

[JustinRP37]

I dont think so.

 

The population of the entire state of kansas is 2,885,905

 

Manhattan alone is 1,619,090. The day time population is much higher. Its also a big destination... tourists, business etc.

 

Now, I dont live in NYC, so im not talking about myself. I just feel that from a marketing perspective, it sort of makes sense to move the big markets first, to reach more people. IE, if permits and infrastructure werent an issue, it would be a no brainer to launch LTE in NYC and LA first. Obviously, we know that its not that easy. Fur casual cell phone user Joe? its not so obvious.

 

If were were talking about my personal experience?

 

I know a lot of pissed of people in Fresno. They bought a wimax device, while told 4G "will be here soon!" Then they updated to an LTE device (after 2 years)....and still no 4G. Thats a customer that could be on Sprint for 4+ years being told that 4G was "coming soon" and yet hadn't arrived. Remember, when they bought the 4G device, they were paying a $10 "4G fee" (since expanded to all data).

 

The failure on sprints part was not telling their associates to NOT create false expectations to seal a sale. The false expectations can and do result in customers not trusting sprint at all, under the assumption that the minimum wage no-nothing at a sprint affiliate store = sprint.

 

All Im saying is that its understandable that people are confused because Sprint has failed. Not failed at network deployment - theyre doing a good job - but at setting the proper expectations. Go ahead, call sprint right now and tell them youre concerned your data speed are slow. Doesnt matter where you are, youll be told "sorry sir, its network vision, your speed will be better than ever in a week!'

 

Okay everyone needs to chill out about this whole NYC thinking we are better than the world. I live in the NYC metro area and have lived in other places. That being said, people are actually extremely helpful. Granted the huge problem, is that with a population as large as NYC, we have more idiots as well. Therefore, we have more idiot users. The idiot user is the one writing OMG my speeds suck everywhere in NYC. When really they are in a basement or subway platform trying to stream music because their science education funding was lowered to an amount so low that the teacher was not even able to explain how radio waves travel. But go on Sprint.com and go to the community forum. Most of the posts are NOT from NYC about speeds and 4G. They are literally from people all across America, and they are usually complaining about not having the ability to stream videos at home. Why in the world so many people are streaming videos to a cell phone over a cell network at home is beyond me, considering most people have computers, WiFi, and at least one TV. You hardly ever hear from people like me that actually use public transit (above ground) and use the device while traveling. And you never heard from people saying wow, the service is really improving, because they are satisfied! I can say that over the past year, coverage and speeds have been improving everywhere I go. There are less areas of NYC with terrible speeds now than ever. But hey, you get one person in an area on a legacy (yet to be updated tower) and they will let the world know how terrible Sprint is.

 

Maybe Sprint has done a terrible job by not announcing how many towers are broadcasting LTE in the NYC market, but they are deploying. Further, Sprint has been deploying for a longer time in NYC that even in Kansas I believe (if not then it was very close). The major problem is how complicated it is to deploy in a dense urban environment. No city in the USA is as dense as NYC. There are also tons of towers to handle the population. Further the equipment is usually in buildings. Sprint cannot just show up at a building, and say we are performing Network Vision today. They have to get approval from many different people: the city, the landlord, and sometimes even a community organization. Therefore, while it may seem like Sprint is avoiding larger cities, it isn't. It is just far more complicated to rollout the network. So maybe Sprint should include how the network is progressing in large urban markets whenever is launches a smaller market? Also, realize that given the large size of these markets, there are naturally going to be idiots, just do not judge a region based on a few outspoken individuals. Sorry for my rant today, but this thread caught me before my second cup of coffee. Off to a meeting I go.

[S4GRU]

 

If were were talking about my personal experience?

 

I know a lot of pissed of people in Fresno. They bought a wimax device, while told 4G "will be here soon!" Then they updated to an LTE device (after 2 years)....and still no 4G. Thats a customer that could be on Sprint for 4+ years being told that 4G was "coming soon" and yet hadn't arrived. Remember, when they bought the 4G device, they were paying a $10 "4G fee" (since expanded to all data).

 

The failure on sprints part was not telling their associates to NOT create false expectations to seal a sale. The false expectations can and do result in customers not trusting sprint at all, under the assumption that the minimum wage no-nothing at a sprint affiliate store = sprint.

 

All Im saying is that its understandable that people are confused because Sprint has failed. Not failed at network deployment - theyre doing a good job - but at setting the proper expectations. Go ahead, call sprint right now and tell them youre concerned your data speed are slow. Doesnt matter where you are, youll be told "sorry sir, its network vision, your speed will be better than ever in a week!'

 

This is borderline rantish and says nothing new that you haven't said before. And for the record, no one likes Fresno.. So we don't fault Sprint for ignoring it.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

[WiWavelength]

I dont think so.

 

The population of the entire state of kansas is 2,885,905

 

Manhattan alone is 1,619,090. The day time population is much higher. Its also a big destination... tourists, business etc.

 

Nope, your reasoning still fails.

 

You apparently have not seen our Sprint market map:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/page/index.html/_/articles/nationwide-sprint-market-map-is-here-r31

 

The Kansas market is not limited to Kansas. It also covers much of eastern Missouri, including the entire Kansas City metro area. So, your population figure is easily short a million. Not to mention, the Kansas market is Sprint's corporate home and a high market share area.

 

Also, you are moving the goal posts, as you previously stated specifically Lower Manhattan. You cannot claim the entire population of Manhattan -- permanent or transient -- for Lower Manhattan, especially when parts of Midtown and much of Harlem have LTE.

 

Furthermore, where is your proof that VZW and AT&T have done anything different? You do realize that both VZW and AT&T have announced LTE in numerous smaller markets prior to many larger markets. Check the press releases. This is the prevailing trend in wireless deployment now. Sprint just has more than its fair share of critics who like to pile on at any opportunity.

 

Now, I realize that you do not live in NYC and have just used it as an illustration. But your example is a poor one.

 

AJ

[jamesinclair]

I dont understand why youre trying to argue with me. Now youre demanding proof about VZW and AT&T when I never mentioned them? Again, you do realize Im speaking of the point of view of non-technical sprint users right? People whos only contact with the company is the monthly bill?

 

All Im saying is that the proper way to mitigate the complaints is with good PR. Theyve failed at that.

 

Instead of "LTE live in farmsville!" (full stop, nothing else) how about wording the press release as "Farmsville is now live with LTE as all four towers in the market have been converted. Meanwhile, we've added 32 LTE towers in NYC since our last update, leading towards our full launch in April"

 

That ensures the customers that their market is not being ignored in favor of another one. It sets expectations on a schedule and also gives insight into the deployment process, by making it clear that larger markets require more work. We might think thats an elementary conclusion, but its not for many.

[WiWavelength]

I dont understand why youre trying to argue with me. Now youre demanding proof about VZW and AT&T when I never mentioned them? Again, you do realize Im speaking of the point of view of non-technical sprint users right? People whos only contact with the company is the monthly bill?

 

As Robert previously pointed out, this is a forum, not your personal blog. So, you do not get to make comments unchallenged. Expect a response. To add to that, your posts are largely negative, and that makes you a target for replies because not everyone shares your disgruntled attitude.

 

Furthermore, your initial NYC example was poor, and your rebuttal to my response was substandard. I called you out on your data. If you have a problem with that, well, that is your problem.

 

All Im saying is that the proper way to mitigate the complaints is with good PR. Theyve failed at that.

 

In that case, the entire industry has failed to provide good PR. And I am offering the larger perspective that you have failed to provide.

 

S4GRU is the "proper" PR wing for Network Vision. Be happy that you are here...

 

AJ

[jamesinclair]

Obviously youre free to argue with me, but youre building up a strawman. You brought up examples like Verizon in an attempt to challenge my post but it has nothing to do with what I said. If youre going to argue, then please try and understand what Im saying. You've accused me of being disgruntled before, without basis. Saying that I think Sprint PR is poor and could do a better job is not being disgruntled - it's pointing out a shortcoming. Is this not a forum to discuss Sprint? They're not perfect, I think it's fair game to discuss both the good aspects but also the shortcomings.

 

The point of this thread (see title and original post) was to discuss uninformed media members and the general public at large who get confused at the Sprint PR releases by making uninformed assumptions.

 

I replied to that topic. I feel that this response is a direct result of poor PR.

 

You bring up another point: do Verizon and AT&T also have poor PR. Yes, I think so. You seem to be under the assumption that because I did not bring up the other companies, I was condoning their strategy while condemning Sprints (ie, telling me to "check their PR releases"). Thats not true, you saw the exact same pattern of complaints every time VZW announced a small market before a large one. Sprint should have learnt from that rather than repeat the PR strategy.

[Paynefanbro]

Somewhere around 4 million people commute to Manhattan daily. I'm sure at least half of those folks are on Lower Manhattan. The rest I agree with except for the overinflated views of ourselves, which in my opinion isn't true.

[Fraydog]

My theory on NYC having issues can be summed up in two words: Alcatel-Lucent.

 

I don't think they're a good network builder. I just don't. Maybe it's instinctive and speculative on my part to think that but I really don't care. I wish NSN was the third supplier of Network Vision. The things they are doing are way ahead of everyone except Ericsson, and Samsung isn't far behind. I am not a big fan of how AL handled their end.

 

If you like Sprint, be mad at how AL is trying to toss Sprint under the bus for giving them beaucoup dollars for building 1/3 of their networks. I wish Sprint would just kick them out and let NSN and Ericsson finish the job.

[Paynefanbro]

My theory on NYC having issues can be summed up in two words: Alcatel-Lucent.

 

I don't think they're a good network builder. I just don't. Maybe it's instinctive and speculative on my part to think that but I really don't care. I wish NSN was the third supplier of Network Vision. The things they are doing are way ahead of everyone except Ericsson, and Samsung isn't far behind. I am not a big fan of how AL handled their end.

 

If you like Sprint, be mad at how AL is trying to toss Sprint under the bus for giving them beaucoup dollars for building 1/3 of their networks. I wish Sprint would just kick them out and let NSN and Ericsson finish the job.

 

I think Alcatel Lucent is doing very well. The 3G upgrades are very good for the most part. I don't have any problems in the city. That might seem a bit biased though because a couple of weeks ago I would've been complaining about my speeds. After the tower by my school got 3G upgraded and the tower by my SAT class got LTE, I was happy.

[Dkoellerwx]

My theory on NYC having issues can be summed up in two words: Alcatel-Lucent.

 

I don't think they're a good network builder. I just don't. Maybe it's instinctive and speculative on my part to think that but I really don't care. I wish NSN was the third supplier of Network Vision. The things they are doing are way ahead of everyone except Ericsson, and Samsung isn't far behind. I am not a big fan of how AL handled their end.

 

If you like Sprint, be mad at how AL is trying to toss Sprint under the bus for giving them beaucoup dollars for building 1/3 of their networks. I wish Sprint would just kick them out and let NSN and Ericsson finish the job.

 

To be fair... AlcaLu is doing a pretty good job with the Shentel area. Granted, you could probably fit all of those sites into the NYC market and still not have enough... but I'm not sure it's all ALs fault. Backhaul providers probably share quite a bit of the blame as well.

[S4GRU]

My theory on NYC having issues can be summed up in two words: Alcatel-Lucent.

 

I don't think they're a good network builder. I just don't. Maybe it's instinctive and speculative on my part to think that but I really don't care. I wish NSN was the third supplier of Network Vision. The things they are doing are way ahead of everyone except Ericsson, and Samsung isn't far behind. I am not a big fan of how AL handled their end.

 

If you like Sprint, be mad at how AL is trying to toss Sprint under the bus for giving them beaucoup dollars for building 1/3 of their networks. I wish Sprint would just kick them out and let NSN and Ericsson finish the job.

 

You don't like them because they're French. Admit it. Sacre bleu!!!

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[Fraydog]

 

You don't like them because they're French. Admit it. Sacre bleu!!!

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

LOL. They're only half-French. The Alcatel part of the company is not really the issue. The part of the company that used to be a part of AT&T is the problem. I'm at least part French in descent so I can't hate the French. Not my fault they can't win a war though.

[WiWavelength]

You don't like them because they're French. Admit it. Sacre bleu!!!

 

To solve the issue, I think that we need to rebrand Alcatel-Lucent infrastructure "freedom" this, "freedom" that. Hey, do I see some "freedom" RRUs?

 

 

AJ

[gljvd]

If you want to see how badly nv is look no further than wimax areas. We have wimax where I am but no luck te and who knows when it will actually arrive. So if I get a new phone I loose 4g. So many customers are complaining when they upgrade and recieve a downgrade.

[Deval]

If you want to see how badly nv is look no further than wimax areas. We have wimax where I am but no luck te and who knows when it will actually arrive. So if I get a new phone I loose 4g. So many customers are complaining when they upgrade and recieve a downgrade.

 

That's a risk with any new upgrade though.

 

NV work is already starting in northern NJ, and quite a few sites are up, with 3G only.

[gljvd]

Yea but people have been upgrading to lte phones for about a year now and still no service. I have yet to pick up any lte in north jersey. Its a slow painful and poorly executed upgrade on sprints end and alot of customers are reminded of wimax. A common complaint is that sprint will announce the next 4g version before finishing lte and we will be right back where we started.

[koiulpoi]

Yea but people have been upgrading to lte phones for about a year now and still no service. I have yet to pick up any lte in north jersey. Its a slow painful and poorly executed upgrade on sprints end and alot of customers are reminded of wimax. A common complaint is that sprint will announce the next 4g version before finishing lte and we will be right back where we started.

I'm sure somebody more eloquent than I will jump in here, but Sprint and their (sub)contractors are completing Network Vision work at an incredible pace. Much faster than VZW's rollout was. People seem to forget that it wasn't instantaneous across the country for them. This is nothing like the WiMAX rollout.

 

Of course, NV is ~3 months behind, but I'm pretty sure NJ is in active deployment. More info in the sponsor sections.

[briank86]

Yea but people have been upgrading to lte phones for about a year now and still no service. I have yet to pick up any lte in north jersey. Its a slow painful and poorly executed upgrade on sprints end and alot of customers are reminded of wimax. A common complaint is that sprint will announce the next 4g version before finishing lte and we will be right back where we started.

 

Many people are comparing Sprint's NV with other carriers upgrades, which only leaves unfulfilled expectations. It's like overhauling an old un-modified car into a high performance beast, yet expecting it to be completed in a time frame and with the problems associated with adding a bolt on exhaust kit. If anyone expects this new network to be put up overnight then they need to realize how much construction costs, especially with an escalated pace. The fact that Sprint is using contractors has shrunk the time frame considerably as they can mobilize throughout the country simultaneously.

[gljvd]

I'm just telling you what I deal with every day. People are tired of paying an extra $10 for nothing. For getting a new phone and having slower internet. Also I don't care about deployments and where work is being done. It doesn't help until it actually goes live. Till then its a non issue.