T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[bigsnake49]

bigsnake, I always thought the SMR block would be a stumbling block for a Sprint/T-Mobile merger, but now that Scalable UMTS has entered the building...

 

http://3g4g.blogspot...ember_214087984

 

I thoroughly believe that this could be a big aid to a combined Sprint/Softbank/T-Mobile.

 

Yes because otherwise T-Mobile voice customers would not benefit from lower frequency spectrum.

[WiWavelength]

bigsnake, I always thought the SMR block would be a stumbling block for a Sprint/T-Mobile merger, but now that Scalable UMTS has entered the building...

 

http://3g4g.blogspot...ember_214087984

 

I thoroughly believe that this could be a big aid to a combined Sprint/Softbank/T-Mobile.

 

Please elaborate. I do not follow how SMR 800 MHz spectrum could be an impediment to a Sprint-T-Mobile merger, nor how S-UMTS would be relevant.

 

Besides, we will not see S-UMTS here. It is for developing countries, where operators and/or subs cannot afford to go LTE.

 

AJ

[Boosted20V]

Yes because otherwise T-Mobile voice customers would not benefit from lower frequency spectrum.

 

With the turnover rate of devices, it wouldn't take that long to migrate the customer base to 800mhz capable handsets.

[Fraydog]

AJ, I'm going through and doing the research on this throughly... but as far as the interim findings go, I'm very excited. It's still not a set standard and something we won't see until 2015... but we probably wouldn't see a merger close until then anyway.

[WiWavelength]

AJ, I'm going through and doing the research on this throughly... but as far as the interim findings go, I'm very excited. It's still not a set standard and something we won't see until 2015... but we probably wouldn't see a merger close until then anyway.

 

So, just for me to speculate, you think that if Sprint were to acquire T-Mobile, then the combined entity might deploy W-CDMA/2 or W-CDMA/4 (by the way, I am coining that terminology right here and now) in SMR 800 MHz to accommodate T-Mobile subs?

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

Please elaborate. I do not follow how SMR 800 MHz spectrum could be an impediment to a Sprint-T-Mobile merger, nor how S-UMTS would be relevant.

 

Besides, we will not see S-UMTS here. It is for developing countries, where operators and/or subs cannot afford to go LTE.

 

AJ

 

Well, if the two merge, then only the Sprint customers will get the benefit of voice on 800MHz SMR, absent a fractional UMTS. With a fractional UMTS both Sprint and T-Mobile customers can get the benefit of voice on SMR. Of course, that would mean that spectrum for LTE on SMR will shrink by a commensurate amount.

Of course the other solution would be to just put 1x + UMTS on SMR and no LTE. You might still need fractional UMTS in Solinc areas.

Edited April 10, 2013 by bigsnake49

[Fraydog]

I'm trying to think along the lines of what SoftBank would do. They're definitely on the 3GPP train. I just don't think they care all that much about CDMA. Sure, they could support it for customers for a long time. I think that if they buy T-Mobile, it would be an opportunity on their end to switch technologies and more or less move off 3GPP2 altogether.

 

Now if they don't buy T-Mobile, it obviously makes sense to keep CDMA around.

 

Yet, I still don't have a conclusion. I may want to wait for the SoftBank/Sprint transaction to close, I want to see what they do for starters upon taking control of Sprint.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

Well, if the two merge, then only the Sprint customers will get the benefit of voice on 800MHz SMR, absent a fractional UMTS. With a fractional UMTS both Sprint and T-Mobile customers can get the benefit of voice on SMR. Of course, that would mean that spectrum for LTE on SMR will shrink by a commensurate amount.

Of course the othe solution would be to just put 1x + UMTS on SMR and no LTE. You might still need fractional UMTS in Solinc areas.

 

Yeah, I got that, but honestly, it does not make sense to me that you guys could possibly be thinking that.

 

One, T-Mobile is basically becoming a sub prime, non contract brand, so who cares if those subs were to have access to SMR 800 MHz? Those subs should get what they pay for and stay on ~2 GHz spectrum.

 

Two, if Sprint were to acquire T-Mobile, then existing T-Mobile subs would require new devices to use SMR 800 MHz in any way, shape, or form, regardless. So, why in the world would Sprint-T-Mobile go the trouble of procuring S-UMTS 800 devices when it could just focus on CDMA1X/EV-DO and GSM/W-CDMA devices with LTE 800 capability?

 

Seriously, guys, come on...

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

What work would need to be done to get Network Vision towers to blast out PCS HSPA and AWS HSPA/LTE?

[ericdabbs]

What work would need to be done to get Network Vision towers to blast out PCS HSPA and AWS HSPA/LTE?

 

A lot. I wouldn't worry about it since it won't happen.

[Fraydog]

 

A lot. I wouldn't worry about it since it won't happen.

 

I'm speaking in terms of a merger or network sharing agreement with T-Mobile.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[ericdabbs]

I'm speaking in terms of a merger or network sharing agreement with T-Mobile.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

Definitely additional antenna panels that support AWS frequencies, carrier cards for PCS HSPA and AWS LTE/HSPA at the BTS, new RRUs that support HSPA and LTE on AWS and PCS. I am sure I am missing some other small details.

[Fraydog]

 

Definitely additional antenna panels that support AWS frequencies, carrier cards for PCS HSPA and AWS LTE/HSPA at the BTS, new RRUs that support HSPA and LTE on AWS and PCS. I am sure I am missing some other small details.

 

That was pretty close to what I thought.

 

That's another reason why I didn't want to say too much. I feel like I still have a lot to learn about the Network Vision itself.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[bigsnake49]

Yeah, I got that, but honestly, it does not make sense to me that you guys could possibly be thinking that.

 

One, T-Mobile is basically becoming a sub prime, non contract brand, so who cares if those subs were to have access to SMR 800 MHz? Those subs should get what they pay for and stay on ~2 GHz spectrum.

 

Two, if Sprint were to acquire T-Mobile, then existing T-Mobile subs would require new devices to use SMR 800 MHz in any way, shape, or form, regardless. So, why in the world would Sprint-T-Mobile go the trouble of procuring S-UMTS 800 devices when it could just focus on CDMA1X/EV-DO and GSM/W-CDMA devices with LTE 800 capability?

 

Seriously, guys, come on...

 

AJ

 

I am sure that T-Mobile denizens would not like your characterization of them as a sub-prime brand.

 

I'm pretty sure that a single channel of 1x would not be enough to accommodate both Sprint and T-Mobile subscribers. Maybe the capacity/coverage tradeoffs of 1x Advanced would help in this instance (lower rate codec, for example).

[WiWavelength]

I am sure that T-Mobile denizens would not like your characterization of them as a sub-prime brand.

 

They would have to take that up with their carrier because that is how T-Mobile is increasingly positioning itself. I am remarking only on what I am observing from T-Mobile.

 

I'm pretty sure that a single channel of 1x would not be enough to accommodate both Sprint and T-Mobile subscribers. Maybe the capacity/coverage tradeoffs of 1x Advanced would help in this instance (lower rate codec, for example).

 

Which single CDMA1X channel are we talking about? CDMA1X 800? If so, there will still be plenty of CDMA1X 1900 channels to go around.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

Meanwhile there is speculation that Dish has amassed a $10B war chest. The speculation is that he goes after T-Mobile or sweetens the offer for Clearwire.

[bigsnake49]

They would have to take that up with their carrier because that is how T-Mobile is increasingly positioning itself. I am remarking only on what I am observing from T-Mobile.

 

 

 

Which single CDMA1X channel are we talking about? CDMA1X 800? If so, there will still be plenty of CDMA1X 1900 channels to go around.

 

AJ

 

Yes, of course the single 1x 800Mhz channel.

[lynyrd65]

 

Yes, of course the single 1x 800Mhz channel.

 

Recall that its 1xAdvanced which can have up to 4 times the capacity of current 1x carriers.

 

Also, later PRL updates will push phones to 1900 carriers first and only connect to 800mhz 1x when 1900 signal is absent.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[WiWavelength]

Yes, of course the single 1x 800Mhz channel.

 

I fail to see the issue, though. It is not as if CDMA1X 1900 is being retired and all traffic will be carried over that single CDMA1X 800 carrier.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

Also, later PRL updates will push phones to 1900 carriers first and only connect to 800mhz 1x when 1900 signal is absent.

 

Do we know that later PRL updates will do this? My prognostication last year was that most/all PRLs would keep devices camped on CDMA1X 800 (where available). Empirical results from Chicago and Texas plus digiblur's PRL interpretations, thus far, have supported my speculation.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

T-Mobile isn't a subprime network in the 225 million POP's they cover with HSPA+. It's just subprime in the areas they still only have GPRS and EDGE.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

T-Mobile isn't a subprime network in the 225 million POP's they cover with HSPA+. It's just subprime in the areas they still only have GPRS and EDGE.

 

I am using "sub prime" in the financial sense, as in T-Mobile is increasingly setting itself up to attract urban, poor, credit challenged subs.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

T-Mobile has been in that area for a while. Alarm bells should have been going off at DT HQ when ARPU started going into the toilet on their end. Perhaps it did and they thought that selling to AT&T would be the fix.

 

The Uncarrier branding is still postpaid. It's just not on contract per se. Now I would call the EIP a type of contract, and the credit requirements for that are, from my understanding, very tight. For a postpaid Uncarrier plan with no contract, not so much.

[WiWavelength]

The Uncarrier branding is still postpaid. It's just not on contract per se. Now I would call the EIP a type of contract, and the credit requirements for that are, from my understanding, very tight. For a postpaid Uncarrier plan with no contract, not so much.

 

From everything that I have seen, T-Mobile's "UNcarrier" strategy offers both postpaid and prepaid options on most/all plans.

 

AJ

[Conan Kudo]

From everything that I have seen, T-Mobile's "UNcarrier" strategy offers both postpaid and prepaid options on most/all plans.

 

AJ

 

There are still specific prepaid options, but the major "UNcarrier" stuff is the dramatic simplification of the postpaid plan system. For the bulk of the time that DT's mobile brand has been operating in the USA, it has had a dizzying array of options to choose from. The result was very confused customers who didn't know what to get. Examples include Even More and Even More Plus, the Classic/Value split, and so on.

 

The hope is that the simplification will reduce administrative costs and boost revenue. Early indicators seem to bear fruit, but we'll wait and see.