T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[S4GRU]

Tmobile penetrates better than sprint in my area by a long shot. Been in plenty places where sprint coverage inside fails but never tmobile

 

It definitely varies by area. However, this is not true anywhere that I go, unfortunately. Tmo indoor coverage in New Mexico is pretty poor unless you're within half mile of a site. Sprint is better in that I can keep 1-3 bars inside (but the data speeds are poor until NV). But with Tmo, I lose service altogether in most commercial buildings. If I'm lucky, I'll fall back to an EDGE signal.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[Terrell352]

 

 

It definitely varies by area. However, this is not true anywhere that I go, unfortunately. Tmo indoor coverage in New Mexico is pretty poor unless you're within half mile of a site. Sprint is better in that I can keep 1-3 bars inside (but the data speeds are poor until NV). But with Tmo, I lose service altogether in most commercial buildings. If I'm lucky, I'll fall back to an EDGE signal.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

It seems to be the opposite in my area lol. I can go inside a building less than a 1/4 a mile away and ill go inside and poof signal down to 3g. This has happened in a few buildings all extremely close to lte towers and I'm wondering if the EVO 4G LTE rf is truly that bad

[S4GRU]

 

It seems to be the opposite in my area lol. I can go inside a building less than a 1/4 a mile away and ill go inside and poof signal down to 3g. This has happened in a few buildings all extremely close to lte towers and I'm wondering if the EVO 4G LTE rf is truly that bad

 

Oh, you're comparing Tmo HSPA to Sprint LTE on the EVO LTE. Well, that explains it. First, LTE will not be as usable as far HSPA from the same site. Even Tmo is going to have this issue with their LTE compared to their HSPA network.

 

And the EVO LTE is a poor RF performer, and that exacerbates the difference even more. You're not in the position to make an apples to apples comparison, I'm afraid.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[slibbidy]

It definitely varies by area. However, this is not true anywhere that I go, unfortunately. Tmo indoor coverage in New Mexico is pretty poor unless you're within half mile of a site. Sprint is better in that I can keep 1-3 bars inside (but the data speeds are poor until NV). But with Tmo, I lose service altogether in most commercial buildings. If I'm lucky, I'll fall back to an EDGE signal.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

I find the exact same situation in Raleigh with my Nexus 4. In most cases, I just turn on Airplane mode to save battery.

[centermedic]

On the other hand there have been price increases for all people who get an employer discount on family plans at Sprint as they now apply the employer discount only to the first line. This did raise my monthly rate about 6%.

They did that early last year IIRC.

[maximus1987/lou99]

T-Mobile has officially declared that they are not expanding their "footprint" until they get 600 MHz.

 

"Ray said that the company is not currently looking to expand its network footprint and is eagerly awaiting next year's scheduled incentive auctions of 600 MHz broadcast TV spectrum. He said using such spectrum is "a far more effective way to go and build those opportunities out"

 

http://www.fiercewir...pops/2013-05-15

 

This doesn't mean that they won't expand their planned LTE past 200 million - though they probably won't even though they currently cover 225 million with HSPA+ - but that any additional coverage past 225 million will only come about using 600 MHz. So, if you buy a T-Mobile LTE phone now then you won't have their 600 MHz coverage and be limited to "urban islands".

 

 

One thing I wonder: where will they start building out their 600 MHz?

In my opinion - boy is it fun to play armchair CEO! - they should start building it out where they do NOT have coverage with their AWS+PCS. Then, once they reach their target coverage, such as 290 million with 600MHz+other combined, they should double back and cover their current PCS+AWS.

 

Why?

1) They don't gain anything by covering areas already covered with PCS+AWS.

They already have coverage there so what's the point? In building? That's not their problem; rural coverage is.

 

2) More importantly, there won't be handsets for many months even after the network equipment is available.

So, if they start covering current 225mil first, people will have to get new phones to take advantage of the 600 MHz.

Yes, the previous statement will be true even if they do rural first but at least TMUS will have a marketing point: "We have 300 million covered! *New phone required"

Hey. It's better than doing urban buildout first and having no marketing points besides: "If you buy a new phone, then in one year you'll be able to have coverage out of urban islands!"

Edited May 15, 2013 by maximus1987

[WiWavelength]

So, if you buy a T-Mobile LTE phone now then you won't have their 600 MHz coverage and be limited to "urban islands".

 

And that would probably be true of most users' next two devices on T-Mobile. Even if the 600 MHz auction actually does happen next year -- and that is highly questionable -- 600 MHz standardization, infrastructure, and devices are years away. Likely, 2017 would be the earliest arrival.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

And that would probably be true of most users' next two devices on T-Mobile. Even if the 600 MHz auction actually does happen next year -- and that is highly questionable -- 600 MHz standardization, infrastructure, and devices are years away. Likely, 2017 would be the earliest arrival.

 

AJ

 

Why? Auction at 700 MHz was in 2008 and VZW launched commercially December 2010; is there something different at 600 MHz?

[WiWavelength]

Why? Auction at 700 MHz was in 2008 and VZW launched commercially December 2010; is there something different at 600 MHz?

 

Show me the 600 MHz band plan and the 3GPP 600 MHz LTE band. Neither exist. And the incentive auction is hardly a sure thing. Many UHF TV broadcasters are not keen on the idea at all.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

Show me the 600 MHz band plan and the 3GPP 600 MHz LTE band. Neither exist. And the incentive auction is hardly a sure thing. Many UHF TV broadcasters are not keen on the idea at all.

 

AJ

 

"Show me the 600 MHz band plan and the 3GPP 600 MHz LTE band."

Are you saying that by this time last go-around, the 600MHz band plan existed?

 

"Many UHF TV broadcasters are not keen on the idea at all."

Uhhgggggggggg. I've thought of my previous posts on this topic, refined my opinions some - since I did receive good back and forth - and I think the following should be done: eminent domain!

 

The Supreme Court, in Kelo v. New London (2005), stated that government could seize private property, provide just compensation, and transfer said property to another private owner if the new owner can provide higher economic value.

 

"the governmental taking of property from one private owner to give to another in furtherance of economic development constitutes a permissible "public use" under the Fifth Amendment."

 

Hmmmmm . . . I wonder if this situation is applicable; let us count the ways.

 

1) Private property - Kelo allows private property to be seized so how much more valid if it's public property (the spectrum)

 

2) Just compensation - provide enough money to the broadcasters to replace their equipment to move to a different band.

 

3) Furtherance of economic development - Duh!

 

Why color me brown and call me Harry! I do think we've satisfied the requirements of Kelo v. New London!!!

 

Because this is a Supreme Court decision, Congress can't do anything to overturn it but pass constitutional amendment and that ain't gonna happen so FCC+DOJ, start kicking ass!

 

FYI: I was against this decision when it came out but because the broadcasters never paid for their spectrum, I'm perfectly ok in using it.

[RCM]

[Mysteriousjustin]

Tmobile penetrates better than sprint in my area by a long shot. Been in plenty places where sprint coverage inside fails but never tmobile

 

Would be the same in my area due to the fact that t-mobile owns 45% or did own 45% of the sites here at one time so their antennas are at the very top. There are some sprint sites here that go very very far and some that don't due to downtilt and how high they are on the tower itself..

[Fraydog]

Maximus1987, if the FCC cited Keto, that would be like dropping an atomic bomb on the entire system. If that happens, you may as well blow the entire thing up and start over again.

[lilotimz]

Just out of curiosity doesn't MetroPCS own some 700 Mhz spectrum? I wonder if T-Mo can stitch together a for coverage only amount kind of like how Sprint will use its SMR bands?

 

Metro has some 700 in pockets here and there. It is not economical nor feasible to just run 700 for select markets and get specialized handsets for those markets.

 

Sprints SMR 800 is nationwide.

[lilotimz]

I wonder how hard it would be for T-Metro to acquire enough for nationwide, they have a fair amount of PCS/AWS to sell//swap for deals potentially. What would be the bare minimum they would need to get I mean top 40-60 markets?

 

I believe it's a mix of rural / small carriers and the blue death star that own the lower 700 mhz bloc. AJ should know.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Just out of curiosity doesn't MetroPCS own some 700 Mhz spectrum? I wonder if T-Mo can stitch together a for coverage only amount kind of like how Sprint will use its SMR bands?

 

"One familiar - but odd - name in Auction 73 was MetroPCS. It bought a large A-block license covering Boston... and that one license is all it bought, which is what's odd. It didn't participate in auctions 44 or 49, either. To have one lone city that uses a completely different frequency band from the rest of your network is generally not a good idea. MetroPCS felt sure enough about it to spend over $310 million on that license, though, so we assume it has some kind of plan."

 

http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187&p=233

[maximus1987/lou99]

I wonder how hard it would be for T-Metro to acquire enough for nationwide, they have a fair amount of PCS/AWS to sell//swap for deals potentially. What would be the bare minimum they would need to get I mean top 40-60 markets?

 

It would be impossible.

 

http://www.phonescoo...php?a=187&p=229

 

The only bands that would be useful are the lower B,C blocks because those are band 17 which is available on T-Mobile iPhone (and ATT&T iPhone which are now the same thing).

 

Verizon+ATT own most but after Verizon was approved to buy AWS from Spectrum Co. - the cable companies - it sold off lower A,B,C licenses; AT&T bought ALOT.

 

http://www.extremete...for-1-9-billion

 

Furthermore, they've very recently declared that they'relooking toward 600MHz for next boost in coverage and they're stopping footprint expansion with AWS+PCS.

 

T-Mobile has officially declared that they are not expanding their "footprint" until they get 600 MHz.

 

"Ray said that the company is not currently looking to expand its network footprint and is eagerly awaiting next year's scheduled incentive auctions of 600 MHz broadcast TV spectrum. He said using such spectrum is "a far more effective way to go and build those opportunities out"

 

http://www.fiercewir...pops/2013-05-15

 

This doesn't mean that they won't expand their planned LTE past 200 million - though they probably won't even though they currently cover 225 million with HSPA+ - but that any additional coverage past 225 million will only come about using 600 MHz. So, if you buy a T-Mobile LTE phone now then you won't have their 600 MHz coverage and be limited to "urban islands".

 

 

One thing I wonder: where will they start building out their 600 MHz?

In my opinion - boy is it fun to play armchair CEO! - they should start building it out where they do NOT have coverage with their AWS+PCS. Then, once they reach their target coverage, such as 290 million with 600MHz+other combined, they should double back and cover their current PCS+AWS.

 

Why?

1) They don't gain anything by covering areas already covered with PCS+AWS.

They already have coverage there so what's the point? In building? That's not their problem; rural coverage is.

 

2) More importantly, there won't be handsets for many months even after the network equipment is available.

So, if they start covering current 225mil first, people will have to get new phones to take advantage of the 600 MHz.

Yes, the previous statement will be true even if they do rural first but at least TMUS will have a marketing point: "We have 300 million covered! *New phone required"

Hey. It's better than doing urban buildout first and having no marketing points besides: "If you buy a new phone, then in one year you'll be able to have coverage out of urban islands!"

 

I actually listened to the entire 40min webcast last night and I think the CTO is delusional. He thinks after they finish 200mil LTE expansion, they can taper their CAPEX and "have a really nice cash flow profile"

 

http://jpmorgan.meta...php?ticker=TMUS

 

and wait it out until the 600 MHz is available.

 

My guess is they're trying to preserve the value of DT's 74% share- until lockup period expires - by not loading TMUS with more debt.

 

I'd love to see their free cash-flow profile when people realize in mid-2014 that even Sprint has more geographic coverage.

 

It's funny cause during the audio webcast, the interviewer explicitly asked "since you're the lowest cost provider and have the iPhone, why do you think people are STILL going to VZW+ATT?" and Mr. Ray starts BEEEEE-SSSSSING, totally avoiding the whole coverage thing.

[Fraydog]

I don't know if he was BSing. He was being real in that not having either Cellular, 700, or SMR put T-Mobile at a disadvantage regarding rural spectrum. I don't think that can be argued.

[ericdabbs]

Why? Auction at 700 MHz was in 2008 and VZW launched commercially December 2010; is there something different at 600 MHz?

 

The 600 MHz auction is still several years from reality because there is no 600 MHz band plan yet. The 600 MHz band is a reverse auction where the FCC is trying to provide incentives and pay the TV broadcasters to give up their 600 MHz chunks. We don't know which broadcasters are keen to the idea or not. So since that variable of how much 600 MHz spectrum will be freed s up in the air, the 600 MHz band can not be defined yet for 3GPP. Once the FCC knows how much 600 MHz spectrum it was able to free up due to the auction, only then can the 3GPP standards be developed for the band classes and such.

 

Tmobile has proposed a 600 MHz band plan but that is just an assumption of how much 600 MHz spectrum will be freed up. So its still going to be several years away.

[milan03]

It would be impossible.

 

http://www.phonescoo...php?a=187&p=229

 

The only bands that would be useful are the lower B,C blocks because those are band 17 which is available on T-Mobile iPhone (and ATT&T iPhone which are now the same thing).

 

Verizon+ATT own most but after Verizon was approved to buy AWS from Spectrum Co. - the cable companies - it sold off lower A,B,C licenses; AT&T bought ALOT.

 

http://www.extremete...for-1-9-billion

 

Furthermore, they've very recently declared that they'relooking toward 600MHz for next boost in coverage and they're stopping footprint expansion with AWS+PCS.

 

 

 

I actually listened to the entire 40min webcast last night and I think the CTO is delusional. He thinks after they finish 200mil LTE expansion, they can taper their CAPEX and "have a really nice cash flow profile"

 

http://jpmorgan.meta...php?ticker=TMUS

 

and wait it out until the 600 MHz is available.

 

My guess is they're trying to preserve the value of DT's 74% share- until lockup period expires - by not loading TMUS with more debt.

 

I'd love to see their free cash-flow profile when people realize in mid-2014 that even Sprint has more geographic coverage.

 

It's funny cause during the audio webcast, the interviewer explicitly asked "since you're the lowest cost provider and have the iPhone, why do you think people are STILL going to VZW+ATT?" and Mr. Ray starts BEEEEE-SSSSSING, totally avoiding the whole coverage thing.

He was actually pretty on point with everything he was talking about. The MetroPCS merger has been completed just 2 weeks ago, and they've already merged MPCS + T-MO LTE networks in Vegas. As of today it's 2x10Mhz instead of 2x5Mhz. They're running MOCN, where LTE is ran completely off of T-Mobile's core.

 

This really excites me since this is almost instant benefit for T-Mobile's existing subs, not to mention MPCS. Other 2x5Mhz can hope to get 2x10Mhz when contiguous AWS spectrum is available.

[maximus1987/lou99]

He was actually pretty on point with everything he was talking about. The MetroPCS merger has been completed just 2 weeks ago, and they've already merged MPCS + T-MO LTE networks in Vegas. As of today it's 2x10Mhz instead of 2x5Mhz. They're running MOCN, where LTE is ran completely off of T-Mobile's core.

 

This really excites me since this is almost instant benefit for T-Mobile's existing subs, not to mention MPCS. Other 2x5Mhz can hope to get 2x10Mhz when contiguous AWS spectrum is available.

 

T-Mobile's network is already fast cause they have so few subscribers.

 

"Speeds increased since 2010. Bandwidth claim based on T-Mobile's network spectrum per customer versus AT&T's."

http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/

(bottom of page)

 

Unless they lower their prices $20/month, I don't think people will accept having such bad geographic coverage.

 

This UNcarrier stuff is mostly smoke-and-mirrors; if you buy a smartphone every two years, there's literally no change (as was mentioned many times on this forum).

[clbowens]

T-Mobile's network is already fast cause they have so few subscribers.

 

"Speeds increased since 2010. Bandwidth claim based on T-Mobile's network spectrum per customer versus AT&T's."

http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/

(bottom of page)

 

Unless they lower their prices $20/month, I don't think people will accept having such bad geographic coverage.

 

This UNcarrier stuff is mostly smoke-and-mirrors; if you buy a smartphone every two years, there's literally no change (as was mentioned many times on this forum).

 

I agree with the every 2 years. These smartphones aren't built to last. Around 2 years, I have always has either a few or a LOT of problems with my smartphone (I'm on my 3rd). Sometimes problems start around a year. And that's with me taking good care of the phone (not dropping it, no water damage, etc).

[HawaiiD]

 

T-Mobile's network is already fast cause they have so few subscribers.

 

"Speeds increased since 2010. Bandwidth claim based on T-Mobile's network spectrum per customer versus AT&T's."

http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/

(bottom of page)

 

Unless they lower their prices $20/month, I don't think people will accept having such bad geographic coverage.

 

This UNcarrier stuff is mostly smoke-and-mirrors; if you buy a smartphone every two years, there's literally no change (as was mentioned many times on this forum).

There's no smoke and mirrors for me.

Say, like in my case, you have 2 phone on a shared plan with T-Mobile. And decided to pay installments 20 dollars each or 40 dollars for both phones. 40 dollars will be added to your monthly bill. After the 24 months your bill will drop by 40 dollars. With any other carriers even after your 2 year contract is up. You bill will still be the same.

 

Example.... For me with Sprint I was paying 157.00 dollars a month with a 24 %

Corporate discount on a simply everything 1500 minute shared plan.

With T-Mobile my bill would have been about 155.00 with 15% with my corporate discount. If I paid monthly for my phone.

My plan is unlimited un throttled

Data. My wife's line is 2.5GB.

Both plans has unlimited calling, text, etc. Also includes free wifi called from anywhere in the world. And 500 MB of tethering on my line and whatever ever data cap of tethering on my wife's line.

 

Since... I have paid both phones off.

My total bill for this month is 126.00

Dollars with insurance for both phones.

 

I will probably be even In price with sprint for the next 2 years since I bought the phones outright. But after the 24th month. I will be saving 30 dollars a month. Or until I get a new phone?

So there are some good value in T-Mobile's un carrier plan. That is if T-Mobile has good coverage in your area?

Sent from my HTC One Coconut Wireless

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

Update on my knowledge of TMUS' towers:

 

* Pre-Metro merger, they had a total of 51,000 towers

1) http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20130507/carriers/whats-next-t-mobile-us/

 

* Though they are only upgrading 37,000 (currently planned)

2) http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-5736

 

So does this mean that they will never be upgrading the last 14k towers that are on PCS EDGE?

* MetroPCS had 11,500 towers but TMUS  but will "decommission approximately 10,000 of its current 11,500 cell sites at a cost savings of up to $7 billion."

3) http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20121116/carriers/metropcs-decommission-10000-sites-part-t-mobile-usa-deal/

 

* Looks like TMUS will indeed wait for 600 MHz to expand coverage to the last 50-60 million

"Ray admitted that while the larger players are able to provide coverage to the last 50 million to 60 million pops easier and less expensively due to their lower-band spectrum holdings, the planned auction of 600 MHz spectrum through the incentive auction process could level the playing field."

4) http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20130517/carriers/metropcs-brand-live-on-focused-urban-markets/

[adamo696]

Will T-mobile LTE coverage catch up with sprint? and att?