T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[WiWavelength]

As far as I know, the only reason T-Mobile doesn't sell service in Omaha (and thus, care more about it) is that they've never been able to get local phone number blocks assigned to them for use in that area. There are ways to buy service, but you don't get a local number.

 

What's the point in doing more for that area if you can't sell phone service there?

 

Probably not, as it's a very demanding job with probably a lower pay scale than what I do now.

 

Neal, I highly doubt that local exchange availability is the reason.

 

Over the years, Omaha has had possibly a US record number of simultaneously separate wireless providers:  Aliant (Alltel -> VZW), US West (AirTouch -> VZW), Sprint, AT&TWS (Cingular -> AT&T), Nextel (Sprint), Qwest (defunct), Cricket (AT&T???), USCC, and T-Mobile.  I may even be forgetting one from a decade ago.

 

Regardless, it is/was arguably the CDMA2000 capital of the world, as it once had four, possibly even five parallel CDMA2000 networks in operation.  Not surprisingly, GSM type networks were late to Omaha and have long lagged behind.  That is the more compelling reason why T-Mobile operates just a license protection market in Omaha.

 

Now, Viaero has made Nebraska far more GSM type network friendly elsewhere in the state.  So, some of us have discussed that T-Mobile should just get out of the market by selling to Viaero -- much as it has done with Iowa in the east by selling Des Moines to Iowa Wireless Services.

 

AJ

[richy]

Well, who needs to "rent to own" their phones?  Consider T-Mobile's audience.  The "urban lowbrow" stereotype carries a fair amount of truth.

 

AJ

 

Ouch, on behalf of the tmo fanbois club I must protest!   Are you just upset we got a Legere Teeth Whitening kit for Christmas  It even came with two fishhooks to give that wonderful forced smile look and a poster of his most inappropriate smeers (half smile half sneer).

 

Re Omaha, is it just a capex issue? They ran short of cash initially and the longer they leave it the more expensive it is to fully build out the network so it doesn't get done? It would take a while to gain traction in an are you have virtually no coverage on, you'd have to let potential customers know you have coverage as well. How long to get over the perception you just don't have coverage. Theres one area not far from me that all the locals will tell you only vzw covers yet at&t has rented tower space for at least 5 years and I can pickup their carriers on my tmo phone (of course I can't roam on it  , that would be sensible). 

[Conan Kudo]

Neal, I highly doubt that local exchange availability is the reason.

 

Over the years, Omaha has had possibly a US record number of simultaneously separate wireless providers:  Aliant (Alltel -> VZW), US West (AirTouch -> VZW), Sprint, AT&TWS (Cingular -> AT&T), Nextel (Sprint), Qwest (defunct), Cricket (AT&T???), USCC, and T-Mobile.  I may even be forgetting one from a decade ago.

 

Regardless, it is/was arguably the CDMA2000 capital of the world, as it once had four, possibly even five parallel CDMA2000 networks in operation.  Not surprisingly, GSM type networks were late to Omaha and have long lagged behind.  That is the more compelling reason why T-Mobile operates just a license protection market in Omaha.

 

Now, Viaero has made Nebraska far more GSM type network friendly elsewhere in the state.  So, some of us have discussed that T-Mobile should just get out of the market by selling to Viaero -- much as it has done with Iowa in the east by selling Des Moines to Iowa Wireless Services.

 

AJ

First: I am aware of the number of redundant network options that were available in Omaha. I used to go there a few times when I was younger (I have a family friend that lives there). 

 

Second: iwireless does not own Des Moines. T-Mobile sold them the rights to market iwireless within Des Moines using the T-Mobile network. It's a weird, network-sharing style arrangement. It's also the reason why iwireless no longer counts as roaming coverage.

 

Third: LEC availability can totally be the reason. For one, the new 531 area code has not been implemented yet. As of Feb 2013, it is estimated to be three years away from activation. And A.J., with so many networks in Omaha, what do you think happened to all those phone number blocks? They were reserved by the carriers. And most of those carriers got swallowed up into larger giants. T-Mobile has no local exchange in the state.

 

Fourth: Why not just buy Viaero Wireless? It would expand T-Mobile's native coverage throughout the entire state, and the assets are largely complementary. And they'd get Nebraskan phone number access, too.

[Nickel]

As far as I know, the only reason T-Mobile doesn't sell service in Omaha (and thus, care more about it) is that they've never been able to get local phone number blocks assigned to them for use in that area. There are ways to buy service, but you don't get a local number.

 

What's the point in doing more for that area if you can't sell phone service there?

 

Probably not, as it's a very demanding job with probably a lower pay scale than what I do now.

Eastern Nebraska got a new area code in 2011.

 

EDIT: Here's an article from 2009 that paints a pretty good picture

http://www.omaha.com/article/20090708/NEWS01/907089914/0/AP03

[Mr.Nuke]

Third: LEC availability can totally be the reason. For one, the new 531 area code has not been implemented yet. As of Feb 2013, it is estimated to be three years away from activation. And A.J., with so many networks in Omaha, what do you think happened to all those phone number blocks? They were reserved by the carriers. And most of those carriers got swallowed up into larger giants. T-Mobile has no local exchange in the state.

Said article also notes the reason 531 hasn't been implemented yet as the following:

Anne Boyle, a commissioner with the state Public Service Commission that oversees area codes locally, said Nebraska avoided installing the new code for more than a decade because the cell phone boom slowed down and small phone providers were hoarding thousands of unused numbers.

If T-Mobile wanted to get numbers here they could. A lack of LEC availability isn't the reason T-Mobile never built out and served Omaha...

[lordsutch]

Besides which, LEC availability can't be an issue any more due to portability rules. New numbers are allocated out of the free number pool without dedicated provider prefixes anymore.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Conan Kudo]

Besides which, LEC availability can't be an issue any more due to portability rules. New numbers are allocated out of the free number pool without dedicated provider prefixes anymore.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

That doesn't jive with the article saying that unused numbers have been reserved by those phone companies that exist in Omaha and sell service there. Portability rules do not change the fact that phone numbers are still owned by a phone company that owns an exchange.

 

I believe that if T-Mobile could get numbers in Omaha, it would. Perhaps it wants to grab a batch of 531 numbers?

[Nickel]

That doesn't jive with the article saying that unused numbers have been reserved by those phone companies that exist in Omaha and sell service there. Portability rules do not change the fact that phone numbers are still owned by a phone company that owns an exchange.

 

I believe that if T-Mobile could get numbers in Omaha, it would. Perhaps it wants to grab a batch of 531 numbers?

Then why wouldn't they start deploying 531 now if T-Mobile wants them? It keeps getting pushed back because it isn't needed/wanted.

[Conan Kudo]

Then why wouldn't they start deploying 531 now if T-Mobile wants them? It keeps getting pushed back because it isn't needed/wanted.

The numbers haven't been used under the existing area code. That's not the same thing as not allocated. 531 won't be activated until all current numbers have been exhausted.

[Vette]

Has anyone used Tmo's coverage map recently? They have updated it since I last checked to "pull the wool over the eyes" in essence. The differences between technologies are now marked by very, very, very subtle color changes (all purple colors). I know my house is covered EDGE only, but one could easily be mistaken into thinking they have at least HSPA. I love their contract strategies, hate their coverage.

[Boosted20V]

Has anyone used Tmo's coverage map recently? They have updated it since I last checked to "pull the wool over the eyes" in essence. The differences between technologies are now marked by very, very, very subtle color changes (all purple colors). I know my house is covered EDGE only, but one could easily be mistaken into thinking they have at least HSPA. I love their contract strategies, hate their coverage.

 

Even the pink for high-speed coverage doesn't denote which. When you click on an area, it will then say 4GLTE, 4G, or 3G depending.

[Vette]

I just realized you can double click an exact location to get it to spit out exactly the coverage. Still a terrible system IMO.

[JosefTor]

I still find it stupid that HSPDA can't be called 4g with consumers. If it is as fast as LTE that other carriers offer, then I don't care if it doesn't meet some definition. I'm a tad disappointed with Sprint's coverage maps with are hard to use (outdated Web technology) and say that southern OC is covered in the new Spark network which is not true in the least. I'm very happy with Sprint and the work they have done with NV but that is no reason to lie.

[Conan Kudo]

I still find it stupid that HSPDA can't be called 4g with consumers. If it is as fast as LTE that other carriers offer, then I don't care if it doesn't meet some definition. I'm a tad disappointed with Sprint's coverage maps with are hard to use (outdated Web technology) and say that southern OC is covered in the new Spark network which is not true in the least. I'm very happy with Sprint and the work they have done with NV but that is no reason to lie.

HSPA+ (which HSDPA is the downlink portion of) can be, and there are several operators that do. T-Mobile, AT&T, Bell, Telus, Claro, Digicel, and LIME are a few examples of operators that do this.

[IamMrFamous07]

It's official they bought the 700mhz A licenses from vzw

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-buys-verizons-700-mhz-block-spectrum-24b/2014-01-06

 

Hopefully sprint can have 800 LTE turned on soon in the DC metro area

[S4GRU]

It's official they bought the 700mhz A licenses from vzw

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-buys-verizons-700-mhz-block-spectrum-24b/2014-01-06

 

Hopefully sprint can have 800 LTE turned on soon in the DC metro area

Yep, it will cover about 2/3 of the Top 30 markets. It won't receive approval from the FCC until mid year at the earliest. Tmo says they will try to get handsets starting for sale and deployment beginning in these affected markets by the end of 2014, should the FCC approve timely.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[Rawvega]

I doubt the FCC will throw any roadblocks up in the way of the transaction.

 

 

There are some obstacles in deploying wireless service on the A Block, including possible interference from channel 51 broadcast TV spectrum, which sits adjacent to the A Block. T-Mobile said its A Block buildout can start in 2014 outside the channel 51 service areas, with more than 50 percent of the covered A Block population in such areas.

Read more: T-Mobile buys Verizon's 700 MHz A Block spectrum for $2.4B - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-buys-verizons-700-mhz-block-spectrum-24b/2014-01-06#ixzz2pd6LizGq 
Subscribe at FierceWireless

 

 

[UserDemos]

I think this is a great move for T-Mobile. They are buying them on the cheap now while there are interference issues and the spectrum is under-valued. They are deploying where they can outside the contours and looking for ways to shrink the interference issues for further deployment. I bet they have plans to buy more A-Block licenses (looking at you Leap and your Chicago license!). When the DT51 interference gets cleared, they can finish deployment *AND* their spectrum has risen in value to the other 700 licenses. While waiting for that, rural and suburban areas are getting a nice 5x5 LTE boost which should help with subscriber counts. So, overall, I am looking at this as smart moves by T-Mobile with the situation they are in. 

[S4GRU]

It's a 6x6 block. So Tmo could put a 5MHz LTE carrier on it. However, they will not be able to put voice on it (until VoLTE) and they do have some significant Channel 51 interference issues. This does help them, for sure. But it is limited in scope.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[S4GRU]

I think this is a great move for T-Mobile. They are buying them on the cheap now while there are interference issues and the spectrum is under-valued. They are deploying where they can outside the contours and looking for ways to shrink the interference issues for further deployment. I bet they have plans to buy more A-Block licenses (looking at you Leap and your Chicago license!). When the DT51 interference gets cleared, they can finish deployment *AND* their spectrum has risen in value to the other 700 licenses. While waiting for that, rural and suburban areas are getting a nice 5x5 LTE boost which should help with subscriber counts. So, overall, I am looking at this as smart moves by T-Mobile with the situation they are in.

I'm not sure I agree that these licenses are cheap. When you consider what I recall nationwide licenses sold for, I would say they paid a premium for these licenses. But they do desperately need them.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[UserDemos]

I'm not sure I agree that these licenses are cheap. When you consider what I recall nationwide licenses sold for, I would say they paid a premium for these licenses. But they do desperately need them.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

I guess I should have clarified and said that they bought them on the cheap compared to buying them after the interference is cleared. At that point, the value of the A Block would probably soar as it would be entirely usable like the B and C Blocks, not to mention, it'd become a great buy for AT&T to make 15x15 combining A+B+C Blocks. Also, it seems that the price per MHz was a bit higher than the original A Block auction, but way lower than either B or C Block price per MHz. Doesn't that seem like "buying them on the cheap"?

 

In a way, I also almost see this as a great move against AT&T in the long run. I think T-Mobile is thinking long term with this buy and I hope it pays off. We need to continue to see T-Mobile and Sprint succeed in the long run to provide increased competition to AT&T and Verizon. I know Sprint and T-Mobile are on the right track with network issues, now we just need to see the customers start coming. \

 

Source for price per MHz comparison: http://assets.fiercemarkets.net/public/mdano/amis/700-tmobile-verizon.pdf

Edited January 6, 2014 by UserDemos

[S4GRU]

I guess I should have clarified and said that they bought them on the cheap compared to buying them after the interference is cleared. At that point, the value of the A Block would probably soar as it would be entirely usable like the B and C Blocks, not to mention, it'd become a great buy for AT&T to make 15x15 combining A+B+C Blocks. Also, it seems that the price per MHz was a bit higher than the original A Block auction, but way lower than either B or C Block price per MHz. Doesn't that seem like "buying them on the cheap"?

 

In a way, I also almost see this as a great move against AT&T in the long run. I think T-Mobile is thinking long term with this buy and I hope it pays off. We need to continue to see T-Mobile and Sprint succeed in the long run to provide increased competition to AT&T and Verizon. I know Sprint and T-Mobile are on the right track with network issues, now we just need to see the customers start coming. \

 

Source for price per MHz comparison: http://assets.fiercemarkets.net/public/mdano/amis/700-tmobile-verizon.pdf

Yes, the spectrum will be valued more after interference issues are mitigated. But I think Tmo paid a value that was post interference. Didn't the 12MHz nationwide B and C licenses go for roughly $4BN each at auction? Even if they have doubled in value, it seems Tmo has overpaid. It seems to me that $2BN for a limited area of 6MHz seems like it may be overpaying even if there were no interference issues. Add interference issues that exist, and it seems very steep.

 

However, what is Tmo to do? It's the only low frequency spectrum out there they can get. It's not like Verizon is going to give it away. Especially to a competitor. And there may have been some bidding going on that drove up the price. I don't blame Tmo for doing this deal. It's pretty necessary. But I won't call it on the cheap, pre or post interference.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[IamMrFamous07]

To be honest I'm very happy for tmobile. My only concerns are: Are they going to refarm their edge coverage into LTE? And are they making a profit with all these un carrier changes

[cdk]

It's a 6x6 block. So Tmo could put a 5MHz LTE carrier on it. However, they will not be able to put voice on it (until VoLTE) and they do have some significant Channel 51 interference issues. This does help them, for sure. But it is limited in scope.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

Does the interference issue block them from using the whole block? Or could they place a 3MHz LTE carrier to avoid interference?

 

How large are voice carriers in the GSM world?

[WiWavelength]

 

 

 

Geographers, discuss...

 

AJ