4/8 Coverage Map Update

[Epic4G25]

Has anyone noticed that the coverage map as updated 4/8 now shows a lot of the country, and especially the west coast as off network roaming? Anyone know the cause of this? Or when it may be back to normal?

[halcyoncmdr]

Probably a roaming agreement expired (possible Strategic Roaming Alliance partner?) and Sprint and the roaming partner couldn't come to another agreement. There are areas of roaming that act as normal coverage due to an agreement.

 

May have been an agreement with a provider that was later swallowed up by the likes of Verizon and the agreement has expired, thus standard roaming now.

[Epic4G25]

I think you replied to me on the Sprint.com forums, thanks for replying again. Is there no why to get anymore information about why most of the "Sprint" coverage basically disappeared overnight. It's a drastic decrease.

[jamesinclair]

Interesting....for the user, does that mean our experience declines?

[Epic4G25]

Basically what was once shown as native coverage, meaning everything worked as if you were on the Sprint network is now off network roaming. Now things will be billed in the effected areas as partner roaming, meaning all calls placed will use Any Time minutes and there is a limit on data roaming.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Epic4G25

[Fraydog]

Sprint losing more pseudo native coverage [Nex-Tech, United Wireless, PTCI]?

 

This could explain it... I don't know what Sprint can do about it.

[Epic4G25]

This could explain it... I don't know what Sprint can do about it.

 

Build out a network of their own? Like AT&T and VZW have done over the years, instead of the typical Sprint "Let's just rely on roaming agreements that could fall apart at the Drop of a Pin." I mean I love Sprint, they remind me of Saab as a wireless carrier and I want them to succeed, but they need to own their own extensive network to do that.

[Fraydog]

Build out a network of their own? Like AT&T and VZW have done over the years, instead of the typical Sprint "Let's just rely on roaming agreements that could fall apart at the Drop of a Pin." I mean I love Sprint, they remind me of Saab as a wireless carrier and I want them to succeed, but they need to own their own extensive network to do that.

 

Sprint has to find their way to profit first. Once the Nextel abomination is finally laid to rest, I think we'll see something using the SMR spectrum. I just don't know what Sprint can do to cover the country short of epic, complete long-term reform of the spectrum held by the Bell Behemoths. I live in an area where the local carriers got laid to waste by the big boys. As the local choices went away, so did the choices for consumers. It is unfortunate but Sprint can't do it all by themselves.

[Epic4G25]

They certainly can't, which is why I'm hoping SoftBank will be much more helpful with Sprint than a company like GM was with Saab.

[Rawvega]

Build out a network of their own? Like AT&T and VZW have done over the years

 

Guess you haven't heard of VZW's LTEiRA program....

[Epic4G25]

I have no problem with roaming agreements, but roaming agreements make up most all of the coverage Sprint claims to have outside of larger towns and highways... The native coverage size difference between the likes of AT&T and VZW are giant.

[Fraydog]

Guess you haven't heard of VZW's LTEiRA program....

 

Key is, VZW still has a pretty formidable network in the LTE game without any LTEiRA partners. I would have no issues with Sprint using a similar strategy. It would help them go back into a more aggressive mode regarding rural coverage.

[Epic4G25]

Key is, VZW still has a pretty formidable network in the LTE game without any LTEiRA partners. I would have no issues with Sprint using a similar strategy. It would help them go back into a more aggressive mode regarding rural coverage.

Thanks for providing a logical standpoint.

[Fraydog]

Knowing the CCA meetings are coming up, it would not surprise me to see Sprint put together a program for rural LTE deployment.

[WiWavelength]

Back to the original question, Sprint has no affiliates nor Sprint Rural Alliance partners on the West Coast presently. And the expiration of a roaming agreement would reduce roaming coverage not native coverage. As for the map, to anyone's eyes, what native coverage has gone missing?

 

AJ

[Epic4G25]

Quite a lot, I've always wanted to move to the west coast so I periodically check out there. Basically everything has gone from "Native" coverage to "Off Network Roaming" other than around the highways and larger towns.

[WiWavelength]

Quite a lot, I've always wanted to move to the west coast so I periodically check out there. Basically everything has gone from "Native" coverage to "Off Network Roaming" other than around the highways and larger towns.

 

You will need to be more specific about the so called missing native coverage in question because what you describe is fairly typical for PCS 1900 MHz footprint.

 

AJ

[Epic4G25]

Can't be much more specific than that, all I can say is there has been a drastic reduction in the areas covered natively out west. The coverage used to be more than just the "Typical PCS coverage." I was simply wondering if there were any major roaming deals that ended causing this. Since there doesn't seem to be that much info on it I guess not.

[WiWavelength]

Can't be much more specific than that, all I can say is there has been a drastic reduction in the areas covered natively out west. The coverage used to be more than just the "Typical PCS coverage." I was simply wondering if there were any major roaming deals that ended causing this. Since there doesn't seem to be that much info on it I guess not.

 

It could be that you misremember the map or that you previously interpreted it incorrectly. The only issue I see on the West Coast is that former Ubiquitel affiliate footprint in California's Central Valley is far too conservatively projected, leading to spotty islands of coverage that are actually much more contiguous.

 

And, as I posted earlier, the expiration of a roaming deal would affect roaming coverage, not native coverage. But your supposition is that the native coverage depiction has been diminished.

 

AJ

[Epic4G25]

I'm not going to worry about it further, as nothing evident is even coming up and I'd like to continue to support Sprint. So I'll just wait and hope that the SoftBank deal will allow Sprint to build out their own network for once, instead of just renting towers and using roaming agreements.

[WiWavelength]

So I'll just wait and hope that the SoftBank deal will allow Sprint to build out their own network for once, instead of just renting towers and using roaming agreements.

 

Hmm, I think that you may hold several misconceptions about Sprint or the wireless industry as a whole.

 

A Sprint rural buildout is unlikely, as it would not be a cost effective venture. Over the past decade, VZW and AT&T appear to have built out much rural coverage, but they actually have constructed very little new coverage. Instead, they have bought out numerous other carriers and claimed those footprints as their own.

 

As for "renting towers," that is called site leasing and has been standard practice in the wireless industry for many years now. All of the carriers lease sites from other carriers and tower management companies. But that is a real estate issue that has no bearing on their wireless network operations.

 

AJ

[Rawvega]

Key is, VZW still has a pretty formidable network in the LTE game without any LTEiRA partners

 

Be that as it may, it still is disingenuous for the OP to try and chastise Sprint for having roaming agreements while giving VZW an 'atta boy'. Meanwhile VZW is using at least 17 (maybe more) LTEiRA partners to help build out their coverage which is similar to Sprint's SRA agreements. If it's ok in one case, then it's ok in both cases.

[Epic4G25]

No, not many misconceptions. I am very well aware AT&T and VZW have extended their networks through mergers and buyouts, however there aren't that many companies left that Sprint could acquire in the same manner. Also it isn't just "rural" that needs to be built out, it's the native Sprint network as a whole, the network foot print is inherently small compared even to the likes of a carrier such as T-Mobile. This becomes even more evident when looking at something like the Sprint 1900MHZ only coverage map they themselves provide. All that's ever been said about any kind of build out for Sprint is that it wouldn't be cost effective, yet that's left us in a position of dwindling coverage as shown by the link Fraydog provided. I simply want a carrier that could possibly one day come close to a native coverage footprint near that of AT&T and VZW.

 

Rawvega - I'm not "chastising" Sprint for using roaming agreements, as they've been a great help to me in more rural areas around me. My problem is that Sprint relies too heavily on them, whereas VZW's coverage can stand mostly on its own without roaming backup.

 

I really don't understand why people can't just admit to Sprint having an incredibly small native footprint that should be expanded to compete with AT&T and VZW while also lessening dependence on roaming contracts. I understand the costs would be high, but with a parent company like SoftBank coming into the picture, now after NV is completed would be the time. Call me unrealistic, but we simply don't have the native network coverage to adequately compete with AT&T and VZW at this time. More native coverage is never a bad thing. IMO

[WiWavelength]

No, not many misconceptions. I am very well aware AT&T and VZW have extended their networks through mergers and buyouts, however there aren't that many companies left that Sprint could acquire in the same manner. Also it isn't just "rural" that needs to be built out, it's the native Sprint network as a whole, the network foot print is inherently small compared even to the likes of a carrier such as T-Mobile.

 

 

Well, that is at least one misconception right there. The Sprint native network and the T-Mobile native network are very comparable in size/coverage. In some areas, Sprint has the advantage; in other areas, T-Mobile has the advantage. But to say that the Sprint native footprint is "inherently small" compared to that of T-Mobile is inaccurate.

 

Call me unrealistic, but we simply don't have the native network coverage to adequately compete with AT&T and VZW at this time. More native coverage is never a bad thing. IMO

 

Yes, you are unrealistic. Sprint cannot compete with VZW and AT&T on a native footprint basis. That ship has sailed because an oligopolistic Baby Bell telecom industry and a pro big business Republican FCC enabled VZW and AT&T to buy up whatever they wanted.

 

So, now, Sprint has to compete on other terms, such as price and quality. And Sprint has weighed the cost-benefit ratio and determined that paying roaming costs in certain lower population density areas is more cost effective than building out a native network in those areas.

 

AJ

[Epic4G25]

They need to find someway to expand someday, roaming as a backup can't go on forever. If thats what a network is reduced to, its not of much use. Even more so in a day of ever growing data use and data speed demands, while Sprint roaming has a 300MB limit as per T&C.