Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Epic4G25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By EntrepreneurKid
      Given the fact that Virgin has access to Extended Coverage ever since it's Inner Circle plan still now with it's current one at least according to customer service. Shouldn't Virgin be using PRL 55070 like it was with Inner Circle or is 7080 correct? I feel like there's an issue that isn't being paid attention too. Does PRL 7080 have the necessary stuff to make the device roam on Sprints extended partners.
    • By EntrepreneurKid
      When Virgin Mobile introduced their Inner Circle plan they added Extended coverage giving them the same coverage as Sprint Postpaid. And a few months ago when Virgin did away with its Inner Circle plan and its iPhone only to the current plan lineup and devices I figured they'd backtrack on the roaming and go back to Sprint only. While they may not have updated their coverage map it would seem they are not allowing roaming as my LG Tribute Dynasty which is compatible with US Cellular roaming is being restricted and blocked post activation. Before hands free activation began I was able to go into the devices network and roaming settings and switch on voice roaming, which worked, it immediately connected to US Cellular, then the hands free activation started which couldn't complete due to no data until I switched on wifi, but after the device rebooted, the voice roaming was turned off and greyed out so it couldn't be switched back on.
      I know this device is capable of roaming, it has band 12 and band 5 for LTE and the CDMA band necessary to roam onto US Cellulars CDMA network, which again it was able to due prior to activation. If Virgin Mobile is going to continue having roaming as an option then it should work otherwise they need to remove it from their coverage map. I've attempted to take the issue up with Virgin but they tell me that they'll help me with any other issue, except roaming. I believe it has something to do with the PRL since it is what determines the devices roaming. I found a old Virgin device from before Inner Circle started, in it was PRL 7080 the same one as it has now, back then Virgin was the home network on Sprint only, no data or voice roaming.
      I don't know where the issue is with this and I'm hoping after filing a complaint with the FCC which has been served that it is either corrected and fixed and roaming starts working, or Virgin removes it from their coverage map if they're not going to allow it. I've asked customer service if the coverage map and the roaming on it applies to current customers or if it was just Inner Circle and they say it does apply to the current plans. If so, and if I have a device that is compatible (LG Tribute Dynasty), why is it being restricted.

    • By danlodish345
      Hey guys I was browsing one of my news applications and I found interesting article about Verizon Wireless in Maine I'm sharing the link.
      http://wcyy.com/verizon-is-dumping-an-entire-chunk-of-maine-from-their-wireless-network/
      Tell me what you think.
    • By clbowens
      Does Sprint have an LTE roaming deals with any carrier anywhere currently?  If so, does it show up on their coverage map?
    • By RedSpark
      Any S4GRU members going to the Super Bowl or planning to be near the stadium? Could you let us know how Sprint's coverage is?

      ----------

      About the DAS: http://www.rcrwireless.com/20150129/network-infrastructure/digging-das-superbowl-tag4
       
  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...