Sprint + U.S. Cellular = incompatible phones?

[maximus1987/lou99]

Why do U.S. Cellular customers have to purchase new phones in markets purchased by Sprint?

 

http://articles.chic...print-spokesman

 

Isn't U.S. Cellular CDMA?

Edited May 3, 2013 by maximus1987

[Rocket87]

Not all the bands are compatiable im sure, its not all bad having to get a new phone sprint is giving us cellular customers in chicago/south bend/ft wayne an additional 50 off each phone on top of the 100 port offer any new customer gets and credited activation fees. Plus sprint will buy and recycle their us cellular phones.

 

 

So they get galaxy 3s for free, iphone 5 and htc one for 50, galaxy 4 for 100 minus whatever their trade in phone is worth.

 

Those are all incrediable offers if you ask me.

 

Where people are getting screwed is failing sprints credit checks or not get approved for enough lines as they had at us cellular.

 

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

This has little to do with USCC. Sprint does not activate devices that are not listed in Sprint's internal database. And that has been the policy for many, many years.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

I thought all CDMA phones, excluding MetroPCS and Cricket, had CDMA Band 0/1 (800/1900) support?

[dedub]

Just because a phone *could* work on sprints network, doesn't mean sprint will *let* it work.

 

As AJ posted, sprint basically whitelists sprint phones, which essentially blacklists non-sprint phones.

[WiWavelength]

Where people are getting screwed is failing sprints credit checks or not get approved for enough lines as they had at us cellular.

 

I am not sure if "getting screwed" is the right phrase. Anyone who fails a Sprint credit check has a rather poor credit rating and would probably be better off on prepaid anyway.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

This has little to do with USCC. Sprint does not activate devices that are not listed in Sprint's internal database. And that has been the policy for many, many years.

 

AJ

 

What's the reason for this? If it's not a technical reason, then it's an unnecessary risk.

 

If people are forced to change their phones, aren't they going to say, "Well, if I have to change phones, might as well look to see what T-Mobile and AT&T are offering"?

[WiWavelength]

I thought all CDMA phones, excluding MetroPCS and Cricket, had CDMA Band 0/1 (800/1900) support?

 

Remember, USCC does not have LTE in Chicago, could not easily launch LTE in Chicago because of spectrum constraints. And any USCC LTE devices in general lack band 25 LTE 1900, so they are not compatible with the Sprint LTE network.

 

Sprint does not want a big influx of older, LTE less devices onto its EV-DO network in the affected markets. That would do Sprint no favors, as it tries to shift spectrum from EV-DO to LTE over the next couple of years.

 

Not to mention, any USCC handsets would be absent Sprint customization: branding, skins, apps, etc. Sprint does not want that.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

Remember, USCC does not have LTE in Chicago, could not easily launch LTE in Chicago because of spectrum constraints. And any USCC LTE devices in general lack band 25 LTE 1900, so they are not compatible with the Sprint LTE network.

 

Sprint does not want a big influx of older, LTE less devices onto its EV-DO network in the affected markets. That would do Sprint no favors, as it tries to shift spectrum from EV-DO to LTE over the next couple of years.

 

Not to mention, any USCC handsets would be absent Sprint customization: branding, skins, apps, etc. Sprint does not want that.

 

AJ

 

I totally get that Sprint doesn't want the non-LTE flood BUT is Sprint in a position to take on the churn risk? Beggars can't be choosers, right?

 

If it was Verizon, I would totally agree with your statement.

[WiWavelength]

What's the reason for this? If it's not a technical reason, then it's an unnecessary risk.

 

See my other post above for some marketing reasons. As for technical reasons, Sprint likely wants to be able to provide support for a limited subset of devices, not every compatible device under the sun.

 

In the end, this is Sprint's longstanding policy. If you do not like, tuff nutz.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

People are not forced to change phones. They can keep their USCC phones until the USCC network is turned off. I believe that is for the remainder of the time anyone would have on contract. At the end of their contract, they can either get a Sprint device or go with another carrier.

 

This is much better than what AT&T did when they took over Alltel customers in our area. They had 45 days to get an AT&T device, or they would no longer have 3G service. And true to form, on the 46th day, Alltel customers dropped to 1x only. All they wanted was to keep their service to the end of their contract.

 

You are better off staying on the the USCC network anyway until Network Vision is largely complete in your area. Then you can upgrade to a Sprint device.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

I totally get that Sprint doesn't want the non-LTE flood BUT is Sprint in a position to take on the churn risk? Beggars can't be choosers, right?

 

Sprint requires USCC's spectrum in Chicago, and that is about it. The USCC network is not coming along for the ride, and any USCC subs retained are a fringe benefit. The rest are collateral damage. No big deal.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

Sprint requires USCC's spectrum in Chicago, and that is about it. The USCC network is not coming along for the ride, and any USCC subs retained are a fringe benefit. The rest are collateral damage. No big deal.

 

AJ

 

That was my other, unspoken question: did Sprint pay $480mil for spectrum or for spectrum+subscribers.

[Rocket87]

People are not forced to change phones. They can keep their USCC phones until the USCC network is turned off. I believe that is for the remainder of the time anyone would have on contract. At the end of their contract, they can either get a Sprint device or go with another carrier.

 

This is much better than what AT&T did when they took over Alltel customers in our area. They had 45 days to get an AT&T device, or they would no longer have 3G service. And true to form, on the 46th day, Alltel customers dropped to 1x only. All they wanted was to keep their service to the end of their contract.

 

You are better off staying on the the USCC network anyway until Network Vision is largely complete in your area. Then you can upgrade to a Sprint device.

 

Robert

 

The letter us cellular sent customers here says they are all out of contract and need to go to a sprint store and tell a rep they need to port. Ill try and get a copy of the letter if i can.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[S4GRU]

I totally get that Sprint doesn't want the non-LTE flood BUT is Sprint in a position to take on the churn risk? Beggars can't be choosers, right? If it was Verizon, I would totally agree with your statement.

 

Sprint was not looking to pick up customers. They were buying spectrum. USCC insisted they take the customers to get the spectrum. And the FCC would have likely required it too, as USCC would have nothing left to serve customers.

 

Sprint is being reasonable in how they are approaching USCC customers. They want to retain as many as they reasonably can. But if they want to leave because of the device constraint, Sprint is willing to accept that. You will need a new device whether you stay with Sprint or go with someone else. No other postpaid carrier is going to take your USCC device either. However, Guido down at the corner Payday loan/Cricket dealer may be able to flash your phone for service with him. For a price, of course.

 

Robert

[maximus1987/lou99]

The letter us cellular sent customers here says they are all out of contract and need to go to a sprint store and tell a rep they need to port. Ill try and get a copy of the letter if i can.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

 

In the article that I posted, I think it does say that your contract is automatically "fulfilled" i.e. no ETFs if you're sold to Sprint.

Edited May 3, 2013 by maximus1987

[S4GRU]

The letter us cellular sent customers here says they are all out of contract and need to go to a sprint store and tell a rep they need to port. Ill try and get a copy of the letter if i can. Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

 

Yes, out of contract. They no longer have a contract. However, they can maintain their service until the closure of the USCC network. That was an agreement of the purchase as far as I can recall. I believe the network was to remain active for 20 months.

 

Robert

[Rocket87]

Here is a copy of the letter i found online. Ive seen about 15 of these over the last week or so.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

However, Guido down at the corner Payday loan/Cricket dealer may be able to flash your phone for service with him.

 

What a coincidence! I think that is MacinJosh's stock broker. Guido's Blue Chip Securities, Payday Loans, and Cricket Comfortable Wireless.

 

 

AJ

[jefbal99]

I am not sure if "getting screwed" is the right phrase. Anyone who fails a Sprint credit check has a rather poor credit rating and would probably be better off on prepaid anyway.

 

AJ

 

Or they could just put the cash down to cover their ETFs and get it back towards the end of their contract. Hopefully their credit improves in the 20months and meets the requirements next time around.

[S4GRU]

Here is a copy of the letter i found online. Ive seen about 15 of these over the last week or so.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Thanks for posting this. They say next few months. However, I think they are trying to be misleading intentionally to get people to try to get off the USCC network as possible. I think they want people off as soon as possible so USCC can shut down and decommission their network to save operational expenses and for Sprint to be able to use the spectrum as soon as possible on their network.

 

But unless something changed/changes, I believe I recall reading that the USCC network would remain in operation for 20 months. But if people leave en masse, they may be able to shut it down early. This letter probably helps to achieve those ends.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

Or they could just put the cash down to cover their ETFs and get it back towards the end of their contract. Hopefully their credit improves in the 20months and meets the requirements next time around.

 

And credit issues may have been one of the reasons why USCC's two largest markets underperformed. USCC may have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for a lot of sub prime customers in Chicago and St. Louis.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

If you have a new USCC device, then you are in a good position. You likely can sell your USCC device on the market to other USCC customers in markets that are not affected to cover the cost of your new Sprint device (or other carrier). If you have an older USCC device, then you are good because you are getting an opportunity to upgrade early. If you are out of contract with USCC, then there is no loss for you except the ability to stay off contract.

 

Robert

[maximus1987/lou99]

What if Sprint had bought ALL of US Cellular?

Would they have made all 5mil+ customers buy new phones?

[tommym65]

What a coincidence! I think that is MacinJosh's stock broker. Guido's Blue Chip Securities, Payday Loans, and Cricket Comfortable Wireless.

 

 

AJ

 

Isn't he also your bail bondsman? Quite the entrepeneur, that Guido!!!