Softbank - New Sprint - Discussion

[Johnner1999]

Dropped calls sooner than LTE. The 3G portion of Netwotk Vision is in full bore and should be done in 2-3 months in most places. This part was accelerated because of CSFB. As for LTE, it comes down to where you live, where you go and what device you use. Some places are good now. Some places will be good soon. Some places will be good now or soon if you have a Triband device. Some places will not be better until later this year. And then there is even a few places (like Baton Rouge) that will not be good until 800MHz LTE is rolled out. It's all about geography. But this is true of Tmo and ATT too. LTE is only good/available depending on where you are. Only VZW has good and available LTE over all their network. EDIT: As far as complaints, there will always be complaints. There are lots of Tmo complaints, AT&T complaints and VZW complaints out here. I read them everyday. Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

 

exactly - people like me will always bitch and moan.... oh wait, nope thats correct :-)

[Johnner1999]

First of all AT&T will be deploying WCS next and acquiring as much AWS as they feel they need.  If they want more spectrum, they'll just buy Dish.

 

The 2 year timeline you base your whole argument on is patently false.  It's almost like you completely ignored all the truth in Robert's post.

 

 

what is funny about AT&T buying or rather using 2300 spectrum is that didn't AT&T or at least its "users" always 'laugh' at Clear/Sprint for trying to use 2600 (which isn't that much higher than what they now "need".  

 

I'm still shocked that AT&T hasn't bought Dish yet as well. 

[Johnner1999]

this article puts into perspective - sort of...

 

http://bgr.com/2014/01/09/t-mobile-uncarrier-analysis-lte-service-coverage/

[utiz4321]

First of all AT&T will be deploying WCS next and acquiring as much AWS as they feel they need.  If they want more spectrum, they'll just buy Dish.

 

The 2 year timeline you base your whole argument on is patently false.  It's almost like you completely ignored all the truth in Robert's post.

What phones use WCS? What is the ecosystem? It will take them another year to two to deploy WCS In any meaningful way. From my understanding they have enough AWS to add another carrier but not enough to add the speed that vzw can. So that puts them in the same spot as sprint, As far as network message anyway (although I suspect they'll keep going with the most reliable claims). As far as my two year claim having being false, I am using sprint' s own claims so unless they are deceiving us or wrong I don't know how my claim for 2.6 can be false. My point is sprint has said they wish to differentiate based on their network. Can they do this based on band on their FDD deployment? Nope, again according to sprint this only brings them to rough parody with with the other carriers (and that if it were complete today). 2.6 is the way they differentiate but unfortunately for them their competition isn't standing still. Tmobile has grabbed low frequency spectrum and is deploying WLTE, vzw is throwing out 20x20 AWS and ATT will have WCS in about the same time frame as sprint will have 100 markets covered. This will drown out the network differentiation message. It simply to slow to be effective. Sprint doesn't have a great network message until 2.6 is widely deployed and unfortunately their time table makes it to late to be effective. That is my opinion anyway guess we will see in two years.

[bruce]

There will ALWAYS be complaints of patchy calls and dropped calls. Part of that is due to people being inside of a structure, part of that being due to service outages, and sometimes even the phones. We should absolutely see a giant decrease in complaints though with the addition of 800 on voice, and LTE. Sprint reps say what they are allowed to say. If they went around making promises saying that tower will be done by january 21st, and it wasn't done by then? Well then, you've just increased complaints by X, multiplied how many people saw the post and then add another 2 people on top of that lol. It's better to provide a 90 day time frame, which in reality is a good guestimation. 

 

One thing is for sure. Service (both voice and data). absolutely 100% will improve. It would be impossible for it not too improve with all of upgrades. 

 

Thank you for replying to my post. The thing is, when I tried out sprint last month, I had many issues with dropped calls. I kept on telling my friends that its going to get better in the future. I asked someone on sprint how often he drops a call and he said when he drives, he drops one every other day. My friends said to me that is not how phones are supposed to work, esp in our day and age. Many people have grown to live with it and think its normal, but coming from verizon, it was something I have not experienced ever. 

If you say that there will always be complaints of patchy calls, I have not made one call to verizon in 13 years about a downed tower. But in my first week with sprint I filed 2 network tickets. Is it possible that it has to do with the amounts of sites verizon has vs the amount sprint has?

[utiz4321]

this article puts into perspective - sort of...

 

http://bgr.com/2014/01/09/t-mobile-uncarrier-analysis-lte-service-coverage/

The article basically boils down to my wireless service with tmobile sucks where I live and play. Every carrier can find people who could write this article.

[jamisonshaw125]

Thank you for replying to my post. The thing is, when I tried out sprint last month, I had many issues with dropped calls. I kept on telling my friends that its going to get better in the future. I asked someone on sprint how often he drops a call and he said when he drives, he drops one every other day. My friends said to me that is not how phones are supposed to work, esp in our day and age. Many people have grown to live with it and think its normal, but coming from verizon, it was something I have not experienced ever. 

If you say that there will always be complaints of patchy calls, I have not made one call to verizon in 13 years about a downed tower. But in my first week with sprint I filed 2 network tickets. Is it possible that it has to do with the amounts of sites verizon has vs the amount sprint has?

I say there will always be complaints, because there is always someone who is unsatisfied why they can't get service inside of their 40 floor office building at the center of the building while making a copy next to a steel door. Lol. With 800 will come improved voice reception guaranteed.

 

Also Sprints network is no where near as complete as Verizon's. In the months to come, it will change.

[S4GRU]

The article basically boils down to my wireless service with tmobile sucks where I live and play. Every carrier can find people who could write this article.

 

This is a true statement.  However, once Sprint is done building out, there will be a lot more Tmo customers saying they don't have LTE service than Sprint customers.  Or customers of any carrier for that matter.

 

Robert

Edited January 9, 2014 by S4GRU
Sorry, accidentally posted after just the first sentence. Fixed.

[S4GRU]

You are right to point out that tmobile will not have their WLTE across their entire lte foot print and the exstint of this roll out is important. But vzw will have a very extensive roll out of the AWS lte well before 2016. I doubt ATT is going to stand still either (although it is much harder to see where the come up with additional spectrum.). Here is why I think it is painfully slow, tmobile will be hammering the faster network and in carrier message for the next two years (providing they are not bought out which is what I think they are angling for) Verizon will continue with it message and likely see their reputation remained unchanged, ATT might be the only company that might have problems as it is hard to see where they go from here. What is sprint message for the next two years? There pricing plans are innovative and maybe that will be it. But they aren't really the cheapest (nor do They want to be known as that really). So what do they go to market place with as the reason people should choose sprint? Are network is the slowest (in terms of average speeds), our plans aren't the cheapest, every one is doing HD voice (except vzw), they will have the most advance network but the average end user won't see it that way, They'll see slower lte data, so what is the marketing message that they can deliver on. one of the appeals of NV was the speed of the original time line and had it been exicuted sprint would be at rough parody with all the other carriers today. But it wasn't and so they aren't in most areas. Maybe it can argued and maybe it is true that sprint band 41 rollout will keep them in line with their competition but that is not what sprint needs to be doing right now. They need to pull a head of the competition and really try to differinciate their network ( which is what they claim to be doing). For the reasons mentioned above I don't think their current time table will allow them to do this. But maybe this new pricing scheme will be the message.

 

 

You make some great points.  However, I was just responding to your previous point that the build out of Band 41 is depressingly slow and that Sprint will not be in a position to compete on a network level for 2 more years.  I feel I addressed that point thoroughly, and you did not respond to those points.

 

I also agree with you that it is actually AT&T in the worst shape in the mid and long term.  AT&T has lots of options to deploy more 5MHz carriers to keep up capacity.  But AT&T is not in much of a position to shore up its one 10MHz carrier (in the places it could deploy it), or even step out further with anything approaching 15 or 20MHz (like Sprint, Tmo and VZW are doing).  And as you rightly point out in another post, AT&T is still years away from WCS deployment.

 

Sprint is sitting in a much better position than AT&T.  Also, most of Tmo's aggression is directed at AT&T.  AT&T stands to lose the most here in the next battle that is unfolding.  And Stephenson should be flogged publicly, because it is his company's money and spectrum that was the catalyst for Tmo to start moving this direction.  I still don't understand why he hasn't been fired.

 

As far as marketing goes, you're right.  Sprint sucks at marketing.  And they need to do some major overhauls.  However, referencing Sprint's marketing failures as a response to my point about Band 41 deployment not being slow is kind of silly.  Yes, VZW will be done with their AWS overlay first.  That's great.  Someone has to be first.  Sprint will not be able to get there before VZW.  Sprint will likely finish about the time Tmo finishes getting 50+Mbps to every one of their Top 100 market sites (if they ever do).

 

It's easy to pick on Sprint now.  With a legacy network still functioning (or not functioning) in too many places.  One 5MHz LTE channel that is filling up, especially in places that have too many users on too few live LTE sites.  But it will not be long, probably this summer, when Sprint passes the POP number of Tmo.  Because Sprint is taking LTE over its whole network.  And we know they are working outside of the city limits.  That's where they started to the chagrin of many of their customers.  We are not far off from saying the Sprint network is good and getting better, everywhere.  The only legitimate pot shots that people will be able to make of Sprint then will be, "well, they used to suck."

 

Another thing, I have a hard time reading your long posts.  You desperately need paragraphs.

 

Robert

[Johnner1999]

This is a true statement. However, once Sprint is done building out, there will be a lot more Tmo customers saying they don't have LTE service than Sprint customers. Or customers of any carrier for that matter.

 

Robert

That's what I was aiming for. TMO is really building a kick ass lte system in select areas. Vs sprint every where.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[newgroundsguru]

So all this talk about 800 sounds great but what about areas in the IBEZ? Are they planning to get it to every site or are they just going to skip all the towns close to the borders. Did the softbank buyout affect this or did it just stay the same?

[lilotimz]

So all this talk about 800 sounds great but what about areas in the IBEZ? Are they planning to get it to every site or are they just going to skip all the towns close to the borders. Did the softbank buyout affect this or did it just stay the same?

Mexican IBEZ rebanding has begun a bit back. They're aiming for a 3x3mhz FDD-LTE carrier + the 1.4mhz 1xA carrier by at least 2016. 

 

Canadian IBEZ is still in a limbo last check. 

[twospirits]

I don't get all of this "Sprint is a damaged name" talk. There was a time not so long ago when AT&T was well known for its crippled and useless 3G network back during its iPhone exclusive days. It recovered and currently has the crown for most consistent and fastest speeds. No one would consider AT&T changing its name. T-Mobile has been well known for its limited network coverage and terrible Edge service, but yet people are flocking towards the Magenta T in record numbers. Many people acknowledge Sprint for its excellent voice service and it's well known that Network Vision is taking care of the long term capability of its data network. Sure, a lot of people have had issues with Sprint's network. But why does that mean that Sprint should ditch its brand identity?

A+

 

i really wish folks will stop on this "If the merger goes through I want them it to keep the T-Mobile name, not Sprint (name), they suck" bandwagon. 

The newly merged company (if it comes to that) will retain the Sprint name, or give the new company a new name, but it will never use the T-Mobile one. As for upper management,  Legere will never be the top cheese, especially since Hesse and Son are close friends so folks wishing Legare be in charge, get that idea out of your heads as well.

 

TS

[centermedic]

You are right to point out that tmobile will not have their WLTE across their entire lte foot print and the exstint of this roll out is important. But vzw will have a very extensive roll out of the AWS lte well before 2016. I doubt ATT is going to stand still either (although it is much harder to see where the come up with additional spectrum.). Here is why I think it is painfully slow, tmobile will be hammering the faster network and in carrier message for the next two years (providing they are not bought out which is what I think they are angling for) Verizon will continue with it message and likely see their reputation remained unchanged, ATT might be the only company that might have problems as it is hard to see where they go from here. What is sprint message for the next two years? There pricing plans are innovative and maybe that will be it. But they aren't really the cheapest (nor do They want to be known as that really). So what do they go to market place with as the reason people should choose sprint? Are network is the slowest (in terms of average speeds), our plans aren't the cheapest, every one is doing HD voice (except vzw), they will have the most advance network but the average end user won't see it that way, They'll see slower lte data, so what is the marketing message that they can deliver on. one of the appeals of NV was the speed of the original time line and had it been exicuted sprint would be at rough parody with all the other carriers today. But it wasn't and so they aren't in most areas. Maybe it can argued and maybe it is true that sprint band 41 rollout will keep them in line with their competition but that is not what sprint needs to be doing right now. They need to pull a head of the competition and really try to differinciate their network ( which is what they claim to be doing). For the reasons mentioned above I don't think their current time table will allow them to do this. But maybe this new pricing scheme will be the message.

Here is the problem. Sprint was criticized, sometimes here, for over promising and under delivering. There is the distinct possibility that they are now under promising. Additionally, if Sprint covers the major metro areas with band 41 then I really don't think anybody is going to care if the network overly takes two years. In that comparison T-Mobile will not have a leg to stand on.

[utiz4321]

You make some great points. However, I was just responding to your previous point that the build out of Band 41 is depressingly slow and that Sprint will not be in a position to compete on a network level for 2 more years. I feel I addressed that point thoroughly, and you did not respond to those points.

 

I also agree with you that it is actually AT&T in the worst shape in the mid and long term. AT&T has lots of options to deploy more 5MHz carriers to keep up capacity. But AT&T is not in much of a position to shore up its one 10MHz carrier (in the places it could deploy it), or even step out further with anything approaching 15 or 20MHz (like Sprint, Tmo and VZW are doing). And as you rightly point out in another post, AT&T is still years away from WCS deployment.

 

Sprint is sitting in a much better position than AT&T. Also, most of Tmo's aggression is directed at AT&T. AT&T stands to lose the most here in the next battle that is unfolding. And Stephenson should be flogged publicly, because it is his company's money and spectrum that was the catalyst for Tmo to start moving this direction. I still don't understand why he hasn't been fired.

 

As far as marketing goes, you're right. Sprint sucks at marketing. And they need to do some major overhauls. However, referencing Sprint's marketing failures as a response to my point about Band 41 deployment not being slow is kind of silly. Yes, VZW will be done with their AWS overlay first. That's great. Someone has to be first. Sprint will not be able to get there before VZW. Sprint will likely finish about the time Tmo finishes getting 50+Mbps to every one of their Top 100 market sites (if they ever do).

 

It's easy to pick on Sprint now. With a legacy network still functioning (or not functioning) in too many places. One 5MHz LTE channel that is filling up, especially in places that have too many users on too few live LTE sites. But it will not be long, probably this summer, when Sprint passes the POP number of Tmo. Because Sprint is taking LTE over its whole network. And we know they are working outside of the city limits. That's where they started to the chagrin of many of their customers. We are not far off from saying the Sprint network is good and getting better, everywhere. The only legitimate pot shots that people will be able to make of Sprint then will be, "well, they used to suck."

 

Another thing, I have a hard time reading your long posts. You desperately need paragraphs.

 

Robert

I try to work on my formatting .

 

I don't think I have been expressing my self very well so I try a slight different take.

 

If we look out at the state of the wireless industry when sprint plans on having 100 market covered with spark where will their competition be (assuming tmobile is not bought out)? Vzw, will more than likely be done with its 20x20 deployment, tmobile will have all markets that they have the spectrum to deploy the wide band lte deployed and well along with its 700 mtz deployment. Att is a little hard to figure out but I would say the will probably have 100 markets with WCS.

 

I think we can agree that band 41 is where sprint has a real competitive advantage, but when they have 100 markets deployed who do they have an advantage over? Only really ATT. The competition will have a similar level of service (band 41 still gives sprint speed and capacity advantages) in a broader area and it will have been out for a longer period of time. Sprint really can't afford to be play catch up on the network side if they expect to take market share. This is one way it which the roll out is slow, slow compared to the competition.

 

Another way this is slow is if you campare it to NV. NV 1.0, a total rip and replace of Sprint entire network only took about 3 yrs if it finishs mid year. One of the advantages to NV was the ability to add new spectrum quickly. Well nearly 2/3 the time of the original project to cover a 100 markets is in comparison slow.

[S4GRU]

I try to work on my formatting .

 

I don't think I have been expressing my self very well so I try a slight different take.

 

If we look out at the state of the wireless industry when sprint plans on having 100 market covered with spark where will their competition be (assuming tmobile is not bought out)? Vzw, will more than likely be done with its 20x20 deployment, tmobile will have all markets that they have the spectrum to deploy the wide band lte deployed and well along with its 700 mtz deployment. Att is a little hard to figure out but I would say the will probably have 100 markets with WCS.

 

I think we can agree that band 41 is where sprint has a real competitive advantage, but when they have 100 markets deployed who do they have an advantage over? Only really ATT. The competition will have a similar level of service (band 41 still gives sprint speed and capacity advantages) in a broader area and it will have been out for a longer period of time. Sprint really can't afford to be play catch up on the network side if they expect to take market share. This is one way it which the roll out is slow, slow compared to the competition.

 

Another way this is slow is if you campare it to NV. NV 1.0, a total rip and replace of Sprint entire network only took about 3 yrs if it finishs mid year. One of the advantages to NV was the ability to add new spectrum quickly. Well nearly 2/3 the time of the original project to cover a 100 markets is in comparison slow.

I appreciate the formatting.  Much easier to understand and follow.  Thanks for that.

 

I think when you go two years out, I see it differently than you project.  Sprint will have wall to wall Band 41 coverage within the Top 100 markets, including adding new density.  Remember, they committed to converting all NV sites and Clearwire sites in the markets (which would likely make the densest network in America), PLUS adding more macro sites to fill in coverage.  Son is wanting a seamless Band 41 experience for customers.  Inside and outside.  That is what they are promising in the Top 100 in 2 years.

 

VZW will likely be 100% done with their AWS overlay.  Which in some places will be another 10MHz carrier, a 15MHz carrier or a 20MHz carrier, depending on spectrum holdings.  I think the 20MHz markets will be nice and free flowing.  However, they may start to run into some more capacity issues in some of the smaller AWS carrier markets.  

 

I think VZW will do a good job managing their network, but it will not be all roses everywhere.  Remember data usage is still growing, the smartphone adoption rate is still growing and there are still 3G only customers that will be jumping into LTE.  I still feel VZW has a good plan, though.  And Sprint will be competitive all things considered.

 

Tmo, will be in a much less position than VZW.  They will have a mix of 10, 15 and 20MHz carriers around the country in just urban areas.  They may have some capacity problems in places with smaller carriers, but they should be fine.  Tmo's achilles heel is coverage.  If they can maintain capex funding levels.  As for 700MHz, they currently can only deploy in about a half dozen LTE markets starting in about 12 months.  They say they have licked Channel 51 interference, but why is it a secret?  Until they can prove it, we aren't buying it.  And if they can, that just adds another dozen places.  Tmo cannot make a 700MHz move on the Top 100 markets, not even all the Top 25.  This is a boutique solution for Tmo unless they score a lot more spectrum.  And they will be deploying a small 5MHz carrier in 700 like Sprint.  And to think no one called Legere on that after his Sprint 5MHz joke.

 

AT&T is dubious in two years.  They can maintain their current network capacity, but I don't see them making a play for big speed 20MHz style deployments.  I don't see the spectrum that would allow them to do that.  And AT&T has very diversified holdings...one band here, two band there, sometimes three or four in some areas.  It's a very hodgepodge mess.  

 

AT&T is still in the market to finish buying out more WCS spectrum.  We aren't even sure if AT&T Band 30 will be in deployment in 2 years.  They always speak as if it is far off.  I've not seen any evidence so far that AT&T will begin Band 30 deployment or issuing Band 30 devices in the next 24 months.  At best, it will just start being a factor in 2 years.  Also, each band of WCS is 5MHz.  If you owned all of Band 30, you may be able to squeeze out a 15MHz carrier.  But I think there are some interference issues on one side.  So it may make it only possible to deploy Band 30 at a maximum 10MHz channel.  Still, at best, Band 30 is equal to Sprint's plans.

 

Adding Band 26 or Band 41 is nowhere near as intensive or as long as the initial Network Vision.  It will be more like Tmo's LTE overlay.  Except it will take longer than Tmo's since Sprint is taking these bands nationwide, and not cherry picking for a better marketing tagline.  I also disagree with you that Network Vision 1.0 will be three years in come Mid 2014.  The FIT's didn't even start until November 2011.  Phase 1 deployment began in February 2012.  It will just be two years next month.  Damned impressive.

 

Don't tell me that they started planning in Summer 2011.  That doesn't matter.  How long did Tmo, VZW, AT&T plan their deployments?  It doesn't matter.  No one counts that against them.  They count from when they started working on sites until it was finished.  You need to do the same with Sprint.  Sprint originally planned to have Network Vision to be 3-4 years.  They dialed it back to 24 months in order to get out as fast as possible.  That's not panned out.  But it now appears Network Vision 1.0 will be complete with all the hardware around 30 months.

 

God only knows when the last site will get backhaul.  But to be fair, there are tons of VZW, Tmo and AT&T sites that don't have their backhaul yet.  But since none of us can track them on a site by site basis, we believe them when they say their market is complete.  I think it would turn the world on its head if they could see maps of what has not been done on the other 3 carriers.

 

I just don't see it the way you do, it appears.

 

Robert

[Nickel]

AT&T is still in the market to finish buying out more WCS spectrum.  We aren't even sure if AT&T Band 30 will be in deployment in 2 years.  They always speak as if it is far off.  I've not seen any evidence so far that AT&T will begin Band 30 deployment or issuing Band 30 devices in the next 24 months.  At best, it will just start being a factor in 2 years.  Also, each band of WCS is 5MHz.  If you owned all of Band 30, you may be able to squeeze out a 15MHz carrier.  But I think there are some interference issues on one side.  So it may make it only possible to deploy Band 30 at a maximum 10MHz channel.  Still, at best, Band 30 is equal to Sprint's plans.

 

Robert

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/att-progressing-23-ghz-lte-rollout-targets-all-ip-future/2014-01-06

[S4GRU]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/att-progressing-23-ghz-lte-rollout-targets-all-ip-future/2014-01-06

 

Thanks for this.  I also went and looked at their WCS spectrum holdings.  Looks like the most they own is 15MHz, and in some places they own 5MHz.  So, on the 15MHz, they can only deploy one 10x10 carrier.  On the 5MHz, the most they can deploy is a 3MHz carrier.  And based on the comments from AT&T in their article, it doesn't sound like they are going nationwide with Band 30.  Most likely, it will just be to keep up speed and capacity in places where performance starts to suffer.

 

WCS/Band 30 will not take AT&T to VZW and Tmo's 20MHz super e-penis status.  And it won't even help it against Sprint's 20MHz TDD carriers.  Especially when they start CA on them.

 

Robert

[Nickel]

Thanks for this.  I also went and looked at their WCS spectrum holdings.  Looks like the most they own is 15MHz, and in some places they own 5MHz.  So, on the 15MHz, they can only deploy one 10x10 carrier.  On the 5MHz, the most they can deploy is a 3MHz carrier.  And based on the comments from AT&T in their article, it doesn't sound like they are going nationwide with Band 30.  Most likely, it will just be to keep up speed and capacity in places where performance starts to suffer.

 

WCS/Band 30 will not take AT&T to VZW and Tmo's 20MHz super e-penis status.  And it won't even help it against Sprint's 20MHz TDD carriers.  Especially when they start CA on them.

 

Robert

Are you looking at post nextwave acquisition WCS holdings? 

[S4GRU]

Are you looking at post nextwave acquisition WCS holdings? 

 

Yes.  The WCS Band is only 15MHz wide, total.  Remember C and D Blocks do not have a corresponding uplink and downlink like the A and B blocks do.  The C block goes one way, the D block the other.

 

You can put a 15MHz LTE carrier on three bands of WCS being used in one chuink.  10MHz is the max, because you have to have guard bands on each side of the carrier.  You can only put a 5MHz carrier on a 10MHz block, and one 3MHz carrier on a 5MHz block.

 

Robert

[Nickel]

Yes.  The WCS Band is only 15MHz wide, total.  Remember C and D Blocks do not have a corresponding uplink and downlink like the A and B blocks do.  The C block goes one way, the D block the other.

 

You can put a 15MHz LTE carrier on three bands of WCS being used in one chuink.  10MHz is the max, because you have to have guard bands on each side of the carrier.  You can only put a 5MHz carrier on a 10MHz block, and one 3MHz carrier on a 5MHz block.

 

Robert

Not quite, C and D  blocks are unusable due to SDARS

 

http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/131316-att-and-sirius-xm-propose-rules-to-allow-lte-on-wcs

[S4GRU]

Not quite, C and D  blocks are unusable due to SDARS

 

http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/131316-att-and-sirius-xm-propose-rules-to-allow-lte-on-wcs

 

Even worse for AT&T.  WCS is just an expensive to use capacity band.

 

Robert

[Nickel]

Even worse for AT&T.  WCS is just an expensive to use capacity band.

 

Robert

I just like how Sprint owns both the A and B block in Dallas.   

[WiWavelength]

I know that I have posted on this previously, but I have only a moment and not enough time to dig up my prior post(s).  In short, the WCS 2300 MHz band plan has been made 10 MHz FDD because the inner two TDD blocks are currently unusable.  Once all is said and done in terms of spectrum swaps or sales, AT&T will have 10 MHz FDD across most, if not all of the country.

 

AJ

[mozamcrew]

A+

 

i really wish folks will stop on this "If the merger goes through I want them it to keep the T-Mobile name, not Sprint (name), they suck" bandwagon. 

The newly merged company (if it comes to that) will retain the Sprint name, or give the new company a new name, but it will never use the T-Mobile one. As for upper management,  Legere will never be the top cheese, especially since Hesse and Son are close friends so folks wishing Legare be in charge, get that idea out of your heads as well.

 

TS

 

This won't happen since Deutsche Telecom owns the T-Mobile brand. If Sprint bought them out they'd have to give up the use of the trademark eventually.