Softbank - New Sprint - Discussion

[bigsnake49]

I've mentioned it multiple times. I immensely prefer a network sharing agreement where Sprint and T-Mobile share GSM/UMTS/LTE networks, maintaining a common platform while executing on developing broad coverage and high capacity networks using the broad portfolio of spectrum the two companies have.

 

In such a scenario, Sprint would still need to retire the CDMA network, as network sharing in CDMA is not feasible. It's somewhat possible, but it's so ugly, difficult, fragile, and not worth it. 3GPP networks have been designed from the beginning to support network sharing very easily, which is why ACS and GCI in Alaska transitioned to GSM/UMTS/LTE after merging their networks into a NetCo called AWN and now use the shared network.

 

Why should they skip AWS-3? AWS-3 offers T-Mobile the opportunity to get AWS LTE up and running in several markets where it can't now, such as Cincinnati. And the AWS ecosystem is much larger than the PCS one for LTE, making it much more cost effective for both companies.

 

They have nationwide AWS. I am sure they can move UMTS to PCS.

[Conan Kudo]

They have nationwide AWS. I am sure they can move UMTS to PCS.

Yes, but T-Mobile still needs to support several generations of AWS UMTS devices that lack support for PCS. While the number of users who have AWS-only UMTS devices continues to dwindle, it's still significant enough to warrant maintaining it, especially in markets like Cincinnati, where many users come to T-Mobile from Cincinnati Bell Wireless.

[dkyeager]

That is dumb on so many levels. For one, GSM/UMTS earn T-Mobile more than 70% of its revenue. Within that, UMTS earns T-Mobile greater than 65% of its revenue. GSM, while steadily earning less revenue, is still profitable to maintain due to domestic and multinational roaming and M2M services.

 

As UMTS is shifted from AWS to PCS, it can increasingly take over the role of GSM, allowing GSM to fade from the network. AT&T, ironically, is helping this by infusing a massive boost into the UMTS ecosystem by driving costs down to integrate UMTS into devices. It's now just as cheap as GSM to put into a device, in large part thanks to AT&T.

 

As for CDMA, the reason it's not worth maintaining is due to the increasing costs in the ecosystem. As operators steadily convert from CDMA to UMTS and cut off orders for CDMA-enabled devices, the cost of supplying those devices and network gear goes up. About a decade ago, a CDMA device would probably cost roughly the same as a UMTS one, because nearly all of the Americas maintained CDMA networks, as did several countries in Africa and Asia. This is definitely no longer the case. As a result, a CDMA device costs many times more than its UMTS counterpart. And more CDMA operators are disappearing every month. A few months ago, S-Fone in Vietnam declared bankruptcy and completely shut down. Bangladesh's CityCell is in the process of shutting down its CDMA network for GSM, pending approval to convert its mobile license to GSM/UMTS and turn on the replacement network. CityCell no longer offers CDMA roaming services, and has been preparing for two years for the switch. If its request isn't approved, CityCell will likely shut down. Bell and Telus in Canada are jointly shutting down CDMA across the country throughout the year. Movistar (owned by Telefónica) completed shutting down its last CDMA network in Venezuela about a month ago. Iusacell in Mexico has successfully migrated nearly all of its subscribers to UMTS and is repurposing CDMA spectrum for LTE service, in partnership with Nextel Mexico and Movistar. China Telecom, the biggest CDMA operator in the world, will likely fully switch back to GSM through a network sharing agreement being hashed out by all three Chinese mobile network operator companies to speed up LTE deployment. China Telecom already provides to its customers access to the China Unicom/China Mobile GSM network through its dual-mode CDMA/GSM devices that use GSM1X for the CDMA part.

 

Sprint's problems are compounded by the fact that no one outside the US use PCS for CDMA. And Sprint is the only one in the world using ESMR for CDMA. This makes CDMA device procurement exceptionally expensive, which is why Sprint has trouble with devices from time to time. KDDI elected to use it for LTE to avoid the cost issue, and Nextel Japan remains in limbo (though I expect it to have been fully shut down for the last few years, and they may not even have SMR licenses anymore).

 

We don't live in a vacuum, as much as many would like to think.

Much longer amortization time with Advanced LTE, hence that is where the money should be spent.  Let CDMA and GSM die a natural death.  Several of the markets mentioned are significant purchasers of used phones, thus don't really factor into new phone economics.  Phone radios are also handling more frequencies with each generation. In terms of being global, Son's move to increase purchasing power with his companies and alliances with others may help more than any merger with T-mobile.  In terms of companies, consolidation is a known trend world-wide.

[kyle_4thousand]

I've noticed AT&T and Verizon sponsor a lot of events like music festivals, concerts and professional sports, much like Sprint does for NASCAR. Do we know if Massa/Sprint wants (or is going to) to expand sponsorships for events like these once the NV 2.0 rollout matures? I think it would be an excellent way to market the network and get back at Big Red and the Death Star.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

[COZisBack]

I've noticed AT&T and Verizon sponsor a lot of events like music festivals, concerts and professional sports, much like Sprint does for NASCAR. Do we know if Massa/Sprint wants (or is going to) to expand sponsorships for events like these once the NV 2.0 rollout matures? I think it would be an excellent way to market the network and get back at Big Red and the Death Star.

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

Sprint continues to sponsor a lot of events. Don't forget they're primetime right now with the NBA and the playoffs. Their name is on a few venues as well.

 

You can read more here: http://www.sprint.com/sponsorships/

 

It's possible there will be an increase but you have to have a product that people can say they're proud of before you go blowing money.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[Johnner1999]

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2014/05/12/t-mobile-expected-to-receive-1b-if-sprint-buyout-falls-through/

 

Wrong forum I assume but...

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Terrell352]

Old news

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2014/05/12/t-mobile-expected-to-receive-1b-if-sprint-buyout-falls-through/

 

Wrong forum I assume but...

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[caspar347]

So this is a thing now...

It showed up in my inbox yesterday. How long has this been happening? It's pretty cool that they can tell that I spend 3/4 of my life parked on one tower.

[tybo31316]

So this is a thing now...

It showed up in my inbox yesterday. How long has this been happening? It's pretty cool that they can tell that I spend 3/4 of my life parked on one tower.

I received this email and hours later I picked up CDMA 800 in my city for the first time on my nexus 5 and I've owned it since November.

[halcyoncmdr]

So this is a thing now...

 

It showed up in my inbox yesterday. How long has this been happening? It's pretty cool that they can tell that I spend 3/4 of my life parked on one tower.

 

The Top Tower tool was just being rolled out in retail in March shortly before I was laid off. It allowed reps to see the top 5 towers you use, the dates the 3G 1900 upgrades were scheduled for or completed, and had an option to notify the customer when their towers were upgraded. So I'd assume the system itself was in development and testing several months before that. Much like how Service Trender is not being integrated into Sprint Zone for ticket notifications.

[caspar347]

The Top Tower tool was just being rolled out in retail in March shortly before I was laid off. It allowed reps to see the top 5 towers you use, the dates the 3G 1900 upgrades were scheduled for or completed, and had an option to notify the customer when their towers were upgraded. So I'd assume the system itself was in development and testing several months before that. Much like how Service Trender is not being integrated into Sprint Zone for ticket notifications.

Awesome! If this means more communication between front line retail and the rest of the company, then I love it.

[JThorson]

I got that notification last week and while the voice coverage is better the data is still poor. Still a work in progress though.

[Ascertion]

So this is a thing now...

It showed up in my inbox yesterday. How long has this been happening? It's pretty cool that they can tell that I spend 3/4 of my life parked on one tower.

94 tabs. Damn

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

[KD8JBF]

94 tabs. Damn

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

All that memory tho....

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

[dstar2002]

I have gotten this email 4 times in 6 weeks. Crappy part is my number 2 used tower is still overloaded 3g, that finally at least got panels put up during the middle of April.

 

Sent from my HTC M8

[caspar347]

94 tabs. Damn

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

I'm regularly over 100. lol.

 

All that memory tho....

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

Surprisingly, it only uses about 100MB of RAM on average. Not all tabs are actually loaded in to memory because I haven't used them since last time I closed the app. Cache is another story though. I've seen it hit 1.2GB.

[WiWavelength]

94 tabs. Damn

I'm regularly over 100. lol.

 

That is seriously way too many.  You need to go on a diet.  Here, to get started, have a Tab.

 

 

AJ

[Ascertion]

That is seriously way too many. You need to go on a diet. Here, to get started, have a Tab.

 

 

AJ

He needs less Tab instead of more!

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

[PDXmike]

He needs less Tab instead of more!

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

 

Depends on the Tab. 

 

[KD8JBF]

 

Just put it on his tab...

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

[bigsnake49]

Interesting perspective by Verizon's McAdam:
 

Speaking of wireless consolidation, McAdam was sanguine and said Verizon could continue to compete no matter the industry structure. "We can certainly compete in a four-player market," but he said Verizon could compete in a three-player market as well. He added that typically, three-player are markets are more stable but that "whatever the regulators decide, they decide."

Read more: Verizon's McAdam: We're not talking to Dish about any deals - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizons-mcadam-were-not-talking-dish-about-any-deals/2014-05-20#ixzz32GnzeUg6

I think that AT&T and Verizon are OK with the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. T-Mobile/DT definitely are. I think that if Sprint does a spectrum swap with Dish and then hosts Dish's spectrum in a joint venture that will concentrate on fixed broadband, then the merger will be acceptable to the feds.

Edited May 20, 2014 by COZisBack
Post edited for copyright protection.

[Conan Kudo]

Interesting perspective by Verizon's McAdam:

 

Speaking of wireless consolidation, McAdam was sanguine and said Verizon could continue to compete no matter the industry structure. "We can certainly compete in a four-player market," but he said Verizon could compete in a three-player market as well. He added that typically, three-player are markets are more stable but that "whatever the regulators decide, they decide."

 

Read more: Verizon's McAdam: We're not talking to Dish about any deals - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizons-mcadam-were-not-talking-dish-about-any-deals/2014-05-20#ixzz32GnzeUg6

I think that AT&T and Verizon are OK with the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. T-Mobile/DT definitely are. I think that if Sprint does a spectrum swap with Dish and then hosts Dish's spectrum in a joint venture that will concentrate on fixed broadband, then the merger will be acceptable to the feds.

 

Stable is bad, in this case. Right now, we don't have a price war. We have healthy competition on value propositions. T-Mobile competes based on features for price, Sprint competes with its unique plan structure, AT&T competes on bundled value and multi-layer mobile broadband, and Verizon competes on coverage of LTE.

 

In the event Sprint and T-Mobile were to merge, the effect would result in three "stable players." This is similar to Japan and Korea, where after consolidating to three players and they reached relative equilibrium in terms of what they wanted, they stopped truly competing. We won't get a price war.

 

Right now, Japan's telecom market is stable as a rock, enabling SoftBank to invest in other businesses and NTT to do research into new telecom technology. Three stable players means that competition would level off, rather than increase. Also, there would be no incentive to compete as long as you can hold nearly a third of all U.S. customers. As long as that balance is held, then there's no point in trying.

 

McAdam isn't stupid. He's keenly aware that the scenario that took place in Japan is the ultimate destination in the U.S. if more consolidation among major players is permitted.

Edited May 20, 2014 by COZisBack
Post edited for copyright protection.

[Keitarou]

When Verizon/at&t is for it... it never is good for the consumer.

[Fraydog]

Also let's not forget the Robelus cartel up north, which doesn't have to compete on price and is able to own content providers and sports teams because it doesn't have to invest that money in their operating structure. Is this the structure we want? No, but it's definitely what Verizon/AT&T/Comcast want.

[JimBob]

Stable is bad, in this case. Right now, we don't have a price war. We have healthy competition on value propositions. T-Mobile competes based on features for price, Sprint competes with its unique plan structure, AT&T competes on bundled value and multi-layer mobile broadband, and Verizon competes on coverage of LTE.

 

In the event Sprint and T-Mobile were to merge, the effect would result in three "stable players." This is similar to Japan and Korea, where after consolidating to three players and they reached relative equilibrium in terms of what they wanted, they stopped truly competing. We won't get a price war.

 

Right now, Japan's telecom market is stable as a rock, enabling SoftBank to invest in other businesses and NTT to do research into new telecom technology. Three stable players means that competition would level off, rather than increase. Also, there would be no incentive to compete as long as you can hold nearly a third of all U.S. customers. As long as that balance is held, then there's no point in trying.

 

McAdam isn't stupid. He's keenly aware that the scenario that took place in Japan is the ultimate destination in the U.S. if more consolidation among major players is permitted.

Sprint and T-Mobile currently do not produce a profit; Sprint losing billions of dollars for the past decade. In this case, stability might mean that the two survive and effectively compete against AT&T+Verizon.