Jump to content

At Sprint, Directors Watch CEO Closely


marioc21
 Share

Recommended Posts

Interesting article in the WSJ today regarding Sprint. Some interesting nuggets from it. Looks like any thoughts of a network sharing deal with T-Mobile are dead for now. Maybe in the future, but not anytime soon. Plus that MetroPCS deal was discussed at three separate board meetings before the board finally scuttled it.

 

At Sprint, Directors Watch CEO Closely

 

 

 

By JOANN S. LUBLIN, ANTON TROIANOVSKI and ANUPREETA DAS

 

 

 

Sprint Nextel Corp. chief Dan Hesse is negotiating one of the trickiest high-wire acts in corporate America. And behind the scenes, the company's board of directors is taking an unusually active role to head off missteps amid vocal investor complaints.

 

At stake is whether the No. 3 wireless carrier can stop losing money after five years in the red, and whether it can remain a viable competitor to rivals

AT&T Inc. and Verizon Wireless in an industry that regulators fear has already grown too concentrated.

 

 

 

 

http://online.wsj.co...4239257808.html

Edited by S4GRU
Removed details how to bypass WSJ subscription service.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thoughts about what the board must think of Hesse. Sprint is caught between the frying pan and the fire. Have some decisions been questionable? Yes. But Sprint's network and operations went through years of neglect which was caused by Forsee's decisions that Hesse inherited. Overall I'm pleased with the turnaround Hesse has done. CS is better and it seems that the direction of the organization has turned for the better with some hiccups along the way and some more to face in the near future.

 

Now Sprint has to spend money it doesn't have to fix things. If Hesse is still around when NV is complete, I think it will provide some vindication. He has made some stupid decisions with Clearwire and I still believe that Sprint should just take control of it. The Metro PCS deal seemed questionable, but we don't have any facts to make a realistic assessment. Maybe Sprint had to make a deal with the devil (Oops, I mean Apple) to get the iPhone. Again, since Sprint/Hesse aren't really transparant with the reasoning of its decisions we'll have to wait to see how it plays out. I don't really like how Hesse has changed policys from removing discounts, changing programs and increaseing fees to soak us for every nickel and dime, but I understand why.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deff agree. Don't have many negative things to say about Hesse here...

 

One thing I fear is that if they made a change there that we would more likely be pushed into tiered data plans sooner than if Hesse was at the helm...

 

I like the direction they are going now and want to give the guy at least till NV is complete and had a year under its belt in the maintenance cycle...

 

Only thing i dislike is the time Sprint takes to push updates to devices. The time they add on for their own testing is too long IMHO. Hence you see the GS2 oversease is getting its update already....sprint should not be waiting much longer after that is done and in reality should be working closer with OEMs to shorten the process...but that in itself is another ball of wax and not 100% on Hesse either...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think for the most part Hesse has done a good job given the horrible situation he was put into in 2008. I think people give Hesse a bad rap because they think its so simple to turnaround the company a complete 180 degrees in very short time period of 1-2 years. Starting with the customer service, I noticed it has improved dramatically since Hesse has taken over. I used to dread calling Sprint CSR in 2007 just because they were so bad at resolving issues. The whole Network Vision project and the switch to LTE are both great strategic moves that needed to occur no matter what the cost. The tower infrastructure before was from the 20th century but now the Network Vision towers are for the 21st century especially since it gives Sprint ways to remotely change configurations to adjust demand and also allow for network hosting of other networks.

 

The only thing I would say Hesse took some missteps were more related with 3G/4G data speed issues. Hesse should have added more T1 backhaul lines earlier or heck even switch to fiber/microwave backhaul back in 2008/2009 to relieve capacity concerns when the smartphone market really took off. I can't say that back then Network Vision should have started back in 2009/2010 because the financials were not strong enough to take on a new project. Also I think Hesse should have more control of Clearwire back then to basically stop Clearwire from entering the retail business which was a huge cash drain. If that had not occurred, maybe Clearwire would have had more cash to build a bigger footprint but nowhere near a nationwide network. Also by not working with Clearwire on building the Wimax on Sprint tower infrastructure it made Clearwire spend more money on renting towers and equipment and having inconsistent 4G coverage areas.

 

I am glad that the missteps I mentioned above are going to be addressed with Network vision and working more closely with Clearwire to build TD-LTE on Sprint tower infrastructure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It saddens me that lately every article i read on Sprint is about Hesse being the bad guy for Sprints failures when in fact it takes two (or more) to tango. i do believe the board has to approve each and every decision that would affect the company, Nextel, Clearwire, T-Mobile, Metro PCS, LightSquare, Apple iPhone, etc etc It seems they want the guy out the door yesterday, but i fail to see anyone come up with a better plan.

 

I do get the feeling that once Hesse is forced out that unlimited is gone by way of the dodo. And that is one benefit that Sprint has over others that really keeps the customers staying and or coming in.

 

 

 

Only thing i dislike is the time Sprint takes to push updates to devices. The time they add on for their own testing is too long IMHO. Hence you see the GS2 oversease is getting its update already....sprint should not be waiting much longer after that is done and in reality should be working closer with OEMs to shorten the process...but that in itself is another ball of wax and not 100% on Hesse either...

Agree that its not 100% on Hesse but I would like to point out that I do not think its also has to be 100% Sprint's fault either.

 

case in point. The Motorola Photon, it came out June 30th last year. Google 4.O ICS was announced around May 10th and officially released on Oct 19 to the manufacturers. I would assume that Motorola has a few more developers on staff than Sprint would, but even if they didn't it should take that long to adapt the ICS code onto their phones. (Mind you this is before the bloatware of Sprint). According to their own ICS update page it still shows most of their phones (including the Photon) as in Development and with a possible release sometime in 3rd Quarter 2012. This will place it over a year after the phone was released. This is by the way before actual testing by both Motorola and Sprint, and before Sprint even gets it to place their own boatware on it.

 

This is why I can't blame Sprint totally for holding up updates and rather blame the manufacturers. It's true that Sprint may add to the time-frame for testing and adding other stuff to it, but the majority is the manufacturers fault in my opinion. it is also why so many root and unlock their phones and rely on 3rd party developers for roms, add-ons and updates.

 

BTW, this also applies to bloat-free devices like the Nexus as well. Samsung also takes a long arse time. :angry:

 

TS

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note: S4GRU Members can only edit their posts for 30 minutes after posting...or an hour. Something like that. Sponsor members can for a longer period. S4GRU Premier Sponsors and S4GRU Contributing Authors can infinitely edit their posts.

 

- Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, first of all, I am going to say that I am part of the 10% of smartphone users that wants the newest software and will root and will sometimes load up the alpha builds, even though I fully expect bugs, just because I am so curious about what future versions will bring. I can fully sympathize with Nexus S owners that you were promised quick upgrades, but beware the following soapbox rant:

 

For every one smartphone user that is dying for the ICS update there are two people who don't want it. Why would someone not want an upgrade? Well, they finally have a phone with software that has all the bugs worked out. They might also enjoy the version of Android that they are on and not want to learn a whole new system. I have read that there is a huge fragmentation problem with iPhones because people don’t want to upgrade.

 

My first example on Android: the Samsung Epic 4G. Owners of the Epic 4G were treated to a "long overdue" (in their words) upgrade from Froyo to Gingerbread. "Wait a minute, this software is buggy! Boo Samsung, I will never buy another Samsung, because they took forever to release gingerbread and when they did, it had bugs!" Of course there are bugs. It is a new OS on an old handset, you are going to have some bugs that didn’t surface in the Alpha and Beta testing and now that it hit release candidate and went all over the country, it reared its ugly head.

 

I have come to realize that manufacturers don't owe the customer anything besides bug fixes. Any upgrade to the latest version of Android is a plus. The thing is, the manufacturer just wants to keep their customers happy. Just think if every manufacturer decided to stop releasing updates other than bug fixes.

 

The only product line that promises updates to the latest version of Android is the Nexus line. They have failed Nexus S owners so far, but they are not holding it back as some giant tease. There are obviously issues and bugs that they are working out. The Nexus S owners that received the update are having battery life issues and an assortment of other bugs. I don’t blame Google for throwing the rest of the updates back into alpha testing or scrapping altogether and starting over. It takes Google about a year to design the next Nexus phone and write the next software. It still comes out with bugs. Why? Because everyone is screaming for the next Nexus and they have to cut their testing cycles shorter. Now everyone is screaming for Motorola, HTC or Samsung to “just give them ice cream sandwich already!” Well, what do you want? A polished relatively bug-free release candidate or a beta version that will require two or more bug-fix updates to get it polished? Then you run into data corruption issues because you are modifying modified software.

 

The infancy of Android is behind (most of) us. Ever since Froyo’s release, Android has been a great operating system. There are minor additions with each new version, but as with iOS, most of the big changes come with the newest hardware, not software.

 

I recently decided that I was done waiting for Samsung and upgraded my Galaxy Tab to Gingerbread, and I was amazed at how little was changed. It still is a 7 inch, Wi-Fi only tablet with cameras that aren’t very good, but it runs all my favorite apps. I guess it ran all my favorite apps before… Maybe if I upgrade to ICS it will make it suck less?

 

P.S. I am sorry if I offended anyone with this post, but I had to quit reading XDA because people were getting on my nerves expecting the developers to give them ice cream sandwich ROMs. “Well the source code is out there, just do it already, what is taking you unpaid lazy !@%$ so long to just give us ICS already?” It costs the manufacturers a lot of money to rework the entire operating system, and they take a lot of heat for any bugs that surface after release. I don’t blame them for taking their time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note: S4GRU Members can only edit their posts for 30 minutes after posting...or an hour. Something like that. Sponsor members can for a longer period. S4GRU Contributing Authors can infinitely edit their posts.

 

- Robert

I would bet I edit my posts an average of 2 times after posting. LOL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ S4GRU

Good to know, I'll make a sponsor contribution in the morning.Typing fast and fat finger syndrome be damned. lol

 

@ pyroscott

Totally agree with what you are saying. Except for one thing. The manufacturers themselves are the ones that started this trend, the customers just took the animal by the horns and went further by wanting the updates (be it bug fixes or OS versions) on devices that hardware wise, can run the OS upgrade and or enhancements.

As for the devices themselves, well I believe that instead of spitting out a new device every few weeks (I'm looking at you Samsung Galaxy x, y and z) I think it would benefit the community at whole to just make one or two new devices per carrier every year that wouldn't contribute to the boat load of devices that have different hardware software requirements that can lead to fragmentation. But regardless of competing with the rotten apple, there are so many competing among themselves that lead to this problem.

 

As for xda, lol I know the feeling. But that sentiment goes both ways over there. You have badly behaved members that request everything under the sun that make it bad for those that are patiently waiting for the devs to do their excellent work. Then you also have some devs (and staff members I might add) that also contribute to the problem by acting like immature kids themselves too. It may be a development site by developers, but if you open the gates for all to see, then expect stuff like that to happen. Otherwise close the site off to all and just make it a paid access site for developers by developers. But I doubt that will ever happen because their egos will be crushed and bottom line is alot of them love the huge amount of non devs following them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@twospirits I agree that the manufacturers have made their bed on this, both by starting the updating of software, and by releasing a ton of phones at the top end that people expect to be updated. In a perfect world, all customers on every carrier could use any phone. All galaxy 2 would be the same hardware etc. They are trying to consolidate their lines, but they all know that everyone wants the newest model. Look at the Evo 3D and E4GT, E4GT is just slightly better than the 3D, but they can't give the 3D away anymore.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think that a simple rule could be followed. High-end and qualified mid-level phones should be considerd upgradable since the physical specifications of the device can usually handle the OS updates. Entry-level devices get what they get.

 

There is some truth that limiting the number of devices holds has some value, but we don't want the pendulum to swing over so far that the OEM's become like Apple and you get one device a year/OEM. I think the industry is still searching for balance on this one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Samsung as well. Look for the GSlll here in the U.S. to look the same as the non-branded edition. The plus is we should get it sooner than what occured the past two years since Sammy won't have to change the design for everyone.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Added, and 2 more estimated sites: T-Mobile eNB 876480. Looks like its located at (40.62210996397784, -73.97627312607108), as the tower looks like a Sprint setup. T-Mobile eNB 875632. Both this site and Sprint eNB 9022 seem to be located at (40.61640722407462, -73.96985178560767).
    • Many of these sites I am uploading are for sites that do not exist, yet.  Although, I suppose I could go into NR only mode every time I connect to a new site, and then switch back, allowing all the TAC NR trails that occur to now have a home. Ideally, I would love to ne able to add the TAC's myself.  I have the NR Trails CSV file downloaded, and I see all the TAC-less NR entries.  Is there any way I can edit and manually upload them myself?  Maybe create a portal for such an upload?  Or at least give me a way to create at least one manual entry for every new site? Robert
    • Could we send the TAC as -1 if it’s invalid? Then, if there’s and existing site that matches the other info, I could match the web data entry up with it (despite the TAC being absent). 
    • Mine has been enabled.  And they show up in my device logs with the TAC null. Robert
    • If the TAC is missing, an entry is still recorded in the log, but it would not be included in uploads.. so you could probably manipulate a trail log export to add the data to the map if you were able to nail down the sites without the TAC. EDIT: Sites with a missing TAC are only recorded in the log if the option to do so is enabled (Logger > Log Sites with Missing TAC).
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...