NV Completion pushed back to middle of 2014

[Terrell352]

The executives know but I firmly believe that the employees have no clue how bad sprints network has fallen. Although its getting better at a rapid pace its apparently not fast enough for most people. I'm getting a nexus 7 LTE when it comes out to put a end to my complaining of there network because then I will have access all big 4 LTE networks. So if sprint sucks then I use on the the other 3 for my data needs until sprint is finished with my market. Its gonna be awesome have all the LTE networks.

Wait, are you really implying that the Sprint execs are ignorant of - or worse, willfully ignorant of - the current churn rates and customer issues?

[JayJayinNYC]

Wait, are you really implying that the Sprint execs are ignorant of - or worse, willfully ignorant of - the current churn rates and customer issues?

 Of course not. But it doesn't help when you have customer service reps that say "Boost phones run off of a different frequency". Sprint is mismanaged and has a history of making bad business decisions. They come up with good ideas but fail to properly execute them. T-Mobile's LTE deployment is ahead of schedule and they're worse off than Sprint financially. They were bleeding customers. You don't see them blaming it on birds nests SMH

Edited August 8, 2013 by JayJayinNYC

[lynyrd65]

Of course not. But it doesn't help when you have customer service reps that say "Boost phones run off a different frequency". Sprint is mismanaged and a history of making bad business decisions. They come up with good ideas but fail to property execute them. T-Mobile's LTE deployment is ahead of schedule. You don't see them blaming it on birds nests SMH

I guess it isn't said enough. T-Mobile's LTE upgrade is a cakewalk. The back haul is already in place on all the sites they're upgrading.

 

Imagine if all Sprint NV 3G sites were 4G instead. Sprint would definitely be winning over T-Mobile. The difference is all backhaul.

 

T-Mobile may never upgrade its 2G sites which is a disgrace. Sprint already has 1x or better on all sites which means highway coverage is usable.

 

For me, TMobile can be absolutely infuriating in 2G areas when Google search fails, maps fails and streaming fails. I thought I could live with it but I can't, its truely worse than Sprints current 3G network.

 

Sprint has a plan to fix its network problems while T-Mobile is doing its absolute best to cover up and avoid addressing its real problems.

 

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[koiulpoi]

Of course not. But it doesn't help when you have customer service reps that say "Boost phones run off a different frequency". Sprint is mismanaged and has a history of making bad business decisions. They come up with good ideas but fail to property execute them. T-Mobile's LTE deployment is ahead of schedule and they're worse off than Sprint financially. They were bleeding customers. You don't see them blaming it on birds nests SMH

if you were talking about pre-softbank sprint or, heaven forbid, pre-Hesse, I'd agree.

 

T-Mobile already had advanced backhaul to all of their sites of import, and thus are doing much less work. Sprint is replacing the literal entire network. This isn't a case of them being lazy hackjobs. The 800 and 2500 rollouts will go much faster once the base NV platform is in place.

 

For the birds, reread that article. It was a legitimate concern.

 

 

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4

 

[ryry4ya]

I was just told by an installer for Sprint, they need to hire 87,000 positions. They are definitely short on staff and things are going to take a lot longer if things go the way they are.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Rocket87]

87000 people? so what they can permanently have like 3 people at all l 39200 towers at once? I think that person was a little off....

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4

 

 

[AJC1973]

I was just told by an installer for Sprint, they need to hire 87,000 positions. They are definitely short on staff and things are going to take a lot longer if things go the way they are.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

were they talking about sprint or the contractor they work for?  

 

sprint has contracted out this work its not sprint employees on the mass majority of "installs" 

 

yea i think that number is just a bit overexaggerated 

[S4GRU]

I was just told by an installer for Sprint, they need to hire 87,000 positions. They are definitely short on staff and things are going to take a lot longer if things go the way they are.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

That number is not even close to realistic. That would mean that they would hire 3 people for each site upgrade. They would upgrade the site in a week, and then what? They get fired? Whomever you talked with is full of $#!+

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

 

 

[mhammett]

People do forget, though, that while Sprint is outsourcing to Samsung, AlcaLu, etc., they're all just hiring the same pool of subcontractors. The same guy could be on a Sprint tower for Samsung one day, then someone for AT&T the next.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[milan03]

People do forget, though, that while Sprint is outsourcing to Samsung, AlcaLu, etc., they're all just hiring the same pool of subcontractors. The same guy could be on a Sprint tower for Samsung one day, then someone for AT&T the next.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

This is absolutely true. I know a few subcontractors that have been working on T-Mobile sites in NYC for more than a year, getting offers to work on NV sites in Denver, San Francisco, Michigan and Ohio areas. 

[mhammett]

That's the same reason why Sprint can't just hire NSN or whomever else is left to do the 2.5 upgrade. There aren't any subcontractors left.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[MacinJosh]

That's the same reason why Sprint can't just hire NSN or whomever else is left to do the 2.5 upgrade. There aren't any subcontractors left.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

No, they just contract for the equipment and pass it down to the current sub-contractors to install. It isn't that hard to get equipment. In terms of contractors, ALU hired a couple more cell tower subcontractor companies to handle sites in Vegas that the original 3 just can't handle. I think they are overworked there in Vegas, and they just don't have the number of employees needed to do the work. Now that they have hired 2 more companies in, it means Verizon and at&t have slowed down on the work they have been doing in Vegas for the last year.

[ryry4ya]

I guess what I was referring to was not just Sprint's network. I guess the industry as a whole. I guess there's a shortage of good workers in this industry

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[WiWavelength]

I guess what I was referring to was not just Sprint's network. I guess the industry as a whole. I guess there's a shortage of good workers in this industry

We need to institute the cell site worker draft. Forced conscription.

 

AJ

[mhammett]

No, they just contract for the equipment and pass it down to the current sub-contractors to install. It isn't that hard to get equipment. In terms of contractors, ALU hired a couple more cell tower subcontractor companies to handle sites in Vegas that the original 3 just can't handle. I think they are overworked there in Vegas, and they just don't have the number of employees needed to do the work. Now that they have hired 2 more companies in, it means Verizon and at&t have slowed down on the work they have been doing in Vegas for the last year.

 

There is little to no regional advantage. Crews from Chicago are going to New York and Florida to build out LTE for various companies. There may be a margin increase in work output, but I'm not certain it is all that much. The tower construction and maintenance is a very dirty industry.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Before getting locked yesterday, I read in that that there were over 30,000 sites in some sort of NV progress (if it is the same article)... THAT seems like good news to me..

That includes the sites already live.

[maximus1987/lou99]

The delay, I'd assume, is due to the massive increase in 2.5 plans. It's also interesting that while building out NV, they're still increasing the capacity ofimproving the legacy network.

No. The delay is because they originally planned to have 250 million with LTE by end of 2013 but "vendor execution" pushed them back 6 months.

 

Sprint said recently that it plans to cover 200 million POPs with LTE by the end of this year, which is down from the company's initial target of 250 million POPs. The company also now expects to put the finishing touches on the effort by the middle of 2014; the company previously planned to finish the project by the first quarter of 2014.

 

Read more: Sprint blames 'vendor execution' as a reason for Network Vision delays - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-blames-vendor-execution-reason-network-vision-delays/2013-05-07#ixzz2bUmCbyNK

Subscribe at FierceWireless

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

That's the same reason why Sprint can't just hire NSN or whomever else is left to do the 2.5 upgrade. There aren't any subcontractors left.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Can you list off some of these companies? I always wonder who they are.

[maximus1987/lou99]

I guess it isn't said enough. T-Mobile's LTE upgrade is a cakewalk. The back haul is already in place on all the sites they're upgrading.

 

Imagine if all Sprint NV 3G sites were 4G instead. Sprint would definitely be winning over T-Mobile. The difference is all backhaul.

 

T-Mobile may never upgrade its 2G sites which is a disgrace. Sprint already has 1x or better on all sites which means highway coverage is usable.

 

For me, TMobile can be absolutely infuriating in 2G areas when Google search fails, maps fails and streaming fails. I thought I could live with it but I can't, its truely worse than Sprints current 3G network.

 

Sprint has a plan to fix its network problems while T-Mobile is doing its absolute best to cover up and avoid addressing its real problems.

 

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

Tmobile has (practically) definitively stated they're only upgrading to LTE 225 million - 3 million shy of their HSPA+ coverage - and then they're leaving their 15k 2g towers as is until they can get 600 MHz.

 

http://edge.media-server.com/version/1375971396/m/a/6obxvmjt/iv/34b1a4f4bb881a8d940af97d09e3c25141919464/?token=79a4e4923668f2d1ccc642edc20710ef2167468

Slide 10. If you're 2g-only, away from HSPA+, you're staying 2g until 2016-ish

 

 

Ray said that the company is not currently looking to expand its network footprint and is eagerly awaiting next year's scheduled incentive auctions of 600 MHz broadcast TV spectrum. He said using such spectrum is "a far more effective way to go and build those opportunities out" and that getting access to such low-band spectrum would mean "we would finally have a level playing field in the U.S. marketplace" between smaller carriers and AT&T and Verizon Wireless (NYSE:VZ), which dominated the 700 MHz auction in 2008.

 

Read more: T-Mobile to expand MetroPCS footprint by 100M POPs - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-expand-metropcs-footprint-100m-pops/2013-05-15#ixzz2bUoitUOX

Subscribe at FierceWireless

 

Edited August 9, 2013 by maximus1902

[Keitarou]

Once again, I'd like to disagree. I was in Lower Manhattan by South Street Seaport and Midtown by the Circle Line over the weekend.. Because of the number of sites in those areas, speeds weren't half bad. I experienced near 900Kbps on legacy equipment in Lower Manhattan with an occasional LTE signal shooting across the East River. 

 

I had 4G while waiting for the Circle Line and it also appeared at random times while I was on the boat.

 

Weekend isn't the norm in lower Manhattan. I work here and will say the speed isn't just bad, it's the worst. come here during weekday and do a speed test. besides, summer isn't the best time to do a test. So many people out of the offices.

[mhammett]

Can you list off some of these companies? I always wonder who they are.

 

For instance this winter when AT&T had to rotate the whole sector mount on the tower, AT&T hired Nsoro and Nsoro hired Deerfield Construction. I've also seen Wigdahl Electric at that AT&T site.

 

Other companies around me are Tower Works, Mid America Tower and some others I can't remember.

 

There are also likely different companies doing structural modifications, antenna\coax installation, QA, etc.

[utiz4321]

The executives know but I firmly believe that the employees have no clue how bad sprints network has fallen. Although its getting better at a rapid pace its apparently not fast enough for most people. I'm getting a nexus 7 LTE when it comes out to put a end to my complaining of there network because then I will have access all big 4 LTE networks. So if sprint sucks then I use on the the other 3 for my data needs until sprint is finished with my market. Its gonna be awesome have all the LTE networks.

Churn for the last quarter was largely drive by the Nextel shut down and problems created by the NV vision upgrades. Both are necessary for sprint to fix their long term network issues and the NV related churn will continue until the end of the project, thankfully the Nextel related churn only has one more quarter to plague sprint.

[Paynefanbro]

Weekend isn't the norm in lower Manhattan. I work here and will say the speed isn't just bad, it's the worst. come here during weekday and do a speed test. besides, summer isn't the best time to do a test. So many people out of the offices.

I am Lower Manhattan nearly everyday during the school year, as I do go there for school. I have LTE at school since earlier this year. Along Varick and Charlton. My 3G speeds are also greater than 1 Mbps while on 3G. In my opinion Lower Manhattan has the site density where the legacy network doesn't fall to pieces like it does in parts of Brooklyn.

 

I remember I did a speed test on 3G before I knew about Network Vision and got over 2Mbps on legacy equipment near the WTC. And when I got home in Brooklyn, I had 10Kbps on legacy equipment.

[Keitarou]

I am Lower Manhattan nearly everyday during the school year, as I do go there for school. I have LTE at school since earlier this year. Along Varick and Charlton. My 3G speeds are also greater than 1 Mbps while on 3G. In my opinion Lower Manhattan has the site density where the legacy network doesn't fall to pieces like it does in parts of Brooklyn.

 

I remember I did a speed test on 3G before I knew about Network Vision and got over 2Mbps on legacy equipment near the WTC. And when I got home in Brooklyn, I had 10Kbps on legacy equipment.

We are experiencing the complete opposite. Come test wall st and broadway area. That area is awful. All I know is my signal strength is awesome. Everything else is not. And even before sandy happened, I never got 900kbs. 500kbs was normal.

[simplesam]

I'm used to those 3G "speeds" in St. Louis - except I'm lucky to crack ~500kbps.

 

I can't wait for this to all be over because I know it'll be worth the wait, but getting there is hard.

And it seems to be getting worse before it gets better