WSJ: Sprint looking at T-Mobile purchase

[milan03]

No, hell no.

 

As I have said numerous times, SoftBank is a weak name.  Plus, it has no cachet in the US.  It sounds like a flaccid place to get a checking account.

 

AJ

Haha I don't like it either, but I think it's likely to happen. 

[mozamcrew]

Why would you force T-Mobile subscribers to new CDMA devices if a large number of Sprint's existing devices already support GSM/WCDMA on 1900Mhz band? Not to mention the CDMA chipset licensing that even Verizon is trying to get rid of!

 

You don't force them over, at least not right away. You just transition them over when they come in to buy a new phone. Only when it's time to relinquish the AWS spectrum, maybe 3 years down the road, will you need to put your foot down with your lagging customers. Most of them are probably cheep flip-phone users anyhow, so you just give them their choice of cheep/free phones and call it a day.

[Conan Kudo]

Right now TMUS is running HSPA and GSM in PCS, and running LTE and W-CDMA in PCS. You leave your TMUS sites running during the transition, but you gradually move PCS spectrum from TMUS sites to NV sites as GSM/HSPA traffic declines. In urban areas you will also be able to reduce your site count by thinning out TMUS sites during this stage as more users move to Sprint devices. The AWS LTE/W-CMDA part of the network is the last part you'd shut down. If Sprint's RRUs and base station gear supports it, maybe even keep one W-CDMA block in PCS. If nothing else, I bet they would make good money just on international roaming. 

UMTS == HSPA == HSPA+ == WCDMA == W-CDMA. The terms are interchangeable from a network planning perspective (even though HSPA/HSPA+/WCDMA are different portions of the UMTS standard). T-Mobile runs GSM and UMTS on PCS. T-Mobile runs UMTS and LTE on AWS. MetroPCS has a few locations with LTE on PCS, but those are being shut down. LTE on PCS is in the minority, not the majority.

 

You may not like it, but the dominant network is likely to be T-Mobile's in the face of a merger. Like Sprint's "Network Vision", T-Mobile's recent deployment is a modernization effort. It just doesn't have fancy marketing names like Sprint's does. It's also moving along much more smoothly than Sprint's.

[milan03]

Right now TMUS is running HSPA and GSM in PCS, and running LTE and W-CDMA in PCS. You leave your TMUS sites running during the transition, but you gradually move PCS spectrum from TMUS sites to NV sites as GSM/HSPA traffic declines. In urban areas you will also be able to reduce your site count by thinning out TMUS sites during this stage as more users move to Sprint devices. The AWS LTE/W-CMDA part of the network is the last part you'd shut down. If Sprint's RRUs and base station gear supports it, maybe even keep one W-CDMA block in PCS. If nothing else, I bet they would make good money just on international roaming. 

What do you mean by "if nothing else"? 3GPP is where you'd want this to go, and assuming this merger is to happen Sprint finally has a valid reason to do so. Save on CDMA licensing, collect roaming revenue, simultaneous voice/data, and have a serious fallback HSPA+42 network.

 

Reducing site count is also valid, but you don't just shut down a site because it's T-Mobile's... You take your time to strategically figure out which sites will provide the best coverage and capacity, how to avoid interference between the sites, and you shut down redundant sites regardless of the origin. Don't forget that 99+% of T-Mobile's HSPA+ sites are fiber fed.

 

As I mentioned earlier, WCDMA could be easily added to existing Sprint NV sites, so that Sprint's existing WCDMA capable phones can fully utilize it. AWS LTE could follow as well. 

On T-Mobile sites TDD-LTE with 800Mhz LTE could be added since T-Mobile has already met and exceeded their LTE modernization goals.

[GinaDee]

What do you mean by "if nothing else"? 3GPP is where you'd want this to go, and assuming this merger is to happen Sprint finally has a valid reason to do so. Save on CDMA licensing, collect roaming revenue, simultaneous voice/data, and have a serious fallback HSPA+42 network.

 

Reducing site count is also valid, but you don't just shut down a site because it's T-Mobile's... You take your time to strategically figure out which sites will provide the best coverage and capacity, how to avoid interference between the sites, and you shut down redundant sites regardless of the origin. Don't forget that 99+% of T-Mobile's HSPA+ sites are fiber fed.

 

As I mentioned earlier, WCDMA could be easily added to existing Sprint NV sites, so that Sprint's existing WCDMA capable phones can fully utilize it. AWS LTE could follow as well. 

On T-Mobile sites TDD-LTE with 800Mhz LTE could be added since T-Mobile has already met and exceeded their LTE modernization goals.

 

Exactly!

 

This is why the brains at Sprint scare me.  They'd spend 10 years trying to migrate everyone over to 1xRTT while the rest of the world already moved on.  

 

If they seriously would want to battle AT&T and steal their subs they don't do it with 2G CDMA.  

[insurance]

What if were taking the rumor too literally.  What about a tower sharing agreement?  Operate separately but share tech?  Now to a business you want control, and I know its a unlikely scenario... but what if they entered into a 5 year tower sharing agreement, and exchanged some spectrum or entered exclusive roaming agreements?  They could modernize, and lower costs by eliminating redundant antennas/towers, and create a standard frequency preference/phone tech among the two.

 

The End Game? it gets them competitive in the next few years, but companies want autonomy and control, so it'd have to end at some point.

 

"The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend"

 

Just a off the wall thought.

[Nickel]

UMTS == HSPA == HSPA+ == WCDMA == W-CDMA. The terms are interchangeable from a network planning perspective (even though HSPA/HSPA+/WCDMA are different portions of the UMTS standard). T-Mobile runs GSM and UMTS on PCS. T-Mobile runs UMTS and LTE on AWS. MetroPCS has a few locations with LTE on PCS, but those are being shut down. LTE on PCS is in the minority, not the majority.

 

You may not like it, but the dominant network is likely to be T-Mobile's in the face of a merger. Like Sprint's "Network Vision", T-Mobile's recent deployment is a modernization effort. It just doesn't have fancy marketing names like Sprint's does. It's also moving along much more smoothly than Sprint's.

Wait, WCDMA and W-CDMA are two different things?

[JossMan]

Sprint Mobile Corporation

[Conan Kudo]

Wait, WCDMA and W-CDMA are two different things?

No, they refer to the same air interface. I thought that part was at least obvious...?

 

What if were taking the rumor too literally.  What about a tower sharing agreement?  Operate separately but share tech?  Now to a business you want control, and I know its a unlikely scenario... but what if they entered into a 5 year tower sharing agreement, and exchanged some spectrum or entered exclusive roaming agreements?  They could modernize, and lower costs by eliminating redundant antennas/towers, and create a standard frequency preference/phone tech among the two.

 

The End Game? it gets them competitive in the next few years, but companies want autonomy and control, so it'd have to end at some point.

 

"The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend"

 

Just a off the wall thought.

 

Honestly, I think this would probably be the only thing permitted, since the companies would still be operating separate strategies and "compete" for customers. Network sharing is commonplace throughout the world, and it can work when it is set up right.

[CrimsonKnightDX]

No, hell no.

 

As I have said numerous times, SoftBank is a weak name. Plus, it has no cachet in the US. It sounds like a flaccid place to get a checking account.

 

AJ

 

 

 

Agreed , SoftBank is a weak name. Honestly if the merger with tmobile happens, the new company should be called sprint. Also would like to see SoftBank in Japan take the sprint name too.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

[jroepcke51]

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-16/softbank-declines-on-report-sprint-is-considering-t-mobile-bid.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

SoftBank is declining report.

[Dfarley]

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-16/softbank-declines-on-report-sprint-is-considering-t-mobile-bid.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

SoftBank is declining report.

Your comment is slightly confusing, I think "SoftBank is declining to comment" would be a better representation:

 

Mitsuhiro Kurano, a Tokyo-based spokesman for SoftBank, declined to comment on the Wall Street Journal report.

 

[anthony.spina97]

What if were taking the rumor too literally.  What about a tower sharing agreement?  Operate separately but share tech?  Now to a business you want control, and I know its a unlikely scenario... but what if they entered into a 5 year tower sharing agreement, and exchanged some spectrum or entered exclusive roaming agreements?  They could modernize, and lower costs by eliminating redundant antennas/towers, and create a standard frequency preference/phone tech among the two.

 

The End Game? it gets them competitive in the next few years, but companies want autonomy and control, so it'd have to end at some point.

 

"The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend"

 

Just a off the wall thought.

If anything were to happen, I would like this to happen. It really doesn't seem like that bad of an idea. If Sprint doesn't have coverage somewhere and T-Mobile does, let Sprint users use T-Mobile's network, and vice-versa. Also, if you are somewhere that either network is capacity constrained, let some subscribers from one network offload to the other network.

[Destroyallcubes]

I personally think 2.52.6 Ghz would be kept. Softbank has good success with it. They will want to stick with what they know for sure. But AWS could be sold to the others for big money to help expansion. I'm sure they would keep more of sprints side of things...especially customer service agents haha. Way better customer service than tmobile

[The Dave]

Sprint Mobile Corporation

I was just going to suggest this. I really like the Sprint name. It has history and just works in my opinion. Maybe it will be Sprint Mobile with a Magenta logo? All we need now is a hot girl on a Magenta and yellow motor cycle..

[WiWavelength]

Maybe it will be Sprint Mobile with a Magenta logo? All we need now is a hot girl on a Magenta and yellow motor cycle..

 

No, not magenta.  Like the SoftBank name, it is weak.  In American culture, magenta is basically a feminine color.  Whenever I see T-Mobile marketing collateral, I cannot help but think "wireless for girls."

 

Now, SoftBank grey would be okay.

 

AJ

[RichardXy]

I hope this goes through. We desperately need the spectrum and infrastructure in San Diego County.

[JeffDTD]

No, not magenta. Like the SoftBank name, it is weak. In American culture, magenta is basically a feminine color. Whenever I see T-Mobile marketing collateral, I cannot help but think "wireless for girls."

 

Now, SoftBank grey would be okay.

 

AJ

Not to mention that unless DT continued to hold a share of the combined entity, continued tmo branding would require licensing.

 

I think the name of the combined asset's offering is simple: Spark. Spark has a symbol. Its not Sprint nor Tmobile. It could drop both magenta and yellow in favor of black and orange hues. As assets in markets are combined and service offerings improve, re-brand retail stores as Spark stores. Whatever causes the sprint name to be shed (and it will happen) needs to be big. A fantastic merger offering simple pricing and amazing lte with a new name in merged areas would be the break from the past needed.

 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[WiWavelength]

If Sprint acquires T-Mobile and the marriage proceeds the way of the Nextel merger, it could rename itself T-Pain.

 

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

If Sprint acquires T-Mobile and the marriage proceeds the way of the Nextel merger, it could rename itself T-Pain.

 

 

Actually, on second thought, this could be a great TV marketing campaign against T-Mobile:

 

"Does your wireless service drop to 2G when you leave the city limits?  When you enter a building, does your phone display 'No Service'?  Are you tired of your wireless provider's chosen color being pink?

 

Then, you might be experiencing T-Pain..."

 

At that point, cue a typically auto tuned T-Pain with a Sprint message.

 

AJ

[CrimsonKnightDX]

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-16/softbank-declines-on-report-sprint-is-considering-t-mobile-bid.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

SoftBank is declining report.

 

 

Of course, they are not planning to confirm this until next year when they are ready to go public with the offer.  Don't expect T-Mobile or Sprint to comment either. 

[digiblur]

AT&T already provides auto tune for all of their customers on their regular voice plans.

[JossMan]

 

[WiWavelength]

AT&T already provides auto tune for all of their customers on their regular voice plans.

 

No, the experience of talking to an AT&T sub over AMR-HR is best represented by a different rapper.  WHAT?!

 

 

AJ

[DerekKY1980]

I have a question...  someone mentioned that  the AT&T/T-Mo  merger failed because it would make a GSM Monopoly    if   Sprint/T-Mo   merge   wouldn't it be the same?  I mean they would have to either  go CDMA or GSM     if they go CDMA  then wouldn't AT&T have the GSM monopoly after all and if they go GSM  then wouldn't Verizon  have a CDMA  Monopoly?

 

With that being said  I think the Merge would be a great Idea IF they bring somebody from T-Mobile to help them convert CDMA to HSPA+ like T-Mo is doing (or going to do) with Metro   with NV  800/1900/2500 LTE along with  w/e T-Mobiles is  would be pretty fast  I would think especially if they get the 700Mhz from Verizon. I do know they would have to sell some of T-Mobiles Spectrum but  even so  the  700/800/1900/2500   would  work nicely.