WSJ: Sprint looking at T-Mobile purchase

[Conan Kudo]

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.

A CDMA monopoly isn't really possible because of the large number of CDMA operators in the country. There are still super-regional operators that offer CDMA service. Also, in the marketplace, CDMA is considered a technology of limited scale. The disappearance of CDMA would not be nearly as problematic, since there are no markets outside of the United States where CDMA is the dominant technology (or even used anywhere near how much GSM/UMTS is). Verizon Wireless, for example, is planning on exiting the CDMA ecosystem within the next 8 months. Remember a monopoly is only such if it is deemed valuable. The CDMA ecosystem has been losing value over the last five years, and continues to do so.

[NYC126]

I doubt the Fcc and the DOJ allow this to happen. They seem to love what tmobile is doing with disrupting the market.

[DerekKY1980]

A CDMA monopoly isn't really possible because of the large number of CDMA operators in the country. There are still super-regional operators that offer CDMA service. Also, in the marketplace, CDMA is considered a technology of limited scale. The disappearance of CDMA would not be nearly as problematic, since there are no markets outside of the United States where CDMA is the dominant technology (or even used anywhere near how much GSM/UMTS is). Verizon Wireless, for example, is planning on exiting the CDMA ecosystem within the next 8 months. Remember a monopoly is only such if it is deemed valuable. The CDMA ecosystem has been losing value over the last five years, and continues to do so.

I guess that makes sense.  And you are right Verizon said they would get rid of it by 2021    If this does go threw  I really hope they switch off CDMA and go direct to HSPA+   cause  here in KY  it seems  T-Mo  has more 2G coverage than Sprint     and  if it goes ALL  HSPA+   then  might make better coverage between the 2  for all of Kentucky    according to a map I've seen  T-Mo covers about 80% of Kentucky with 2G  where as sprint covers about 20-30% with 2G (just guessing here not actual facts lol)

[bigsnake49]

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

 

Spark!!!! Light a fire under AT&T and Verizon's asses!

[anthony.spina97]

I think it would be pretty cool if Sprint does to T-Mobile what Softbank did to Sprint. Give T-Mobile a ton of cash so that T-Mobile can build-out/upgrade their network, and when it's great like Sprint's, Sprint can profit off it!

[utiz4321]

I think it would be pretty cool if Sprint does to T-Mobile what Softbank did to Sprint. Give T-Mobile a ton of cash so that T-Mobile can build-out/upgrade their network, and when it's great like Sprint's, Sprint can profit off it!

Where would sprint get a ton of cash?

[anthony.spina97]

Where would sprint get a ton of cash?

I would guess their Japanese brethren.

[briank86]

I guess that makes sense. And you are right Verizon said they would get rid of it by 2021 If this does go threw I really hope they switch off CDMA and go direct to HSPA+ cause here in KY it seems T-Mo has more 2G coverage than Sprint and if it goes ALL HSPA+ then might make better coverage between the 2 for all of Kentucky according to a map I've seen T-Mo covers about 80% of Kentucky with 2G where as sprint covers about 20-30% with 2G (just guessing here not actual facts lol)

When you say 2G for sprint technology are you in fact referring to the technologies labeled 1XRTT and 1XRTT advanced? Sprint does not have any 2G sites still in existence. This is a common mistake and an easy aggrevator for the one named AJ.

[Boosted20V]

I think it would be pretty cool if Sprint does to T-Mobile what Softbank did to Sprint. Give T-Mobile a ton of cash so that T-Mobile can build-out/upgrade their network, and when it's great like Sprint's, Sprint can profit off it!

 

Why would Sprint be upgrading its own network while also having T-Mobile upgrade theirs? That essentially IS the Nextel debacle... operating two networks.

[DerekKY1980]

When you say 2G for sprint technology are you in fact referring to the technologies labeled 1XRTT and 1XRTT advanced? Sprint does not have any 2G sites still in existence. This is a common mistake and an easy aggrevator for the one named AJ.

well I guess so I just went by an app called CellMaps   my area is really bad on Sprint  my signals  fluctuates between 1 and 3 bars up and down at my address   go east  a bit  and  it's worse

[WiWavelength]

I guess that makes sense.  And you are right Verizon said they would get rid of it by 2021    If this does go threw  I really hope they switch off CDMA and go direct to HSPA+   cause  here in KY  it seems  T-Mo  has more 2G coverage than Sprint     and  if it goes ALL  HSPA+   then  might make better coverage between the 2  for all of Kentucky    according to a map I've seen  T-Mo covers about 80% of Kentucky with 2G  where as sprint covers about 20-30% with 2G (just guessing here not actual facts lol)

 

T-Mobile does not cover 80 percent of Kentucky with "2G," "3G," or any "G."  Are you sure that you are looking at the correct maps?  Do not include roaming.  As is typical, native coverage footprint in the state is quite similar between T-Mobile and Sprint.

 

AJ

[DerekKY1980]

T-Mobile does not cover 80 percent of Kentucky with "2G," "3G," or any "G."  Are you sure that you are looking at the correct maps?  Do not include roaming.  As is typical, native coverage footprint in the state is quite similar between T-Mobile and Sprint.

 

AJ

AJ  here is pics of the maps  for Sprint and  T-Mo 

 

 

[anthony.spina97]

Why would Sprint be upgrading its own network while also having T-Mobile upgrade theirs? That essentially IS the Nextel debacle... operating two networks.

I don't think Sprint should begin running T-Mobile, I think that Sprint should get 2 seats on the board, like Softbank has with Sprint. T-Mobile would still be pretty much its own company, other than Sprint having a huge stake in the company. Like I said, make a Sprint-T-Mobile deal like the Sprint-Softbank deal. And set up roaming contracts between the two companies for when coverage is not available or when capacity is constrained. That's just my opinion, whether or not it's feasible or not is a different story.

[TheForce627]

I wish sprint would focus on expanding their current footprint. That's probably the only way to get that bad taste out of people's mouths. And increasing cell site density wouldn't hurt either. T mobile doesn't give sprint a bigger footprint.

[WiWavelength]

AJ  here is pics of the maps  for Sprint and  T-Mo 

 

!cid_IMG_08751.png

 

!cid_IMG_66571.png

 

Do not use a phone app to compare coverage.  Use the actual operators' coverage tools on a full size device.  If you do, you will see that T-Mobile does not have even close to the "2G" native coverage breadth that unverified source displays.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

Magenta makes my brain hurt looking at it on a coverage map. Especially the colors T-Mobile uses that I have real issues distinguishing. It is, from my point of view, an accessibility nightmare.

 

I hope I don't drag this too far off-topic, but I'll be perfectly content to see that color go far, far away, as in back to Deutschland. 

[DerekKY1980]

Do not use a phone app to compare coverage.  Use the actual operators' coverage tools on a full size device.  If you do, you will see that T-Mobile does not have even close to the "2G" native coverage breadth that unverified source displays.

 

AJ

I did what you said on the laptop and  it seems  less  than what the phone app showed like u mentioned  but not by a whole lot  it still has more coverage than Sprint does in Kentucky  If  Sprint/T-Mobile was converted to HSPA+  it  might actually have great coverage I Think.   

Do you know if there is away to tell where T-Mo's  towers are in my area?   Sprint only has 4 towers and  If T-Mos are at different locations than where  Sprints are   it might actually  improve my area

[Bob Newhart]

Magenta makes my brain hurt looking at it on a coverage map. Especially the colors T-Mobile uses that I have real issues distinguishing. It is, from my point of view, an accessibility nightmare.

 

I hope I don't drag this too far off-topic, but I'll be perfectly content to see that color go far, far away, as in back to Deutschland. 

 

Sprint does this too . ... . zoom in, enhance, zoom in, enhance... etc.

[Conan Kudo]

Magenta makes my brain hurt looking at it on a coverage map. Especially the colors T-Mobile uses that I have real issues distinguishing. It is, from my point of view, an accessibility nightmare.

 

I hope I don't drag this too far off-topic, but I'll be perfectly content to see that color go far, far away, as in back to Deutschland. 

Everybody does this. AT&T does this with blues, Verizon does it with reds, and Sprint does it with greens. If you want to use an alternative coverage map, there are five or six options for T-Mobile, three of which have different color schemes.

 

Do not use a phone app to compare coverage.  Use the actual operators' coverage tools on a full size device.  If you do, you will see that T-Mobile does not have even close to the "2G" native coverage breadth that unverified source displays.

 

AJ

 

That source isn't unverified. CellMaps is made by Mosaik Solutions, formerly known as American Roamer. They receive the data from the operators themselves.

 

 

 

[Fraydog]

Everybody does this. AT&T does this with blues, Verizon does it with reds, and Sprint does it with greens. If you want to use an alternative coverage map, there are five or six options for T-Mobile, three of which have different color schemes.

 

 

That source isn't unverified. CellMaps is made by Mosaik Solutions, formerly known as American Roamer. They receive the data from the operators themselves.

 

This is the map I use for T-Mobile, it's the MetroPCS HSPA+/LTE map. Like AT&T, it uses blues. Blues are far easier for me to color separate.

 

http://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/maps/index.html?map=metro

[WiWavelength]

Everybody does this. AT&T does this with blues, Verizon does it with reds, and Sprint does it with greens. If you want to use an alternative coverage map, there are five or six options for T-Mobile, three of which have different color schemes.

Prior to the current version, T-Mobile had a nice coverage tool that actually showed signal strength gradients for both W-CDMA and GSM. Now, the GSM gradients are gone. We get just an amorphous single color for "2G."  Yuck.  That is on the level of the lowly VZW coverage tool.

 

That source isn't unverified. CellMaps is made by Mosaik Solutions, formerly known as American Roamer. They receive the data from the operators themselves.

 

Well, the app is wrong. It is showing native GSM coverage that T-Mobile does not have.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

If  Sprint/T-Mobile was converted to HSPA+  it  might actually have great coverage I Think.

 

No thanks.  LTE 800 + CDMA1X 800 trumps W-CDMA 1900 or W-CDMA 2100+1700.

 

So, if you want HSPA+, you are giving up on SMR 800 MHz.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

I refuse to trust ANY map that shows Sprint's "2G" coverage. Sprint no longer has any 2G running.

[DerekKY1980]

No thanks.  LTE 800 + CDMA1X 800 trumps W-CDMA 1900 or W-CDMA 2100+1700.

 

So, if you want HSPA+, you are giving up on SMR 800 MHz.

 

AJ

But isn't HSPA+  a faster 3G  network? I mean I have read cases where ppl get 12-25Mbps on HSPA+ alone. And with VoLTE   it wouldn't matter  would it?   Not  trying to argue here  just asking your opinion on the matter  but tbh  I don't think we have 800Mhz voice installed here in my town    cause when u check the updates thing on Sprint site  it says 5 data updates  in the past 6 months  but someone told me the otherday  that  Ericsson  blocks 800Mhz  as well  so  I am confused.

[Fraydog]

But isn't HSPA+  a faster 3G  network? I mean I have read cases where ppl get 12-25Mbps on HSPA+ alone. And with VoLTE   it wouldn't matter  would it?   Not  trying to argue here  just asking your opinion on the matter  but tbh  I don't think we have 800Mhz voice installed here in my town    cause when u check the updates thing on Sprint site  it says 5 data updates  in the past 6 months  but someone told me the otherday  that  Ericsson  blocks 800Mhz  as well  so  I am confused.

 

There are two issues I see with HSPA/LTE as Sprint's future technology track:

 

1. The 800 MHz spectrum Sprint owns is too narrow for use of W-CDMA. WCDMA and HSPA require 5 MHz chunks. With 800 LTE coming that's 5x5, that takes up all the head room for the 800 MHz spectrum. 

2. Everything is migrating to VoLTE long term anyway, I would rather see Sprint skate to where the puck is going (LTE, TD-LTE, VoLTE) than where it is now (CDMA voice and WCDMA voice).