WSJ: Sprint looking at T-Mobile purchase

[Conan Kudo]

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

CellMaps defines 1xRTT as 2G, just like Verizon and Sprint do.

 

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). 

 

Not everyone everywhere will go to VoLTE. WCDMA voice will be required for devices originating from countries where IP voice systems are prohibited by law, or otherwise handicapped (such as LG smartphones from South Korea, which use a non-standard authentication scheme for IP voice that breaks when used outside of the home network). Not to mention that a UMTS carrier can fit into 1.25MHz and 2.5MHz slices in Release 12, if need be. However, I expect ESMR to be used entirely for LTE, with maybe 1.25MHz allocated to CDMA 1X for legacy services.

 

WCDMA service also carries the benefit of inbound roaming revenue. One of Sprint's aspirations is to become a preferred roaming partner for the US market, but that is hampered by the frequency bands and technologies it uses. PCS A-F has CDMA2000, and PCS G has LTE. Band 25 (for PCS G) has not be well-received outside of the Sprint sphere, so it's an island.

 

ESMR has CDMA 1X and LTE. The CDMA 1X is a non-issue, and the LTE is on an island band that was crafted basically for Sprint. However, ESMR LTE on Band 26 will become more interesting as NTT DoCoMo and Telus adopt it.

 

If PCS A-F shifted to WCDMA, then it can become a preferred roaming partner for Eurasia, as tri-band UMTS 900/1900/2100 devices are very common due to the large amount of economic efforts between Eurasia and Latin America. ESMR can retain CDMA 1X for backwards compatibility, and LTE on ESMR, PCS G, AWS, and BRS+EBS would enable great compatibility globally. Without T-Mobile, the only thing it lacks is AWS. That's fine, too. Band 41 LTE TDD networks can be configured to also support Band 38 LTE TDD devices, provided that an LTE carrier is in the Band 38 frequency range.

 

A UMTS/LTE Sprint would be a powerhouse that would be a preferred partner for virtually all operators all over the world.

[milan03]

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). 

800Mhz spectrum is ideal for 1x voice and I'm sure that'll stay spectrum of choice for 1x and LTE. But in quite a few markets Sprint's PCS spectrum is contiguous with T-Mobile's which is a goldmine. Could be repurposed for LTE and in Release 12 they could aggregate B2 with B4 for example. But short term could provide NewCo HSPA+42 in the PCS and free up AWS for 20x20Mhz LTE.

[DerekKY1980]

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). 

See I agree with VoLTE  I think it would be a lot better  than  the CDMA voice as far as coverage goes  cause I can see in my area LTE has a lot better coverage on Sprint than the voice does  the 800Mhz LTE  would make it even better I believe

[Nickel]

CellMaps defines 1xRTT as 2G, just like Verizon and Sprint do.

Where has Sprint said that 1X is 2G? 

[briank86]

CellMaps defines 1xRTT as 2G, just like Verizon and Sprint do.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2

 

You don't have to believe any of us, but everyone knows that almost no one will dispute the almighty wiki. In the off chance u happen to be one of the rare ones that isn't too lazy to research outside of wiki, then u know what to do. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000

[WiWavelength]

See I agree with VoLTE  I think it would be a lot better  than  the CDMA voice as far as coverage goes  cause I can see in my area LTE has a lot better coverage on Sprint than the voice does  the 800Mhz LTE  would make it even better I believe

Uh, no. LTE coverage is more limited and fragile compared to that of CDMA1X. You have some learning to do. But you are in the right place to get the correct info.

 

AJ

[bitbang3r]

Oh... there's *plenty* of room in Sprint's 800Mhz spectrum for W-CDMA... or at least, there WILL be, after T-Mobile makes Sprint gamble it all on the merger, the feds shoot it down, and T-Mobile walks away with it. :-D

 

Don't feel too bad for Sprint, though... whatever they lose, Softbank will just turn around and replace with new 600Mhz spectrum anyway.

 

Food for thought: the only country on earth whose mobile phone market is more restricted, locked down, gimped, proprietary, and basically run in ways that make AT&T and Verizon look like poster children for open hardware and Cyanogen is... Japan.  Nintendo -- the most dominant videogame company on earth just a couple of years ago -- was blinded by its messed-up home market and concluded that phones were a hopeless lost cause. Sony was, too... until it bought Ericsson. Softbank wants to replicate its "success" in the US.

 

Imagine, for a moment, if Sprint were in charge of T-Mobile and got to dictate policy going forward during a transition... and did something completely evil, like disabling new, non-grandfathered T-Mobile SIM cards from working in non-T-Mobile-branded phones (whose ESN wasn't in Sprint's database). 

 

A Sprint-Tmobile merger would be a tragedy because it would eliminate the only lifeboat to semi-freedom we *have* in the United States.  And that's precisely why the feds will find a way to shoot down the merger. T-Mobile has done a great job of casting itself as the white knight who's here to save Americans from being exploited by Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon. The feds won't care whether or not a larger Sprint would be "more competitive" with AT&T and Verizon... it's going to care whether a Sprint-owned T-Mobile will still be "kind of unofficially non-blatantly-evil".

 

There's another reason why I believe the merger will never happen, even if the feds won't stop it: Google. T-Mobile has been Google's favorite bully pulpit since day one. It's been the one American network where Google has never had to kneel before anyone and play "Mother, May I?" I firmly believe that if push came to shove, Google will show up at the last minute and buy T-Mobile just to keep it from being swallowed by Sprint, Verizon, and AT&T. It'll buy it just to make sure it never has to beg for permission to do anything.

 

As far as 1xRTT  is concerned, 1xRTT will be the LAST legacy service Sprint shuts down. 1xRTT will be available for YEARS after the last site with EVDO repurposes its spectrum. When it comes to wide open rural areas that occasionally have an influx of tourists, 1xRTT has some real advantages over W-CDMA (mainly, it can accommodate more simultaneous users in narrower channels, instead of just a few users splattering high-powered noise across huge chunks of the band). Two dozen W-CDMA users with directional antennas & high-power picocells can't hear each other's uplinks, but the tower can hear them all stomping on each other. 1xRTT is a convenient way to separate them by space into smaller chunks of spectrum than W-CDMA would allow.

Edited December 17, 2013 by bitbang3r

[gnoj]

See I agree with VoLTE I think it would be a lot better than the CDMA voice as far as coverage goes cause I can see in my area LTE has a lot better coverage on Sprint than the voice does the 800Mhz LTE would make it even better I believe

It sounds like you're relying on Sprint's official coverage maps, which around here are known to be very inaccurate with respect to the extent of LTE coverage. You will never have Sprint LTE where you lack native voice/text service. The superior propagation of CDMA 1xA on 800 MHz compared to what anyone else can currently provide (plus how well it fits into the small slice of SMR left after deploying LTE) means VoLTE will supplement, not replace, CDMA service for the foreseeable future.

[Nickel]

Oh... there's *plenty* of room in Sprint's 800Mhz spectrum for W-CDMA... or at least, there WILL be, after T-Mobile makes Sprint gamble it all on the merger, the feds shoot it down, and T-Mobile walks away with it. :-D

I realize that you're either kidding or a troll but there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that happens

[Fraydog]

Food for thought: the only country on earth whose mobile phone market is more restricted, locked down, gimped, proprietary, and basically run in ways that make AT&T and Verizon look like poster children for open hardware and Cyanogen is... Japan.  Nintendo -- the most dominant videogame company on earth just a couple of years ago -- was blinded by its messed-up home market and concluded that phones were a hopeless lost cause. Sony was, too... until it bought Ericsson. Softbank wants to replicate its "success" in the US.

 

Imagine, for a moment, if Sprint were in charge of T-Mobile and got to dictate policy going forward during a transition... and did something completely evil, like disabling new, non-grandfathered T-Mobile SIM cards from working in non-T-Mobile-branded phones (whose ESN wasn't in Sprint's database). 

 

A Sprint-Tmobile merger would be a tragedy because it would eliminate the only lifeboat to semi-freedom we *have* in the United States.  And that's precisely why the feds will find a way to shoot down the merger. T-Mobile has done a great job of casting itself as the white knight who's here to save Americans from being exploited by Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon. The feds won't care whether or not a larger Sprint would be "more competitive" with AT&T and Verizon... it's going to care whether a Sprint-owned T-Mobile will still be "kind of unofficially non-blatantly-evil".

 

There's another reason why I believe the merger will never happen, even if the feds won't stop it: Google. T-Mobile has been Google's favorite bully pulpit since day one. It's been the one American network where Google has never had to kneel before anyone and play "Mother, May I?" I firmly believe that if push came to shove, Google will show up at the last minute and buy T-Mobile just to keep it from being swallowed by Sprint, Verizon, and AT&T. It'll buy it just to make sure it never has to beg for permission to do anything.

 

First off, Google isn't going to want to buy a mobile provider. They've had ample opportunity to buy T-Mobile but haven't done it, when everyone knows it is for sale.  

 

Secondly, SoftBank has been the most open and standard provider in Japan for a while. They use globally standard frequencies while DoCoMo and Au by KDDI use either the "eeevill" CDMA or weird GSM frequencies no one uses. SoftBank has been the disruptor. Even SoftBank's JDM phones are far more standard than their counterparts running on DoCoMo or KDDI. 

 

Third, TMobile is going to hit the hard glass ceiling when people figure out they have zero rural coverage and no lower band spectrum. What Legere has done was something that would have happened anyway, which was to move away from subsidies. 

 

The scenario you mention is complete FUD, especially when Sprint would be moving more or less toward a 3GPP architecture and has been doing that anyway.  DT still wants out and Legere wants to start cashing his checks, while you are hoping everyone is blinded by "oh no, poor GSM/UMTS is going to die!" If SoftBank implores Sprint to buy T-Mobile, it would be done to pair 20x20 AWS LTE with TD-LTE. That duo would be enough to make Sprint blow away AT&T and Verizon in the speed contest. 

[DerekKY1980]

It sounds like you're relying on Sprint's official coverage maps, which around here are known to be very inaccurate with respect to the extent of LTE coverage. You will never have Sprint LTE where you lack native voice/text service. The superior propagation of CDMA 1xA on 800 MHz compared to what anyone else can currently provide (plus how well it fits into the small slice of SMR left after deploying LTE) means VoLTE will supplement, not replace, CDMA service for the foreseeable future.

no the coverage map for Sprint has been the same for the past year or so in my area for voice that has never changed LTE however has changed in my area  it's lit up with orange now.   But the  network updates site http://network.sprint.com/ for  Somerset, KY 42501  says there has been 5 data speed upgrades in the last 6 months  and no voice    however if u  just put in 42501  you will get a bigger area that says 11 upgrades  1 voice  and that is around London, KY I believe

 

 

Uh, no. LTE coverage is more limited and fragile compared to that of CDMA1X. You have some learning to do. But you are in the right place to get the correct info.

 

AJ

Wouldn't  Verizon had put LTE on every tower if this was the case?  (just trying to understand lol)     I read they only put  LTE  on a select few towers  within a market

[MacPCS]

 

 

Wouldn't Verizon had put LTE on every tower if this was the case? (just trying to understand lol) I read they only put LTE on a select few towers within a market

vzw had very different objectives with their LTE deployment than sprint does. They just wanted to blanket the country with coverage first and worry about capacity later. They used 700 MHz first and are going back with AWS I believe and strengthening their capacity. It was a pretty straightforward network overlay rather than what Sprint is doing...

 

Sprint OTOH is rebuilding their entire network. Piece by piece, site by site. Not specifically targeting coverage as much as just trying to get it done.

[Nickel]

First off, Google isn't going to want to buy a mobile provider. They've had ample opportunity to buy T-Mobile but haven't done it, when everyone knows it is for sale.  

 

Secondly, SoftBank has been the most open and standard provider in Japan for a while. They use globally standard frequencies while DoCoMo and Au by KDDI use either the "eeevill" CDMA or weird GSM frequencies no one uses. SoftBank has been the disruptor. Even SoftBank's JDM phones are far more standard than their counterparts running on DoCoMo or KDDI. 

 

Third, TMobile is going to hit the hard glass ceiling when people figure out they have zero rural coverage and no lower band spectrum. What Legere has done was something that would have happened anyway, which was to move away from subsidies. 

 

The scenario you mention is complete FUD, especially when Sprint would be moving more or less toward a 3GPP architecture and has been doing that anyway.  DT still wants out and Legere wants to start cashing his checks, while you are hoping everyone is blinded by "oh no, poor GSM/UMTS is going to die!" If SoftBank implores Sprint to buy T-Mobile, it would be done to pair 20x20 AWS LTE with TD-LTE. That duo would be enough to make Sprint blow away AT&T and Verizon in the speed contest. 

If Wikipedia is to be believed, it doesn't look that bad. Especially since it looks like everyone will eventually use Band 1.

 

 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_network_operators_of_the_Asia_Pacific_region#Japan

[DerekKY1980]

vzw had very different objectives with their LTE deployment than sprint does. They just wanted to blanket the country with coverage first and worry about capacity later. They used 700 MHz first and are going back with AWS I believe and strengthening their capacity. It was a pretty straightforward network overlay rather than what Sprint is doing...

 

Sprint OTOH is rebuilding their entire network. Piece by piece, site by site. Not specifically targeting coverage as much as just trying to get it done.

so they are doing it on every tower? just little at a time?  (Verizon I mean) I knew Sprint was doing that  I have been keeping up as much as i can with NV  (mostly in my area lol) as well as other companies  cause  I was tired of paying Verizons over priced under capped  prices   I had planned to switch to Sprint in Jan when my contract was up with Verizon but just said screw this and broke my contract on Oct 31st/Nov 1st  and switched to Sprint anyway   at the time tho  1 of the reps told me they added 800Mhz to a tower about 1.35 miles from my house   which actually happened to be 3G data not voice

[Conan Kudo]

Where has Sprint said that 1X is 2G? 

 

 

They've been calling it that with their M2M stuff. I work for a company that does M2M stuff, so we've been talking to carriers about M2M cellular service for months.

 

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2

 

You don't have to believe any of us, but everyone knows that almost no one will dispute the almighty wiki. In the off chance u happen to be one of the rare ones that isn't too lazy to research outside of wiki, then u know what to do. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000

 

Oh, I know it is. I even know the radio characteristics of each generation of cellular tech. That doesn't change the fact that Sprint and Verizon refer to 1xRTT as 2G anyway.

 

Uh, no. LTE coverage is more limited and fragile compared to that of CDMA1X. You have some learning to do. But you are in the right place to get the correct info.

 

AJ

 

I'd like to know where you got that idea, because it seemed to me that LTE has more tolerance of a weaker signal than CDMA 1X does. Also, the repeated FUD you push about VoLTE. VoLTE has some problems related to software implementation details, but I don't ever recall there being coverage issues. Have you ever used VoLTE in the real world to see how it works? Remember, it doesn't work the same way as Skype or other VoIP packages do.

 

TMobile is going to hit the hard glass ceiling when people figure out they have zero rural coverage and no lower band spectrum. What Legere has done was something that would have happened anyway, which was to move away from subsidies. 

 

The scenario you mention is complete FUD, especially when Sprint would be moving more or less toward a 3GPP architecture and has been doing that anyway.  DT still wants out and Legere wants to start cashing his checks, while you are hoping everyone is blinded by "oh no, poor GSM/UMTS is going to die!" If SoftBank implores Sprint to buy T-Mobile, it would be done to pair 20x20 AWS LTE with TD-LTE. That duo would be enough to make Sprint blow away AT&T and Verizon in the speed contest. 

You seem to be spreading a lot of FUD yourself, along with A.J. I guess I'll need to provide counterpoints...

 

On Deutsche Telekom:

• T-Mobile US provides almost a third of the entire Group's revenue, and almost a quarter of the entire Group's profits. The only other unit more profitable than T-Mobile US is Telekom Germany. All the other units of DT aren't doing that well and are under major restructuring and redevelopment plans. Despite TMUS' redevelopment work, it is still highly profitable for DT. It is also the only reason DT's balance sheet isn't in the red like all the other European operators (except Vodafone).
• DT didn't want to sell T-Mobile US to AT&T initially. But AT&T persuaded them with a very hefty purchase price and generously favorable breakup fee terms. It didn't help that the German government (who owns ~30% of DT stock) was pressuring them to rationalize (simplify and reduce) the cost structure of the Group in order to improve focus on Germany. Those pressures have gone away, so I don't expect this to happen again.

On John Legere:

• I have no idea where you got the idea that Legere is only there to "pretty up" T-Mobile for sale. Are we talking about the same Legere who rejected a purchase offer for Global Crossing, turned the company around, and only sold the company on the direction of the board and shareholders? I would agree if I had seen any indicators showing Deutsche Telekom wanted to sell T-Mobile US, but I have not.
• Deutsche Telekom and Legere have made open-ended comments about the structure of the deal. However, that is practically required in order to give shareholders confidence in them, as well as assure Wall Street that options are available, if need be.
• Those comments are also the reason why T-Mobile's latest debt and stock offerings went so well. The market was reassured that the stock issuance that reduced DT's stake didn't trip up the lockup agreement. TMUS has the flexibility to offer stock as part of any deal to acquire another company. This would reduce DT's stake through dilution of existing shares, but it doesn't matter as long as DT retains more than 30% of the common stock of the company. Company bylaws state DT is to be treated as majority and controlling shareholder as long as DT owns 30% or more of the common stock of TMUS.

On rural coverage:

• I'm guessing you are more than a little bitter about your area not being upgraded. I can completely understand. I was bitter about mine not being upgraded for quite some time, too. Heck, I'm still bitter that my dad's home is just outside an upgraded zone, so it doesn't get the HSPA+/LTE coverage that exists there. But T-Mobile has actually been doing rural upgrades. If you look at the coverage maps and the documentation in Howard Forums and other places, you can see that T-Mobile is steadily reducing the number of GSM-only areas. And unlike Sprint, T-Mobile is also expanding the total coverage area. New cell sites are being constructed and approved, when needed.
• The major reason HSPA+ coverage didn't reach all over T-Mobile's existing footprint by now was because of the recession started around the same time T-Mobile was given permission to start deploying its new network. And of course, when T-Mobile was going to begin that three-year program to actually do it in 2011, AT&T killed it. It's only now started up again. T-Mobile has been very unlucky in that respect, but I think it is finally turning that around.
• T-Mobile is actively negotiating with all Lower 700MHz licensees to acquire Band 12 spectrum (largely A block, but also B and C block that isn't under the control of AT&T). An announcement of the sale of Verizon's assets will come this week, and others will follow soon enough. T-Mobile raised enough money to buy out everyone in cash, but will try not to spend only cash with Verizon, since its licenses are the priciest.

[dnwk]

Another iDEN problem

[anthony.spina97]

no the coverage map for Sprint has been the same for the past year or so in my area for voice that has never changed LTE however has changed in my area  it's lit up with orange now.   But the  network updates site http://network.sprint.com/ for  Somerset, KY 42501  says there has been 5 data speed upgrades in the last 6 months  and no voice    however if u  just put in 42501  you will get a bigger area that says 11 upgrades  1 voice  and that is around London, KY I believe

 

 

Wouldn't  Verizon had put LTE on every tower if this was the case?  (just trying to understand lol)     I read they only put  LTE  on a select few towers  within a market

On your first point about the coverage map for Sprint, of course your voice coverage hasn't changed. If 1x800 isn't on in your area (which it is safe to assume it isn't), then your voice coverage isn't going to change much. The fact that the coverage for LTE has changed is because Sprint added LTE to all the towers that already had 3G data and voice on them. Sprint's 1900 MHz LTE (which is what they have been deploying for the last year and a half) will only cover their existing footprint. Like gnoj said, you won't find yourself with Sprint LTE coverage when you don't have native Sprint Voice/Text coverage, because the LTE signal is more fragile, so if anything, you'll lose LTE signal before you lose 1x Voice and Text.

 

On your second point about Verizon, their LTE frequency (700 MHz) is a lower frequency than their Voice and Text frequency, which is at 1900 MHz. As known with lower frequencies, they handle distance better and penetrate deeper into buildings than higher frequencies. And since Verizon's cell site spacing is set up for 1900 MHz spacing, then they only need to upgrade every second or third tower in a given market, because they were trying to provide LTE coverage first before they provided capacity. To my understanding, I believe they are now going back and adding 700 MHz LTE to every tower that hasn't been upgraded (correct me if I'm wrong) and they are also adding their AWS LTE that will provide a ton of capacity for them.

[MacinJosh]

On your first point about the coverage map for Sprint, of course your voice coverage hasn't changed. If 1x800 isn't on in your area (which it is safe to assume it isn't), then your voice coverage isn't going to change much. The fact that the coverage for LTE has changed is because Sprint added LTE to all the towers that already had 3G data and voice on them. Sprint's 1900 MHz LTE (which is what they have been deploying for the last year and a half) will only cover their existing footprint. Like gnoj said, you won't find yourself with Sprint LTE coverage when you don't have native Sprint Voice/Text coverage, because the LTE signal is more fragile, so if anything, you'll lose LTE signal before you lose 1x Voice and Text.

 

On your second point about Verizon, their LTE frequency (700 MHz) is a lower frequency than their Voice and Text frequency, which is at 1900 MHz. As known with lower frequencies, they handle distance better and penetrate deeper into buildings than higher frequencies. And since Verizon's cell site spacing is set up for 1900 MHz spacing, then they only need to upgrade every second or third tower in a given market, because they were trying to provide LTE coverage first before they provided capacity. To my understanding, I believe they are now going back and adding 700 MHz LTE to every tower that hasn't been upgraded (correct me if I'm wrong) and they are also adding their AWS LTE that will provide a ton of capacity for them.

Verizon voice and data operate on 850 MHz in most areas, with fallback to PCS for extra capacity. But even then, 700 MHz still has further signal range.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

[centermedic]

 

 

On Deutsche Telekom:

• T-Mobile US provides almost a third of the entire Group's revenue, and almost a quarter of the entire Group's profits. The only other unit more profitable than T-Mobile US is Telekom Germany. All the other units of DT aren't doing that well and are under major restructuring and redevelopment plans. Despite TMUS' redevelopment work, it is still highly profitable for DT. It is also the only reason DT's balance sheet isn't in the red like all the other European operators (except Vodafone).
• DT didn't want to sell T-Mobile US to AT&T initially. But AT&T persuaded them with a very hefty purchase price and generously favorable breakup fee terms. It didn't help that the German government (who owns ~30% of DT stock) was pressuring them to rationalize (simplify and reduce) the cost structure of the Group in order to improve focus on Germany. Those pressures have gone away, so I don't expect this to happen again.

 

Citation please. Prior to AT&T trying to buy out T-Mo there were more than ample statements with in the industry that DT was actively looking for a buyer for T-Mo.

[Conan Kudo]

Citation please. Prior to AT&T trying to buy out T-Mo there were more than ample statements with in the industry that DT was actively looking for a buyer for T-Mo.

Can you cite anyone from DT saying they wanted to? Looking at various financial statements gives a far better picture than any rumor story could ever do.

 

More to the point, can you prove DT wants to sell TMUS now? Because all evidence points to the contrary.

[centermedic]

Can you cite anyone from DT saying they wanted to? Looking at various financial statements gives a far better picture than any rumor story could ever do.

 

More to the point, can you prove DT wants to sell TMUS now? Because all evidence points to the contrary.

The short answer is no. However, thats how these things usually get done in the business world. To many different reliable sources reported that DT was shopping T-Mo for it not to have at least a basis in reality. I am more than willing to change that assessment if you can provide a citation.

[GinaDee]

Det_Conan_Kudo makes great points.  A lot of posters here state opinions of T-Mobile that are just based on conjecture.  The way I see it any success by T-Mobile will earn the ire of Sprint fanboys.  

[centermedic]

Can you cite anyone from DT saying they wanted to? Looking at various financial statements gives a far better picture than any rumor story could ever do.

 

More to the point, can you prove DT wants to sell TMUS now? Because all evidence points to the contrary.

A quick google search produced these sites.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/t-mobile-sale-may-close-tough-chapter-for-deutsche-telekom/?_r=0

 

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Deutsche-Telekom-in-talks-to-sell-T-Mobile-USA-to-Sprint-and-keep-a-stake-in-the-resulting-carrier_id17281

 

http://qz.com/73497/t-mobile/

[centermedic]

Det_Conan_Kudo makes great points.  A lot of posters here state opinions of T-Mobile that are just based on conjecture.  The way I see it any success by T-Mobile will earn the ire of Sprint fanboys.  

Until proven otherwise his points are conjecture. I have provided the basis for my statements.

[irwinshere]

Det_Conan_Kudo makes great points. A lot of posters here state opinions of T-Mobile that are just based on conjecture. The way I see it any success by T-Mobile will earn the ire of Sprint fanboys.

This is a website devoted to sprint networks. One would expect those who have sprint would want to see the sprint network improve and flourish. What is it that you want to see GinaDee?

 

Jim, Sent from my Photon 4G using Tapatalk 2