Sprint Reportedly Bowing Out of T-Mobile Bid (was "Sprint offer" and "Iliad" threads)

[jamisonshaw125]

Pretty fair write up in the WSJ:

Sprint Move Puts Pressure on T-Mobile

Now if only I could read that....

 

Edit: Also, I think that Legere better watch his mouth. 6 ft 6 beast of a human Marcelo might have to  teach him a lesson. 

[Johnner1999]

Now if only I could read that....

Just google search the full title....

[sbolen]

Now if only I could read that....

Google the title and click on the link - boom! - no paywall.

[jamisonshaw125]

Just google search the full title....

DERP. I actually read that article earlier....

[hercules rockefeller]

I want to pay the lowest sustainable price that includes proper network growth and maintenance. I know that the lowest prices possible is not always in my best interest.

 

If it lowers it to the point that one or two of the four ends up on shaky financial footing, it's going to lead to less competition. When they go out of business or the Feds do end up allowing mergers to keep one from going bankrupt.

 

I have no idea where that threshold is. We are probably not there yet.

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

 

I don't think that any of the four major carriers are there yet. In fact, I don't think they're anywhere close. Just look at the ridiculous gross margins posted by AT&T and Verizon ( IIRC they aproach 50%). T-mobile may be extremely agressive in pricing, but they've also eliminated phone subsidies, which allows them to stay profitable even with lower pricing. Sprint posted a profit this quarter despite continuing to lose post paid subs. If / when Sprint gets to the point where it's not spending boatloads of money on network vision (or next year's spectrum auctions) there will be even more room for agressive pricing. At some point Sprint and T-Mobile will start to really compete with AT&T and Verizon, and that's when we'll see pricing come back down to more reasonable levels throughout the wireless industry.

[mozamcrew]

What is your basis for that?

 

I don't have any traffic figures I can site that can somehow "prove" Sprint's need for additional low frequency spectrum. They obviously haven't moved to VoLTE yet and many phones on the network now can't yet use band 26. Look at the existing low frequency spectrum of ATT and VZW.

VZW holds 24Mhz of 700 nationwide plus a 25Mhz of cellular license spectrum in most markets. ATT has a cellular license in most markets, and any array of 700Mhz licenses varying from 0 to 24Mhz from market to market.

I largely agree that providers with a Cellular license plus ANY 700Mhz spectrum in a market simply shouldn't be bidding in the 600Mhz auctions. if they want additional capacity, then they need to bid in the AWS auctions, deploy WCS spectrum, or by some other mid/high frequency spectrum (like maybe Dish's stuff?).

Sprint AT BEST will have 14-16 Mhz of 800 spectrum, but in some places they won't even have that due to IBEZ issues and SouthernLINC spectrum. Hence the need for Sprint to get additional spectrum. Even if they just swap their WCS holding for some 700Mhz licenses in areas where they are particularly hurting for low frequency spectrum. They need SOME additional low frequency spectrum.

I'm still a fan of Sprint trying to buy up any 700Mhz A block that isn't held by a CCA member (all these holding companies). If they can do that, then either buy TMUS 700Mhz spectrum, or turn around and sell your purchased 700Mhz spectrum to TMUS if they won't sell to you. Doing that will make the reserved spectrum pool less expensive to the remaining bidders.

[mhammett]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o2kege1ose7nnwz/800.bmp

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w6tm8qw0gowu33d/600.bmp

https://www.dropbox.com/s/657m3k4ogxgwbmf/1900.bmp

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zbd4uxu362m3mtc/2500.bmp

 

 

 

Not much difference, though I am open to tweaks in my generation.

 

 

Links to 1900 and 2500 added for reference.

[Paynefanbro]

No, the average american does not travel.

 

The average american spends most of their life within 20 miles of their home. What the coverage is like in bumbleville Alabama is of no significance to someone living in Kansas. What the network is like 40 miles out of NYC doesnt matter to Mr. Brooklyn.

 

And when they do travel, they go to LA, NYC or Orlando.

 

Tmobile has a weak rural network. Everyone knows that. The fact that theyre doing so well is because for most people, it doesnt matter.

 

Mind you, Im on Sprint precisely because a large (roaming) network DOES matter to me. It also matters to people like Robert, who travel for work all the time. So theres certainly value in having an expansive network. That doesnt mean you cant be very successful NOT serving that market.

 

I always thought those Verizon 4G network map ads were ridiculous.

 

You want maps that matter to people? Show and compare coverage in their home and work area codes. A half acre dead spot by my favorite lunch deli is a problem. 100,000 acres of dead spot in west virginia are of no significance to me.

 

Just saying, I happen to be Mr. Brooklyn, and I care about the network in Greenville, NC (a pretty small city surrounded by cornfields). 

[Paynefanbro]

Links to 1900 and 2500 added for reference.

 

The difference between 2500 and 1900 is negligible when compared to 1900 and 800.

[caspar347]

I don't have any traffic figures I can site that can somehow "prove" Sprint's need for additional low frequency spectrum. They obviously haven't moved to VoLTE yet and many phones on the network now can't yet use band 26. Look at the existing low frequency spectrum of ATT and VZW.

VZW holds 24Mhz of 700 nationwide plus a 25Mhz of cellular license spectrum in most markets. ATT has a cellular license in most markets, and any array of 700Mhz licenses varying from 0 to 24Mhz from market to market.

I largely agree that providers with a Cellular license plus ANY 700Mhz spectrum in a market simply shouldn't be bidding in the 600Mhz auctions. if they want additional capacity, then they need to bid in the AWS auctions, deploy WCS spectrum, or by some other mid/high frequency spectrum (like maybe Dish's stuff?).

Sprint AT BEST will have 14-16 Mhz of 800 spectrum, but in some places they won't even have that due to IBEZ issues and SouthernLINC spectrum. Hence the need for Sprint to get additional spectrum. Even if they just swap their WCS holding for some 700Mhz licenses in areas where they are particularly hurting for low frequency spectrum. They need SOME additional low frequency spectrum.

I'm still a fan of Sprint trying to buy up any 700Mhz A block that isn't held by a CCA member (all these holding companies). If they can do that, then either buy TMUS 700Mhz spectrum, or turn around and sell your purchased 700Mhz spectrum to TMUS if they won't sell to you. Doing that will make the reserved spectrum pool less expensive to the remaining bidders.

Very good points. It would be nice if the 600 spectrum was inaccessible on a per-market basis to any carrier with 30 Mhz or more of sub-1Ghz spectrum in that market.

[irev210]

Really? You want me to go into their whole cost structure? I would if they gave me all the data.

 

That's my whole point.  As consumers, it's our job to just sit back and enjoy the benefits of competition.

 

Management of these billion dollar wireless companies can decide how to price their services and if they are appropriately priced to grow the business in the long-term.

 

Just arbitrarily saying that a $100 cellphone plan costs too much is sort of silly.  If they could price it for $50 and generate a nice return, sign me up!  I doubt wireless companies are going to create cost structures that are not sustainable.  Everything that T-Mobile has done seems to be very creative while maintaining margins. 

 

The fact that Sprint is about to go on an all out price war while continuing NV2.0 is a telling sign that we haven't hit bottom in terms of pricing.

 

I think what clearwire did with microwave and site leasing was very innovative (for the time).  I suspect there is lots of room to innovate further to reduce costs and increase performance.

 

Also, at some point, with all the old T-1 lines ripped out and all the base stations from a decade ago replaced, capital spending will normalize.

 

I can't wait for lower prices and better services from Sprint and T-Mobile.

[mhammett]

The difference between 2500 and 1900 is negligible when compared to 1900 and 800.

 

Indeed. That's why I don't get nearly as excited about PCS vs. AWS vs WCS vs ITFS\MMDS as most people do. It's worse, but not THAT much worse. Now this is fairly zoomed out. If one were to highlight for instance just a single county, you'd see a lot more variance. I suppose I could have made the images larger and smaller coverage samples, but that would mean redoing them. If leadership thinks they'd be valuable, I'd be more than willing to regenerate.

 

It's all relatively easy peasy compared to where I play in 3,600, 5,800, 11,000, 23,000, 24,000, etc.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Indeed. That's why I don't get nearly as excited about PCS vs. AWS vs WCS vs ITFS\MMDS as most people do. It's worse, but not THAT much worse. Now this is fairly zoomed out. If one were to highlight for instance just a single county, you'd see a lot more variance. I suppose I could have made the images larger and smaller coverage samples, but that would mean redoing them. If leadership thinks they'd be valuable, I'd be more than willing to regenerate.

 

It's all relatively easy peasy compared to where I play in 3,600, 5,800, 11,000, 23,000, 24,000, etc.

Thank you for your contribution. Those comparisons are nice to look at and help to frame the narrative.

 

Sent from my LG G3 using Tapatalk

[GoBigRed79]

Pretty fair write up in the WSJ:

Sprint Move Puts Pressure on T-Mobile

 

Nice to see a major media outlet recognize that things are not all rosey at T-Mobile.  Bottom line is if they can't find a partner with deep pockets, they are going to get left behind long term.  And their pricing structure, while great in the short-term, will not work long-term for a carrier that is going to need spectrum and a lot of cash to get it.

[S4GRU]

That's my whole point.  As consumers, it's our job to just sit back and enjoy the benefits of competition.

 

Management of these billion dollar wireless companies can decide how to price their services and if they are appropriately priced to grow the business in the long-term.

 

Just arbitrarily saying that a $100 cellphone plan costs too much is sort of silly.  If they could price it for $50 and generate a nice return, sign me up!  I doubt wireless companies are going to create cost structures that are not sustainable.  Everything that T-Mobile has done seems to be very creative while maintaining margins. 

 

The fact that Sprint is about to go on an all out price war while continuing NV2.0 is a telling sign that we haven't hit bottom in terms of pricing.

 

I think what clearwire did with microwave and site leasing was very innovative (for the time).  I suspect there is lots of room to innovate further to reduce costs and increase performance.

 

Also, at some point, with all the old T-1 lines ripped out and all the base stations from a decade ago replaced, capital spending will normalize.

 

I can't wait for lower prices and better services from Sprint and T-Mobile.

 

I don't know bigsnake49 at all, but I have read his posts here for years and on other nameless sites before S4GRU.  My guess is that he considers himself an investor before a consumer.

 

Robert

[S4GRU]

Indeed. That's why I don't get nearly as excited about PCS vs. AWS vs WCS vs ITFS\MMDS as most people do. It's worse, but not THAT much worse. Now this is fairly zoomed out. If one were to highlight for instance just a single county, you'd see a lot more variance. I suppose I could have made the images larger and smaller coverage samples, but that would mean redoing them. If leadership thinks they'd be valuable, I'd be more than willing to regenerate.

 

It's all relatively easy peasy compared to where I play in 3,600, 5,800, 11,000, 23,000, 24,000, etc.

 

Something that you are well aware of, but our members may not be, is a thing we call ground clutter.  A 1900MHz map doesn't look too bad compared to 850MHz, all things considered.  However, 1900MHz is much more impacted by ground clutter.  Bouncing signals off objects, dense foliage, RF shadows, etc.  

 

The lower frequency will handle ground clutter objects much better than the higher frequency.  And in the outer third of a signal range, lower frequency is more likely be able to be usable than the higher frequency for that reason.

 

Robert

[mhammett]

Something that you are well aware of, but our members may not be, is a thing we call ground clutter.  A 1900MHz map doesn't look too bad compared to 850MHz, all things considered.  However, 1900MHz is much more impacted by ground clutter.  Bouncing signals off objects, dense foliage, RF shadows, etc.  

 

The lower frequency will handle ground clutter objects much better than the higher frequency.  And in the outer third of a signal range, lower frequency is more likely be able to be usable than the higher frequency for that reason.

 

Robert

I know the program takes in clutter data, but I'm not exactly sure what it does with it. It could throw it out the window for all I know.

 

As far as the outer reaches of the coverage range... I'd likely attribute that to simply better loss characteristics. Signals vary all the time due to transmitter temperature and other internal stuff, tower movement, etc. A lower frequency doesn't have as much free space loss. It also has an inherently somewhat larger beamwidth, even if rated the same. It's just a little bit harder to correctly shape a larger wave. That tower shaking is going to affect it just a little bit less. All of that nonsense contributes to a more stable signal at the edge. It's not so much that 860 MHz is better at -117 than 2600 is at -117, but that 860 is more likely to stay -117 than it is for 2600 to stay at -117 vs. dropping to say -121.

 

BTW: Random picture of one of my links that can get impacted by tower sway. It's only 23 GHz. It gets a lot worse at 80 GHz! Need to figure out why the SNR sucks so bad.https://www.dropbox.com/s/1ttkmnsval5lkxi/Dragonwave%20status.PNG

[mozamcrew]

Very good points. It would be nice if the 600 spectrum was inaccessible on a per-market basis to any carrier with 30 Mhz or more of sub-1Ghz spectrum in that market.

It also depends on how much spectrum is available in a market. If the FCC clears 70Mhz of spectrum in a market, I'm fine with someone who has Cellular plus some 700Mhz bidding on a 10Mhz worth. What I don't want to see is customers in a particular market only having 2 choices because the two carriers who have the cellular licencses also have large pieces of both 700Mhz AND 600Mhz. 

[JustinRP37]

About hockey being edged out of the big four? I'm dead serious. One more lockout and they're a niche sport.

Hockey has had record growth the past few years. Basketball has had a few years of decline...

[jwang]

The 8/19 NYC event must have something to do with new plans or new business strategies. I am excited to hear what the new CEO will say then.

 

DT doesn't have a long term plan for TMO. If DISH wants to have a network hosting deal, they should go to Sprint. I expect DISH and Sprint to announce network hosting deal by the end of September.

 

Legere is talking to overtake Sprint to be no.3 carrier by the end of this year. He is good at creating topics. The game is on. Legere tried his best to make the merger not happen. Well, Sprint will become mad dog which is much bigger than Tmobile. Watch out from Sep what Sprint will bring to the table.

 

I expect a completely revamped Framily plan and device plan with the prices which won't need to change in a year or longer.

 

I certainly don't agree Sprint has to hit certain data speed in order not to upset customers. What they need is usable data which is 1M~2Mbps. Those who try to test data speed every day are not the group to make Sprint recover financially. Nothing against those speedtest fans but just try to say most customers don't do that instead of caring if they can open webpage/email/app in acceptable time.

[saywhatman]

 

I certainly don't agree Sprint has to hit certain data speed in order not to upset customers. What they need is usable data which is 1M~2Mbps. Those who try to test data speed every day are not the group to make Sprint recover financially. Nothing against those speedtest fans but just try to say most customers don't do that instead of caring if they can open webpage/email/app in acceptable time.

 

I'd still prefer they meet their advertised speeds (5-8 down). My benchmark for a network is being able to stream music during my entire commute without stuttering, while I'm reading text based news at the same time, at 1-2 down, this tends not to work. If Sprint can do that and keep my framily plan at $25 + $20, I'll be happy. They can't do it in San Francisco, and they can almost do it in Oakland. When I go back to Chicago in the fall, I'm relatively certain I should be able to do it, but we'll see. 

[kojitsari]

I'd still prefer they meet their advertised speeds (5-8 down). My benchmark for a network is being able to stream music during my entire commute without stuttering, while I'm reading text based news at the same time, at 1-2 down, this tends not to work. If Sprint can do that and keep my framily plan at $25 + $20, I'll be happy. They can't do it in San Francisco, and they can almost do it in Oakland. When I go back to Chicago in the fall, I'm relatively certain I should be able to do it, but we'll see.

They advertise 3-6 mb/s. In reality a constant 5 mb/s is perfect, it allows you to stream full HD video without stuttering which should be the most taxing thing you really need to do on a mobile device.

[jwang]

It's all about money. Even with 2.5Ghz you can win over 700mhz, if you let China mobile to come to US, they will spread 200,000 sites in first round and build more in 2nd round to crackdown Verizon/ATT in less than 4 years. China mobile is working on this much sites in China to deploy TDD 2.5Ghz LTE. You talk about penetration? Well when I was there, China mobile has cells in almost all decent office buildings in big cities in order to make sure you will have full signal even in elevators.

 

But the beautiful part of the war is to win it without much cost. Sprint made the smart moves to connect CCA and showed the gut to walk away from Tmobile. Next step should be getting DISH on board and scoop some smaller carriers up.

 

I suspect according to the net neutrality ruling, COMCAST/ATT/VERIZON will soon charge companies including google or facebook because the same reason they use to charge NETFLIX. There is a lot of reason this country needs another broadband provider. It's a long way to go because you need own backhaul in order to be the real broadband provider.

[truefan31]

The 8/19 NYC event must have something to do with new plans or new business strategies. I am excited to hear what the new CEO will say then.

 

DT doesn't have a long term plan for TMO. If DISH wants to have a network hosting deal, they should go to Sprint. I expect DISH and Sprint to announce network hosting deal by the end of September.

 

Legere is talking to overtake Sprint to be no.3 carrier by the end of this year. He is good at creating topics. The game is on. Legere tried his best to make the merger not happen. Well, Sprint will become mad dog which is much bigger than Tmobile. Watch out from Sep what Sprint will bring to the table.

 

I expect a completely revamped Framily plan and device plan with the prices which won't need to change in a year or longer.

 

I certainly don't agree Sprint has to hit certain data speed in order not to upset customers. What they need is usable data which is 1M~2Mbps. Those who try to test data speed every day are not the group to make Sprint recover financially. Nothing against those speedtest fans but just try to say most customers don't do that instead of caring if they can open webpage/email/app in acceptable time.

Really? Sprints been working on nv for over 4 years now. Management from top to bottom is bad, customer service is bottom every year. Tmobile now has more prepaid customers than sprint. It's not a shock if tmobile is 3 by this time next year

[jwang]

I'd still prefer they meet their advertised speeds (5-8 down). My benchmark for a network is being able to stream music during my entire commute without stuttering, while I'm reading text based news at the same time, at 1-2 down, this tends not to work. If Sprint can do that and keep my framily plan at $25 + $20, I'll be happy. They can't do it in San Francisco, and they can almost do it in Oakland. When I go back to Chicago in the fall, I'm relatively certain I should be able to do it, but we'll see. 

 

Guess what I got on XLTE from Verizon at lunch time? 0.99m down and 1.6m up, and another time is 1.6m down and 1.9up.

Well I didn't complain about that, the good part is you can always rely on their coverage and low pings to make the basic needs (webpage, email, some apps) satisfied.

 

Sprint has the gut to walk away from Tmobile. They should also have the gut to offer tier sharing data in a relatively cheaper price than other carrier, while jack up the unlimited price. If they offer 3GB in basic framily plan and charge $5 for 7 GB, $10 for 10GB, they should be safe to walk away from the unlimited data. They don't need those people who can't afford a TV and home broadband to be the customers to make profit. Let them go to Tmobile to crash their network.