The pole, the pole, the pole is on fire. We don't want no GMO let the freaking pole burn!
-
-
-
Posts
-
By Dkoellerwx · Posted
Probably a lot of Midwest towers. Slight bias since Nebraska is a weird market, but there are tons of USCC sites that T-Mobile isn't yet co-located on. Think a similar situation in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Missouri. But some other markets, like yours, probably don't have that issue! -
-
Sticky Customers - YES, and leave them flip to the T-Mobile PLMN when needed and they will be even more likely to Stick. -
It seems to me that if the goal is to improve rural, the US Cellular buy-out would get them only part of the way there, considering there are plenty of rural areas that US Cellular does not serve. But I also have a hard time reading it the way I think that article is, that the cost of this deal comes straight out of the $9 billion. I mean, they're getting spectrum for their existing operations in US Cellular markets, including places that I wouldn't call rural. (Roanoke, VA is the 9th largest city in the state, for example.) It seems like some of it should be allocated to rural expansion, but certainly not the whole purchase price. There's also something to be said for getting the customer base of potentially sticky customers who have been used to US Cellular being the only game in town for potentially decades. - Trip -
T-Mobile has stated 15% of their sites don't have 5g triband. In WV I know WISPs had a lot of 2.5GHz, but T-Mobile was trying to buy as much as possible. More rural FWA would be a big selling point that might overcome any soft bandwidth cap slight overages. Especially since UScellular likely started offering it on c-band.
-
-
Recently Browsing
- No registered users viewing this page.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.