Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[Rawvega]

couldn't selling some 2.5 help fund the upcoming 600 spectrum wars?  Or maybe help ease a buy offer for Dish?

 

Sure it could. However, Piecyk remarks, much like I did in a different post somewhere, selling some of the spectrum strengthens a competitor and decreases Sprint's ability to offer a truly differentiated product.

[lou99/maximus1987]

Sure it could. However, Piecyk remarks, much like I did in a different post somewhere, selling some of the spectrum strengthens a competitor and decreases Sprint's ability to offer a truly differentiated product.

The equipment shortages are over, yes?

So by the end of this year, what is there to stop sprint from having more than 20mhz deployed?

If there's no impediment, we'll know how serious sprint is about offering a differentiated product by how many carrier cards it orders and installs.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[joshuam]

Sprint has 2 lines for 100 with either 8gb or unlimited.

To an average consumer that is just stupid. No value in one option, almost makes no sense to even list it. To a low data usage consumer, Verizon certainly is a better value because they have better coverage/faster speeds.

 

Edit: I'm not trying to troll or say VZW is wicked awesome...just pointing out perception. Sprint needs to live up to its value proposition.

[lou99/maximus1987]

VALUE AND UTILITY OF THE U.S. 2.5 GHz SPECTRUM BAND

 

Dr. Kostas Liopiros Sun Fire Group LLCAlexandria VA 22034Prepared for Sprint Nextel 27 February 2013

 

http://newsroom.sprint.com/images/9004/press/25GHzValueUtilityAnalysisMarch2013.pdf

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Johnner1999]

maybe SoftBank's engineer's figured out that Band 41 isn't the answer for all locations.

 

I know thats not popular around here....

[anthony.spina97]

You realize that link is from February of 2013, right? A very long time ago and also before Softbanks purchase of (80% of) Sprint, and before the completion of purchasing the remaining stake of Clearwire.

 

I'm not sure why everyone keeps suggesting that Sprint sell some of it's 2.5 GHz assets. It's not going to happen. 2.5 GHz is the key to Sprint's comeback as a data strong network, and they aren't going to risk their comeback by giving it to their competitors. If Sprint participates in the 600 MHz auction, it will be financed by other means, not by the sale of any of 2.5 GHz.

 

-Anthony

[Fraydog]

So Walter thinks selling parts of the spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band is a lack of commitment? Only if Masa is taking the money with him back to Japan. I would be open to any generous deal that gives Sprint capital back for network investment.

[lou99/maximus1987]

You realize that link is from February of 2013, right? A very long time ago and also before Softbanks purchase of (80% of) Sprint, and before the completion of purchasing the remaining stake of Clearwire.

 

I'm not sure why everyone keeps suggesting that Sprint sell some of it's 2.5 GHz assets. It's not going to happen. 2.5 GHz is the key to Sprint's comeback as a data strong network, and they aren't going to risk their comeback by giving it to their competitors. If Sprint participates in the 600 MHz auction, it will be financed by other means, not by the sale of any of 2.5 GHz.

 

-Anthony

Did you read the doc? It presents the technical characteristics of 2.5 and compares to other bands. Still valid today.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lou99/maximus1987]

So Walter thinks selling parts of the spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band is a lack of commitment? Only if Masa is taking the money with him back to Japan. I would be open to any generous deal that gives Sprint capital back for network investment.

How about a four step plan:'

1) softbank borrows money

2) softbank writes check to sprint

3) sprint cashes said check

4) sprint uses said money to continue on

 

If sonny truly believes in sprint's 2.5ghz -not just in the sprint+TMO combination that was plan A - then borrowing money to lend to sprint should be a no brainer.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fraydog]

You realize that link is from February of 2013, right? A very long time ago and also before Softbanks purchase of (80% of) Sprint, and before the completion of purchasing the remaining stake of Clearwire.

 

I'm not sure why everyone keeps suggesting that Sprint sell some of it's 2.5 GHz assets. It's not going to happen. 2.5 GHz is the key to Sprint's comeback as a data strong network, and they aren't going to risk their comeback by giving it to their competitors. If Sprint participates in the 600 MHz auction, it will be financed by other means, not by the sale of any of 2.5 GHz.

 

-Anthony

Sprint also needs more density for their network and frankly I'd rather Sprint have 100 MHz of 2.5 they can utilize for their network with far greater cell density than 200 MHz at their current density.

[lou99/maximus1987]

Sprint also needs more density for their network and frankly I'd rather Sprint have 100 MHz of 2.5 they can utilize for their network with far greater cell density than 200 MHz at their current density.

Why is everyone precluding softbank itself as a funding source? It's telling.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fraydog]

Why is everyone precluding softbank itself as a funding source? It's telling.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If liquidity is choppy that would be open. But why dilute capital unless you have no other choice?

[lou99/maximus1987]

If liquidity is choppy that would be open. But why dilute capital unless you have no other choice?

Couldn't softbank lend to sprint, no equity involved?

 

I'm seeing the astounding results that ONE 20mhz 2.5ghz can bring and I'm stupefied as to why softy is hesitating in funding sprint. And I don't even have sprint!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

Sprint also needs more density for their network and frankly I'd rather Sprint have 100 MHz of 2.5 they can utilize for their network with far greater cell density than 200 MHz at their current density.

 

I am sorry, but the density/densification argument is getting old.  Or maybe I am spoiled from living in the Kansas City area.  Band 41 is kicking ass and taking names.  It generally holds from site to site at current density.  Even if it does not, band 25 and band 26 ably fill out the rest of each sector.  Speeds do not have to be consistent from sector core to edge.  In a single frequency network, that is impossible.

 

Along those lines, the Magentan argument that T-Mobile has 15-20 MHz FDD speeds everywhere in each sector in applicable "wideband" markets is specious.  Technically, the carrier bandwidth is accurate -- it is still 15-20 MHz FDD.  But the real truth of the matter is that fading in mid/high band spectrum drops even 15-20 MHz FDD to the slow lane toward cell edges.  That is called adaptive modulation and optimized scheduling.  And that degradation in "wideband" speeds is arguably even worse than the switch from band 41 to band 25 or band 26.

 

AJ

[MacinJosh]

Look what got added to Change your Services on MySprint. Talk about FINALLY!

 

 

It appears that the Japan Roaming for $5/mo is a promo for business accounts. According to this brochure, it ends on March 12th. https://shop.sprint.com/global/pdf/shop/japan_roaming_add_on.pdf

Edited February 24, 2015 by MacinJosh

[Johnner1999]

I am sorry, but the density/densification argument is getting old.  Or maybe I am spoiled from living in the Kansas City area.  Band 41 is kicking ass and taking names.  It generally holds from site to site at current density.  Even if it does not, band 25 and band 26 ably fill out the rest of each sector.  Speeds do not have to be consistent from sector core to edge.  In a single frequency network, that is impossible.

 

Along those lines, the Magentan argument that T-Mobile has 15-20 MHz FDD speeds everywhere in each sector in applicable "wideband" markets is specious.  Technically, the carrier bandwidth is accurate -- it is still 15-20 MHz FDD.  But the real truth of the matter is that fading in mid/high band spectrum drops even 15-20 MHz FDD to the slow lane toward cell edges.  That is called adaptive modulation and optimized scheduling.  And that degradation in "wideband" speeds is arguably even worse than the switch from band 41 to band 25 or band 26.

 

AJ

come to the NE area of the country and 2.5 B41 I doubt will work…..

 

I can get B41 for about 1000ft radius —

 

some areas where Sprint has the towers to make it work AWESOME yes!

[dnicekid]

The equipment shortages are over, yes?

So by the end of this year, what is there to stop sprint from having more than 20mhz deployed?

If there's no impediment, we'll know how serious sprint is about offering a differentiated product by how many carrier cards it orders and installs.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

They can put as many cards as they want in b41... The link is so fragile it doesn't reach that far. I am speaking of my experience here in the northeast with trees and buildings etc.. If I have a clear line of sight its fine..

 

It might not be how many cards but rather how many more towers, small cells etc.

 

Sprint needs to get cash in order to build out

[lou99/maximus1987]

Please direct your attention to the Artemis thread!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bmoses]

I'm guessing that people having such terrible signal on B41 is a result of poor/non optimizations yet. while there are only 3 towers with B41 installed around here, the signal from them has been excellent. I can get B41 in my house from a tower thats 4 miles away. I also picked up B41 in a nordtrom rack store from a tower that is also about 4 miles away. and i'm not talking -120+ signals just to say it connected, i was connected anywhere from -105 to -115 with speed tests of 15 to 30 meg down.

[greencat]

I'm guessing that people having such terrible signal on B41 is a result of poor/non optimizations yet. while there are only 3 towers with B41 installed around here, the signal from them has been excellent. I can get B41 in my house from a tower thats 4 miles away. I also picked up B41 in a nordtrom rack store from a tower that is also about 4 miles away. and i'm not talking -120+ signals just to say it connected, i was connected anywhere from -105 to -115 with speed tests of 15 to 30 meg down.

It is interesting that you have only 3 towers, but they've been optimized.

 

I hope that happens to my area. I'm often in the -110 or higher range and that range kills my battery.

[Fraydog]

I am sorry, but the density/densification argument is getting old.  Or maybe I am spoiled from living in the Kansas City area.  Band 41 is kicking ass and taking names.  It generally holds from site to site at current density.  Even if it does not, band 25 and band 26 ably fill out the rest of each sector.  Speeds do not have to be consistent from sector core to edge.  In a single frequency network, that is impossible.

 

Along those lines, the Magentan argument that T-Mobile has 15-20 MHz FDD speeds everywhere in each sector in applicable "wideband" markets is specious.  Technically, the carrier bandwidth is accurate -- it is still 15-20 MHz FDD.  But the real truth of the matter is that fading in mid/high band spectrum drops even 15-20 MHz FDD to the slow lane toward cell edges.  That is called adaptive modulation and optimized scheduling.  And that degradation in "wideband" speeds is arguably even worse than the switch from band 41 to band 25 or band 26.

 

AJ

 

I look at the national NetIndex scores. Sprint has spectrum that's slightly higher frequency than T-Mobile's, so I would think it's physics that they would need a little higher density to get to the same speeds unless Sprint starts with carrier aggregation of 2.5 GHz bands. I just have got hammered on posts over and over again at HowardForums which decry Sprint's speeds. These posts act as if you can't do anything with 8 Mbps speeds when frankly most Sprint customers are ecstatic that they have those speeds, and those speeds are 100X then when the data network didn't even work. 

 

I have seen, when I can slide into Sprint stores in St. Louis, speeds getting into the 20's and 30's when I test VZW in the same spot and it's 5. I am reluctant to include this as evidence of anything because of anecdotal evidence and all. To be fair T-Mobile stores and my test T-Mobile SIM was in the same range, but there's two markets where Sprint is doing better with speeds. Again, I'm reluctant to include the anecdotal evidence. 

 

I do see Verizon getting faster and T-Mobile getting slower slightly on a national level. Verizon supposedly has this awful cell density from 850 CDMA yet they are faster over all on NetIndex. I'm not counting T-Mobile's LTE only cherry picked results, I'm looking at all NetIndex tests. 

[lou99/maximus1987]

I look at the national NetIndex scores. Sprint has spectrum that's slightly higher frequency than T-Mobile's, so I would think it's physics that they would need a little higher density to get to the same speeds unless Sprint starts with carrier aggregation of 2.5 GHz bands. I just have got hammered on posts over and over again at HowardForums which decry Sprint's speeds. These posts act as if you can't do anything with 8 Mbps speeds when frankly most Sprint customers are ecstatic that they have those speeds, and those speeds are 100X then when the data network didn't even work. 

 

I have seen, when I can slide into Sprint stores in St. Louis, speeds getting into the 20's and 30's when I test VZW in the same spot and it's 5. I am reluctant to include this as evidence of anything because of anecdotal evidence and all. To be fair T-Mobile stores and my test T-Mobile SIM was in the same range, but there's two markets where Sprint is doing better with speeds. Again, I'm reluctant to include the anecdotal evidence. 

 

I do see Verizon getting faster and T-Mobile getting slower slightly on a national level. Verizon supposedly has this awful cell density from 850 CDMA yet they are faster over all on NetIndex. I'm not counting T-Mobile's LTE only cherry picked results, I'm looking at all NetIndex tests. 

 

VZW is faster because of less generous data/$ AND high penalty for going over.

[Fraydog]

VZW is faster because of less generous data/$ AND high penalty for going over.

 

But the scores still stand. If you have to cite that you may as well throw out Ookla as a data source since most carriers worldwide don't have unlimited.

[doakills]

Going to chime in here, but my Portland/Vancouver B41 sites that I can tell to be optimize perform almost on par to my b25 counterparts with the major difference in speed that sets them aside. a 3 bar b25 I pull 11-15mbps at best? A 3 bar b41 signal I pull 30-40mbps... The bandwidth is so much wider then the b25 due to its frequency that its smoother for me. This is all at the same location, no moving around. 

[lou99/maximus1987]

But the scores still stand. If you have to cite that you may as well throw out Ookla as a data source since most carriers worldwide don't have unlimited.

I'm not excusing anything.

In fact, the fact that TMO speeds are anywhere near vzw is amazing.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk