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

[anthony.spina97]

Is it possible that this could be the start of AT&T's downfall? Their network is beginning to lag behind their competitors, with Sprint and T-Mobile catching up to them in many markets. And now they have lost almost a million subscribers this quarter, after losing a few hundred thousand more over the past year. Could this be the beginning of their demise? 

 

-Anthony

[WiWavelength]

Is it possible that this could be the start of AT&T's downfall? Their network is beginning to lag behind their competitors, with Sprint and T-Mobile catching up to them in many markets. And now they have lost almost a million subscribers this quarter, after losing a few hundred thousand more over the past year. Could this be the beginning of their demise? 

 

Define "demise."  AT&T is far too big to fail.  Millions of people would lose basic phone and Internet access.  That would never be allowed to happen.

 

What likely is happening, instead, is that T-Mobile continues to siphon off subs from AT&T.  T-Mobile has become the cool, new kid in school.  Will that coolness remain or wear thin?  We cannot say right now.  But T-Mobile will have to up its game to retain the subs it has gained.  That is the gambit being played.

 

AJ

[Arysyn]

Is it possible that this could be the start of AT&T's downfall? Their network is beginning to lag behind their competitors, with Sprint and T-Mobile catching up to them in many markets. And now they have lost almost a million subscribers this quarter, after losing a few hundred thousand more over the past year. Could this be the beginning of their demise?

 

-Anthony

Excellent post, Anthony!

 

I've been writing about the subject quite a bit here on S4GRU lately, which after reading all of the negative reviews of its network in these reports, and seeing them just doing way too many things, does seem they may very well be headed that way.

 

Although, and this is just my opinion, I think AT&T may be waiting to see if a Republican administration gets in so they can take another try at acquiring T-Mobile. Of course, Sprint also wants T-Mobile, though if AT&T tries for it again, I do think AT&T will win it.

 

Besides, it is very important for Sprint to get working on NGN, which while I understand how it makes more sense in some ways to spend money in acquiring T-Mobile rather than spending alot of that money on a major network expansion. However, there just are too many uncertainties in the merger option, and it will take more time Sprint just doesn't seem to have, according to these analysts.

 

I'm not placing judgment on Sprint though, and I want to see them do well. I also realize that by not participating in the 600mhz spectrum auction, their only opportunity at getting that spectrum later on seems to be through a merger with T-Mobile. Currently, it does seem that is what Sprint might be counting on. If so, it'll be interesting to see how, if even this affects NGN.

 

Back to AT&T though, it looks like they will need an NGN of their own pretty soon. Yet like Sprint, I'm thinking they are waiting for the right moment to try acquiring T-Mobile.

[Arysyn]

Define "demise." AT&T is far too big to fail. Millions of people would lose basic phone and Internet access. That would never be allowed to happen.

 

What likely is happening, instead, is that T-Mobile continues to siphon off subs from AT&T. T-Mobile has become the cool, new kid in school. Will that coolness remain or wear thin? We cannot say right now. But T-Mobile will have to up its game to retain the subs it has gained. That is the gambit being played.

 

AJ

You definitely are right about T-Mobile there, AJ. Although while I'm certainly critical of T-Mobile and of John Legere in alot of ways, I do think T-Mobile is going to continue to grow very well. It is what they need to do, in order for DT to get as much as possible out of an acquisition of T-Mobile.

[maxsilver]

Is it possible that this could be the start of AT&T's downfall? Their network is beginning to lag behind their competitors, with Sprint and T-Mobile catching up to them in many markets

 

I don't think a major downfall is likely.

 

Your absoultely right that AT&T's unmaintained markets are lagging behind Sprint and T-Mobile's maintained markets, and we're seeing that in RootMetrics. Grand Rapids in 2015-1H, for instance (AT&T had basically ignored their LTE network there since deployed in 2013. When Sprint rolled out Spark in 2015, they roughly matched median data speeds of AT&T's 2013-era LTE networks 2015 data speeds, according to RootMetrics).

 

But in areas that AT&T has modernized aggressively, they typically hold/retain a strong score. (see markets like Pittsburgh 2015-2H or Ann Arbor 2015-2H http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/pittsburgh-pa/2015/2H )

 

AT&T has just been slow / lazy about updating some markets so far. And Verizon/T-Mobile/Sprint generally haven't been lazy -- they're upgrading all over the place. In 2015-1H, Sprint and T-Mobile had more maintained markets than AT&T did. This hurts AT&T in the short term (as it should, people should pick whatever they prefer most).

 

But in most markets, AT&T isn't trapped in some sort of "bad situation" -- they just haven't chosen to pay the cash to keep up. If / when performance becomes enough of a problem for AT&T, they will probably just pay for the upgrades to fix it.  They easily have the cash to do that.

 

I suspect that might have already started in some areas, and we won't see those results until more 2015-2H reports come out.

[DanielB]

It is humorous, all things aside. Verizon and AT&T's coverage maps are bad as it is, but I don't know how T-Mobile can legally get away with their coverage map. Hopefully there will eventually be an investigation and standards that could even force VZW and AT&T to use more realistic algorithms, but I tend to believe that's a pipe dream.

 

My experience with T-Mobile has been that the coverage maps technically tend to be accurate....if one is outside. They absolutely do not represent fair in-building coverage, however. I've had T-Mobile reps go so far as to argue with me that I get indoor coverage in a certain location because their beloved coverage map says I should when I actually have nothing. The key has always seemed to be indoor vs. outdoor coverage, which of course is a characteristic of their band 2/4 spectrum in non-12 markets (like Virginia).

[anthony.spina97]

Define "demise."  AT&T is far too big to fail.  Millions of people would lose basic phone and Internet access.  That would never be allowed to happen.

 

What likely is happening, instead, is that T-Mobile continues to siphon off subs from AT&T.  T-Mobile has become the cool, new kid in school.  Will that coolness remain or wear thin?  We cannot say right now.  But T-Mobile will have to up its game to retain the subs it has gained.  That is the gambit being played.

 

AJ

Oh no, I'm not saying that they would go bankrupt or anything. What I'm suggesting is that basically, they could become the new pre-NV Sprint. Lose a ton of subs as your network slips behind your competitors because you didn't keep up with it.

 

-Anthony

[WiWavelength]

Oh no, I'm not saying that they would go bankrupt or anything. What I'm suggesting is that basically, they could become the new pre-NV Sprint. Lose a ton of subs as your network slips behind your competitors because you didn't keep up with it.

 

Are you speaking of subscriber numbers or network quality perception?

 

For subscriber numbers, that ship has long since sailed.  AT&T will not fall behind Sprint.  If it did, that would mean the end of AT&T.  Bankruptcy would be almost inevitable.  But executive leadership and investors would not allow that to happen.  Far sooner, AT&T would find a way to acquire T-Mobile or Sprint to halt the bleeding.

 

AJ

[Arysyn]

My experience with T-Mobile has been that the coverage maps technically tend to be accurate....if one is outside. They absolutely do not represent fair in-building coverage, however. I've had T-Mobile reps go so far as to argue with me that I get indoor coverage in a certain location because their beloved coverage map says I should when I actually have nothing. The key has always seemed to be indoor vs. outdoor coverage, which of course is a characteristic of their band 2/4 spectrum in non-12 markets (like Virginia).

Certain T-Mobile representatives have become really arrogant, likely as a result of T-Mobile's growth and "hip" image, where they feel like they must defend the company as "its cool to represent the uncarrier, and any talk against it needs to be represented" Like "Represent, and fight back against those who dare diss the mighty uncarrier".

 

It is similar to some of Verizon's staff, though the arrogance is more snotty at Verizon, less hip groupie-like. Staff from both companies are likely to be defensive of their coverage in their own unique style of arrogance. Like a hippie versus a yuppie.

[DanielB]

Certain T-Mobile representatives have become really arrogant, likely as a result of T-Mobile's growth and "hip" image, where they feel like they must defend the company as "its cool to represent the uncarrier, and any talk against it needs to be represented" Like "Represent, and fight back against those who dare diss the mighty uncarrier".

 

It is similar to some of Verizon's staff, though the arrogance is more snotty at Verizon, less hip groupie-like. Staff from both companies are likely to be defensive of their coverage in their own unique style of arrogance. Like a hippie versus a yuppie.

 

Uggghhhh. I was in a Verizon store yesterday actually; traffic and inventory spot-checking. Anyway, you are right.....they seem almost disgusted to regard anything but their way as an acceptable business practice. I was hassled, cajoled, and bothered by several reps in my ~5 minutes in the store. "Just looking." or "Do you have x in stock?" are apparently the literary equivalent to opening Pandora's box in a VZW store!

[Arysyn]

Uggghhhh. I was in a Verizon store yesterday actually; traffic and inventory spot-checking. Anyway, you are right.....they seem almost disgusted to regard anything but their way as an acceptable business practice. I was hassled, cajoled, and bothered by several reps in my ~5 minutes in the store. "Just looking." or "Do you have x in stock?" are apparently the literary equivalent to opening Pandora's box in a VZW store!

Sounds though they are getting worse since their mini-redesign with their new logo, etc. I figured maybe they'd try being friendlier considering their lighter "look", but it seems not.

 

I'm still disappointed over their decision not to carry the Sony Z4v, which affected my outlook of Verizon to being a bit less positive than before, though I'm hoping for a good turnaround for them during the holidays. If they come out with good promotions, I might check them out, though only if I haven't joined Sprint or decided to go with AT&T or even sticking with T-Mobile, as I'm tempted to stay on GSM for the Sony Xperia Z5 Premium, as I found some online stores already taking preorders for it.

 

Which reminds me to ask here. Has anyone here had or know someone who's ordered from one of those Overseas Electronics type stores? There is a company with that name taking preorders, and a few others also. Are they good /reputable to buy from?

[jreuschl]

Kansas City Royals in the World Series = More advertising for Sprint!

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

Kansas City Royals BACK in the World Series AGAIN = More advertising for Sprint!

 

I fixed your quote.

 

AJ

[JosefTor]

Kansas City Royals in the World Series = More advertising for Sprint!

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Was it just me but the only wireless company not advertising during the show was Sprint? If I was sprint it would have brought out the message that Sprint is number one in KC.

[JonnygATL]

 

YIPE!

Oooh. She looks PISSED.

[Arysyn]

There is an article I'll post a link to here, then I'll give my opinions about it :

 

http://investorplace.com/2015/10/cmcsa-comcast-tmus-sprint/2/#.Viu0598o7qA

 

The writer, Brian Nichols, has written other articles regarding wireless, though obviously more based on stocks than on tech, though he seems to havea fairly good knowledge pertaining to tech, as well as stocks. Also, he doesn't seem at all biased, unlike many other writer-analysts. There is no bias in this article against Sprint, which is a refreshing change from the norm in articles I've been reading lately.

 

In this article, he mentions how he believes Comcast might purchase Sprint and the various reasons why that would be a better decision than purchasing T-Mobile. He gives both business and technical reasons why he thinks this is, which I happen to agree with him. Of course, I still believe Verizon would be better suited for Comcast, though I certainly can see Sprint being a good choice too, partly based by the reasons he gives for it.

 

Both T-Mobile and Verizon would be very expensive options for Comcast to merge with, particularly Verizon. However, Sprint wouldn't cost as much to buy, and Comcast not being in the same situation as Softbank, which according to analysts, isn't good, Comcast could spend alot of money on both NGN and the 600mhz spectrum, if they could get the merger done in time for the auction, which while doubtful, they could try to get the auction postponed a bit.

 

The only issues with it, which are obvious, are customer service for Sprint, which is a shame as Sprint's customer service is pretty good for the most part. Then there is the issue of price. I know those issues are a major negative for the customer, though for business it makes sense and is the only thing I think could happen with Comcast in wireless, other than Verizon. I seriously doubt Comcast is going to go with T-Mobile.

[markjcc]

Does anybody know why Virgin Mobile has "Limitless Music" - LINK

 

Is it coming to postpaid customers on Sprint? VM is a MVNO of sprint so I don't see why not..

[Arysyn]

Does anybody know why Virgin Mobile has "Limitless Music" - LINK

 

Is it coming to postpaid customers on Sprint? VM is a MVNO of sprint so I don't see why not..

I don't understand why they are offering it, though I know some people here are against the idea, as am I. Considering the rumor of Sprint possibly adding unlimited data to their tiered data plans as means to more closely compete with T-Mobile I presume, it is a possibility Sprint is using Virgin Mobile to test the idea and may implement it for Sprint in the future.

[Arysyn]

Speaking of unlimited streaming music, I wonder why it is only on Virgin Mobile and not on Boost Mobile. Seems to me that it would be equally, if not more fitting on Boost Mobile, as Boost Mobile seems more recognizable as a Sprint MVNO, as I rarely hear about Virgin Mobile nowadays. Although, I could be wrong about that, as I'm unaware of the actual customer numbers between the two. Just that I hear much more news about Boost than I do about Virgin.

[markjcc]

Speaking of unlimited streaming music, I wonder why it is only on Virgin Mobile and not on Boost Mobile. Seems to me that it would be equally, if not more fitting on Boost Mobile, as Boost Mobile seems more recognizable as a Sprint MVNO, as I rarely hear about Virgin Mobile nowadays. Although, I could be wrong about that, as I'm unaware of the actual customer numbers between the two. Just that I hear much more news about Boost than I do about Virgin.

Sprint should just consolidate VM and Boost into Sprint, It'll give it a stronger brand name like T-Mobile Postpaid and Prepaid..

[Johnner1999]

Sprint should just consolidate VM and Boost into Sprint, It'll give it a stronger brand name like T-Mobile Postpaid and Prepaid..

and metro pcs

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[markjcc]

and metro pcs

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eh, I guess it's the same.. Sprint Postpaid/Prepaid then MVNO's like VM, Boost

 

T-Mobile Postpaid/Prepaid then MetroPCS

[markjcc]

I don't understand why they are offering it, though I know some people here are against the idea, as am I. Considering the rumor of Sprint possibly adding unlimited data to their tiered data plans as means to more closely compete with T-Mobile I presume, it is a possibility Sprint is using Virgin Mobile to test the idea and may implement it for Sprint in the future.

What's pulling you back from the idea of Unlimited Unmetered music?

 

If you're in a family data share plan with 20G, 4 Devices streaming Pandora everyday.. That 20GB will be depleted quick.

 

Sprint needs Unlimited music streaming to draw customers away from T-mo who are staying because of that.

Single line no problem, You've got unlimited. Family.. Nope

[Johnner1999]

There is an article I'll post a link to here, then I'll give my opinions about it :

 

http://investorplace.com/2015/10/cmcsa-comcast-tmus-sprint/2/#.Viu0598o7qA

 

The writer, Brian Nichols, has written other articles regarding wireless, though obviously more based on stocks than on tech, though he seems to havea fairly good knowledge pertaining to tech, as well as stocks. Also, he doesn't seem at all biased, unlike many other writer-analysts. There is no bias in this article against Sprint, which is a refreshing change from the norm in articles I've been reading lately.

 

In this article, he mentions how he believes Comcast might purchase Sprint and the various reasons why that would be a better decision than purchasing T-Mobile. He gives both business and technical reasons why he thinks this is, which I happen to agree with him. Of course, I still believe Verizon would be better suited for Comcast, though I certainly can see Sprint being a good choice too, partly based by the reasons he gives for it.

 

Both T-Mobile and Verizon would be very expensive options for Comcast to merge with, particularly Verizon. However, Sprint wouldn't cost as much to buy, and Comcast not being in the same situation as Softbank, which according to analysts, isn't good, Comcast could spend alot of money on both NGN and the 600mhz spectrum, if they could get the merger done in time for the auction, which while doubtful, they could try to get the auction postponed a bit.

 

The only issues with it, which are obvious, are customer service for Sprint, which is a shame as Sprint's customer service is pretty good for the most part. Then there is the issue of price. I know those issues are a major negative for the customer, though for business it makes sense and is the only thing I think could happen with Comcast in wireless, other than Verizon. I seriously doubt Comcast is going to go with T-Mobile.

 

I highly doubt Comcast would buy sprint. It would take too much time and money.

 

Riding on VZW as an MVNO would give a quicker ramp up with less CS issues. And no large infrastructure to deal with.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

What's pulling you back from the idea of Unlimited Unmetered music?

 

If you're in a family data share plan with 20G, 4 Devices streaming Pandora everyday.. That 20GB will be depleted quick.

 

Sprint needs Unlimited music streaming to draw customers away from T-mo who are staying because of that.

Single line no problem, You've got unlimited. Family.. Nope

You are right about Sprint needing to compete with T-Mobile, which having unlimited music streaming certainly would help with that, which some people would consider it a necessity that I completely understand.

 

However, there has been a debate going around here from time to time over the issue of unlimited streaming music conflicting with net neutrality, which I've struggled with trying to form an opinion about as both sides have good and bad points to say about it.

 

Due to that, I've gone about deciding to take the issue differently. Instead of bothering with forming an opinion based on the complexities and realities of net neutrality and all the various conflicting opinions about it, I decided instead to think how a carrier could price their rate plans to be more accommodating to the needs people have.

 

I've come up with a solution that treats all data equally if carriers would choose a low base rate, then offer an affordable per gb rate on top of that, similar to Google Fi's structure, but at a much less expensive per gb rate. That way, everyone could afford plenty of music streaming, while treating other forms of data fairly, and also help keep networks from congestion due to what many here consider to be caused by the "data abuse" often done by those with unlimited data plans.

 

Of course, there is that whole debate too between sides of that, which like with the net neutrality debate, I believe in the same simple solution of the rate plan example I just made. Yet, it is the carriers who need to make that choice. I blame the carriers who choose not to do so, rather than blame the user. So as long as unlimited music streaming is offered, I say go ahead and stream away, so long as no violations of the terms of service are being done.