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

[RedSpark]

Marcelo's new LinkedIn Pulse Post about his "Listening Tour":

 

Dispatches from the Road: My Listening Tour – San Francisco

 

Great read.

[WiWavelength]

Just to be clear, my questioning of the results had no correlation to who "won" other than the methodology of the sampling not being clear, with results being given in Bytes per second, versus bits, and my assumption being that if the measurement is in Bytes, then it must be a total throughput over time, which should directly correlate to total traffic measured for each provider.

 

And I believe I quoted one of your previous posts, you quoted one of my previous posts, or both.  But for me to be clear, too, I was not trying to call you out -- or anyone in particular out.  Sometimes, I quote posts just to serve as examples.  I digress.

 

To address the bits/bytes issue above and in your previous post, I think that you are making too much of it.  It clearly is a typographical error.  An executive, engineer, or PR person screwed up when writing that release.  People who should know better still use MB/s or MBps when they really mean Mb/s or Mbps.

 

The total data transfers were measured in TB.  The average data speeds were measured in Mbps.  Despite any typographical error, that really should be obvious.

 

AJ

[Jones]

Marcelo's new LinkedIn Pulse Post about his "Listening Tour":

 

Dispatches from the Road: My Listening Tour – San Francisco

 

Great read.

That is a great read. Thanks for posting

[Arysyn]

Marcelo's new LinkedIn Pulse Post about his "Listening Tour":

 

Dispatches from the Road: My Listening Tour – San Francisco

 

Great read.

 

 

That is a great read. Thanks for posting

 

 

While I appreciate people posting articles here for the sake of information, at least, I have to say that this article was pretty shocking to me, in the sense that it made me think very differently about Marcelo Claure and the direction of Sprint. I can't say this was great though, despite my appreciation for the post, as my changed outlook now isn't so good now.

 

What I mean is not meant to be harsh criticism towards Sprint, which I recognize the achievements made to its network, etc., but I can't help thinking Marcelo doesn't have much a clue about his customers, despite his career position, business successes, etc. His perspective about them based on the rating system he gave, while in concept good, he is really, very off on how he is using it to such a major degree, in my opinion. He stated that a 7 rating was good at one point in the article, then bad in another. A 7 rating for any type of business, that is if 10 is best, 1 is the worst (I'll retract my thoughts on this if he meant 10 as being the worst, though I'm thinking he meant otherwise, being 10 at best), then a 7 is pretty darn good, even a 5 which he seems very disappointed with. A 5 rating means average, 7, if 10 is best, is very good, which in that case, Marcelo should be happy.

 

The other thing is how he didn't mention anyone telling him less than 5. Again, no offense to Sprint, especially for the achievements it has made, as I stated earlier, but there still is such a major issue with its past reputation that I can't believe he didn't meet anyone with a less than a 5 rating. I'm not saying I think there ought to be many of those, which certainly the improvements it has made ought to improve its reputation. However, and this isn't only an issue for Sprint but all carriers have customers that complain, and in such a situation with a CEO meeting with customers on a tour around the country, there is bound to be at least one person in a group like that.

 

Anyways, what shocked me the most, is the overall disappointment he seemed to have for a company that really is improving and if those truly are the numbers he is getting from his customers, he ought to be pleased. Although, he seems to down about it, that along with the lack of any news from Sprint lately, other than its continuation of 50% off and matching the T-Mobile offer, he isn't doing much about what he seems to be down about. With that in mind, along with reports regarding Softbank, I can't help to think what would have been had Softbank not bought Sprint, and had Marcelo never been given the position of CEO at Sprint, had Dan Hesse stayed put. There were all the major changes happening at Sprint during that time, which somewhat leads me to believe that all of the great development started during the Hesse "era", would have led to better things Sprint could have used to prosper with greatly, rather than just managing to stay around.

 

I mean no offense, as I've said, just thinking about those "what-ifs" that this article got me thinking about.

[bigsnake49]

While I appreciate people posting articles here for the sake of information, at least, I have to say that this article was pretty shocking to me, in the sense that it made me think very differently about Marcelo Claure and the direction of Sprint. I can't say this was great though, despite my appreciation for the post, as my changed outlook now isn't so good now.

 

What I mean is not meant to be harsh criticism towards Sprint, which I recognize the achievements made to its network, etc., but I can't help thinking Marcelo doesn't have much a clue about his customers, despite his career position, business successes, etc. His perspective about them based on the rating system he gave, while in concept good, he is really, very off on how he is using it to such a major degree, in my opinion. He stated that a 7 rating was good at one point in the article, then bad in another. A 7 rating for any type of business, that is if 10 is best, 1 is the worst (I'll retract my thoughts on this if he meant 10 as being the worst, though I'm thinking he meant otherwise, being 10 at best), then a 7 is pretty darn good, even a 5 which he seems very disappointed with. A 5 rating means average, 7, if 10 is best, is very good, which in that case, Marcelo should be happy.

 

The other thing is how he didn't mention anyone telling him less than 5. Again, no offense to Sprint, especially for the achievements it has made, as I stated earlier, but there still is such a major issue with its past reputation that I can't believe he didn't meet anyone with a less than a 5 rating. I'm not saying I think there ought to be many of those, which certainly the improvements it has made ought to improve its reputation. However, and this isn't only an issue for Sprint but all carriers have customers that complain, and in such a situation with a CEO meeting with customers on a tour around the country, there is bound to be at least one person in a group like that.

 

Anyways, what shocked me the most, is the overall disappointment he seemed to have for a company that really is improving and if those truly are the numbers he is getting from his customers, he ought to be pleased. Although, he seems to down about it, that along with the lack of any news from Sprint lately, other than its continuation of 50% off and matching the T-Mobile offer, he isn't doing much about what he seems to be down about. With that in mind, along with reports regarding Softbank, I can't help to think what would have been had Softbank not bought Sprint, and had Marcelo never been given the position of CEO at Sprint, had Dan Hesse stayed put. There were all the major changes happening at Sprint during that time, which somewhat leads me to believe that all of the great development started during the Hesse "era", would have led to better things Sprint could have used to prosper with greatly, rather than just managing to stay around.

 

I mean no offense, as I've said, just thinking about those "what-ifs" that this article got me thinking about.

 

Arsyn, just enjoy T-Mobile. Please stop these long-winded diatribes. Nobody wants to read them. Go to Tmonews. They might!

Edited February 17, 2016 by bigsnake49

[smooth25]

Not sure if this requires it's own thread so I will just leave it here. I was always curious about using satellites. Does anyone think it will be used in the U.S.? This would be awesome.

 

http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/02/16/810833/0/en/SoftBank-to-Provide-High-Speed-LTE-Services-Using-Gilat-s-Satellite-Based-Cellular-Backhaul-Technology.html

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[chaddy0122]

Not sure if this requires it's own thread so I will just leave it here. I was always curious about using satellites. Does anyone think it will be used in the U.S.? This would be awesome. http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/02/16/810833/0/en/SoftBank-to-Provide-High-Speed-LTE-Services-Using-Gilat-s-Satellite-Based-Cellular-Backhaul-Technology.html

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

Looks like it..

 

"We also expect to see the application of this technology to the mobile network of our group company Sprint in the US."

[smooth25]

Thanks I was just about to post that quote.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[luvixuha]

Does anyone think it will be used in the U.S.? This would be awesome.

If by awesome you mean terrible latencies and limited bandwidth, then yeah, it will be real awesome.

[smooth25]

If by awesome you mean terrible latencies and limited bandwidth, then yeah, it will be real awesome.

Yeah this would suck in the mountains.

 

"The latest trials demonstrated FTP downlink rates of up to 100Mbps using actual mobile handsets, which until now have been very difficult to achieve."

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

If by awesome you mean terrible latencies and limited bandwidth, then yeah, it will be real awesome.

 

Unless you need real-time performance for gaming, etc., this service could suffice for most usage in the mountains/hills, etc.

 

Latency isn't a dealbreaker here at all.

[smooth25]

I'm sure if T-Mobile did this there would be a massive celebration of the upcoming "Super Duper Extended Range LTE"

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[luvixuha]

From the Gilat Skyedge II sales doc "TCP performance over satellite without special treatment is impacted due to the latency introduced by the distance between the Earth and the satellite. Typically this distance translates to a latency of between 240 to 280 msec, depending on where the sending and receiving sites are in the satellite footprint. This makes the round trip time due to propagation delay at least 480 milliseconds."

 

Half second ping times are not going to make for a very good mobile experience. Delay in opening webpages is going to be reminiscent of dial-up.

Edited February 17, 2016 by luvixuha

[RedSpark]

Looks like it..

 

"We also expect to see the application of this technology to the mobile network of our group company Sprint in the US."

 

The Gilat webpage has some good info on Cellular Backhaul via Satellite and Small Cell Over Satellite.

 

Be sure to read the SatMagazine articles which are referenced:

 

200Mbps TDMA VSAT for 3G/LTE Backhaul

 

Small Cell Over Satellite: Connecting Rural Areas Cost Effectively

[smooth25]

From the Gilat Skyedge II sales doc "TCP performance over satellite without special treatment is impacted due to the latency introduced by the distance between the Earth and the satellite. Typically this distance translates to a latency of between 240 to 280 msec, depending on where the sending and receiving sites are in the satellite footprint. This makes the round trip time due to propagation delay at least 480 milliseconds."

 

Half second ping times are not going to make for a very good mobile experience. Delay in opening webpages is going to be reminiscent of dial-up.

I think having any mobile experience in isolated areas is a good experience.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

From the Gilat Skyedge II sales doc "TCP performance over satellite without special treatment is impacted due to the latency introduced by the distance between the Earth and the satellite. Typically this distance translates to a latency of between 240 to 280 msec, depending on where the sending and receiving sites are in the satellite footprint. This makes the round trip time due to propagation delay at least 480 milliseconds."

 

Half second ping times are not going to make for a very good mobile experience. Delay in opening webpages is going to be reminiscent of dial-up.

 

If the alternative is having no coverage at all in areas because of low ROI, is this preferable? To me, it is.

[RedSpark]

From the Gilat Skyedge II sales doc "TCP performance over satellite without special treatment is impacted due to the latency introduced by the distance between the Earth and the satellite. Typically this distance translates to a latency of between 240 to 280 msec, depending on where the sending and receiving sites are in the satellite footprint. This makes the round trip time due to propagation delay at least 480 milliseconds."

 

Half second ping times are not going to make for a very good mobile experience. Delay in opening webpages is going to be reminiscent of dial-up.

 

As Louis C.K. said, it's coming from space....give it a second.

[Mercurial1]

While I appreciate people posting articles here for the sake of information, at least, I have to say that this article was pretty shocking to me, in the sense that it made me think very differently about Marcelo Claure and the direction of Sprint. I can't say this was great though, despite my appreciation for the post, as my changed outlook now isn't so good now.

 

What I mean is not meant to be harsh criticism towards Sprint, which I recognize the achievements made to its network, etc., but I can't help thinking Marcelo doesn't have much a clue about his customers, despite his career position, business successes, etc. His perspective about them based on the rating system he gave, while in concept good, he is really, very off on how he is using it to such a major degree, in my opinion. He stated that a 7 rating was good at one point in the article, then bad in another. A 7 rating for any type of business, that is if 10 is best, 1 is the worst (I'll retract my thoughts on this if he meant 10 as being the worst, though I'm thinking he meant otherwise, being 10 at best), then a 7 is pretty darn good, even a 5 which he seems very disappointed with. A 5 rating means average, 7, if 10 is best, is very good, which in that case, Marcelo should be happy.

 

The other thing is how he didn't mention anyone telling him less than 5. Again, no offense to Sprint, especially for the achievements it has made, as I stated earlier, but there still is such a major issue with its past reputation that I can't believe he didn't meet anyone with a less than a 5 rating. I'm not saying I think there ought to be many of those, which certainly the improvements it has made ought to improve its reputation.

 

 

 

I mean no offense, as I've said, just thinking about those "what-ifs" that this article got me thinking about.

He uses a net promoter system for those ratings which is common in many fields. In this case a score of 7 is neutral and to be a net promoter he needs a score of 9 or 10.

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[smooth25]

From the Gilat Skyedge II sales doc "TCP performance over satellite without special treatment is impacted due to the latency introduced by the distance between the Earth and the satellite. Typically this distance translates to a latency of between 240 to 280 msec, depending on where the sending and receiving sites are in the satellite footprint. This makes the round trip time due to propagation delay at least 480 milliseconds."

 

Half second ping times are not going to make for a very good mobile experience. Delay in opening webpages is going to be reminiscent of dial-up.

Nice try. That document is from April 2011.

 

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[Trip]

The speed of light hasn't changed lately as far as I'm aware.

 

- Trip

[smooth25]

The speed of light hasn't changed lately as far as I'm aware.

 

- Trip

Lol true. I posted that to also show the extent that people will go to criticize. That was on page 49 on a 5 year old document.

Well I'm not sure he was critical or just sarcastic. Either way, low or high latency isn't a factor in desolate areas.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[Trip]

That information never becomes outdated, though.  A geostationary satellite is in orbit 35,800 km (roughly) above the earth.  Light travels 300,000 km per second (roughly).  If you do the math, considering that your request results in a need to:

 

1) Travel to the satellite

2) Travel from the satellite

3) Be processed

4) Return to the satellite

5) Return from the satellite

 

(That's four satellite trips.) 

 

Each trip between a geostationary satellite and the Earth is 119 ms, giving you a latency between the time you send your request from your phone to the time the first packet is received as 477 ms, assuming 0 ms latency in step 3, between your phone and the tower, or within the satellite itself between steps 1/2 and 4/5.

 

You can get around it by using lower-orbit satellites, though I'm not sure how much you can really use those for this sort of thing, given they will be constantly moving across the sky and in and out of reception range.

 

- Trip

[Trip]

Either way, low or high latency isn't a factor in desolate areas.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

Saw you edited to add this.  To which I say, it is if you're trying to make a phone call.

 

- Trip

[smooth25]

Saw you edited to add this. To which I say, it is if you're trying to make a phone call.

 

- Trip

Don't they already do with 3G?

 

"SoftBank has already succeeded in providing cost-efficient 3G mobile communications in Japan, where it is difficult to build facilities for fixed-line and mobile communications, by using satellite communications as backhaul." 

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[Trip]

It doesn't really make clear whether they mean 3G voice, 3G data, or both.  Could just be 3G data.

 

- Trip