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

[Arysyn]

Sprint just announced its 4Q15 Earnings Call Date:

 

Sprint Corporation Schedules Fiscal 2015 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Results Announcement

May 3, 2016 at 8:30AM ET

 

It does seem like quite a while ago since the last one. Same with the T-Mobile reports too, unless I've missed it recently.

[utiz4321]

It does seem like quite a while ago since the last one. Same with the T-Mobile reports too, unless I've missed it recently.

One every 3 months or one every quarter.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

One every 3 months or one every quarter.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

 

Usually time passes by pretty quickly for me, though these past few months have been so slow in comparison to how it usually is, hence my comment. Hopefully its been as good of a quarter fiscally for Sprint as it has been regarding network ratings.

[bigsnake49]

Sorry to interrupt but I found an interesting article on rcrwireless about the Shentel/Ntelos merger:

 

http://www.rcrwireless.com/20160418/carriers/sprint-affiliate-shentel-talk-spectrum-network-plans-tag17

 

According to the article, all Ntelos spectrum will be assigned to Sprint which will then allow Shentel to deploy it on their network. They will upgrade all 857 Ntelos sites and expand the network by 150 sites. They will deploy band 26 and 25 throughout the network and band 41 in the population denser part of the coverage area.

 

Well, you might have known, but the rest of us did not know that Ntelos had 857 sites or that Shentel promised to add 150 sites to the network.

[RedSpark]

It does seem like quite a while ago since the last one. Same with the T-Mobile reports too, unless I've missed it recently.

 

See: Quarterly Results

 

See: Events

[Arysyn]

See: Quarterly Results

 

See: Events

 

Ah, that helps! Now if I miss anything, I'll know where to go, thanks!

 

I'm going to be very interested in what losses T-Mobile might have this upcoming quarter. Cricket just revealed their new unlimited plan which while is throttled to 8mbps with LTE/4mbps with HSPA, doesn't have a deprioritization throttle, is around $30 cheaper per month than T-Mobile, and has a much better network in many areas than what T-Mobile offers. I imagine this is going to hurt T-Mobile's numbers pretty badly.

 

Also, if I were in charge of Sprint, I'd merge Boost and Virgin into Sprint Prepaid, or come up with a single prepaid name other than Sprint, to compete with Cricket. I think what I'd do is offer a $45 monthly unlimited plan with a 15mbps speed cap. I've seen a few comments from people on various sites suggesting Cricket raise the speed to 15mbps. I've always found that to be a great number for a speed cap too, so I'd use it at that $45 monthly rate. In doing so, I think it would add to the competition T-Mobile has, and would help Sprint too. Unfortunately, I'm not hearing much comparison to Boost in these news reports about Cricket's new unlimited plan. They've basically been comparing it to T-Mobile and to MetroPCS, barely ever mentioning Sprint and its unlimited plan or even Boost's unlimited plan.

[RedSpark]

Ah, that helps! Now if I miss anything, I'll know where to go, thanks!

 

I'm going to be very interested in what losses T-Mobile might have this upcoming quarter. Cricket just revealed their new unlimited plan which while is throttled to 8mbps with LTE/4mbps with HSPA, doesn't have a deprioritization throttle, is around $30 cheaper per month than T-Mobile, and has a much better network in many areas than what T-Mobile offers. I imagine this is going to hurt T-Mobile's numbers pretty badly.

 

Also, if I were in charge of Sprint, I'd merge Boost and Virgin into Sprint Prepaid, or come up with a single prepaid name other than Sprint, to compete with Cricket. I think what I'd do is offer a $45 monthly unlimited plan with a 15mbps speed cap. I've seen a few comments from people on various sites suggesting Cricket raise the speed to 15mbps. I've always found that to be a great number for a speed cap to, so I'd use it at that $45 monthly rate. In doing so, I think it would add to the competition T-Mobile has, and would help Sprint too. Unfortunately, I'm not hearing much comparison to Boost in these news reports about Cricket's new unlimited plan. They've basically been comparing it to T-Mobile and to MetroPCS, barely ever mentioning Sprint and its unlimited plan or even Boost's unlimited plan.

 

You're welcome! There's a lot of content on the Sprint Investors Website: http://investors.sprint.com/

 

I think Boost and Virgin should be folded into Sprint Prepaid for greater cost savings. Having to promote multiple brands with separate marketing channels seems very costly.

[utiz4321]

You're welcome! There's a lot of content on the Sprint Investors Website: http://investors.sprint.com/

 

I think Boost and Virgin should be folded into Sprint Prepaid for greater cost savings. Having to promote multiple brands with separate marketing channels seems very costly.

It depends on the value of the brand. It is hard to measure but if the value of the brand is greater than the cost saving they should keep the way it is. I think they are and have looked at it.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

You're welcome! There's a lot of content on the Sprint Investors Website: http://investors.sprint.com/

 

I think Boost and Virgin should be folded into Sprint Prepaid for greater cost savings. Having to promote multiple brands with separate marketing channels seems very costly.

 

I definitely agree! I'm curious how much Sprint has to pay for licensing of the Virgin name, unless of course they bought the rights to the name completely when they took over operations of it years ago. It would really help with easing marketing difficulties to merge them though. Or if they really feel they'd be better having a youthful-sounding branding name for the prepaid division, they could always call it by the name they choose, followed with "by Sprint".

[richy]

I definitely agree! I'm curious how much Sprint has to pay for licensing of the Virgin name, unless of course they bought the rights to the name completely when they took over operations of it years ago. It would really help with easing marketing difficulties to merge them though. Or if they really feel they'd be better having a youthful-sounding branding name for the prepaid division, they could always call it by the name they choose, followed with "by Sprint".

 

Virgin branding doesn't work that way (buying the brand). There are a set of quality criteria to sustain, a % stake in the company, an upfront payment and a yearly fee (theres some variation but generally its this formula). I worked for a virgin branded company and went through the acquisition of the brand. This makes a pile of money, an ongoing income and the ability to terminate the agreement should a company act in a manner which tarnishes the brand. 

 

Going forward do they need as many brands, I'm sure sprint reviews the costs and benefits of each owned brand and considers folding them in. 

[Arysyn]

Virgin branding doesn't work that way (buying the brand). There are a set of quality criteria to sustain, a % stake in the company, an upfront payment and a yearly fee (theres some variation but generally its this formula). I worked for a virgin branded company and went through the acquisition of the brand. This makes a pile of money, an ongoing income and the ability to terminate the agreement should a company act in a manner which tarnishes the brand. 

 

Going forward do they need as many brands, I'm sure sprint reviews the costs and benefits of each owned brand and considers folding them in. 

 

I really wasn't sure on how the Virgin branding worked, so the best I could assume under the scenario I discussed with what was mentioned.

 

I'm not too fond of the idea where a company runs a business using another company's name. It can be confusing and misleading for the customer, especially one where a customer has a certain expectation of the brand. For instance, and I don't mean any offense towards Sprint as we know Sprint is much better now than it has been in the past, though a customer loyal to Virgin could have been put off towards Virgin for the problems occurred on Sprint's network during the difficult times. Same could be said of a loyal Sprint customer turned off by any negativity going on in the Virgin company, if they are not aware of the branding situation. Hopefully before they misjudge, they'll do some research in finding out the situation before going off against either company, switching carriers, or whatever.

 

Of course, there is some benefit to having Sprint run Virgin Mobile as it has been doing and still is, though at what benefit versus loss is there in doing so. Not just loss of money in whatever cost there is to use the brand in contrast to money made from it, but also would Sprint be better off just having its own unique prepaid branding. There is a sense of pride in running a business with its own unique identity in contrast to running a business off of the name of something else that is known, but not your own. Perhaps Sprint would be better off combining the prepaid groups into one, then making a major run with it as something truly their own, unique identity that possibly could expand into replacing the Sprint name, if they choose to do so at some time in the future.

 

It is an issue that has a lot of possibilities and definitely one that has different viewpoints to it. I'm looking at it just trying to think of what might be a good name for a prepaid brand, if Sprint were to use something other than Sprint Prepaid. Personally, I think calling it Sprint Prepaid is best, in terms of establishing a connection to the main brand right away, then if Sprint decides to change the brand name in the future, they can change them both together. However, Sprint may want to have a separate name too. Any ideas?

[Camcroz]

 

 

Ah, that helps! Now if I miss anything, I'll know where to go, thanks!

 

I'm going to be very interested in what losses T-Mobile might have this upcoming quarter. Cricket just revealed their new unlimited plan which while is throttled to 8mbps with LTE/4mbps with HSPA, doesn't have a deprioritization throttle, is around $30 cheaper per month than T-Mobile, and has a much better network in many areas than what T-Mobile offers. I imagine this is going to hurt T-Mobile's numbers pretty badly.

 

If you want to compare apples to apples, metro pcs, which is tmobiles prepaid brand just as cricket is to att, has an unlimited plan with no throttle for 60 dollars. I believe there is the depriorization though at 22gb.

 

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

If you want to compare apples to apples, metro pcs, which is tmobiles prepaid brand just as cricket is to att, has an unlimited plan with no throttle for 60 dollars. I believe there is the depriorization though at 22gb.

 

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk

 

I've heard it has the deprioritization, which is why if people are okay with the speed being mostly around 8mbps, Cricket makes for a much better deal, particularly with autopay. Cricket's rate on autopay only is $5 more per month, though has a much better network and no deprioritization down to low dialup levels. For many people, it makes Cricket a much better choice. I suspect this is going to hurt T-Mobile with their unlimited plans just as it will for MetroPCS. At least from what I've been reading, the comparison is being made to both, likely because there have been many reports of T-Mobile's speeds decreasing lately, likely due to BingeOn bringing congestion on the network. If people on T-Mobile have speeds around 8mbps or less most of the time due to this congestion, then it makes sense to switch to Cricket for the better network and no deprioritization.

[Camcroz]

I've heard it has the deprioritization, which is why if people are okay with the speed being mostly around 8mbps, Cricket makes for a much better deal, particularly with autopay. Cricket's rate on autopay only is $5 more per month, though has a much better network and no deprioritization down to low dialup levels. For many people, it makes Cricket a much better choice. I suspect this is going to hurt T-Mobile with their unlimited plans just as it will for MetroPCS. At least from what I've been reading, the comparison is being made to both, likely because there have been many reports of T-Mobile's speeds decreasing lately, likely due to BingeOn bringing congestion on the network. If people on T-Mobile have speeds around 8mbps or less most of the time due to this congestion, then it makes sense to switch to Cricket for the better network and no deprioritization.

Ya if att is solid in your area than the cricket plan is for sure a great deal. Especially in those slow tmobile markets. I'm in a 20x20 market and I almost never have any problems with speed. However I've rolled through some cities that aren't as fortunate spectrum wise and the speeds can get pretty nasty. Besides 8mbps can do just about anything so I see no problem with that.

 

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk

[MarshieZ]

You might be surprised.  Try to put up a cell phone tower in your yard and see how many people come to town meetings shrieking about cancer risks and other such stupidity--often while talking on the phone pressed against their head.  The inverse square law is really lost on those people.

 

- Trip

 

You're absolutely right here and speaking of which... while not a RF issue more so a location issue, the whole N.I.M.B.Y (not in my backyard) situation is coming into play here. By the way... this is about a Verizon tower being built.

 

I'm sure a good chunk of the residents complaining are Verizon customers, but of course because people are uneducated they don't understand the common sense here of that a location is chosen for a reason. You can't just plunk one down anywhere... I mean I'm no fan of Verizon but the comments and complaints I've seen from this story makes me shake my head. 

[Terrell352]

http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/19/study-americans-are-ditching-home-internet-for-mobile/

 

I find this troubling. People need realize that mobile finite resources are no substitute for isp.

[Arysyn]

http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/19/study-americans-are-ditching-home-internet-for-mobile/

 

I find this troubling. People need realize that mobile finite resources are no substitute for isp.

 

Perhaps these people are using it mostly for web browsing not for video streaming. AT&T and Verizon are too expensive for most people to stream video and well if its T-Mobile they might be streaming video from, these people really are not to blame for this. T-Mobile actively promotes heavy video streaming, which is a major reason why its network is getting so awful.

 

If the FCC would change the auction system towards fair spectrum distribution methods, charging a fair lease price on the usage of spectrum, then the carriers could have more spectrum, especially if the FCC arranged the spectrum amounts giving three carriers 30x30 spectrum on low-band, mid-band, and high-band 3x TDD equivalents. That after allowing a merger with T-Mobile, so there is only three national carriers. 90mhz downlink and 90mhz uplink on each carrier by three carriers giving the public 270mhz downlink and 270mhz uplink (possibly more depending on how a carrier arranges its high-band TDD spectrum), is plenty of spectrum to handle most landline uses. However, carriers would need too have sensible speed management on their networks I suggest the speed be set at 15mbps-18mbps maximum speeds.

 

While unlimited data might be technically feasible under those conditions, I still prefer there'd be a sensible per gb price. Possibly around 10 cents per gb, but only in the scenario I've presented here. Currently, the lowest rate I envision it going is $1 per gb, which will not be sustainable among a growing need for wireless data that requires more spectrum on continually developing networks. More spectrum is needed and will eventually be provided so that customers can use more data for lower costs. Carriers will need to have sensible speed management though to keep these networks usable for all customers, regardless how small or great the amount of spectrum available. There likely never will be room for hundreds or even thousands of people getting gigabit speeds on wireless networks at the same time. Have the speeds at 4k-capable speeds of 15mbps - 18mbps, ought to make this possible, though again at these spectrum amounts.  

[Calvin200]

https://nycstreets.net/Public/Permits/SearchMobile#disclaimerPage

 

Permits search

Anyone look around on here?  

[Paynefanbro]

Anyone look around on here?

I don't think that link has any cell permits. They're all Street permits. There is however, a directory of all cellular permits that was listed in a table format that could be viewed in Excel. I can't seem to find it though.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Lots of "One Sprint" announcements today:

 

Kevin Kunkel Named Sprint President, Southern California Region

 

Jonathan Blitz Named Sprint President, South Central Region

 

Mark Nachman Joins Sprint as President, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia Region

 

Michael McMahon Joins Sprint as President, Great Plains Region

[dedub]

they sure are dividing 'one sprint' into a lot of presidents.

 

They keep going and they will have more presidents than the federal reserve.

[utiz4321]

You're welcome! There's a lot of content on the Sprint Investors Website: http://investors.sprint.com/

 

I think Boost and Virgin should be folded into Sprint Prepaid for greater cost savings. Having to promote multiple brands with separate marketing channels seems very costly.

It depends on the value of the brand. It is hard to measure but if the value of the brand is greater than the cost saving they should keep the way it is. I think they are and have looked at it.

they sure are dividing 'one sprint' into a lot of presidents.

 

They keep going and they will have more presidents than the federal reserve.

I am not sure but i think they already do.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[kg4icg]

Before anyone else wants to go hop on the 5G band wagon again why Sprint should start trials. Verizon just put 5G in perspective saying it's about fixed internet structure, not mobility.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/verizons-shammo-5g-pilot-2017-all-about-fixed-wireless-not-mobility/2016-04-21?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=958371&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpaaU1EUmtNamcwWVRGaiIsInQiOiJoMENMMGx0Qkp4ZFpvZzJVRGhVekNTSWpqcmRidFJCK0l4MG1jS2tYaXg2YkRGRGZESWMxS2V6WE1sc1JnenlJdnBRSjI1bE8rRm95K1ZuRVVLN3ZpSG55YnlcL0tDYzNxRHZjRVo2TUg1Y009In0%3D

 

Sent from my LGLS996 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Before anyone else wants to go hop on the 5G band wagon again why Sprint should start trials. Verizon just put 5G in perspective saying it's about fixed internet structure, not mobility.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/verizons-shammo-5g-pilot-2017-all-about-fixed-wireless-not-mobility/2016-04-21?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=958371&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpaaU1EUmtNamcwWVRGaiIsInQiOiJoMENMMGx0Qkp4ZFpvZzJVRGhVekNTSWpqcmRidFJCK0l4MG1jS2tYaXg2YkRGRGZESWMxS2V6WE1sc1JnenlJdnBRSjI1bE8rRm95K1ZuRVVLN3ZpSG55YnlcL0tDYzNxRHZjRVo2TUg1Y009In0%3D

 

Sent from my LGLS996 using Tapatalk

 

Sprint's take on 5G is a bit different it seems:

 

 

So yeah, what is that 5G, anyway? All of the carriers are now saying they're leaders in 5G. In Saw's view, 5G is a "dense network using high-band spectrum," which conveniently places Sprint as a leader, as one can see its 2.5GHz band as the very lowest band of that high-band spectrum.

 

"2.5 is going to be the low-band, beachfront spectrum of 5G," Saw said. "Ten years ago, everybody laughed at us, but I think it's come full circle, and everybody now recognizes the value of high-band spectrum for 5G."

 

[kg4icg]

Right now my take is. Basically being a WISP at higher frequencies

 

Sent from my LGLS996 using Tapatalk