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

[greenbastard]

Yes. Yes. Of course they can be wrong. Most of them are wrong.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Are you stating that as a fact or opinion???

 

Wait, I could of sworn I blocked you! Didn't we have a mutual agreement to stop replying to each other's messages as per your request? I guess you couldn't resist. That's ok, I'll just head over to settings and fix my ignore list. I'll honor both our requests properly.

[kg4icg]

Opinions are like a-holes, everyone has one.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

[greenbastard]

Opinions are like a-holes, everyone has one.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

Except for Kim Jong Il. He never pooped according to the DPRK.

[kg4icg]

Except for Kim Jong Il. He never pooped according to the DPRK.

No, the crap all comes out of his mouth everytime he speaks.

 

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

[JThorson]

Okay everyone, lets get back on topic here and stop talking about who poops where.

 

With this whole ARM acquisition, what are people's thoughts regarding Sprint? Of course you hear rumors on how Softbank is done with Sprint and blah blah, but I don't believe that is the case. I still think Softbank is invested in Sprint but is waiting for Marcelo to make it more profitable. But as I asked, what is everyone's thoughts regarding this and the future of Sprint?

[Terrell352]

Okay everyone, lets get back on topic here and stop talking about who poops where.

 

With this whole ARM acquisition, what are people's thoughts regarding Sprint? Of course you hear rumors on how Softbank is done with Sprint and blah blah, but I don't believe that is the case. I still think Softbank is invested in Sprint but is waiting for Marcelo to make it more profitable. But as I asked, what is everyone's thoughts regarding this and the future of Sprint?

Softbank would see profit faster if it actually invested instead of letting Sprint fend for themselves. Sprint is making tremendous progress but not fast enough.

[kg4icg]

Well I say no armchair CEO speculating until we see what comes out Monday. Of course we are going to see some throw there last .2 cents in and go broke anyway.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Okay everyone, lets get back on topic here and stop talking about who poops where.

 

With this whole ARM acquisition, what are people's thoughts regarding Sprint? Of course you hear rumors on how Softbank is done with Sprint and blah blah, but I don't believe that is the case. I still think Softbank is invested in Sprint but is waiting for Marcelo to make it more profitable. But as I asked, what is everyone's thoughts regarding this and the future of Sprint?

 

Marcelo seemed hyped about it: https://twitter.com/marceloclaure/status/755117746258604032

 

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that something good is in the works.

[Deval]

Softbank would see profit faster if it actually invested instead of letting Sprint fend for themselves. Sprint is making tremendous progress but not fast enough.

 

Not really though. Profit isn't a magical number that comes from having money thrown at it. Same goes for Sprint as a company. Throwing money at things won't make sites get upgraded faster, won't get permitting done faster.

[clbowens]

Not really though. Profit isn't a magical number that comes from having money thrown at it. Same goes for Sprint as a company. Throwing money at things won't make sites get upgraded faster, won't get permitting done faster.

 

I think it could get sites upgraded faster.  But I agree that it won't get permitting done faster.

[RedSpark]

Not really though. Profit isn't a magical number that comes from having money thrown at it. Same goes for Sprint as a company. Throwing money at things won't make sites get upgraded faster, won't get permitting done faster.

 

Wouldn't throwing money at protection sites in Montana get them upgraded sooner?

 

Wouldn't throwing money at 3G areas like Central/West PA (especially Williamsport, PA, etc.) (or no coverage areas) enable them to get LTE sooner, and not force Sprint to compromise on its deployment by using GMO's?

 

Both of these situations seem to be due to a shortage of money/funding, and not equipment or permitting delays. Of course, if I'm wrong on this, please set me straight! 

[grapkoski]

I'm hoping we see Sprint turn cash flow positive this quarter. That and approval of the spectrum swaps with T-Mo and VZ would be most welcome surprises.

[Mr.Nuke]

Throwing money at things won't make sites get upgraded faster, won't get permitting done faster.

Yeah it would if the reason or even a factor in sites not getting upgraded faster was reducing capital expenditures in an effort to minimize overall losses. Sprint had initially said they were going to spend $15 billion on network expansion over 3 years ($5 billion a year on average). In May, they lowered their guidance to $3 billion for this year.

 

At the time Claure brushed it off that they were using data to strategically target where to put additional sites and thus deferring the expense as well as looking at lower cost options like femtocells. This is in pretty stark contrast to the previous strategy where Claure had said we are going to put 2.5 on every site we possibly can and Sprint walked away from many already permitted sites*.

 

It seems pretty evident that more money would've allowed Claure to carry out his original plan and would've indeed lead to sites getting upgraded faster. Instead, Sprint is once again forced to try and do the best with what they've got.

 

 

*I realize Omaha isn't a major market and will never be a big market for Sprint, but just as an example they walked away from about 45 permitted 8T8R sites here and there hasn't been any observed Band 41 site activity for 10 months.

[RedSpark]

Yeah it would if the reason or even a factor in sites not getting upgraded faster was reducing capital expenditures trying to minimize overall losses. Sprint had initially said they were going to spend $15 billion on network expansion over 3 years ($5 billion a year on average). In May, they lowered their guidance to $3 billion for this year.

 

At the time Claure brushed it off that they were using data to strategically target where to put additional sites and thus deferring the expense as well as looking at lower cost options like femtocells. This is in pretty stark contrast to the previous strategy where Claure had said we are going to put 2.5 on every site we possibly can and Sprint walked away from many already permitted sites*.

 

It seems pretty evident that more money would've allowed Claure to carry out his original plan and would've indeed lead to sites getting upgraded faster. Instead, Sprint is once again forced to try and do the best with what they've got.

 

 

*I realize Omaha isn't a major market and will never be a big market for Sprint, but just as an example they walked away from about 45 permitted 8T8R sites here and there hasn't been any observed Band 41 site activity for 10 months.

 

Good points.

 

How much money would it have cost Sprint to upgrade those 45 8T8R sites?

 

If Sprint was to start over with the permitting process on those, how long of a time frame are we looking at?

[Deval]

Wouldn't throwing money at protection sites in Montana get them upgraded sooner?

 

Wouldn't throwing money at 3G areas like Central/West PA (especially Williamsport, PA, etc.) (or no coverage areas) enable them to get LTE sooner, and not force Sprint to compromise on its deployment by using GMO's?

 

Both of these situations seem to be due to a shortage of money/funding, and not equipment or permitting delays. Of course, if I'm wrong on this, please set me straight! 

 

Has anyone considered that perhaps those sites are not upgraded because the focus is elsewhere? 

[Hypeo]

Has anyone considered that perhaps those sites are not upgraded because the focus is elsewhere?

I think that's what they're referring , if they had the money they wouldn't have to shift the focus and they would just develop and expand

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deval]

I think that's where they're referring to if they have the money they wouldn't have to shift the focus and they would just develop and expand

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Even having more money doesn't mean you have to spend it haphazardly.

[utiz4321]

Even having more money doesn't mean you have to spend it haphazardly.

No. But it does mean that you don't leave giant wholes in your latest network where you just never upgraded your existing equipment.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Has anyone considered that perhaps those sites are not upgraded because the focus is elsewhere? 

 

Having additional money would enable Sprint to broaden its focus... assuming permitting and equipment availability weren't limiting factors.

[RedSpark]

Even having more money doesn't mean you have to spend it haphazardly.

 

I'm not suggesting Sprint engage in haphazard spending. However, the bar for what passes as acceptable immediate/short-term ROI would be lowered if Sprint had more funds to work with.

 

Williamsport, PA would get LTE, etc. You'd have full macro builds instead of GMO's. More markets would get LTE Plus. The holdover dual mode Clearwire equipment would get swapped out for new 8T8R equipment in more places and more quickly.

[JWMaloney]

Yeah it would if the reason or even a factor in sites not getting upgraded faster was reducing capital expenditures trying to minimize overall losses. Sprint had initially said they were going to spend $15 billion on network expansion over 3 years ($5 billion a year on average). In May, they lowered their guidance to $3 billion for this year.

 

Sprint did not claim that it was no longer planning to spend $15 billion over 3 years. Sprint issued a lower guidance for this year only due to regulatory issues. That means that when the regulatory hurdles are cleared, spending will increase. Expect to see a jump in FY2017 when many of their expenses actually hit the books.

[JustinRP37]

Sprint did not claim that it was no longer planning to spend $15 billion over 3 years. Sprint issued a lower guidance for this year only due to regulatory issues. That means that when the regulatory hurdles are cleared, spending will increase. Expect to see a jump in FY2017 when many of their expenses actually hit the books.

 

You cannot look at an announcement just like that. A company would never come out and just say they are no longer going to commit as much money to their future as was once planned. That would be stock suicide in a fragile moment such as the one Sprint it is. Sprint HAS to maintain and instill investor confidence for the stock to grow. If they succeed in instilling confidence, then they will be able to increase CAPEX more in the future. I am hoping that the numbers at the investor call start showing that they are on the right path. If they have a weak quarter, then things could get a bit uglier. I am an investor in Verizon and seeing Verizon grow this strong is exciting yet frightening because I am a Sprint user and love the company. Put it this way, Verizon's profit right now, per quarter, are close to what Sprint is spending for capital expenditures in an entire year. The underdogs Sprint and T-Mobile, have to pick and choose their battle grounds and words very carefully.

[nexgencpu]

Looks like Verizon just ended unlimited data. Sprint will most likely see a huge influx of subs, I'm just worried they are the wrong type of subs that would slowly deteriorate the network with abuse.

[danny12345]

Looks like Verizon just ended unlimited data. Sprint will most likely see a huge influx of subs, I'm just worried they are the wrong type of subs that would slowly deteriorate the network with abuse.

What do you mean ended? Wasn't it done for a while ago? Or do you mean the grandfathered unlimited data?

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Mr.Nuke]

Sprint did not claim that it was no longer planning to spend $15 billion over 3 years. Sprint issued a lower guidance for this year only due to regulatory issues. That means that when the regulatory hurdles are cleared, spending will increase. Expect to see a jump in FY2017 when many of their expenses actually hit the books.

They haven't exactly said they're still going to either. When asked on the earnings call last quarter if we should consider this a deferral he said no.

 

Although we have today is we have an estimate that we intend to spend around $3 billion of CapEx this year. In the case that those approvals come faster out of which so far we're satisfied the way they are coming, we will be spending potentially more than $3 billion. If these approvals get delayed, then we will move us forward. But what I want to make sure we leave it clear is there's not an intent to basically defer CapEx into fiscal year 2017.

 

Basically, we want to spend as much as it's necessary in order for us to provide a good experience to our customers and continue with densification of our network.

The potential issue here is even it wasn't a deferment for financial reasons at the time, in effect it is. Marcelo has done a great job of cutting costs, but fairly soon you run out of things to cut. Spending $3 billion this year means you can still get to $15 billion by spending $6 billion each of the next two years. Delay it further and the math starts becoming more dubious especially if Sprint is still bleeding money elsewhere. We'll see what the guidance is on the next earnings release.