Jump to content

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


joshuam

Recommended Posts

Verizon and AT&T compete directly with the local cable company in many cases. In my area, I have Verizon FiOS, and Cox is also available (but significantly more expensive for whatever reason).

 

- Trip

That is my point exactly. Who cares if all the cable companies merged together. In the vast majority of markets it wouldnt make any difference in the number of providers people have to choose from.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't these talks with Charter and Comcast just about deploying Strand Mount Small Cells?  This would be a fantastic way to densify Sprint's network.  The NIMBY's won't even notice these since they are so used to the existing equipment hanging on the lines.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get the anti-trust argument against cable companies merging. They dont compete directly. Cable companies are local monopolies who compete with sat. And telephone companies to deliver content.

 

Antitrust concerns are not limited to consumer interests.  They extend to market influence over content providers.  The larger the merged cable companies -- even if that only minimally affects competition at the consumer level -- the more likely the merged cable companies can make or break any content and content providers.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antitrust concerns are not limited to consumer interests. They extend to market influence over content providers. The larger the merged cable companies -- even if that only minimally affects competition at the consumer level -- the more likely the merged cable companies can make or break any content and content providers.

 

AJ

Content providers have a plethora of delivery methods, many of which are under utilized because of the relatively good relationships between content and deviled companies. A good example of the is HBO now and how long it took HBO to take that step.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is my point exactly. Who cares if all the cable companies merged together. In the vast majority of markets it wouldnt make any difference in the number of providers people have to choose from.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

I believe you are right about cable. The path I think things may be on, is where one company controls all the cable in the nation, along with one half of the national wireless carrier competitive market, while the other company controls all the phone line and entertainment satellite providers, along with the other half of the national wireless carrier competitive market.

 

Such as Charter and Comcast buying up the Cable market across the country so they can provide national bundles through the potential Sprint/Verizon conglomerate, while AT&T markets advanced DSL/Fiber bundles, along with Directv/Dish (unless Verizon takes Dish as an alternative to Cable the way Directv is somewhat of an alternative to Uverse), bundling services through AT&T/T-Mobile.

 

Of course, this could completely not happen if Sprint goes ahead with T-Mobile, though its questionable at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe you are right about cable. The path I think things may be on, is where one company controls all the cable in the nation, along with one half of the national wireless carrier competitive market, while the other company controls all the phone line and entertainment satellite providers, along with the other half of the national wireless carrier competitive market.

 

Such as Charter and Comcast buying up the Cable market across the country so they can provide national bundles through the potential Sprint/Verizon conglomerate, while AT&T markets advanced DSL/Fiber bundles, along with Directv/Dish (unless Verizon takes Dish as an alternative to Cable the way Directv is somewhat of an alternative to Uverse), bundling services through AT&T/T-Mobile.

 

Of course, this could completely not happen if Sprint goes ahead with T-Mobile, though its questionable at the moment.

But also the cable providers infrastructure like the fiber optics that really can help Sprint upgrade the rest of their Network and as was mentioned before densify it to. I'm just interested to see what happens.

 

Sent from my ASUS_Z01HD using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same will be true of time warner content soon, They will have to negotiate with ATT. I dont see problems with that.

 

So, you are in favor of just a few gigantic "walled gardens" for content and delivery?  And no Net Neutrality protections for consumers and society at large?

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But also the cable providers infrastructure like the fiber optics that really can help Sprint upgrade the rest of their Network and as was mentioned before densify it to. I'm just interested to see what happens.

 

Sent from my ASUS_Z01HD using Tapatalk

This probably is a reason why Charter and Comcast are looking at Sprint. If they can consolidate cable across the nation with their own cable, that could be used as backhaul for Sprint to really succeed. My theory is they'll get Sprint, then use Sprint on a national basis for why they need to pickup other cable companies across the nation, also for service bundling purposes too. Then the excuse will be the need for more towers, and from there they can introduce Verizon into it as making a stronger company between Verizon and Sprint.

 

The network reach of Verizon, the immense spectrum of Sprint, in conjunction with the cable reach of the combined cable companies would make for a very strong national carrier completely ready for 5G and beyond. The cable is essential for this, which is why after a deal with Sprint, if that were to happen, likely would bring on the cable mergers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't these talks with Charter and Comcast just about deploying Strand Mount Small Cells?  This would be a fantastic way to densify Sprint's network.  The NIMBY's won't even notice these since they are so used to the existing equipment hanging on the lines.

Not sure why everyone else thinks it's anything more than that. T-Mobile has already been doing the same in some areas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I see Google mentioned in any Comcast/Charter/Sprint article. 

Jeff Kagan: Sprint is the Bell of the Comcast, Charter Google Ball.

 

 

On a side note, since the above article reminded me of SpectrumCo LLC with so many hands in the pot, I noticed something odd when I looked up the company.

According to Crunchbase, SpectrumCo is still a sub set of Comcast, that much I knew. But the website listed on Crunchbase points to fiercewireless.com. But the FW website states it's a division of Questex. Confusing to say the least.

 

 

1s1dho.jpg

 

 

TS

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you are in favor of just a few gigantic "walled gardens" for content and delivery? And no Net Neutrality protections for consumers and society at large?

 

AJ

We have had discussion on net neutrality before. You are pro and I don't think the government should decide how profits are divided up between content and infurstructor companies. Do people value being able to access their content quickly and reliably from anywhere they are located more that have more choices on content? I don't know and I don't the government does either.

 

I would like to point out that in the history of the internet net neutrality has never had the force of law except a few years under the Obama administration. In all that time before that date nothing like the apocalyptic vision of the internet came into being and there is no reason to think it would, because the consumer values the openness of the internet. The closest you can come to a walled garden is the app store but even then every iphone has a web browser.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I see Google mentioned in any Comcast/Charter/Sprint article. 

Jeff Kagan: Sprint is the Bell of the Comcast, Charter Google Ball.

 

 

On a side note, since the above article reminded me of SpectrumCo LLC with so many hands in the pot, I noticed something odd when I looked up the company.

According to Crunchbase, SpectrumCo is still a sub set of Comcast, that much I knew. But the website listed on Crunchbase points to fiercewireless.com. But the FW website states it's a division of Questex. Confusing to say the least.

 

 

1s1dho.jpg

 

 

TS

That was a good read. Thanks for sharing. Finally, someone sees the fruits of Sprint's efforts.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't sure where to post this.  This thread seems as good as any.

 

Went out and about last night and spotted this:

 

http://imgur.com/Y1FdQb4

 

Do you see it?  If not, here's a zoomed picture.

 

http://imgur.com/vqbms0A

 

That's a Verizon small cell.  I knew it was there because of the -50 dBm AWS signal on my Verizon phone, but it took me a while to find it.  When I got home, I found the building permit for it; it was apparently filed 12/15/16, issued 3/1/17, and passed inspection on 6/5/17.  ( https://apps.alexandriava.gov/permittracker/CaseDetails.aspx?casenum=BLD2016-02856

 

I wish Sprint could move so fast...

 

- Trip

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish Sprint could move so fast...

 

- Trip

 

 

Hopefully it will one day.

 

Magic Boxes coming this Fall apparently: https://www.sprint.com/content/Sprint/sprint_com/us/en/shop/services/magic-box/status.html

 (Updated: June 30, 2017)

 

Tidal is still acting as a money sink in my opinion. Sprint should sell its $200M stake (assuming it can get that much or more) and put the money into CapEx for the worst of the worst sites. Assuming $100,000 per site, that could be 2,000 new/upgraded sites which is an appreciable amount. That would be a substantial performance boost for the network in the most needed locations.

 

Sprint actually bought Digital copies of Jay-Z's album which helped it go Platinum in six days: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/7857108/jay-z-444-certified-platinum-riaa-sprint-promotion

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I wish Sprint could move so fast...

 

- Trip

This is what I've been saying all along! Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile all move really fast when they set their mind to something. B12 adds have been popping up weekly for TMO, Verizon can do its macro builds within a few weeks (the biggest delays there are getting backhaul in place), and AT&T can seemingly do carrier adds overnight.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I've been saying all along! Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile all move really fast when they set their mind to something. B12 adds have been popping up weekly for TMO, Verizon can do its macro builds within a few weeks (the biggest delays there are getting backhaul in place), and AT&T can seemingly do carrier adds overnight.

And Sprint does well... nothing lol I'm hoping there will be some movement soon but I'm not getting my hopes up.

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't sure where to post this.  This thread seems as good as any.

 

Went out and about last night and spotted this:

 

http://imgur.com/Y1FdQb4

 

Do you see it?  If not, here's a zoomed picture.

 

http://imgur.com/vqbms0A

 

That's a Verizon small cell.  I knew it was there because of the -50 dBm AWS signal on my Verizon phone, but it took me a while to find it.  When I got home, I found the building permit for it; it was apparently filed 12/15/16, issued 3/1/17, and passed inspection on 6/5/17.  ( https://apps.alexandriava.gov/permittracker/CaseDetails.aspx?casenum=BLD2016-02856

 

I wish Sprint could move so fast...

 

- Trip

 

Man that's freaking awesome. I'm assuming they have some form of fixed backhaul for them? Curious how they got fiber there, unless they ran it up the side of the building?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tidal is still acting as a money sink in my opinion. Sprint should sell its $200M stake (assuming it can get that much or more) and put the money into CapEx for the worst of the worst sites. Assuming $100,000 per site, that could be 2,000 new/upgraded sites which is an appreciable amount. That would be a substantial performance boost for the network in the most needed locations.

 

Sprint actually bought Digital copies of Jay-Z's album which helped it go Platinum in six days: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/7857108/jay-z-444-certified-platinum-riaa-sprint-promotion

I'm no fan of exclusives, but its a necessary evil in this day and age to differentiate yourself, jumping on a Jay Z and Beyonce combo isn't a bad place to start. Also, does not hurt that people are giving 4:44 stupendous reviews (Album is truly one of the best hip hop albums in a looong time)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man that's freaking awesome. I'm assuming they have some form of fixed backhaul for them? Curious how they got fiber there, unless they ran it up the side of the building?

 

If that's NoVA where Trip's profile says he is then Verizon fiber is a plenty over there. I'm sure they just ran a strand of fiber from the nearest terminal to the building for it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of exclusives, but its a necessary evil in this day and age to differentiate yourself, jumping on a Jay Z and Beyonce combo isn't a bad place to start. Also, does not hurt that people are giving 4:44 stupendous reviews (Album is truly one of the best hip hop albums in a looong time)

It's funny I randomly tried to get Tidal working today after a month and it worked, have no plans to listen to the jayz album though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny I randomly tried to get Tidal working today after a month and it worked, have no plans to listen to the jayz album though.

If your not a poetic hip hop fan, then that's fine I guess. But if you are, your basically doing yourself a disservice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your not a poetic hip hop fan, then that's fine I guess. But if you are, your basically doing yourself a disservice.

I'm more into the old school hip hop at this point in my life, pre 2004 is where you'll catch me. :P

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...