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

[newyork4me]

Not to go wildly off subject, but... really?  I didn't think anyone actually believed T-Mobile's numbers.  I know I don't.  Way too many holes in the coverage (when you think about how wildly overstated the maps are) to actually reach that many people in a serious way.

 

By contrast, at least Sprint roams in places where it has no coverage.  True, I see T-Mobile native in more places than I see Sprint, but I have nTelos (which will soon be Sprint) and US Cellular and the RRPP members to fall back on (albeit in 3G--beats "No Service").  T-Mobile may be moving in that direction, but nothing is announced yet.  I have that on Sprint today.

 

- Trip

 

Let's be clear: the difference between the 280 million POPs that Sprint and T-mobile had at the start of the year (and Sprint still has now--rounding up in their favor, no less) and the 304 million POPs that T-Mobile has now is 1,000,000 sq miles of new coverage. Even if the maps are overstated in some places--much like Sprint does too--that's 1,000,000 sq miles, or 1/3 of the geographic area of the continental US. Not all of that is "overstated".

 

T-Mobile's network is vastly larger; there is no question about that. And, T-Mobile offers roaming on a lot of AT&T where they don't have service and roam-like-home on Viaero in Nebraska & iWireless in Iowa too. Not in-market everywhere, but with the 100mb roaming limit on Sprint, that's quite a bit of a red herring on that side.

 

But, again, today's promotion is largely meaningless. Sprint was already the cheapest carrier. For someone to have not chosen them to begin with, it had to be a reflection of their network greatly lagging the other carriers. And they already offered half off any Verizon & AT&T bills. So, today's announcement offers half-off to T-Mobile subscribers only; the same T-Mobile subscribers who already made a conscious decision to pay more for T-Mobile to have a better network. 

 

Thus, the only incremental add they will get are the very few people who are willing to downgrade in network quality to save a small amount of money for a few years--or should I say, save a slightly larger amount of money over that which they would have prior to today's announcement. 

 

This does not appear well thought out, to say the least. Oh well, I'm sure some people thought it quite valuable to rearrange the deck chairs during the Titanic's final moments too.

[sonny_crockett]

I do not recall all of the details off the top of my head, but T-Mobile has eliminated some grandfathered elements -- such as subsidized upgrades -- from legacy plans.  I think there was also an old $5.99 add on that still provided "unlimited" data, but T-Mobile has enacted recent policies that make those existing users uncomfortable.  Some time ago, they were complaining to high heaven on TmoNews.

 

And that is my point.  It happens everywhere, across many industries.  New subs get most of the love.  Existing subs need to be satisfied with their service plans -- or take their business elsewhere.

 

AJ

 

I was under the impression that Sprint was similarly removing subsidized upgrades from its legacy plans.  Is this not the case?

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/sprint-getting-rid-of-phone-contracts-calls-them-a-thing-of-the-past/

[Jones]

I read that softbank owns a majority stake in supercell. What if sprint offered a perk like 1000 gems to any clash of clans players on their network. It would ruin the integrity of the game but still be nice for those who play. Not me of course... I'm a grown man. ????

[Johnner1999]

Not at T-Mobile.  Business is frat boy posturing and trash talking.

 

AJ

 

that very well may be true.   But at the moment Sprint has lost more money and TMO has became a decent profit center for their parent company.   Has secured debt to purchase new spectrum etc etc...

 

 

as many have said here - only phone geeks really know what happens at the carriers.  The masses see TMO as the underdog and shaking things up... so they try it and their friends try it ect ect --- where as most people don't see Sprint as a decent solution.  

 

But back on topic -- none of these carriers are our friends!  They are in business to make money.   

[Houston_Texas]

 

 

But back on topic -- none of these carriers are our friends! They are in business to make money.

People seem to forget that.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910T

[WiWavelength]

I was under the impression that Sprint was similarly removing subsidized upgrades from its legacy plans.  Is this not the case?

 

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/sprint-getting-rid-of-phone-contracts-calls-them-a-thing-of-the-past/

 

That is irrelevant to my point about tasty perks for new versus existing customers.

 

But, no, Sprint has not yet discontinued subsidized upgrades and two year contracts.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

T-Mobile's network covers 304 million POPs with LTE now. AT&T and Verizon both cover more than that. Sprint's does not come close. That's the difference. 

 

Sure, if Sprint works better for someone who had another carrier before, this could be a good deal. But Sprint was already the cheapest, and this announcement does nothing for current customers. So it's only of value to people who already weren't using the cheapest option--and it entices them to give up more coverage with...cheaper prices? Which is what they had before. 

 

I somehow doubt this will do much to stop the near 3-to-1 porting ratio of Sprint to T-Mobile in Southern California, for example. That's largely a coverage/network based reaction (T-Mobile has a network that rivals Verizon in the Southland now that they've turned on Band 12). Pricing your way to poverty isn't going to bring back those subscribers...

 

You can cite specious T-Mobile POPs statistics.  But as Trip suggests in an earlier post, do you really believe them?  T-Mobile has reintroduced rudimentary signal gradient maps, and they are not pretty.  Lots of "Fair Signal."  Not consistent, not reliable.

 

So, you can cherry pick T-Mobile markets all that you want.  Sprint can do the same.  But read the most recent RootMetrics national report:

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/blog/special-reports/2015-1h-national-us

 

T-Mobile has been and still is the national wireless network weakling, ranking fourth behind Sprint.  Overall performance is not even close.  Sprint is well ahead, closer to second place AT&T than to last place T-Mobile.

 

T-Mobile is not just the "uncarrier" -- it is the unreliable carrier.  Those are the objective facts.

 

AJ

[belusnecropolis]

Does anyone still use the lounge?

I usually orbit around there a couple nights a week and hold the door while I do homework.

[WiWavelength]

This is true.  He basically comes here to promote or celebrate anti-Sprint or anti-S4GRU discussion.  But he has managed to do so without breaking the rules.  He is the evidence that we just don't go banning people we disagree with or don't like.  If so, he would have been banned a long time ago.

 

#Houston_TexasDoesntMatter

 

 

AJ

[jamesinclair]

Im not liking how Sprint is presenting their plans.

 

Go to the website, hit shop, and youre presented with one and ONLY one option, which is $20 + data + phone, aka ~$60 a month for a 1GB plan, or ~$110 for unlimited

 

....and thats it.

 

But go to Best Buy.com, say youre a new customer, and you can get an iPhone 6 for $1 on a 2 year, and then choose between

Simply Everything Family SPR   (apparently $70 for unlimited data)
My All-in (Individual) SPR (apparently $80 for unlimited data, if you go through all the checkout screens)

Sprint Family Pack SPR (I cant even figure out the pricing here)

 

And I dont even know where one finds the iPhone for life or was it means - edit, apparently $80 with the phone, $65 if you bring your own?

 

And of course now you have pricing based on what your previous carrier was - unless you're on prepaid and then youre ignored.
 

 

This is confusing right? It's not just me?

[Ascertion]

 

 

You can cite specious T-Mobile POPs statistics. But as Trip suggests in an earlier post, do you really believe them? T-Mobile has reintroduced rudimentary signal gradient maps, and they are not pretty. Lots of "Fair Signal." Not consistent, not reliable.

 

So, you can cherry pick T-Mobile markets all that you want. Sprint can do the same. But read the most recent RootMetrics national report:

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/blog/special-reports/2015-1h-national-us

 

T-Mobile has been and still is the national wireless network weakling, ranking fourth behind Sprint. Overall performance is not even close. Sprint is well ahead, closer to second place AT&T than to last place T-Mobile.

 

T-Mobile is not just the "uncarrier" -- it is the unreliable carrier. Those are the objective facts.

 

AJ

A lot of their expansion though has been B12 only, which makes their rural numbers (at the state level) look horrible due to RootMetrics testing with an older device. I do think Sprint is better rural but I don't think T-Mobile is that far behind. 2H is getting close to being over, but we'll probably see the national rankings in Feb.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

[lilotimz]

A lot of their expansion though has been B12 only, which makes their rural numbers (at the state level) look horrible due to RootMetrics testing with an older device. I do think Sprint is better rural but I don't think T-Mobile is that far behind. 2H is getting close to being over, but we'll probably see the national rankings in Feb.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

 

Rootmetric tests with a Galaxy Note 4 B12 enabled device and have tested with it for months. Likewise they upgraded the Sprint S5 to a GNE when it become apparent Sprint was firing up 2nd B41 carriers and carrier aggregation.

 

Now it appears they've upgraded to Galaxy S6 for Sprint because of rumored issues with the GNE. 

[Ascertion]

Rootmetric tests with a Galaxy Note 4 B12 enabled device and have tested with it for months. Likewise they upgraded the Sprint S5 to a GNE when it become apparent Sprint was firing up 2nd B41 carriers and carrier aggregation.

 

Now it appears they've upgraded to Galaxy S6 for Sprint because of rumored issues with the GNE.

True, but in AJs post, he was referencing 1H results, which were tested and reported using a Galaxy S5 (non B12 device.)

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

[Calvin200]

This may be my one and only post on the so called "hype."  Yes, this move is major and worthy of the hype -- for new subscribers.  Had VZW, AT&T, and/or T-Mobile offered a deal to cut your Sprint bill in half for equivalent plans, many of you would be out of here in a heartbeat and on that deal like fliesye on shit.

 

#DoubleStandard

 

AJ

The problem is it's not a double standard.   Sprint's network, like it or not, is not up to Verizon's or ATT's nationwide standards.   Sprint knows this and improved A LOT--- and has.  They however are not there yet and that's why they have to do such promotions.  Yes people would leave because they would get half of "almost there" prices.  That's why it's not a double standard.  Comparing apples and not ripe apples.  

[WiWavelength]

A lot of their expansion though has been B12 only, which makes their rural numbers (at the state level) look horrible due to RootMetrics testing with an older device. I do think Sprint is better rural but I don't think T-Mobile is that far behind. 2H is getting close to being over, but we'll probably see the national rankings in Feb.

 

Yes, the band 12 deployment could make a difference.  But the early returns have not been that great.  When zoomed in -- the return of rudimentary signal gradient coverage maps have exposed some likely overstatement.

 

And for the record in 1H 2015, here are the RootMetrics numbers for Sprint and T-Mobile:

 

Overall Performance:  Sprint 87.5, T-Mobile 82.0

Network Reliability:  Sprint 91.3, T-Mobile 82.7

Network Speed:  T-Mobile 85.1, Sprint 75.8

Data Performance:  T-Mobile 87.0, Sprint 85.0

Call Performance:  Sprint 88.3, T-Mobile 75.1

Text Performance:  Sprint 95.0, T-Mobile 90.5

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/blog/special-reports/2015-1h-national-us

 

While individual market performance or individual experience may vary, any well reasoned statistician would say that Sprint soundly beat T-Mobile in that national contest.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

The problem is it's not a double standard.   Sprint's network, like it or not, is not up to Verizon's or ATT's nationwide standards.   Sprint knows this and improved A LOT--- and has.  They however are not there yet and that's why they have to do such promotions.  Yes people would leave because they would get half of "almost there" prices.  That's why it's not a double standard.  Comparing apples and not ripe apples.  

 

The deal now includes freaking T-Mobile.  Do you not get that?!  T-Mobile, the "uncarrier," the one that is cutting and/or raising prices, as well as handing out free candy -- not Net Neutrality friendly, though, for those who have allergies.

 

It is a double standard.  ABCD.  If A, B, or C were offering half off of the others, people would be clambering to get those plans.  The cult of marketing and personality.

 

If you are sticking with what you consider to be a substandard Sprint just for the price, please go elsewhere.  I am sick of this kind of shit.

 

AJ

[gusherb]

280+ posts and 2 hours of reading later here I am... I completely forgot about this announcement (even though I remembered last night right before going to bed) and am glad I did! 

 

I believe this went wrong on many levels. Definitely overhyped, for what it was. My first impression while reading through these 280+ posts is "are you F-ing kidding me! all this hype over something they've had for a year now!!!!". Then I learned that they did change it around a little.

 

I have to say, the promo itself is not bad, it seems decently put together (not as well as It should be IMO, but it's better then the previous version which seemed half baked).

Will it get me back? No. I want "best" or "near best" service, and Sprint doesn't provide that to me. I was just testing again, and found my phone dropping off LTE like it always has (at 33rd and Halsted in Chicago, indoors), it's crucial that I have good service in that area, and Sprint still doesn't quite cut the mustard. 

 

I also spoke to 3 friends while catching up on this thread, who are quite a bit less techie than me. Mentioned the promo to them, and none were interested because they either thought the network sucked still, or the network actually still sucks where they are.

 

What I don't quite get is how screw ups like this are still happening with a new parent company, and a new CEO whom is supposedly cleaning house. (I'm talking about all the hype they built, albeit not widely publicized, it's still hype). The proper way to have gone about this particular announcement would've been to have just quietly announced it "out of the blue" and then started marketing like crazy after that announcement. 

[WiWavelength]

I have to say, the promo itself is not bad, it seems decently put together (not as well as It should be IMO, but it's better then the previous version which seemed half baked).

Will it get me back? No. I want "best" or "near best" service, and Sprint doesn't provide that to me. I was just testing again, and found my phone dropping off LTE like it always has (at 33rd and Halsted in Chicago, indoors), it's crucial that I have good service in that area, and Sprint still doesn't quite cut the mustard.

 

You are an anomaly.  The other anecdotal experiences and objective reports drown you out.  That is not to say that you and your experience do not matter.  But Sprint is the "best" or "near best" in Chicagoland now.  Though that may not be where you work, live, play, etc.  Wireless service is all about location, location, location.  National last place T-Mobile can beat out national first place VZW in some locations.

 

AJ

[gusherb]

You are an anomaly. The other anecdotal experiences and objective reports drown you out. That is not to say that you and your experience do not matter. But Sprint is the "best" or "near best" in Chicagoland now. Though that may not be where you work, live, play, etc. Wireless service is all about location, location, location. National last place T-Mobile can beat out national first place VZW in some locations.

 

AJ

Yep I sure am. You also should know that I live in an area where almost nobody from any tech forums posts from, and hardly anyone frequents here. The only poster on here that has visited here, and mentioned his experiences here was Vince, and his if I recall correctly were good, but he also didn't venture too far into the area and he happened to be in areas that were covered very well. You head out my way a little and things start to show a different story.

This is no small area (the county is half a million), it is technically a suburban area of Chicago but Illinoisans as a general rule don't come here unless they're visiting someone (they usually are lost in my subdivision asking for directions), or they're from the south suburbs coming over the border to escape the high taxes of Cook county.

The good news is that our image of being "simple folk way out in Indiana" has been changing as more Illinoisians are fleeing the state and coming here for cheaper taxes and less corruption.

[mnjeepmale]

I actually wish they would give me an incentive to get off framily. I know it won't last forever as people drop off, but compared to current plans I would have to lose half my members before it really makes sense. If they would make a deal to move my two lines to family share and waive the access fees I would consider for the hotspot benefit. I would be paying more and be happy. Win Win.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm with you in the same boat. I'm on Framily and been on it for over a year. We are at max users and only had 1 person drop in all the time I've been on this plan. That person was replaced shortly later. Mind you I don't know any of the other Framily member's. But who knows how long this plan or users will be around. I just can't find anything better then$45 unlimited everything.

[Rocket87]

I'm with you in the same boat. I'm on Framily and been on it for over a year. We are at max users and only had 1 person drop in all the time I've been on this plan. That person was replaced shortly later. Mind you I don't know any of the other Framily member's. But who knows how long this plan or users will be around. I just can't find anything better then$45 unlimited everything.

Not to be rude, but im curious why sprint needs to give you a guys a reason to switch from framily. You got a sick deal with yearly upgrades and a current equivalent plan would be $70 +10 for yearly upgrade and the only added benifet is 3gb hotspot. Id rather pay 45,50,55 all the way to 75 instead of 80.

 

Anyways like i said im not being rude i just dont understand what you want or why you feel entitled to something else that will never end up being as good.

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[Paynefanbro]

Not to be rude, but im curious why sprint needs to give you a guys a reason to switch from framily. You got a sick deal with yearly upgrades and a current equivalent plan would be $70 +10 for yearly upgrade and the only added benifet is 3gb hotspot. Id rather pay 45,50,55 all the way to 75 instead of 80.

 

Anyways like i said im not being rude i just dont understand what you want or why you feel entitled to something else that will never end up being as good.

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

My sentiments exactly. Framily was cancelled because it was too good of a deal and would cut into their revenue. There will likely never be a plan as good or offering more value at the price that Framily did.

[jonathanm1978]

I'm wishing I had never got a tablet and needed a share plan with it, which forced me to dump my 8 person framily. If that rep on the phone had never convinced me to get that LG tab, I would still be on framily

[Fraydog]

Top-down, ass-clown.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What did Magic Mike delete? 

[Fraydog]

A few points and I'll yield the discussion:

 

1. Whether it's really leveraging 300 MM POP's of their own, or more band 41 CA deployment, Sprint has to get the network narrative changed. The whole problem with citing RootMetrics numbers is that most people in the real world aren't going to understand how all that affects their daily network experience. Ookla doesn't really account for coverage either. What I find is that a lot of the current network metrics on the board suck. Data is the most important thing at this stage, but 2/3 of RootMetrics is still talk and text measured over circuit switched channels. Root themselves have come out and said they're still testing circuit switched and not VoLTE. What did Verizon say about VoLTE call reliability? They said it's very close if not equal to their old ass CDMA network reliability. T-Mobile's engineers I know, when asked off the record, said VoLTE reliability was similar to UMTS on 1900 LTE and better on 700 MHz for what it's worth. I'm eager to see what P3 Group does in their testing. The US needs more competition not only on mobile but on network measurement for that manner. 
2. Sprint has to cease their giveaways. I'd be much more comfortable with no unlimited on Sprint by the end of 2016 or fully prioritized "all you can eat" that has a 25 GB + prioritization component. It should also be priced $20-30 north of what it is now. End SERO (by stripping subsidy out it) for that manner. 
3. The price entitlement of some reminds me of Magenta yelping over their price increases. It isn't OK when Mangentans do it, it isn't OK coming from yellow either. 
4. How do you think Sprint is going to be able to finance future network improvements without more bailouts coming from SoftBank...wait for it, increased prices.