Jump to content
joshuam

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

Recommended Posts

Just now, Brad The Beast said:

But certainly I could subsidize my urban users by improving services in their area, providing the ability to earn more paying customers? Then I'm increasing my ability to earn more money, thus making more money available for rural expansion. 

Sure, but the metrics say that is exactly what is not happening. Having spent 3 billion in the previous 2 years of the current one rolling out 2.5 there has been a steady loss of urban customers. Pouring debt financed resources into the same markets that do not lack capacity has netted the same pattern each quarter in this current year. Expand to win or keep feeding the snake it's tail. There are plenty of markets that are in the area of several thousand to 10's of thousands not receiving service.  The money is easy to get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, belusnecropolis said:

Sure, but the metrics say that is exactly what is not happening. Having spent 3 billion in the previous 2 years of the current one rolling out 2.5 there has been a steady loss of urban customers. Pouring debt financed resources into the same markets that do not lack capacity has netted the same pattern each quarter in this current year. Expand to win or keep feeding the snake it's tail. There are plenty of markets that are in the area of several thousand to 10's of thousands not receiving service.  The money is easy to get.

So would it be safe to say that you are saying to expand into areas where Sprint could make a good reputation for itself (pretty much areas that don't have service yet)? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brad The Beast said:

So would it be safe to say that you are saying to expand into areas where Sprint could make a good reputation for itself (pretty much areas that don't have service yet)? 

Indeed, they have a large enough spend of 5 billion. Imagine allocating a decent source of that to the idea of expansion to grab more market share. You know what a neglected network experience is like in the Dakotas, Montana went by the wayside. You don't need blanket layered service like a city, but you could get there cheap. You also do not run the risk of overspend when your operating costs are so much lower from a capacity standpoint of 2.5. Further upgrading technology in an area that literally is not giving you the time of day requires maximum marketing. The cost of acquiring new customers in an area you did not service is the cost of flyers, a billboard or two and some airtime.

The cost of telling LA you are really gonna offer great awesome service this time, promise! requires TeeVee spend, a rebranding effort and a ton of resources diverted from possible network spend and if we are to believe the talking heads a straight up merger. That merger also uses the economic advantages of scale, rural expansion and increased services as a reference for how NewCo will be able to finance and expand at brisker pace due to new service revenue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, belusnecropolis said:

You know what a neglected network experience is like in the Dakotas, Montana went by the wayside.

Yeah. In the three years I've been here I've seen 1 new tower go up in the entire state. It makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brad The Beast said:

Yeah. In the three years I've been here I've seen 1 new tower go up in the entire state. It makes sense.

Yeah but a corner in NY that has 12% market capture has 1000Mb p/s throughput gear, but can't afford to upgrade the backhaul to get it there for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, belusnecropolis said:

Yeah but a corner in NY that has 12% market capture has 1000Mb p/s throughput gear, but can't afford to upgrade the backhaul to get it there for some reason.

I think backhaul is one of the most expensive things isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Brad The Beast said:

I think backhaul is one of the most expensive things isn't it?

It is high on the list of operating expenses with power and leasing yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think backhaul is one of the most expensive things isn't it?

Yes. Sprint has sites not broadcasting a signal cause of backhaul.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Yes. Sprint has sites not broadcasting a signal cause of backhaul.

Really? Why bother putting up equipment if you can't use it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

Really? Why bother putting up equipment if you can't use it?

Just another effect of construction. It may be in an inopportune place or having difficulty with permitting and bureaucracy, maybe lining up associated trades to work on that site.

Another issue is areas that have fiber or microwave, but the backhaul is simply provisioned much lower than they have a capacity to deliver. Areas that exceed capacity needs with installed equipment may be forward thinking, but not allowing that capacity in an area it is installed in, even if undersubscribed is common. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

I'm talking about more than that. Coverage isn't up to par with everyone else. Uploads are not that great and, waiting on VOLTE is getting old.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

None of these are sufficient justifications for a merger in my opinion, because they can be fixed with increased capex and support from SoftBank as the parent company.

A merger simply lets SoftBank off easy and subjects the consumer to the negative effects of a consolidated carrier market... and there’s no going back from that in the near/long term.

The “Merge or we lose in 5G” argument is such a PR stretch it’s ridiculous.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of these are sufficient justifications for a merger in my opinion, because they can be fixed with increased capex and support from SoftBank as the parent company.

A merger simply lets SoftBank off easy and subjects the consumer to the negative effects of a consolidated carrier market... and there’s no going back from that in the near/long term.

The “Merge or we lose in 5G” argument is such a PR stretch it’s ridiculous.

The capex isn't going up. The 5-6 billion they once said is no longer happening. Seems like softbank wants Sprint off their hands. If Tmobile doesn't get Sprint then a cable company will. TMobile sounds way better to me

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The capex isn't going up. The 5-6 billion they once said is no longer happening. Seems like softbank wants Sprint off their hands. If Tmobile doesn't get Sprint then a cable company will. TMobile sounds way better to me 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Do not underestimate a motivated Cable co with full vertical landline and wireless integration that wants to stick it in the face of other cable cos and wireless carriers.

 

Sprint and tmobile is not a threat to Verizon and ATT.

 

Comcast or TWC getting their hands on a nationwide wireless carriers network to combine with their cable and fiber holding is scary. Sprint has for years considered that possibility a significant threat.

 

 

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do not underestimate a motivated Cable co with full vertical landline and wireless integration that wants to stick it in the face of other cable cos and wireless carriers. 
Sprint and tmobile is not a threat to Verizon and ATT.
 
Comcast or TWC getting their hands on a nationwide wireless carriers network to combine with their cable and fiber holding is scary. Sprint has for years considered that possibility a significant threat.
 
 
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 
 
 
So your saying Tmobile is a better choice than cable?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

So your saying Tmobile is a better choice than cable?

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

No.

 

A cable company buying out Sprint or T-mobile would be very likely better for the consumer as they'd have an incentive to compete and gain subscribers.

 

It's only the natural path forward if one looks at how Comcast and TWC (Spectrum) is setting up things. They've already began building the infrastructure of supporting wireless users and triple play integration based on their MVNO setup. The next step would fully integrate those wireless users into their entire network top down instead of piggybacking off say Verizon.

 

They can leverage their long haul fiber and last mile hybrid fiber coaxial networks to provide dedicated full speed backhaul to their own cell sites and new ones they can leverage using their own telephone poles and right of ways. 

It's one of the reasons why Shentel land is so amazing. Full vertical integration. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, lilotimz said:

It's one of the reasons why Shentel land is so amazing. Full vertical integration. 

Yep. This statement is one to pay attention to. Totally Correct.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2019 at 3:50 PM, RedSpark said:

No it doesn’t.

The whole idea of leading or “keeping up” with China for 5G is a farce in my opinion.

There's no way to refute this without getting a bit political, so I won't do that. 

But what I will say is that 5G is very important for our economy. I really hope the merger happens as it seems like SoftBank has hit a dead end. It's gotten to the point where they can't even give the service away for free.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, greenbastard said:

There's no way to refute this without getting a bit political, so I won't do that. 

But what I will say is that 5G is very important for our economy. I really hope the merger happens as it seems like SoftBank has hit a dead end. It's gotten to the point where they can't even give the service away for free.

I don't think what I said was inherently political. I think this merger has become attached to politics in certain ways, as most things can... Just as interest groups which had nothing to do with wireless (National Education Association, NAACP, GLAAD, etc.) were lumped by AT&T into supporting its attempted merger with T-Mobile at the time:

http://www.nea.org/archive/44679.htm

https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/politico_is_good_on_att_buying.php

Of course the merger didn't go through, and I think one of the reasons was "overreach" by AT&T. There was so much BS PR behind that merger, that people eventually saw it for what it was... and of course, there was the leak of the ultimate truth, which undermined the whole case for the merger: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Leaked-ATT-Letter-Demolishes-Case-For-TMobile-Merger-115652

The "Merge or we lose in 5G to china" justification is very much in the same vein.

I read this kind of stuff with great skepticism: https://twitter.com/telecoms/status/1114114312346439680

Honestly, it's fear-driving... and Dr. Saw actually retweeted this on April 5, 2019.

5G is important to our economy. However, we have a very different economy than the Chinese do. We shouldn't attempt to replicate what they do or try to beat them with a largely irreversible market consolidation.

Edited by RedSpark
Added more thoughts....
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think what I said was inherently political. I think this merger become attached to politics in certain ways, as most things can... Just as interest groups which had nothing to do with wireless (National Education Association, NAACP, GLAAD, etc.) were lumped by AT&T into supporting its attempted merger with T-Mobile at the time:
http://www.nea.org/archive/44679.htm
https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/politico_is_good_on_att_buying.php
The "Merge or we lose in 5G to china" justification is very much in the same vein.
I read this kind of stuff with great skepticism: https://twitter.com/telecoms/status/1114114312346439680
Honestly, it's fear-driving.
5G is important to our economy. However, we have a very different economy than the Chinese do. We shouldn't attempt to replicate what they do or try to beat them with a largely irreversible market consolidation.

Yes, most carriers that claim nationwide coverage of 5G. There networks just aren’t as big as ours in the us or have to cover as much land for that matter. Verizon runs one of the largest networks in the world. China does not have rules in place like we do.. carriers just can’t put towers/small cells wherever they please.. I don’t think we can beat China to 5G based on those rules and smaller networks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paynefanbro said:

Sprint probably got reduced roaming rates.

I'm curious as to what they got. Time will tell I guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the odds that they gave Sprint some spectrum? Probably zero yeah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

What are the odds that they gave Sprint some spectrum? Probably zero yeah?

Definitely zero. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RAvirani said:

Definitely zero. 

Yeah that's what I thought. So Sprint either got screwed or got a deal they couldn't pass up. I wonder which.

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...