Jump to content
joshuam

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

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

1.2B in Capex spent isn't the sign of a company that is completely defeated...

For comparison "T-Mobile spent $1.8 billion on cash capex, excluding capitalized interest, compared to $1.3 billion in the first quarter of 2018 and $1.1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2018."

If you truly look deep into the numbers, Sprint really didn't do that badly at all. Especially considering they have rangled in most of those super discount heavy promotions. In fact, most wallstreet analyst had them pegged worse than they did. Even ARPU is slightly up Y over Y.

At the end of the day, Its really about looking doom and gloom to finally get that merger approved, that is Masa's number one priority. 

 

Sprint’s capex still hasn’t been enough to change the trajectory of the company, and the net losses show that. It’s enough to say they’re doing something, but it’s not enough to result in a major network transformation to gain customers.

Should this merger fail, I believe Softbank will have to pitch in some major capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bought some Sprint stock @ $6.74 today.  Sold some for $7.90 just five days ago.  I continue to play these price swings for 8 years now. 😂

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

Yeah, this is not a good look, capex surge or not. The capex hasn’t made a difference yet.

The fact that people aren’t staying with Sprint without promotions means that Sprint’s underlying value proposition isn’t working, and that’s because it’s not perceived as a product that people are willing to pay more for, as is the case with Verizon (if their marketing and network awards are taken at face value) when the promos run out.

When you do the math on 175k net losses, that’s almost 2,000 lines lost per day for the quarter! That’s not a sustainable trend line.

Churn is also down YoY, despite of them weaning people off crazy promotions.

It's all a show for the merger. Dire situation it is not. 

Also, you say Capex is not helping?! I hope you mean you personally, because deployment is still on-going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Churn is also down YoY, despite of them weaning people off crazy promotions.

It's all a show for the merger. Dire situation it is not. 

Also, you say Capex is not helping?! I hope you mean you personally, because deployment is still on-going. 

Again as I mentioned. Although numbers are getting better sprint is not seeing any money! No return on investment at all, they lost 111 million for the quarter.. you carry those type of numbers over 4 quarters those are huge losses

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2019/08/02/sprint-first-quarter-continues-losses.amp.html?ana=yahoo&__twitter_impression=true

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tyroned3222 said:


Again as I mentioned. Although numbers are getting better sprint is not seeing any money! No return on investment at all, they lost 111 million for the quarter.. you carry to numbers over 4 quarters those are huge losses
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2019/08/02/sprint-first-quarter-continues-losses.amp.html?ana=yahoo&__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The interest expense that Sprint is carrying alone is just punishing: “$619 million, which ate up $455 million in operating income and left the company with a $111 million loss.”

I agree with you completely. The level of capex that Sprint is spending just isn’t enough to get ahead of the curve to reverse this trend. Instead, the amount they’re spending is effectively returning zero. They aren’t profitable and they aren’t gaining customers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

Churn is also down YoY, despite of them weaning people off crazy promotions.

It's all a show for the merger. Dire situation it is not. 

Also, you say Capex is not helping?! I hope you mean you personally, because deployment is still on-going. 

The crazy promotions should have been spent on capex instead.

Those promotions were all for nought in my opinion. They didn’t wind up creating enough long term customers out of them. The underlying product didn’t convey a sense of true value without being on a promotion. People left because they didn’t perceive Sprint as a brand worth the regular cost.

All these crazy promotions did was defer the customer losses we’re seeing now for a year or two or three. They didn’t make sense to do in the first place.

Sprint missed a real opportunity for effective capex in the past few years, customer losses be damned, because they’re happening right now anyway and Sprint is well behind the curve on where it should be on its network. If the product improves, people won’t leave if they perceive value.... but if it doesn’t measure up, they won’t come in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s an interesting approach...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That’s an interesting approach...
They probably set up a small cell and made sure it was a bad location for the other 3

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They probably set up a small cell and made sure it was a bad location for the other 3

 

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

 

Or are making it up since we don't see any pics of the tests. Every Sprint small call I was ever on way slow at it only had 1 carrier vs 2-4 xca on the other carriers.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Terrell352 said:

They probably set up a small cell and made sure it was a bad location for the other 3 emoji23.png

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk
 

For 5G it would have to be a Massive MIMO site I believe, but otherwise you’re right: They probably speed tested the other carriers here to do this.

Fine Print probably says “does not include upload”.

Sprint now has about 3,000 Massive MIMO sites deployed, which gives us a good idea of their 5G footprint. They’re going to need a lot more than this though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For 5G it would have to be a Massive MIMO site I believe, but otherwise you’re right: They probably speed tested the other carriers here to do this.
Fine Print probably says “does not include upload”.
Sprint now has about 3,000 Massive MIMO sites deployed, which gives us a good idea of their 5G footprint. They’re going to need a lot more than this though.
Yeah unless they were doing 25+41 ca I'm sure upload isn't included

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah unless they were doing 25+41 ca I'm sure upload isn't included

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Even that wont save the upload nationwide. In places where its 2xCA 5mhz b25 the difference should be small compared to 1-2 upload on b41.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even that wont save the upload nationwide. In places where its 2xCA 5mhz b25 the difference should be small compared to 1-2 upload on b41.

 

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

 

Yeah most but not all metros have 10x10 just wish more did to. Mine can't until CDMA is gone. Under TMO they can do 20x20. So under TMobile the upload would be great. That's if they do 25+41+41

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah most but not all metros have 10x10 just wish more did to. Mine can't until CDMA is gone. Under TMO they can do 20x20. So under TMobile the upload would be great. That's if they do 25+41+41 
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 
 
 
I dont know. Doing aggregation with b41 is kind of pointless on New Tmobile. B4, B66 B12, B2, B25, B71 is plenty. I would save B41 for 5G. Not to mention they want to shut down CDMA fast so that extra spectrum would also be used.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That’s an interesting approach...

 

Probably a cherry picked location but who knows. Let’s try this with 4G and not 5G.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont know. Doing aggregation with b41 is kind of pointless on New Tmobile. B4, B66 B12, B2, B25, B71 is plenty. I would save B41 for 5G. Not to mention they want to shut down CDMA fast so that extra spectrum would also be used.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Yeah I know. The more spectrum the better considering TMobile will have around 130 customers out of this. In my area the total holdings are 20x20 4 with MFBI 66 20x20+10x10 B2/25 5x5 B25 5x5 B12 15x15 B71 then whatever Sprint holds for B41. I don't know if they plan to use B41 for LTE at the start then shut it down when the 5G capacity is needed.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I know. The more spectrum the better considering TMobile will have around 130 customers out of this. In my area the total holdings are 20x20 4 with MFBI 66 20x20+10x10 B2/25 5x5 B25 5x5 B12 15x15 B71 then whatever Sprint holds for B41. I don't know if they plan to use B41 for LTE at the start then shut it down when the 5G capacity is needed.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

I think they should go for the 5G only approach for B41 imo. Granted N41 maxes out at 100mhz so in places where they have more than that they could use some for LTE.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Terrell352 said:

I think they should go for the 5G only approach for B41 imo. Granted N41 maxes out at 100mhz so in places where they have more than that they could use some for LTE.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk
 

Why they don't have the back haul for all that bandwidth? 64x64 MIMO with 100 Mhz is around 24 Gbps per sector with no phones on it. Give it 2-3 years before you have enough devices. Just leave it 32x32 with 60Hz(7Gbps) of 4G and 32x32 with 40+Mhz(5+Gbps) of 5G. Which is still 12 Gbps per sector for the massive MIMO if you have the backhaul and signal strength. Then as you watch people use more 5G move more spectrum over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why they don't have the back haul for all that bandwidth? 64x64 MIMO with 100 Mhz is around 24 Gbps per sector with no phones on it. Give it 2-3 years before you have enough devices. Just leave it 32x32 with 60Hz(7Gbps) of 4G and 32x32 with 40+Mhz(5+Gbps) of 5G. Which is still 12 Gbps per sector for the massive MIMO if you have the backhaul and signal strength. Then as you watch people use more 5G move more spectrum over.
Why would you want to make 4G faster than 5G? That makes no sense at all. 5G needs to be impressive out of the gate. 80mhz for N41 and 60-80 for LTE. It's less work to do.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would you want to make 4G faster than 5G? That makes no sense at all. 5G needs to be impressive out of the gate. 80mhz for N41 and 60-80 for LTE. It's less work to do.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

In my opinion 5G is overhyped. I actually don't care for it. But obviously there are usable applications for that a real world applications. so that's that for me as a general consumer from my point of view I don't see 5G as something as revolutionary as LTE was back in the day.

Sent from my moto g(7) using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max Speed would not change you are still limited by the phone design not the tower. More capacity is needed right now on the 4G side. 4x4 phone on 40Mhz is still 600+Mbps but they still need more right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max Speed would not change you are still limited by the phone design not the tower. More capacity is needed right now on the 4G side. 4x4 phone on 40Mhz is still 600+Mbps but they still need more right.
Yes they obviously need much more. More capacity is needed. But then again more cell site density is also needed.

Sent from my moto g(7) using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max Speed would not change you are still limited by the phone design not the tower. More capacity is needed right now on the 4G side. 4x4 phone on 40Mhz is still 600+Mbps but they still need more right.
No they dont because you are forgetting the AWS1, AWS3, B2/B25 PCS + 40MHZ of b41 can likely handle it.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No they dont because you are forgetting the AWS1, AWS3, B2/B25 PCS + 40MHZ of b41 can likely handle it.

Sent from my SM-G977P using Tapatalk

But then again as well you need coverage for it. Speed is useless without coverage. I don't really care too much about speed what I really care about is a coverage and consistency of the network. Density is also an issue with 5G.

Sent from my moto g(7) using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want reliable and speedy data service. Verizon is reliable for the most part. Data speeds are another story. 

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...