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

[JeffDTD]

I wish they would offer that for individual lines. I'd prefer to pay for my data -- but Sprint doesn't really have a fair price for data buckets for individual lines

 

Sprint only sells the $50 or 60/month for "Unlimited with throttling/prioritization/management/asterisks/whatever after 5GB". Which seems like a worse deal for everyone -- Users are incentivized to use as much data as they can, and Sprint is incentivized to slow their data down as much as possible or play stupid games with data (like double-compressing images)

 

 

 

Cricket's plans are the right idea. If Sprint just shamelessly copied Cricket's entire pricing + plan lineup, I would be thrilled. Kill "Unlimited" and replace it with reasonable data buckets and no overage fees.

 

I'd happily pay $45/month for 5GB (w/ no overages) or $55/month for 10GB (w/ no overage) over $50/month for "Unlimited-ish-depending". That solves the whole 'fairness in data usage' issue and the iPhone vs Android price/data discrimination issue all at once.

I agree with everything you said. Individual lines have a lot of room for growth.

[jroepcke51]

Can we start a countdown clock for WiMax?

[Arysyn]

And they're the cult of Legere that AJ references. I had an exchange on twitter with a cult member who insists that legere is a true consumer advocate and would never raise prices as CEO of combined TMO sprint co. Why? Bevsuse he met him and 'he seems to be a good guy'

 

#delusional

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a great post!

 

I couldn't have described the T-Troll mindset any better.

 

I'll have another post to make, once I finish reading this thread.

[jreuschl]

I'm watching the Google I/O keynote and they talked about Android Pay (coming in Android M release)

 

They are working with carriers.  AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.  Where is Sprint on this?  Are they going to stick their nose up and say our 3rd party thing is going to work better?  Dumb move if true.

 

Especially strange since Google Wallet wasn't allowed on other phones if ISIS had been installed.

[caspar347]

I'm watching the Google I/O keynote and they talked about Android Pay (coming in Android M release)

 

They are working with carriers.  AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.  Where is Sprint on this?  Are they going to stick their nose up and say our 3rd party thing is going to work better?  Dumb move if true.

 

Especially strange since Google Wallet wasn't allowed on other phones if ISIS had been installed.

I'm pretty sure Sprint was the only one that didn't block Google Wallet. I would assume that they're still onboard.

[Arysyn]

I wish they would offer that for individual lines. I'd prefer to pay for my data -- but Sprint doesn't really have a fair price for data buckets for individual lines

 

Sprint only sells the $50 or 60/month for "Unlimited with throttling/prioritization/management/asterisks/whatever after 5GB". Which seems like a worse deal for everyone -- Users are incentivized to use as much data as they can, and Sprint is incentivized to slow their data down as much as possible or play stupid games with data (like double-compressing images)

 

 

 

Cricket's plans are the right idea. If Sprint just shamelessly copied Cricket's entire pricing + plan lineup, I would be thrilled. Kill "Unlimited" and replace it with reasonable data buckets and no overage fees.

 

I'd happily pay $45/month for 5GB (w/ no overages) or $55/month for 10GB (w/ no overage) over $50/month for "Unlimited-ish-depending". That solves the whole 'fairness in data usage' issue and the iPhone vs Android price/data discrimination issue all at once.

I also like this post and agree about Cricket's pricing along the lines of what they were doing with their Advanced plan. However, I think $55 Monthly for 10gb is a bit much for the vast majority of moderate to heavy unlimited data users, though I'm basing moderate to heavy on my own viewpoint of it, which is 15gb to 45gb Monthly being moderate, while 45gb to 95gb Monthly is heavy, over 95gb would make me suspicious of T.O.S. issues, though I'm not going to judge any user since ultimately it is up to the carriers to decide how much usage is too much for their networks. Although, they all could be much more transparent about it.

 

I love the topic of rate plans, and have many different ideas for alternatives, though my favorite being the one I write about often here, being the sliding scale option that involves simple affordable overages for people who do not want to go up to the next rate plan level, similar to Sprint's Fair&Flexible, but with an overage option. I believe in order for wireless carriers to keep unlimited users using their networks on per GB data plans, carriers are going to need to bring down the per GB data rate down to $2 to $3 per Gb. My idea, similar to Cricket's Advanced plan, is start at $55 for 25gb Monthly, then $75 for 35gb Monthly, and finally up to $95 for 45gb Monthly, with additional data being a flat rate of $1 per GB. This works out to $5 Monthly plus $2 per gb, then $1 per Gb after the 45th gb. A speed cap of 15mbps (typical), up to 30mbps (maximum) could be implemented, with extra speed costing more, say a $60 Monthly premium.

 

Anyways, I have some other ideas, though this one is for a single-line only arrangement, not multi shared lines. As much as I dislike shared lines, I have some ideas for their use I will post here sometime as well. Though the simplest one being $30 Monthly for the first line, $15 Monthly for every additional line, $3 per GB. No data packages needed.

[coorsleftfield]

I believe the true threat to unlimited data is 4k video streaming. I suspect that's what Marcelo is referring to when he talking about newer video streaming services.

[lou99/maximus1987]

I believe the true threat to unlimited data is 4k video streaming. I suspect that's what Marcelo is referring to when he talking about newer video streaming services.

 

There's no threat: sprint easily can and currently does limit video streaming bitrate; easy fix.

[jreuschl]

I'm pretty sure Sprint was the only one that didn't block Google Wallet. I would assume that they're still onboard.

 

It was very strange though because they had the Android Pay logo up, the 3 carrier logos, and no Sprint on that slide or in the presentation audio.

[caspar347]

It was very strange though because they had the Android Pay logo up, the 3 carrier logos, and no Sprint on that slide or in the presentation audio.

Yeah I wondered about that too. I'm not totally sure what's going on, but I'd like to think the reason Sprint wasn't mentioned was because they are already onboard.

[lou99/maximus1987]

This is gonna sting

 

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0OD2E420150528?irpc=932

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

I'm fine with paying for what I use, but USA data prices are ridiculously overpriced as are the prices for text messaging and voice calling. And it goes both ways, Sprint can pay me when their swiss cheese network doesn't cover me or my network speeds are so slow they're unusable.

 

Do you complain this much in your everyday life -- at home, at work, in stores, in restaurants, etc.?  If so, you must be a delight.

 

AJ

[Arysyn]

There's no threat: sprint easily can and currently does limit video streaming bitrate; easy fix.

4k video can't be limited enough not to make some sort of effect on the network. Netflix 1080p won't work under 3mbps and the smallest 1080p HD video size on Comcast Xfinity Streampix/ToGo for an average length hour and a half movie, is 3gb Data.

 

I've read news reports where the minimum streaming rate for 4k video on Netflix will be around 15mbps, five times that of HD, so it will impact the network. As I expect both sides of the "unlimited is an excuse for network abuse!" vs the "we pay for unlimited so we're gonna stream and download all we damn want!" debate, will turn into ugly arguing once 4k usage becomes more common among unlimited users.

 

While I wouldn't want the network to become strained because of 4k, I don't think it should cost over $30 for people just to watch one 4k movie using their wireless service.

[Arysyn]

This is gonna sting

 

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0OD2E420150528?irpc=932

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is going to really hurt T-Mobile a lot more than it'll hurt Sprint. Although a limit to the 600mhz availability may end up helping Sprint, as Masa Son, alongside T-Mobile, in convincing the FCC as to why the two companies need to merge, especially if AT&T and Verizon end up getting the majority of this spectrum.

 

The only other thing that could help T-Mobile after such a loss in this auction, is for them to merge with Dish.

[derrph]

That is going to really hurt T-Mobile a lot more than it'll hurt Sprint. Although a limit to the 600mhz availability may end up helping Sprint, as Masa Son, alongside T-Mobile, in convincing the FCC as to why the two companies need to merge, especially if AT&T and Verizon end up getting the majority of this spectrum.

 

The only other thing that could help T-Mobile after such a loss in this auction, is for them to merge with Dish.

If this goes though then T-Mobile is going have to put up or shut up they also could just buy what they need in key states.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ascertion]

That is going to really hurt T-Mobile a lot more than it'll hurt Sprint. Although a limit to the 600mhz availability may end up helping Sprint, as Masa Son, alongside T-Mobile, in convincing the FCC as to why the two companies need to merge, especially if AT&T and Verizon end up getting the majority of this spectrum.

 

The only other thing that could help T-Mobile after such a loss in this auction, is for them to merge with Dish.

They're not budging on the rules because the current owners of the 600Mhz spectrum want as much as they can get out of it.  If they limit a chunk of it to smaller competitors, there's no way they'll get as much. 

 

AT&T no doubt will gobble up as much as they can.  T-Mobile is very dependent on this auction to sustain their growth for the long run.  Verizon will likely just purchase extra in areas that need a bit more bandwidth and I have no idea what Sprint's going to do.

[JThorson]

They're not budging on the rules because the current owners of the 600Mhz spectrum want as much as they can get out of it.  If they limit a chunk of it to smaller competitors, there's no way they'll get as much. 

 

AT&T no doubt will gobble up as much as they can.  T-Mobile is very dependent on this auction to sustain their growth for the long run.  Verizon will likely just purchase extra in areas that need a bit more bandwidth and I have no idea what Sprint's going to do.

I agree AT&T will buy as much as they can. I also think Verizon will do the same. The other entity that may be interesting is if Dish is allowed to bid in this auction. They would definitely buy as much as they can. 

[caspar347]

This is gonna sting

 

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0OD2E420150528?irpc=932

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

C'mon.

That's only gonna make this worse. 

[Arysyn]

I think AT&T will purchase most of the 600mhz spectrum, with Verizon at 2nd, unless it is a switch around from the AWS-3 auction, which I doubt. AT&T may seem to be neglecting their wireless in the U.S. with all of their mergers and acquisitions, along with their interests in connected cars and such, but I think AT&T is like a sleeping giant with their wireless, while quietly dreaming of their plans while it collects all the cash it needs for a big massive network improvement using all of its newly acquired spectrum.

 

Sprint was like that for a while, but now is in that development stage where it'll be huge too, though it could still use another major resource to help make it all the more grand, such as either 600mhz dspectrum, or a merger with T-Mobile. Speaking of T-Mobile, they seem to be at the weakest position in all of this, which without a major increase of spectrum in many areas, particularly in the Midwest, they will need to merge with someone. If Sprint comes away with a lot of the 600mhz spectrum, which would be a wise decision to do if not for their own network gain, at least to do this competitively, similarly to why Dan Hesse wanted to acquire MetroPCS. Then T-Mobile will be extra desperate, but have more the reason and hopefully enough of it to convince thee FCC to allow them to merge with either Sprint or Dish.

 

That leaves Verizon doing well with whatever they decide to do or not do.

[tybo31316]

I can see AT&T and Verizon going buck wild buying all the spectrum they can. Sprint will purchase a nationwide 5x5. T-Mobile will buy what they need in key markets. If dish is able to bid. I see dish as the wild card buying more than expect then either merging, buying, or striking a network host deal with T-Mobile.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6

[ahecht]

I assume that Android Pay is the result of Google buying Softcard/ISIS, and that is why Sprint isn't showing up as an Android Pay partner -- they were never a Softcard partner.

[Deval]

Because most people don't read s4gru.

They switched to TMO and as long as TMO is good enough, they're not gonna switch back. Sprint is in a huge hole (negative brand equity)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Actually according to the latest numbers, Sprint is actually a positive 9 on the brand equity scale. Used to be negative, and then zero.

[Dkoellerwx]

I'm watching the Google I/O keynote and they talked about Android Pay (coming in Android M release)

 

They are working with carriers.  AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.  Where is Sprint on this?  Are they going to stick their nose up and say our 3rd party thing is going to work better?  Dumb move if true.

 

Especially strange since Google Wallet wasn't allowed on other phones if ISIS had been installed.

 

Sprint has always been Google friendly. I don't see any reason for that to change.

[red_dog007]

I interpret that as existing plans for sale. If you already have it, you'll keep it, just no longer be able to buy it.

[cortney]

I just fear the day when John pulls unlimited. People will have a fit and call him a bunch of liars and every name in the book.

I don't fear that day, in fact, I'm looking forward to it. It's inevitable for both companies.

 

He can't lie to them forever...

 

I believe I've seen fanboys asking if T-Mobile will go to Canada or Mexico to spread their "movement". They really don't live in reality, nor do they come up for air.  

 

The T-Army is going to be in for a reality check, no matter how much nor how long they continue to tap-dance, attack and cry.

 

T-Mobile isn't taking over the world (or the US), sorry.

Edited May 28, 2015 by cortney