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

[lou99/maximus1987]

I should really stop reading TmoNews.  People there are so oblivious to almost everything related to wireless networks.

Yep. One person said "all tmo has to do is just build more towers and small cells to maintain unlimited at current prices".

They really are ignorant, not in the funny way, but the ghetto way.

[S4GRU]

Yep. One person said "all tmo has to do is just build more towers and small cells to maintain unlimited at current prices".

They really are ignorant, not in the funny way, but the ghetto way.

You mean doubling or tripling capex every quarter forever to just build more towers and small cells to the point where everyone can be on unlimited, all without raising prices, is not a legitimate business plan? Heresy!

 

Even if Tmo could spend that much, they would never get enough equipment or crews to do it. Tmo is running as much capex as they can spend, given the current equipment production rates and available workforce. As it is, they are pulling a rabbit out of their hat. Some people's children.

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

[lou99/maximus1987]

You mean doubling or tripling capex every quarter forever to just build more towers and small cells to the point where everyone can be on unlimited, all without raising prices, is not a legitimate business plan? Heresy!

 

Even if Tmo could spend that much, they would never get enough equipment or crews to do it. Tmo is running as much capex as they can spend, given the current equipment production rates and available workforce. As it is, they are pulling a rabbit out of their hat. Some people's children.

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

 

Some were trying to reason with them but a person trying to convince a fool of something is a bigger fool himself.

[mittenmitten]

AThe moment a T-Mobile customer steps out of town, they have no service.  While some people are willing to accept that, I'm sure many more do not, and even if Sprint doesn't use their 600 MHz purchase themselves, their RRPP partners will definitely use it and make Sprint service that much more attractive both to their own customers and those of the RRPP members.

 

Not going to comment on the "just move to the city!" fallacy that many people like to repeat.

 

- Trip

 I never said move to the city, I said people should have realistic expectations and understand that it costs more money to provide ANYTHING to less populated areas. Sprint shouldn't prioritize rural customers simply because it's not cost effective. if you live in a rural area, expect to pay more and have fewer choices (and slower data).

 

not saying Sprint should abandon all rural coverage, just saying it's GOING to be at the bottom of their list of 'stuff to fix' because it doesn't have ROI like urban markets do. they are basically doing the same thing T-Mobile is; fix the biggest cities first because they're going to pay for everything else and look the most impressive. the difference is that Sprint had a larger footprint, so people are left hanging longer.

[Paynefanbro]

 I never said move to the city, I said people should have realistic expectations and understand that it costs more money to provide ANYTHING to less populated areas. Sprint shouldn't prioritize rural customers simply because it's not cost effective. if you live in a rural area, expect to pay more and have fewer choices (and slower data).

 

not saying Sprint should abandon all rural coverage, just saying it's GOING to be at the bottom of their list of 'stuff to fix' because it doesn't have ROI like urban markets do. they are basically doing the same thing T-Mobile is; fix the biggest cities first because they're going to pay for everything else and look the most impressive. the difference is that Sprint had a larger footprint, so people are left hanging longer.

 

Except if you take a look at their initial LTE build a lot of the rural areas were the first to get LTE as opposed to the cities. Now that Sprint is doing Band 41, it makes sense to concentrate deployment on urban areas first as they tend to have better site density as well as, in some areas, non-collocated ex-Clearwire sites. Sprint's deployment pattern reminds me of a sine wave in that they built from the outside in and now they're building from the inside out. 

[lou99/maximus1987]

Except if you take a look at their initial LTE build a lot of the rural areas were the first to get LTE as opposed to the cities. Now that Sprint is doing Band 41, it makes sense to concentrate deployment on urban areas first as they tend to have better site density as well as, in some areas, non-collocated ex-Clearwire sites. Sprint's deployment pattern reminds me of a sine wave in that they built from the outside in and now they're building from the inside out.

Sprint built wherever they could get permits ready. It wasn't a conscious decision to build rural first.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

If Sprint ultimately wants to complete in rural areas, it will need more than the 5x5 below 1 GHz it effectively has now.  In most areas, Verizon and AT&T have 20x20 spread across 700 and 850 MHz, some of which is dedicated to 3G at present but will ultimately be used for LTE in the future, and Sprint's 5x5 won't touch that by a long shot. 

 

Besides 600 MHz -- if it happens -- Sprint's best hope for additional low band spectrum would be that public safety ultimately moves out of SMR 800 MHz to its dedicated spectrum in Upper 700 MHz.  That might seem like a boondoggle after all the trials and travails of rebanding, but it could open up a full 17 MHz FDD for Sprint in band 27 -- or some future superset of band 26 and band 27 -- allowing for some combination of 5 MHz FDD and 10 MHz FDD carriers or even a 15 MHz FDD carrier.  Sprint still would have to acquire the spectrum in question, but Sprint would be the obvious buyer, since it would have the decided advantage of existing SMR 800 MHz operations.

 

AJ

[lou99/maximus1987]

Besides 600 MHz -- if it happens -- Sprint's best hope for additional low band spectrum would be that public safety ultimately moves out of SMR 800 MHz to its dedicated spectrum in Upper 700 MHz. That might seem like a boondoggle after all the trials and travails of rebanding, but it could open up a full 17 MHz FDD for Sprint in band 27 -- or some future superset of band 26 and band 27 -- allowing for some combination of 5 MHz FDD and 10 MHz FDD carriers or even a 15 MHz FDD carrier. Sprint still would have to acquire the spectrum in question, but Sprint would be the obvious buyer, since it would have the decided advantage of existing SMR 800 MHz operations.

 

AJ

What about combining the A' and an' into one 5x5 block?

Is that plausible technically and politically?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

T-Mobile will meet its limitations eventually in more places than just the Midwest and a few other areas. When that happens eventually, that would be a good time for Verizon to get very competitive. If they do, T-Mobile sure will be in a lot of trouble.

[WiWavelength]

What about combining the A' and an' into one 5x5 block?

Is that plausible technically and politically?

 

Your question does not make sense.  What are you trying to ask?

 

AJ

[utiz4321]

T-Mobile will meet its limitations eventually in more places than just the Midwest and a few other areas. When that happens eventually, that would be a good time for Verizon to get very competitive. If they do, T-Mobile sure will be in a lot of trouble.

Att and vzw have to protect their dividen yields both of which are rather high. That means they have to protect their margins until that becomes untenable. What will move vzw to become more competitive is an increase in loss of high margin customers, until then don't expect much from them.

[lou99/maximus1987]

Your question does not make sense. What are you trying to ask?

 

AJ

You talked once about taking the 850 band and reorganizing it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Att and vzw have to protect their dividen yields both of which are rather high. That means they have to protect their margins until that becomes untenable. What will move vzw to become more competitive is an increase in loss of high margin customers, until then don't expect much from them.

I agree. Just is a nice thought both on a competitive level and seeing Verizon being more customer friendly would be nice, although that is unlikely considering what Verizon's history is, etc.

[Paynefanbro]

Sprint built wherever they could get permits ready. It wasn't a conscious decision to build rural first.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I know that. But it was still a noticeable pattern nonetheless.

[kg4icg]

Because of beauracracy of urban over rural.

[dedub]

note: not finished catching up, that is why quoting older posts.

 

 

I am hardly a wanton capitalist.  But if a person wants to use 40 GB of cellular data per month, for example, while I use less than 1 GB of cellular data, then that person needs to pay more than I do.  Or that person is abusing the system and is part of the problem.

 

AJ

 

You can certainly do this, RIGHT NOW, both on sprint and other carriers.

 

1 gig plans are cheaper than unlimited or other larger allotment plans.

 

Your dreams are already realized!

 

 

OK. And if only 4 or 5 devices were consuming the maximum amount of data per sector, the site performance would suck for the other 100 users. So now a cell has to be added (cell splitting). A new macro site costs up to $250k. So how do you propose we share the cost of that new site just among the 4 or 5 device holders to get a true cost? There in lies the problem.

Since it is almost always high usage unlimited abusers who push a well performing site over the threshold and makes capital spend necessary, dividing out the costs just over this small pool would make their monthly cost $300-$400 per month. Not going to happen. So the ending result is everyone else pays.


Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

 

Oh now I am disappointed in you...

 

you know it is not possible for 4 or 5 devices to consume the maximum while simultaneously causing performance to suck for the other 100 users, unless those 4 or 5 devices were somehow prioritized ahead of the other 100, all 105 connections would share the suckage equally.

 

and if anything, those 4 or 5 devices would be de-prioritized/throttled if they were considered heavy users and on a congested tower anyway.

[lou99/maximus1987]

note: not finished catching up, that is why quoting older posts.

 

 

 

You can certainly do this, RIGHT NOW, both on sprint and other carriers.

 

1 gig plans are cheaper than unlimited or other larger allotment plans.

 

Your dreams are already realized!

 

 

 

Oh now I am disappointed in you...

 

you know it is not possible for 4 or 5 devices to consume the maximum while simultaneously causing performance to suck for the other 100 users, unless those 4 or 5 devices were somehow prioritized ahead of the other 100, all 105 connections would share the suckage equally.

 

and if anything, those 4 or 5 devices would be de-prioritized/throttled if they were considered heavy users and on a congested tower anyway.

The issue is unlimited is not priced proportionately to 1gb.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dedub]

The issue is unlimited is not priced proportionately to 1gb.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well this I can agree with.

 

1 gig is waaaaaay too expensive.

 

1 gig should be included as part of the the base service along with the voice/text.

 

If you need/want more than 1 gig, additional allotments should be reasonably priced accordingly.

[Arysyn]

Well this I can agree with.

 

1 gig is waaaaaay too expensive.

 

1 gig should be included as part of the the base service along with the voice/text.

 

If you need/want more than 1 gig, additional allotments should be reasonably priced accordingly.

I completely agree.

 

People who use a lot of data but don't break the T.O.S. are not intentionally harming the network. There seems to be a feeling of deep resentment by some here towards those who use a lot of data. It really isn't a problem, other than those who violate the terms of service. If heavy data usage is a problem for the network, the carrier has a responsibilty to modify their plan offerings to reduce the stress on their network, not punish the user for using a lot of data, unless of course they are violating the T.O.S.

 

Getting angry about it doesn't help either. Insulting people who use a lot of data by insinuating their data usage must be violating the T.O.S. isn't fair. Their are a lot of legitimate data usage that can add up really fast for even basic stuff. Moderate usage like watching four movies per month and listening to eight hours of CD quality music each week adds up to a bit over 20gb in a month, yet is completely reasonable usage, as I mentioned in the poll thread.

 

dedub is absolutely correct here that carriers should price plans reasonably and accordingly, which is a much more fair way of looking at the issue than it is saying heavy users should "pay through the nose". Although not everyone can afford such things like NFL season tickets or to have data on multiple carriers. Just the same, not everyone who is using a lot of data is a network abuser.

 

Besides, I don't even like using the word "abuse" when it comes to describing heavier usage of data and I realize I need to make an effort to refrain from using the word myself in writing about this. There are much more serious issues where the word is more appropriate to be used.

[greencat]

Regardless of what happens with the network, hearing the CEO (and it's parent company) are on-board with a 18-24 month time table, is quite impressive! Network Vision gave them the architecture and base core network on which to build...exciting times in the future for Sprint customers and shareholders for sure.

 

EDIT: Has anybody found video of the Re/Code talk with Marcelo yet?

History may serve you well. Do you remember the previous CEO's claims? I have more faith in Marcelo and a lot of the pieces are already in place, but still. This timeline seems extremely optimistic.

[lou99/maximus1987]

History may serve you well. Do you remember the previous CEO's claims? I have more faith in Marcelo and a lot of the pieces are already in place, but still. This timeline seems extremely optimistic.

 

We'll see if softb helps sprint with 600 auction. The silent consensus here appears to be no.

[Arysyn]

We'll see if softb helps sprint with 600 auction. The silent consensus here appears to be no.

Such a shame if they don't, because this is a very good thing.

 

Now while I know such an idea has little chance of happening and people may find this unnecessary, etc., I think Softbank/Sprint ought to work a deal with T-Mobile to give T-Mobile its 800mhz entirely, so T-Mobile could have both 700mhz and 800mhz on its network serving various areas where T-Mobile cannot get and deploy 700mhz, or to have additional spectrum to accompany their 700mhz.

 

In exchange for this, T-Mobile works with Softbank/Sprint on getting all (hopefully) of that reserved 30mhz spectrum, or the equivalent nationwide. Then Sprint could do a 15x15 nationwide 600mhz network. Softbank/Sprint could then give T-Mobile additional PCS spectrum and extra cash to accommodate such a deal. Softbank has plenty of cash to see this happen and should do so, even in keepng Dish away from this amount. In the least, Sprint should get enough for a 10x10, though 15x15 is better for this level of spectrum.

[Rawvega]

Now while I know such an idea has little chance of happening and people may find this unnecessary, etc., I think Softbank ought to work a deal with T-Mobile to give T-Mobile

 

Eh?

[Arysyn]

Eh?

Sorry about that.

 

My disability is getting worse in my hands where I have to use a stylus to type. Yet I've been pressing the add reply button too soon on accident before I've finished, which means I have to go back and edit the post. I've been using the device here much more often lately than my computer, which while more convenient in some ways, does have its drawbacks.

[lou99/maximus1987]

Such a shame if they don't, because this is a very good thing.

 

Now while I know such an idea has little chance of happening and people may find this unnecessary, etc., I think Softbank/Sprint ought to work a deal with T-Mobile to give T-Mobile its 800mhz entirely, so T-Mobile could have both 700mhz and 800mhz on its network serving various areas where T-Mobile cannot get and deploy 700mhz, or to have additional spectrum to accompany their 700mhz.

 

In exchange for this, T-Mobile works with Softbank/Sprint on getting all (hopefully) of that reserved 30mhz spectrum, or the equivalent nationwide. Then Sprint could do a 15x15 nationwide 600mhz network. Softbank/Sprint could then give T-Mobile additional PCS spectrum and extra cash to accommodate such a deal. Softbank has plenty of cash to see this happen and should do so, even in keepng Dish away from this amount. In the least, Sprint should get enough for a 10x10, though 15x15 is better for this level of spectrum.

Fcc has said no to joint bidding between TMO and sprint.

Fcc is about to say no to more reserve spectrum.

 

Sprint doesn't have excess pcs spectrum else they would've launched 2nd pcs lte carrier and their network wouldn't have sucked.

 

When you make these grandiose posts, you have to a little bit about what you're talking.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk