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

[twospirits]

 

Yes. Sprint's upgrade message is bad. That's why there is an S4GRU, because customers took the initiative themselves to find out. There would be no S4GRU if Sprint did exactly that. And their customers would cheer.

I disagree. s4gru would still exist somehow.

To think, if it wasn't for your crazy desire for fried chicken and hitting every fried chicken joint, which ironically also had a Sprint site next to it, s4gru probably wouldn't have been created. Sitting there chomping down on a leg and noticing the signal on your phone. Eventually you started taking notes and from a napkin came forth s4gru. Your waist line resented it, be we all thank you for it.

 

 

back on topic...

 

I do think Sprint can spin off this idea and start doing commercials in weird places showing people watching Youtube videos, posting to Twitter/Facebook and watching WatchESPN. Like on top of mountains or etc etc.

That isn't a bad idea.

 

TS out

[COZisBack]

back on topic...

That isn't a bad idea.

 

TS out

 

Thought you might like that.

[COZisBack]

The main problem they have from a marketing perspective is the stagger nature of NV. 1900 lte doesn't allow them to claim "fastest" or reliable lte data. opp could help them gain the reliable moniker but that won't be available every where and not enough spectrum to make anything more than a patch for where 1900 can't get to. 2.6 can give them the edge in average speeds but unless they are willing to invest hevily in small cells or increase cell site density drastically 2.6 will not have blanket coverage and this will drive down average speeds.

 

So what marketing message is left to Sprint on the network side? The only message they are going to be left with is value, more for less statements. A network message is missing except for "hey this isn't the same crazy network it was three years ago" which is what the newest network is ment to say.

 

Agreed that's where they are currently. I have no timeline of when I expect this to happen, but only stating on when it does happen.... When you're truly on a supported Spark network, Sprint will be able to advertise the most consistent LTE network. You'll be able to average the highest consistent speeds. Those may be in the range of 15-20, but that will be the moniker.

[Mr.Nuke]

Agreed that's where they are currently. I have no timeline of when I expect this to happen, but only stating on when it does happen.... When you're truly on a supported Spark network, Sprint will be able to advertise the most consistent LTE network. You'll be able to average the highest consistent speeds. Those may be in the range of 15-20, but that will be the moniker.

And that is ultimately the predicament with advertising the network right now, although I do like your idea posted above. While the NV equipment backbone is present at nearly all of Sprint's sites right now, LTE is obviously lagging behind. It is difficult if not foolish to center your marketing around a network that at this point is still a work in progress (obviously one that is improving daily, but still a WIP).  If they hit the 100 million POPs goal for 2.5 coverage by the end of the year I wouldn't be surprised to see them start taking a more aggressive marketing approach with the network.

[lilotimz]

And that is ultimately the predicament with advertising the network right now, although I do like your idea posted above. While the NV equipment backbone is present at nearly all of Sprint's sites right now, LTE is obviously lagging behind. It is difficult if not foolish to center your marketing around a network that at this point is still a work in progress (obviously one that is improving daily, but still a WIP). If they hit the 100 million POPs goal for 2.5 coverage by the end of the year I wouldn't be surprised to see them start taking a more aggressive marketing approach.

The thing is everyone's looking at 2.6 at this moment. No one is recalling lte 800 which is stealthily sneaking it's way around the nation to 150 mil pops covered by end if this year. That will be more immediately felt and people would notice it.

 

I would say it would be smart start advertising improved coverage in areas where 800 has been widely deployed.

I

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[twospirits]

While it is a work in progress, i am left to wonder, will it ever stop. I don't think so. Not only for Sprint but for any carrier. New technologies abound around each corner and once you finish one thing, another one surfaces and the cycle repeats. So to me it will always be a WIP.

[Rawvega]

 

Owen added that "there's already acceleration plans the network team has put in place," and that while Sprint's 1900 MHz LTE service now covers 254 million POPs, "we are very aggressive with 800 and 2.5 and moving that into our plans to really deliver Spark throughout the network."

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-exec-our-spectrum-position-supports-shared-plans-large-data-buckets/2014-08-20

 

I'm curious to know what those plans are.   

[lilotimz]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-exec-our-spectrum-position-supports-shared-plans-large-data-buckets/2014-08-20

 

I'm curious to know what those plans are.

Giving contracts with better paychecks always makes things go more smoothly with contractors.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-exec-our-spectrum-position-supports-shared-plans-large-data-buckets/2014-08-20

 

I'm curious to know what those plans are.   

 

In context with the following lines, I think he is saying that the B26 and B41 deployments have been accelerated.

 

Robert

[dnicekid]

Sprint could easily have a commercial showing old Eq getting ripped out and replaced with someone narrating about how they are building Americas newest, most reliable network, say we have 160 million with more coming every week.

Show guys on towers working at night to show how dedicated they are in completing the work.

[TheCUJuan]

More hints that unlimited is here to stay!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bvf1px2CAAAlRDW.jpg:large

[maxsilver]

However, Sprint is afraid to do that.  They tried being very open with the Nextel network thin out.  And their competitors used that data against them.  They started telling people in the affected areas, Sprint is reducing your coverage!  They had to take down the informational website because it was costing them big enterprise customers.  AT&T Enterprise sales people would take big Sprint customers right to the Sprint site and use the data against them to pick them up.  It was a huge blunder.

The blunder here isn't that Sprint was open with the data. The blunder here is that Sprint took down Nextel's network and didn't have anything good ready to replace it at that time. I don't believe Sprint's messaging had much to do with it.

 

AT&T could get the sales not because they showed Sprint's website to subscribers, but because Sprint really was "reducing your coverage." That's not some slander AT&T made up, it was often the truth (an exaggerated truth, perhaps. But still factually correct).

 

You can't replace 10 800mhz Nextel sites with 6 1900mhz CDMA sites (or even 10 1900mhz CDMA sites) and claim your getting the same coverage. It's simple physics.

 

1x800 was coming, and would fix a lot of this. But it wasn't really available much when Nextel was shut down. Sprint could have lied / hidden / obfuscated this data. It may have dragged out the losses another couple of months.

 

But I believe they were going to loose most of those folks anyway. Sprint's maps really didn't change this at all. At worst, it might have sped up the customer losses.

[maxsilver]

 

 

The same thing applies here...Sprint needs to be doing a better job of telling users that they have rebuilt their network, fewer dropped calls, faster data, etc.

I know S4GRU skews rural in general, but for most folks in urban/suburban, voice and text has been a "solved problem" for a few years now. The majority of people on Verizon or AT&T rarely have issues with dropped calls in most areas, except for areas everyone struggles with equally (like subways / tunnels / etc).

 

It's not remotely fair that this is that way (they got free lowband spectrum, grandfathered into some sites, have monopolies in other markets to fuel expansion, etc). But that doesn't change the situation Sprint has to deal with.

 

Sprint can't really advertise "less dropped calls", because to do so would appear like an admission that they still struggle with dropped calls. AT&T and Verizon basically don't have this problem for the vast majority of their customers, and haven't for a while now.

 

You can advertise "faster data", because everyone still struggles with data issues in areas. But you can't advertise "less dropped calls" or "more reliable texting" because this is 2014, those problems are effectively solved. To advertise otherwise, would seem like an admission that your struggling with a "solved problem".

 

- - 

 

(A dozen people may reply to this and mention a bunch of times they dropped calls on Verizon and AT&T, or how they still drop calls somewhere. That's all well and good, but in general, those experiences are outliers. There's probably over a thousand objective RootMetrics reports now, from all across the nation that highlight this pattern, a measurable lead on call performance by Verizon or AT&T in nearly every market -- http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/special-report-2014-1h-us

 )

[cletus]

I feel like this conversation veered away from CEO, Town Halls, or Family Share Pack Plan discussion about 10 pages ago. 

[S4GRU]

The blunder here isn't that Sprint was open with the data. The blunder here is that Sprint took down Nextel's network and didn't have anything good ready to replace it at that time. I don't believe Sprint's messaging had much to do with it.

 

AT&T could get the sales not because they showed Sprint's website to subscribers, but because Sprint really was "reducing your coverage." That's not some slander AT&T made up, it was often the truth (an exaggerated truth, perhaps. But still factually correct).

 

You can't replace 10 800mhz Nextel sites with 6 1900mhz CDMA sites (or even 10 1900mhz CDMA sites) and claim your getting the same coverage. It's simple physics.

 

1x800 was coming, and would fix a lot of this. But it wasn't really available much when Nextel was shut down. Sprint could have lied / hidden / obfuscated this data. It may have dragged out the losses another couple of months.

 

But I believe they were going to loose most of those folks anyway. Sprint's maps really didn't change this at all. At worst, it might have sped up the customer losses.

 

You can say all that.  But Sprint is now gun shy on giving away too much information.  I will be surprised if they become any more transparent than the network.sprint.com website.  They feel like any further transparency would just give the competition too much ammo.

 

Robert

[lilotimz]

You can say all that. But Sprint is now gun shy on giving away too much information. I will be surprised if they become any more transparent than the network.sprint.com website. They feel like any further transparency would just give the competition too much ammo.

 

Robert

I. E. Nextel decommissioning map Att marketing used against them quite effectively.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

 

(A dozen people may reply to this and mention a bunch of times they dropped calls on Verizon and AT&T, or how they still drop calls somewhere. That's all well and good, but in general, those experiences are outliers. There's probably over a thousand objective RootMetrics reports now, from all across the nation that highlight this pattern, a measurable lead on call performance by Verizon or AT&T in nearly every market -- http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/special-report-2014-1h-us

 )

 

I just haven't had a dropped call problem on any network for a few years.  Call dropping is becoming rarer and rarer.  The only drops I have anymore are coverage related, like driving into a canyon.  And that is not a network defect.

 

My AT&T experience with dropped calls has been nil.  I don't think I have had one since changing to them last Fall.  However, the call quality is atrocious.

 

Robert

[dnicekid]

http://www.sprint.com/landings/competition/

Please tell me its old.....

 

I saw the pay etc fees but the 4s is a while back.

[joshuam]

http://www.sprint.com/landings/competition/

Please tell me its old.....

 

I saw the pay etc fees but the 4s is a while back.

That's old judging by the fine print...$10 4G tax, etc.

[uecker87]

http://www.sprint.com/landings/competition/

Please tell me its old.....

 

I saw the pay etc fees but the 4s is a while back.

 

It looks extremely old... 

[Rocket87]

It looks extremely old...

That lg lotus gives it away.

[cletus]

Anyways as far as the plans go... after putting all the numbers in a spreadsheet and really looking at it I currently see this plan as a good start but ultimately falling short. To be honest, I am not sure offering more data will necessarily be disruptive in the marketplace. I would personally rather have a 10 GB plan that undercuts T-Mobile than this plan. Why? Because I simply don't use that much data even over 3 possible lines. Hell, I have 2 lines at Ting and I use under 500 MB/month and the line left is an unlimited data line at AT&T. This plan just feels weird. You have different line fees for different data amounts and then adding in bonus data per line only at certain data buckets just adds to the weirdness. At least just make the stupid line fees the same at all data packages. 

 

Honestly I wish they would have just done something similar to framily pricing without all the tiered weirdness. Why can't they just make it super simple for everyone? Make it like Framily where $25/line for 1 GB.. $35/line for 3 GB and $45 for unlimited but take out the clunkyness of having to find Framily IDs online or post yours somewhere and hope people join. Add $25 bucks for a phone subsidy. Hell, even add $5 per line if that is too low. I'd pay that.

 

I get the additional value from this promotion but it feels like a TWC/Comcast/AT&T promotion that lasts a few months and then slams fees into your various orifices. Just check out the pricing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L4FXkfyfM69LNJ6-vJ0baMZxdSWJ8N8aQNS_vVd5XOM/edit?usp=sharing

and compare new vs existing customers. I'm sure people with 4 or 5 lines will really love it when their bill goes up $60 or $75 bucks at the end of 2015. Blegh. Oh and current customers will pay ~$960 more for 4 lines between now and the end of 2015. I mean damn that is nearly 3 Nexus 5 phones!

[mozamcrew]

. I'm sure people with 4 or 5 lines will really love it when their bill goes up $60 or $75 bucks at the end of 2015. Blegh. Oh and current customers will pay ~$960 more for 4 lines between now and the end of 2015. I mean damn that is nearly 3 Nexus 5 phones!

I know everyone is all upset about new customers getting promotions that current customers don't get. I'm fine with them getting device discounts or waving the access fees for a year, as long as they aren't getting a better deal LONG-TERM. When you move to a new carrier and buy all new devices, you have to make a big upfront investment (especially now that we are getting away from phone subsidies). I'm fine with Sprint giving them a break for the first year or so, as long as they don't maintain that status in perpetuity.

[bondog]

So I guess they will not have new plans for single lines?

[MacinJosh]

So I guess they will not have new plans for single lines?

Tomorrow or Friday they will announce new single line plans.