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

[WiWavelength]

I think both of you need to expand your world view. Think outside your bubble!

 

So many people could use this service, but you seem to be limited to your own personal experience.

 

Exactly.  luvixuha and Terrell352 take the myopic view of "Well, I wouldn't use the service, so no one should use the service.  It's a waste."

 

The problem is that neither of you has done any market research on Direct 2 You.  But Sprint has.  Neither of you has any usage stats on Direct 2 You.  But Sprint does.  And neither of you knows the cost structure of Direct 2 You.  But Sprint knows.  Thus, both of you are posting from positions of ignorance.

 

I will never use Direct 2 You.  I think it is an odd service.  However, let Sprint decide if Direct 2 You is worthwhile.  Of course, your objection to that might be "Sprint never makes good decisions.  Direct 2 You must be a bad idea." 

 

AJ

[newboyx]

Direct to you is a waste of money. If we were in 2009-2010? Great idea. 2015? Everyone and their grandma has a smartphone now. I'd bet most current flipphone owners today don't have long for this earth, aren't gonna be long term customers. Not the market Sprint should be targeting.

Thank you! Someone sees where I'm coming from. Im pretty sure most people have had some type of galaxy or iphone and don't really need to be taught how to use them. Thats what the instruction booklet is for and tech reviews. Not hard to look on up they are all over youtube. Point is I barely hear people say they dont know how to use there phone unless they are old or one of those people that asks questions about everything.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

You are giving the average consumer way to much credit for their smartphone knowledge. Anyone that works in mobile retail will strongly disagree. A lot, and I mean a lot, of smartphone users don't even know how to transfer their contacts. A lot of people using Android devices don't even know they have a Google account. A lot of iPhone users say "What is icloud?". You both are making the mistake of assuming that because you know something, every else must also know it. Users of this forum are the exception, not the rule.

 

Sent from my SM-T237P using Tapatalk

[Terrell352]

I think both of you need to expand your world view. Think outside your bubble!

 

So many people could use this service, but you seem to be limited to your own personal experience.

We will see. If any of the other carriers jump on this like they do when tmobile does things I will be the first to eat my words. If they don't then clearly Sprint is the only one that thinks this is a good investment. I'm betting the other carriers are going to ignore this though.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[Terrell352]

I think it's a cool idea, you have those who aren't mobile, the person who is always busy and doesn't have time to visit a store and they have the service meet them wherever and those who are inpatient who wants it now and would rather not order online and their nearest store might be too far. I have family members who would gladly use that service because they can get their phone set up and ask all the questions they need to. So there's a market for this service. I think if it wasn't doing well Sprint wouldn't keep expanding it. I think also because we don't have any numbers being thrown around about how much it's being used it gives the impression that it's a waste.

 

Manuals are cool but who wants the read them or go online to find the answer when they can get a direct and hands on answer and tutorial from another individual.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If that person knows all of the features. If they are anything like the store employees they probably don't know everyhting. Things that the internet DO NOT MISS. Watch how to do it in 10 mins on the internet or 1 hour with a person thats not going to know everything.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

And when Tmo does it, they will be heralded as innovative pioneers and shaking things up.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[utiz4321]

We will see. If any of the other carriers jump on this like they do when tmobile does things I will be the first to eat my words. If they don't then clearly Sprint is the only one that thinks this is a good investment. I'm betting the other carriers are going to ignore this though.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

ATT is already testing this service in select markets.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derrph]

If that person knows all of the features. If they are anything like the store employees they probably don't things that the internet DO NOT MISS.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

The last part of your post makes no sense. Must be the autocorrect.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

If they are anything like the store employees they probably don't things that the internet DO NOT MISS.

 

All your base are belong to us.

 

Every two child did.  I will.

 

AJ

[Terrell352]

All your base are belong to us.

 

Every two child did. I will.

 

AJ

Hey I have basketball size hands so I hit the wrong words all the time even on a screen as big as the Nexus 6. They use to call me E.T. because my fingers are so long.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

Hey I have basketball size hands so I hit the wrong words all the time even on a screen as big as the Nexus 6. They use to call me E.T. because my hands are so long.

 

 

AJ

[Terrell352]

 

AJ

Well I walked right into this. Lmao

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[luvixuha]

This is why it's dangerous to use terms like "most." Only 55% of the US population has a smartphone. That's expected to climb to over 70% in the next five years. That's 45 million new customers for the carriers. That approaching the size of Sprint's existing customer base.

64% of adults in the US have a smartphone according to the latest Pew survey. This includes 85% of those 18-29 and 79% of those 30-49. The large untapped market of non-smartphone users? Age 65+, with 27% of those owning a smartphone. If Sprint wants to spend untold amounts of money targeting people with one foot in the grave, I guess everyone here thinks that's a smart business decision.

 

The problem is that neither of you has done any market research on Direct 2 You.  But Sprint has.  Neither of you has any usage stats on Direct 2 You.  But Sprint does.  And neither of you knows the cost structure of Direct 2 You.  But Sprint knows.  Thus, both of you are posting from positions of ignorance.

You don't have any access to that data either. For all you know, Sprint's internal data may very well show it to be a money losing proposition, but I am not using absence of evidence to base my argument. Do we really need to argue that the older, flip-phone owning demographic is probably not a goldmine?

 

I think if it wasn't doing well Sprint wouldn't keep expanding it.

It wouldn't be the first time a large corporation continued to throw good money after bad.

Edited October 14, 2015 by luvixuha

[WiWavelength]

You don't have any access to that data either. For all you know, Sprint's internal data may very well show it to be a money losing proposition, but I am not using absence of evidence to base my argument. Nor did I make an argument from a financial perspective, although one could be implied.

 

Huh?  Irrelevant.  I do not need access to that data.  I am not making an argument for or against Direct 2 You.  I am merely pointing out flaws in your argument -- of which the gist is "I think Direct 2 You is a stupid idea.  Therefore, it is a stupid idea."

 

AJ

[luvixuha]

I am merely pointing out flaws in your argument -- of which the gist is "I think Direct 2 You is a stupid idea.  Therefore, it is a stupid idea."

On the contrary. I think it's a great idea that arrived 5-6 years too late.

[WiWavelength]

On the contrary. I think it's a great idea that arrived 5-6 years too late.

 

That is moving the goal posts.  If you think Direct 2 You is "a great idea that arrived 5-6 years too late," then you no longer think it is a "a great idea."

 

Well, Sprint can be the judge of that.  But based upon your posting history that leans optimistic toward T-Mobile and pessimistic toward Sprint, I doubt you think that Sprint is capable of making such a decision in its best interest.

 

AJ

[utiz4321]

 

 

 

It wouldn't be the first time a large corporation continued to throw good money after bad.

 

I'll say it again, but it is probably revenue generating or sprint sees it becoming revenue generating given Marcelo's approach to spending.

 

On another note, what do you think the people who use direct 2 u would do if that service wasn't available once they got there phones in the mail? Read the activation instruction mailed to them and transfer all their content through whichever of the easy to use cloud services they choose to use? Nope. They would walk into a store, see a rep anyway and tie down the resources of the stores, which sprint wants to be focused on sales. It probably cost sprint just as much or more having these people come to a store.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nick]

In small towns (at least mine) it made very little sense - as it doesn't help.  Sure I can get near 90 down - but only when I am parked in the same parking lot as the tower LITERALLY - go about 2 miles and its difficult to keep LTE established...  

 

I know its not the same but in the end the consumer doesn't see it as a good thing.   

I used to get the same results, extremely limited LTE range, however that has slowly been changing, literally week by week band 41 reach and penetration has been improving.... I have no explanation as to why exactly, or why the change is so slow, but now with line of sight, or near line of sight to the tower band 41 can reach around 2 miles from my towns best performing tower... and 1 mile from the worst performing band 41 tower.  they are both boomers, with sprint equipment at or near the top rack.  

[luvixuha]

That is moving the goal posts.  If you think Direct 2 You is "a great idea that arrived 5-6 years too late," then you no longer think it is a "a great idea."

I refer you to post #8545. "If we were in 2009-2010? Great idea."

 

There are great ideas that exist and are simply "before their time" or "after their time". Sorry if you fail to recognize that.

 

I'll say it again, but it is probably revenue generating or sprint sees it becoming revenue generating given Marcelo's approach to spending.

I believe that Sprint sees it as becoming revenue generating. Nobody knows for sure, but if it was a smash success or turned out to be a major revenue driver, I'm having a hard time believing they wouldn't be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

On another note, what do you think the people who use direct 2 u would do if that service wasn't available once they got there phones in the mail? Read the activation instruction mailed to them and transfer all their content through whichever of the easy to use cloud services they choose to use? Nope. They would walk into a store, see a rep anyway and tie down the resources of the stores, which sprint wants to be focused on sales. It probably cost sprint just as much or more having these people come to a store.

There's the additional overhead of cars, equipment, logistics, etc. that are involved with the mobile service that you wouldn't have if you simply hired another person at a store. If there is an issue of tying up store resources, are the stores understaffed? Wouldn't that be a problem easier solved by hiring another person? Or improved demand planning/scheduling?

[utiz4321]

Yes, but then the rural base is stuck with (practically speaking) no options. I know they're a minority in that regard for wireless, but in wired almost everyone feels the impact of low competition. That's why I feel Net Neutrality is such a necessity for wired broadband. It doesn't make too much sense to have 4 cable providers servicing the same area (insane combined CAPEX for expansion) so whoever's already serving an area doesn't have much to worry about from a competition standpoint. They get lazy and/or greedy (and don't bother upgrading their networks in many cases) and they charge a lot/abuse their positions to promote their own content services. Consumers have nowhere to go because they only have one cable provider. Oversight is necessary to keep that from happening. On the wireless side things are obviously a little better for urban users as far as options go, but again I doubt any new competition is gonna show up outbof nowhere and upset the incumbents.

 

If I knew the wireless market was going to become healthily competitive and stay that way into the future I would probably change my stance on NN for mobile. But the two underdogs are not exactly in healthy financial states and not mandating NN for mobile is something of a slippery slope if we drop to 3 highly territorial national carriers for one reason or another.

First, you missed the point about rural and urban customers and the effect on the decision making of telecoms. The vast majority of revenue is generated in the nonrural markets and thus any carrier has to consider the competitive nature of those markets in their strategic thinking and rural customer benefit from that. Att and vzw Rural customer pay the same for service as their urban customer do, therefore the moves of competitors in urban areas indirectly benefit rural customers.

 

Rural customers only have two choices because that is what that local market can sustain. rural areas have horrendous choices for all sorts of goods and services for the exact same reasons, it is why I will never choose to live in a rural area of this country.

 

Second, part of the reason the wireless industry has so few healthy players is because the carriers have been operating in a net neutral way. In a NN world it seems only to wireless carriers can make profits. If carriers where allowed to charge contented providers for special high speed access to customer profits for telecom would expand and perhaps sprint and T-Mobile would be in the black. Then maybe having four national carriers would be sustainable, as it is three might not.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

I refer you to post #8545. "If we were in 2009-2010? Great idea."

 

There are great ideas that exist and are simply "before their time" or "after their time". Sorry if you fail to recognize that.

 

Nope, you cannot get away with that.  You are still moving the goal posts.  Is Direct 2 You "a great idea" right now?  What you think it would have been last decade is irrelevant to right now.

 

And you seem to speaking out of both sides of your mouth.  Trying to praise Direct 2 You as "a great idea," yet simultaneously cutting it down.

 

Just own up to it.  You do not have evidence from inside to Sprint to support your assertion, but you do think that Direct 2 You is "a waste of money" and "[n]ot the market Sprint should be targeting" right now.  Those are your own words...

 

Direct to you is a waste of money. If we were in 2009-2010? Great idea. 2015? Everyone and their grandma has a smartphone now. I'd bet most current flipphone owners today don't have long for this earth, aren't gonna be long term customers. Not the market Sprint should be targeting.

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/6319-marcelo-claure-town-hall-meetings-new-family-share-pack-plan-unlimited-individual-plan-discussion-thread/?p=450900

 

AJ

[utiz4321]

I refer you to post #8545. "If we were in 2009-2010? Great idea."

 

 

I believe that Sprint sees it as becoming revenue generating. Nobody knows for sure, but if it was a smash success or turned out to be a major revenue driver, I'm having a hard time believing they wouldn't be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

 

There's the additional overhead of cars, equipment, logistics, etc. that are involved with the mobile service that you wouldn't have if you simply hired another person at a store. If there is an issue of tying up store resources, are the stores understaffed? Wouldn't that be a problem easier solved by hiring another person? Or improved demand planning/scheduling?

They are shouting about it from the rooftops. Marcelo mentions it every time he speaks. He talks about the cost savings, the improved customer satisfaction all the time.

 

Simply Hiring another person doesn't necessarily relieve store congestion. There is a max capacity of the store building itself and the perception problem of a customer walking into a store that looks like it is busy. Apple stores have this problem in my area, I seem to get out of those places in a reasonable amount of time but they look like a visits to the store will take forever and so that is the perception most customers in my area have of them.

 

The proper cost comparison for direct 2 u is between this option and opening a store. In this comparison direct 2 u is probably far cheaper and has customer experience benefits that a store can't match.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[luvixuha]

They are shouting about it from the rooftops. Marcelo mentions it every time he speaks. He talks about the cost savings, the improved customer satisfaction all the time.

Then lets see some numbers, Marcelo. Analysts don't seem to like it.

 

the perception problem of a customer walking into a store that looks like it is busy

Yeah, the perception that the service is popular. That's a perception Sprint desperately needs.

[Qu3st]

I agree with Direct 2 You being a total waste of everything. 

 

It's gimmicky like Framily and probably won't last. 

[nexgencpu]

Then lets see some numbers, Marcelo. Analysts don't seem to like it.

 

 

Yeah, the perception that the service is popular. That's a perception Sprint desperately needs.

Sprint "Analysts"...LOL!

[utiz4321]

Then lets see some numbers, Marcelo. [url=http://seekingalpha.com/article/3452046-how-sprints-latest-moves-can-accelerate-the-path-to-bankruptcy?page=2]

 

 

Yeah, the perception that the service is popular. That's a perception Sprint desperately needs.

So, you walk into grocery store thinking well if I shop here it looks like I am going to have to wait for a few hours but Damn this place looks popular so I am going to stick it out? Or are you just trolling at this point?

 

Most people see a long line a wireless shop and if they don't have a problem that needs to be fix leave and don't stand in line. Since most people can wait to port their lines over that means new service is the first to leave.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk