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

[Arysyn]

In Florida this could be a bad thing. We have no shortage of trees which means lots of foilage and interference.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

Not to forget the senior citizen Nimbys who yell at kids running across their lawns.

[bigsnake49]

Top of a tower can be great for low band as it has more reach if you can get up and over obstructions.

For high band, like Band 41, height might not be as important.  The signal is not going to go as far anyway.

For band 41, it can be advantageous at times to be lower and blast the signal through buildings. A very high antenna on Band 41 can yield a weaker signal when you are close to the tower but on lower ground.  Each site is different because of the terrain and the amount of obstructions.

 

Guys there such things as individual antenna element down tilt adjustments. Also send diversity so that you can adjust one antenna element for close and the other for far. Not like it used to be in the 90's.

[Arysyn]

SoftBank's ownership stake in Sprint actually has to remain below 83%. Otherwise, per the terms of the acquisition, if SoftBank's ownership exceeds 83%, it has to make a tender offer for the remainder of the stock.

 

That is interesting to know, as I don't know too many details of the specifics regarding the Softbank/Sprint deal. Although, I agree with those S4GRU members here who've said they believe Softbank ought to have bought Sprint outright

 

I fully acknowledge, admit, and take responsibility for being both positive and negative in tone about Sorftbank with regards to logical and theoretical issues relating to various topics, particularly concerning Softbank's impact on Sprint. Now, what I'm not doing, is being unfairly judgmental towards Sprint about it, but rather I will criticize Softbank, as I have. Hopefully, people here believe me when I say that I'm not intending to bash/flame Sprint over this. I've seen some posts here by S4GRU moderators politely notifying members to avoid doing this, and I respect that. Again, this isn't my intention to be against Sprint in these ways, though admittedly Softbank is a different matter, in my opinion.

 

Still, this isn't meaning that I'm trying to give myself a pass to be critical here of Softbank, but rather I think it is important to separate Softbank from Sprint where it relates to the rules here regarding Sprint criticism. When thinking about Sprint, I see a company with alot of amazing potential with its spectrum and its build towards the future, which Dan Hesse rightfully put into place. While many might be critical of him, I've been very outspoken here in favor of him and the good he did for Sprint, believing had Sprint not sold over to Softbank, the possibility things could have been better for Sprint by now, especially had Dan Hesse remained CEO.

 

However, I also believe had Softbank bought Sprint outright, perhaps there would have been more incentive for Softbank to do more for Sprint, rather than just waiting to sell the company, merge it out, whatever it may be. While not everyone agrees with me about Dan Hesse and this other Sprint-related stuff, I know there are those here who do agree with me about this, or at least agree with me to a certain extent. The main reason for the agreement though has less to do with them agreeing with me, but more about my agreeing with them. All I did was to add on some of my own perspective to theirs. The foundation of our agreement though remains something so simple that I haven't read any significant disagreement towards, which is the belief that Sprint should get band 41 on the majority of its towers wherever it can, as an action that ought to be a priority for Sprint, but is being held back by Softbank's lack of investment and other relating reasons.

 

The other point to this, is wanting Sprint to then deploy more sites/towers to fill in the coverage gaps. This also needs to be done, though this part of it likely is the main thing being held back on hopeful anticipation by Softbank to merge Sprint with T-Mobile, as Sprint will not need to make as much investment in sites/towers, if they can merge T-Mobile's existing network with Sprint's. That leaves open room for debate over different perspectives regarding what we think ought to be done. Through all the discussion up to this point, at least, I definitely see a group of people here as being very intelligent and loyal to what they have dedicated so much to over the years in Sprint. Some have been hurt by Sprint too, and it reflects in comments made here by those, though I don't see anyone being unfairly critical towards Sprint, which again is very important, and to separate Sprint from Softbank in much of these issues. I know that is what I try to do, and finding most difficult where to place Sprint's current executives between how much they stand with Sprint, in contrast with how their relations with Softbank impact that.

[chamb]

Guys there such things as individual antenna element down tilt adjustments. Also send diversity so that you can adjust one antenna element for close and the other for far. Not like it used to be in the 90's.

Yep, and each site needs individual engineering.  Height of antennas and surrounding territory must all be considered.  It the antennas are too high, then significant down-tilt is probably needed.   Then the distance covered will not be as large. Extra height is not always needed and can actually be a bad thing in some cases. If a site is already on a hill, top position on  a tower may cost more and not be as effective as mounting antennas on a lower spot.

[Mr.Nuke]

SoftBank's ownership stake in Sprint actually has to remain below 83%. Otherwise, per the terms of the acquisition, if SoftBank's ownership exceeds 83%, it has to make a tender offer for the remainder of the stock.

Softbank currently owns ~83% of Sprint. The tender offer is triggered at 85%.

[Fraydog]

The tender offer is triggered at 85% not 83%.

I knew I wasn't dragging 85% out of thin air...

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Mr.Nuke]

I know that is what I try to do, and finding most difficult where to place Sprint's current executives between how much they stand with Sprint, in contrast with how their relations with Softbank impact that.

Please attempt to watch your post lengths. This post could've been made in about a paragraph. Thanks.

[Marv1]

If you think Tampa has alot of band 41 then you clearly have not been to Orlando where they have it on most towers. Hell even going to Tampa on I75 Sprint has a significant amount of 3G coverage and sites that do have LTE only have overloaded b25/26 and the worst part is the staggering amount of shared towers that they are on the bottom of. How is band 41 supposed to work when 50% of the time they choose to be the lowest on the tower?

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Same with New Smyrna Beach. 

[joshuam]

Read your English again, you are comparing Sprint's one quarter to Tmo's ENTIRE year.  Again, leave it to the pros. 

 

But for many folks...it is the same. I never lose LTE on T-Mobile anywhere in central Maryland. Literally never. On Sprint, still spending quite a bit of time on 3G...and it's frequently unusable 3G. Yeah, obviously in the middle of no where, I'd put much more faith in Verizon than T-Mobile. But for for a lot of people, there isn't a difference.

 

 

Will speed limited data plans impact Ookla and OpenSignal (or even Root Metrics) reports? I know AT&T doesn't really market network surveys/results, but if many of your customers are on 3Mbps plans, and they run speed tests...that would bring down the overall average of AT&T.

[JustinRP37]

But for many folks...it is the same. I never lose LTE on T-Mobile anywhere in central Maryland. Literally never. On Sprint, still spending quite a bit of time on 3G...and it's frequently unusable 3G. Yeah, obviously in the middle of no where, I'd put much more faith in Verizon than T-Mobile. But for for a lot of people, there isn't a difference.

 

 

Will speed limited data plans impact Ookla and OpenSignal (or even Root Metrics) reports? I know AT&T doesn't really market network surveys/results, but if many of your customers are on 3Mbps plans, and they run speed tests...that would bring down the overall average of AT&T.

 

Root Metrics wouldn't be affected as I understand they conduct their own tests, not crowdsourced data. However, customer driven data might be affected, but it should still show strong reliability. One of Sprint's biggest problems is the inconsistency of the data speed. Calling is wonderful for the most part, but it isn't 2000 anymore. They have also lost their advantage of being the cheapest (for continuing customers). It would also be nice to finally have simultaneous voice and data, something I have long said what is the point. But recently being on a conference call in a building with no wifi, I could not receive an email that was sent during the call for the call. If I am going to pay the same amount of money to Sprint as I would to Verizon, why wouldn't I switch to the number one network with voLTE, 10GB hotspot, etc? This article sums up my feels pretty well: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/sprint-vs-verizon-network-ads,news-22772.html

[kg4icg]

Root Metrics wouldn't be affected as I understand they conduct their own tests, not crowdsourced data. However, customer driven data might be affected, but it should still show strong reliability. One of Sprint's biggest problems is the inconsistency of the data speed. Calling is wonderful for the most part, but it isn't 2000 anymore. They have also lost their advantage of being the cheapest (for continuing customers). It would also be nice to finally have simultaneous voice and data, something I have long said what is the point. But recently being on a conference call in a building with no wifi, I could not receive an email that was sent during the call for the call. If I am going to pay the same amount of money to Sprint as I would to Verizon, why wouldn't I switch to the number one network with voLTE, 10GB hotspot, etc? This article sums up my feels pretty well: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/sprint-vs-verizon-network-ads,news-22772.html

Look at it on a single line between the 4 and see who is cheaper, also big stink going on that T-Mobile jack there sim card price from $15 to $25.

 

Sent from my 2PYB2 using Tapatalk

[kg4icg]

The reason why I said thatT is because I'm still on the unlimited $70 a month plan with 3gb of hotspot which has no throttle provisions in which I'm not going to switch everytime some new plan comes out. Makes no sense. Look at prices from a single line of service point of view.

 

Sent from my 2PYB2 using Tapatalk

[JustinRP37]

Look at it on a single line between the 4 and see who is cheaper, also big stink going on that T-Mobile jack there sim card price from $15 to $25.

 

Sent from my 2PYB2 using Tapatalk

 

Yes single lines no doubt!  But many people are on family plans or share costs with close friends. However, even with a single line, if you have FiOS you are eligible to get a single line unlimited for $70 with 10GB hotspot. And while T-Mobile jacked its SIM card price up to $25, Sprint still charges a $30 activation fee, which is still more expensive than T-Mobile. Sprint also charges one of the highest administrative fees out there at $1.99 per line, while Verizon charges $1.23. It is definitely peanuts on the dollar, but Sprint isn't really better in fees than the competition.

[afazel]

I don't suppose there's any chance this applies to Frontier FiOS? Verizon divested to Frontier about this time last year.

[Arysyn]

Please attempt to watch your post lengths. This post could've been made in about a paragraph. Thanks.

 

Normally I do,and have for a long time, hence why there have been a general drop in people requesting to me about it in quite awhile.

 

I covered quite a bit about the Sprint/Softbank relationship in that post, with regard to relating its connection with customers, people generally curious about Sprint, and the like. So, I disagree that it could have been shorter, due to the overview nature of it. Perhaps I could have broken it down into a few more posts, which generally I have done lately with other issues. This however was one of times where I felt it was better all at once.

[Arysyn]

Yes single lines no doubt!  But many people are on family plans or share costs with close friends. However, even with a single line, if you have FiOS you are eligible to get a single line unlimited for $70 with 10GB hotspot. And while T-Mobile jacked its SIM card price up to $25, Sprint still charges a $30 activation fee, which is still more expensive than T-Mobile. Sprint also charges one of the highest administrative fees out there at $1.99 per line, while Verizon charges $1.23. It is definitely peanuts on the dollar, but Sprint isn't really better in fees than the competition.

 

I think it makes more sense to have an activation fee rather than charging more for the sim starter kit, as T-Mobile is doing. They obviously think differently though.

[Arysyn]

I don't suppose there's any chance this applies to Frontier FiOS? Verizon divested to Frontier about this time last year.

 

I thought Verizon was going to sell all of Fios, but apparently that didn't happen.

[JustinRP37]

I don't suppose there's any chance this applies to Frontier FiOS? Verizon divested to Frontier about this time last year.

 

No it does not apply to Frontier FiOS. Verizon has not divested all of FiOS though, just in some markets. Much of the BOS-WAS FiOS area is still Verizon.

[afazel]

No it does not apply to Frontier FiOS. Verizon has not divested all of FiOS though, just in some markets. Much of the BOS-WAS FiOS area is still Verizon.

 

I only meant in my area, not nationwide. 

[lbui]

Does anyone know of developments regarding VoWifi to 1X handoffs on iPhones? It works on a Samsung Galaxy S7 but does not work on iPhone 7 Plus in my neighborhood. Has anyone with iPhones had success?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Johnner1999]

I think it makes more sense to have an activation fee rather than charging more for the sim starter kit, as T-Mobile is doing. They obviously think differently though.

Activation fees can be marked down or credited back to a zero cost.

 

Whereas a sim card is bought as a tangible good, which it is.

 

As such some people don't feel it's "nothing" and complain less about buying one.

 

Just my 2cents

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

Softbank currently owns ~83% of Sprint. The tender offer is triggered at 85%.

Whoops, I totally messed that up! Thanks.

[Arysyn]

Activation fees can be marked down or credited back to a zero cost.

 

Whereas a sim card is bought as a tangible good, which it is.

 

As such some people don't feel it's "nothing" and complain less about buying one.

 

Just my 2cents

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That is a sensible viewpoint about it. I know I wasn't too happy with the Verizon rep saying that I'd be getting charged an activation fee on both lines when I had set up service with them, one line being for a smartphone, the other being for a smartwatch.

 

I'd prefer the activation fee being for the account, like an account set-up fee, rather than a line activation fee, then keep the sim card cost at $10 each.

[JustinRP37]

I was just hung up on twice for trying to buyout my lease. That is odd...

[TheCUJuan]

So sprint is offering many folks who left, $300/line to come back to sprint. Does anyone know what plans they are offering them?