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

[coorsleftfield]

Sprint better do something about service in Glendale for the Superbowl. I was in the Gila River arena which is right next door for a concert last Friday.  Had 3G service only, and it was completely dead. No data, text messages to my friends ATT phone were taking 20-30 minutes to show up. Phone was basically a brick.  Outside there was some LTE, but it was band 25 only, and speeds were 2Mbits download.  

[utiz4321]

What exactly do you mean by difficulty improving? The rip and replace took about 2 years to complete, and while it's still ongoing in some areas it's largely completed now. That's faster than the other carriers have deployed a network wide upgrade.

 

Where LTE is deployed, it works. It got saturated fast, which is why they are deploying a second B25 carrier where they can, and B26 most elsewhere.

 

The other carriers have had similar struggles getting their upgrades, it just wasn't nearly as public as Sprint's. It also helps that, AT&T and VZ especially, had LTE rolling out before and while data demands were increasing exponentially, rather than after demand had begun increasing.

 

Until B41 is deploying everywhere on multiple carriers, demand will increase faster than Sprint can bring B25 and 26 online.

I think the problem is that sprint had a later start and was unable to meet their time table. This failure and the fact that NV 1.0 is still not complete (in my market there a 12 or so sites that haven't even been touched. Making lte coverage very spotty.) and that the competition isn't standing still has made the whole NV project something of a flop for sprint. Hopefully NV 2.0 turns out different but sprint is badly placed.

[EvanA]

http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-offers-new-value-on-80-and-90-sprint-family-share-pack-plans.htm

 

The $15 line charge is being extended to the 12GB and 16GB family share packs through Jan 15.

[gnoj]

http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-offers-new-value-on-80-and-90-sprint-family-share-pack-plans.htm

 

The $15 line charge is being extended to the 12GB and 16GB family share packs through Jan 15.

The line charge (which is basically to pay for unlimited talk & text for that phone) should be the same across the board, but ok.

 

This reminds me a bit of the $50 unlimited iPhone plan. Instead of just offering that price point for everyone (like they trialed for a while in the Midwest), they decide to raise it $10 (and remove the annual upgrade benefit) in order to reserve that price for Apple. I can't wait for the $50 unlimited "promo" to help move the Galaxy S6 once that's released. If the argument is that the $10 discount is because of the higher resale value of iPhones (even though it applies to the non-lease options too), then the S6, M9, etc should also benefit since their value will be boosted by virtue of being domestically-unlockable, unlike the Sprint iPhone 6.

 

They must plan these promos months in advance, so that they can wait to roll out what they should have from the get-go. Their strategy may be to hook people on the bigger data buckets to keep ARPU up before inevitably equalizing the line charge across the board. Can't blame them for trying, I guess. If they don't want to lower prices (especially for individual lines), I guess the only other option is to work on the other side of the $/GB equation.

 

I apologize if this comes off as ranty. I just really resent these sorts of pricing games. Set a fair, competitive price for everybody (such as these Straight-Up plans) and be done with it for longer than a few weeks.

[maxsilver]

 Set a fair, competitive price for everybody (such as these Straight-Up plans) and be done with it for longer than a few weeks.

 

Your not thinking like a multinational corporation

 

Show people a low price by advertising less than they want, and tricking them into buying more than they need. The promos are perfect for that.

 

Advertise low prices, put time-limited offers on them (so they have to "buy now!"). Make the good price only on one phone, so people don't waste time trying to window shop, waste reps time asking about phones, or getting any buyers remorse. Slap extra fees on them (early upgrade, TEP, installment plans, activation fees, etc) to drive up the total cost. Tie your service into a dozen other peoples service, so you can't make changes without screwing up your family/friends/coworkers plans as well, to reduce churn. It's basically how all wireless / wireline ISPs work -- the industry is built on it.

 

Not to mention, that you aren't splitting your markets by income and demographics to maximize revenue. (Your supposed to get the maximum dollars each individual person is willing to pay. You can't do that by treating people equally. You have to set up branding specifically for "urban", "youth", "low-income", so that only they get good pricing, and set up different branding for everyone else, so you can charge them more.)

 

It's Economics 101.

 

Your "Straight-Up" plans are too simple, and too cheap. They don't accomplish that goal. If Sprint switched to it, ARPU on individual lines would drop by $20-$30 each, and individuals could churn whenever they wanted. It's an instant no-go. 

[NYC126]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sprint-ceo-marcelo-claure-speak-203000810.html

Sprint Chief Executive Officer Marcelo Claure will speak at the 2014 Wells Fargo Technology, Media & Telecom Conference in New York City on Wednesday, Nov. 12 at 2:30 p.m.

[gnoj]

Your "Straight-Up" plans are too simple, and too cheap. They don't accomplish that goal. If Sprint switched to it, ARPU on individual lines would drop by $20-$30 each, and individuals could churn whenever they wanted. It's an instant no-go.

If you think those plans are too cheap, then you must think Sprint's actual current offerings are cheap. When I first wrote that up after the new (and current) plans were revealed, I priced the various levels as realistically (yet fair) as I thought possible.

 

For individuals, those plans would be ~$5 more than a 7+ Framily (similar to the $40/50 levels trialed recently), leaving just enough room for the suggested $5 discount(s). Also consider that annual upgrades (now available for every level) are paid for separately w/ insurance, and there are no corporate discounts to cut into the margins.

 

More importantly, these prices would keep bills for families under control, similar to the status quo, even without the artificially low add-on price of $10-15 for a line. Comparing to the apparently popular 20GB bucket, 4*40/5GB = $100/20GB + (15*4).

 

ARPU would not drop much, if at all, because most would still buy at least the $30 plan (even if they don't need 2GB) to get mobile data, and then they'll tack on a $15-25/mo handset, plus perhaps insurance.

 

The point of these plans would be greater transparency (no lines are subsidizing the others), flexibility (each line can pick their own amount of high-speed data without worrying about overages or sharing), the ease of mind of "unlimited" with less of the corresponding risk of overburdening the network, and to provide an avenue to lure in value-conscious customers who are willing to work a little to reduce their bill by purchasing a used device or using third-party VoIP, instead of seeing those customers flee to prepaid or even wholesale, where Sprint makes much less total revenue off them.

 

Here's an idea for those of you who have grown to like data buckets: "Data sharing" can be something enabled online by the primary account holder, whereby any lines on the account with tiered data (so excluding the $20 & $50 levels) can pool their high-speed data usage to see if that works better for them. Between that option and the $5/mo monthly discount for the account owner for the "referrals", there'd still be some incentives for families to stick together and not churn.

 

T-Mobile has had record postpaid subscriber adds despite having what is still largely a very splotchy network. This is, in large part, thanks to their "Simple Choice" plans. Customers value simplicity, or at least the illusion of it. I don't see why the same sort of transformation in pricing couldn't work for Sprint.

[maxsilver]

The point of these plans would be greater transparency, flexibility, etc

As I said above, I *like* your plans. They're good plans. Simple, clean, fair.

 

I just don't think Sprint will implement them. Specifically because they are too good, too clean, too simple, too fair.

 

If you think those plans are too cheap, then you must think Sprint's actual current offerings are cheap. For individuals, those plans would be ~$5 more than a 7+ Framily (similar to the $40/50 levels trialed recently)

Right. And they dropped the $40 promo plan (and the $50 one became the iPhone one). Because they lowered ARPU. Framily isn't current, that promo is also over. (I know they haven't technically discontinued it, but effectively they have.)

 

Framily pricing required...a big family. That lower pricing works because you can't leave without screwing up 6+ other people's bills. Sprint's revenue is roughly the same even if a member drops.

 

Your plans don't do that -- they are too simple and too clean. There's no aggressive and unfair penalty built into them for churning on the lower price points.

 

- -

 

I would not assume that most Sprint subscribers are on a maxed-out Framily plan. I suspect that the majority of postpaid subscribers pay more than that per line for service. (It wasn't that long ago that an individual line cost $80-$110/month, regardless of phone subsidy)

 

 

ARPU would not drop much, if at all, because most would still buy at least the $30 plan (even if they don't need 2GB) to get mobile data, and then they'll tack on a $15-25/mo handset, plus perhaps insurance.

Right, but "not drop by much" isn't "raise", which is why this probably won't happen. The plan you just described is $20-$30 cheaper than Sprint's current plans before even touching the add-ons.

 

I know those include "unlimited", and yours didn't. But that's part of the marketing ploy -- convince people to buy more than they need, to bump ARPU up. Your plans don't do that -- it's too honest, too simple.

 

It's why the $40/3GB plan is gone. Sprint's "unlimited" plans are set up so that light users subsidize heavy users service. Letting the light users opt out (through cheaper 3GB or 5GB plans) hurts this -- they'd have to charge more for unlimited plans to compensate for the revenue loss.

 

T-Mobile has had record postpaid subscriber adds despite having what is still largely a very splotchy network. This is, in large part, thanks to their "Simple Choice" plans.

Where's our "Jump to Conclusions" mat?

 

Regardless of how we here feel either way about T-Mobile's network, their postpaid port-ins are higher, and their churn is lower. Clearly a measurable chunk of ex-Sprint subscribers are finding T-Mobile's network to be satisfactory -- since they're leaving Sprint for it, and paying slightly more (on average) to do so.

 

That's obviously not everyone's experience (and not mine -- my personal line is still on Sprint). But I wouldn't be so quick to discount it either. And we can't really accuse this group of being misled or using old/outdated experiences to judge the service and pricing, since they literally were using Sprint until the day they switched.

[twospirits]

Marcelo strikes again.

Sprint in talks to buy wireless startup FreedomPop

 

TS

[cletus]

Marcelo strikes again.

 

Sprint in talks to buy wireless startup FreedomPop

 

TS

So what is the play with FreedomPop? Is it attractive because they charge higher than retail rates for older phones and Marcelo sees a business opportunity there or what?

[Johnner1999]

I suspect it gives a Sprint a couple extra QTRs before Johnny gets his #3 spot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[twospirits]

I suspect it gives a Sprint a couple extra QTRs before Johnny gets his #3 spot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That thought came across my mind as well.

 

TS

[Johnner1999]

That thought came across my mind as well.

 

TS

in all honesty I don't think any consumer cares what position the carrier is in. Just that it works and priced correctly.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bosox801]

So what is the play with FreedomPop? Is it attractive because they charge higher than retail rates for older phones and Marcelo sees a business opportunity there or what?

Market share?

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[gnoj]

As I said above, I *like* your plans. They're good plans. Simple, clean, fair.

 

I just don't think Sprint will implement them. Specifically because they are too good, too clean, too simple, too fair.

Sorry that part came off as defensive. I phrased it that way only to ward off any comments from somebody else to the effect of "well if my net bill would be the same, what would be the point of these plans?"

 

I guess we can only hope that one day they'll change their minds and decide to get more aggressive about standing out from the industry's same-old pricing tactics. Hopefully Son & Claure won't wait until they fall to #4 to do that.

 

I suspect it gives a Sprint a couple extra QTRs before Johnny gets his #3 spot.

I would have thought FP's customers would already be included in Sprint's overall subscriber count as wholesale subscribers?

[Rawvega]

I suspect it gives a Sprint a couple extra QTRs before Johnny gets his #3 spot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Pretty sure those numbers are already included in Sprint's tallies. I think this may be more about keeping FP out of anyone else's hands. A similar situation occurred when someone was allegedly sniffing round Virgin Mobile prior to Sprint buying them.

[maxsilver]

I would have thought FP's customers would already be included in Sprint's overall subscriber count as wholesale subscribers?

 

They are.

 

I must be missing something here, because I don't see the value of this.  Is Sprint so worried that FreedomPop will start selling T-Mobile service / get aquired by them, that it's worth buying the company? 

 

Unless I'm missing something, the only thing FreedomPop has is 250k-ish subscribers on low-revenue, prepaid plans. Based on the expected purchase offer of 250-450 million,  that would mean Sprint hypothetically values FreedomPop at $1,000 to $1,800 per subscriber.

 

For a prepaid, low revenue subscriber. They'd have to keep that subscriber for 4 to 8+ years, just to recoup the purchase price.

[derrph]

tweaks to the current plans are coming again.

 

http://www.streetinsider.com/Management+Comments/Sprint+Corp.+(S)+CEO+Claure%3A+Q414+Will+be+Better+than+Q413/10005157.html

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

Edited November 12, 2014 by derrph

[jamesinclair]

tweaks to the current plans are coming again.

 

http://www.streetinsider.com/Management+Comments/Sprint+Corp.+(S)+CEO+Claure%3A+Q414+Will+be+Better+than+Q413/10005157.html

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

 

Link is broken

[marioc21]

They are.

 

I must be missing something here, because I don't see the value of this.  Is Sprint so worried that FreedomPop will start selling T-Mobile service / get aquired by them, that it's worth buying the company? 

 

Unless I'm missing something, the only thing FreedomPop has is 250k-ish subscribers on low-revenue, prepaid plans. Based on the expected purchase offer of 250-450 million,  that would mean Sprint hypothetically values FreedomPop at $1,000 to $1,800 per subscriber.

 

For a prepaid, low revenue subscriber. They'd have to keep that subscriber for 4 to 8+ years, just to recoup the purchase price.

 

If you read usa today story it mentions fact that FP has very low customer acquisition costs and has a gotten about 50% of the signups to go from free to paying.  Figure Sprint is looking at their marketing/Tech/Management model and thinks it can use it to acquire more customers. 

[cletus]

tweaks to the current plans are coming again.

 

http://www.streetinsider.com/Management+Comments/Sprint+Corp.+(S)+CEO+Claure%3A+Q414+Will+be+Better+than+Q413/10005157.html

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

http://www.streetinsider.com/Management+Comments/Sprint+Corp.+CEO+Claure%3A+Q414+Will+be+Better+than+Q413/10005157.html (fixed the link for you)

 

Yay more spreadsheet tweaks for me maybe?

[NYC126]

Ok I heard the whole conference at work

 

Summary:

New plans coming in the coming weeks

 

Mentioned sprint will be the best value on wireless, but not the cheapest.

 

Asked about if he will ask for capital to softbank. He said the option is there, but he won't at this moment..

 

Asked about the relationship between Massa and himself, he said is spectacular, and that the Japanese is confident.

 

The network, he mentioned sprint will deploy 3 20mhz on the 2.5ghz band, but is more concerned about LTE reliability than speed tests about faster network.

 

Mentioned he is about to hire a lot talented wireless employees especially on network.

 

Mentioned he wants to finish the 800mhz LTE roll out to improve coverage as soon as possible.

 

Says he meet with the network guys everyday.

[derrph]

http://www.streetinsider.com/Management+Comments/Sprint+Corp.+CEO+Claure%3A+Q414+Will+be+Better+than+Q413/10005157.html (fixed the link for you)

 

Yay more spreadsheet tweaks for me maybe?

Thanks! I don't know what was wrong with it everytime I tried to post it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

[IamMrFamous07]

Ok I heard the whole conference at work

 

Summary:

New plans coming in the coming weeks

 

Mentioned sprint will be the best value on wireless, but not the cheapest.

 

Asked about if he will ask for capital to softbank. He said the option is there, but he won't at this moment..

 

Asked about the relationship between Massa and himself, he said is spectacular, and that the Japanese is confident.

 

The network, he mentioned sprint will deploy 3 20mhz on the 2.5ghz band, but is more concerned about LTE reliability than speed tests about faster network.

 

Mentioned he is about to hire a lot talented wireless employees especially on network.

 

Mentioned he wants to finish the 800mhz LTE roll out to improve coverage as soon as possible.

 

Says he meet with the network guys everyday.

Did he say when will the 3 carrier CA will be depolyed? I know originally it was supposed to end of next year but I figured that was going to change

[NYC126]

Did he say when will the 3 carrier CA will be depolyed? I know originally it was supposed to end of next year but I figured that was going to change

Two 20mhz this year another one by summer 2015.