Jump to content
joshuam

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

Recommended Posts

Then sprint eitber needs to be the fastest carrier (something sprint has promised and failed to deliver on), become the bottom basement carrier (I don't think their cost structure will allow it) or need to merge with t-Mobile.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

That's where densification comes in.  Increasing capacity and speeds (within the current footprint).  But they do not "need" to be anything.  They needn't be the fastest nor the one with the most coverage.  They still can do a very good job being the fourth largest carrier with a decently fast (but not necessarily fastest) network.  

 

Why do you think they "need" to be the fastest?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this is moving along.

 

3CA needs to be pushed to all markets it can be.

 

I recall there being deployment "delays" due to certain equipment in certain markets.

I agree I still don't think 3CA has reached to the D.C. Metro area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JonnygATL

 

Your entire post is a mess.

 

Yeah, Sprint should totally stay put and not expand.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Um.  No.  Your thinking is a mess.  Name calling, however, is inappropriate, unnecessary and also indicative of limited cognitive ability.  

 

Run along now and gather some evidence to substantiate your empty claims. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. The problem with Sprint is that they are not even consistent in urban areas with speed and coverage. If they would just be competitive on the coverage and speed front in urban areas, i will be happy.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Precisely what I'm getting at.  Sprint doesn't need to play a goal matching game with the big 2 (or even Tmo, for that matter) until they have the cash to do so.

 

And, as I said, they already cover most major urban and suburban areas (and even some exurbs).  Again, that's where the money is.  Improving the capacity within this pre-existing footprint should be where the focus lies.

 

That may include small cells as well as a few hundred (or more) additional macro cells as well as there are holes within the current footprint that need to be filled in before beginning any meaningful expansion.  This is especially true if we are to see VoLTE come to fruition anytime soon.

 

But my point is that Sprint does not need to cover every American.  If one finds oneself outside Sprint's coverage area, so be it.  Find another carrier.  Sprint just needs to be as good as it can be where it does have coverage.  Once that's settled and it it proves profitable down the line then they can worry about a significant expansion then.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find any public source to substantiate, so consider it more rumor: sprint and tmo are in active merger discussions, according to an 'industry news blurb' on a company newsletter. Whether that assertion is based upon industry gossip/expectations, or our xo team has something more fact based, is certainly up for debate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um. No. Your thinking is a mess. Name calling, however, is inappropriate, unnecessary and also indicative of limited cognitive ability.

 

Run along now and gather some evidence to substantiate your empty claims.

I didn't call you anything outside of your username, but ok.

 

Your ideas and thoughts regarding Sprint NEVER makes sense.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JonnygATL

 

Your entire post is a mess.

 

Yeah, Sprint should totally stay put and not expand.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fabian Cortez is that you?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A MB is a high powered indoor femto that can reach a bit outdoors.

It will do nothing for service gaps which needs substantially higher power small cells or macro cells to cover.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Yes. You're right about that.

 

To the extent it reduces indoor coverage complaints, it's a modest step though it doesn't address CDMA Voice like the upcoming Airave 3 will.

 

I wonder if Sprint gets more complaints about outdoor or indoor coverage. I'd be curious to see the breakdown on that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love your positive attitude and enthusiasm, It reminds me of myself back in 2012-2016 lol

???????????? Me too! But it's good that people are positive about sprint! We just need more to become positive and enthusiastic!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fabian Cortez is that you?

1pj8c0.jpg

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they did not have their act together, now they are leveraging their whole spectrum.

Sounds like Network Vision all over again.

 

After all these years, the initial LTE overlay is STILL not done. If that isn't alarming, I don't know what is...

 

I appreciate the enthusiasm though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by WiseGuy321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precisely what I'm getting at. Sprint doesn't need to play a goal matching game with the big 2 (or even Tmo, for that matter) until they have the cash to do so.

 

Agree with all of this. They should actually make their network usable across their current footprint first. Then work on expansion.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by WiseGuy321
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like Network Vision all over again. That is the project that STILL hasn't been completed. Even after all these years, the initial LTE overlay hasn't been completed.

 

I appreciate the enthusiasm though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Network vision was the complete rip and replace of the old legacy network with modern enbs. They never promised nor planned lte on every site though they're doing that now with management back indoors and 3G only sites bumped to 1st priority.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Network vision was the complete rip and replace of the old legacy network with modern enbs. They never promised nor planned lte on every site though they're doing that now with management back indoors and 3G only sites bumped to 1st priority.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Looking at this map (from 2012), this was the LTE coverage that should've been up by the end of NV in 2014.

 

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sprint-4G-LTE-coverage-map-surfaces_id28566

 

ApJ-y1XCMAE4USN.jpg

 

Looking at the current LTE coverage of ME/NH/MA/CT/RI/VT/NY, they are nowhere near the "promised" coverage almost 3 years past the "end" of NV, so yes, I would argue that the initial LTE overlay is still not done yet.

Edited by WiseGuy321
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree I still don't think 3CA has reached to the D.C. Metro area.

Hope this gets sorted out soon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with all of this. They should actually make their network usable across their current footprint first. Then work on expansion.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Their network is "usable" with in their foot print and large areas out side their footprint they have very usable pseudo native coverage and roaming agreements . They just don't have a competitive offer in some areas and for people that travail to rural areas often. The problem for sprint is they are heavily indebted and can't spend the money for something like a project ocean and their original densification plans. They should have be allowed to merge with T-mobile a couple of years ago.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at this map (from 2012), this was the LTE coverage that should've been up by the end of NV in 2014.

 

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sprint-4G-LTE-coverage-map-surfaces_id28566

 

ApJ-y1XCMAE4USN.jpg

 

Looking at the Northeastern LTE coverage, they are nowhere near the "promised" coverage in 2017 (almost 3 years after the planned completion)

I love those old maps and times. So much over promise and under deliver.

 

I can't believe we're arguing over this shit in almost the middle of 2017 after a buyout, management change, network maintainence and management change, and even one of the old NV vendors going kaput and being bought out.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Network vision was the complete rip and replace of the old legacy network with modern enbs. They never promised nor planned lte on every site though they're doing that now with management back indoors and 3G only sites bumped to 1st priority.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Didn't Hesse or Marcelo originally say that 2.5 GHz was going to be deployed on every tower?

 

Marcelo then changed the 2.5 GHz deployment strategy to be targeted deployments... but it's unclear if the "2.5 GHz on every site" promise still stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

???????????? Me too! But it's good that people are positive about sprint! We just need more to become positive and enthusiastic!

Lmao!! It's really hard to be positive due to the several let downs but I'm going to try!! I'm always rooting for Sprint though and hope they have my business again.

 

All I need from them is to have 3XCA (Dense) and Volte in my market then I'll switch back to them. However I'm going to wait until the 2018 iPhone to come out.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their network is "usable" with in their foot print and large areas out side their footprint they have very usable pseudo native coverage and roaming agreements . They just don't have a competitive offer in some areas and for people that travail to rural areas often. The problem for sprint is they are heavily indebted and can't spend the money for something like a project ocean and their original densification plans. They should have be allowed to merge with T-mobile a couple of years ago.

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

Project Ocean didn't happen?

 

What about Project Cedar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Hesse or Marcelo originally say that 2.5 GHz was going to be deployed on every tower?

 

Marcelo then changed the 2.5 GHz deployment strategy to be targeted deployments... but it's unclear if the "2.5 GHz on every site" promise still stands.

Hesse said 2.5 to every site. Marcelo overruled. Went targeted. Marcelo overruled by bean counters. Paid off and paying off debts.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hesse said 2.5 to every site. Marcelo overruled. Went targeted. Marcelo overruled by bean counters. Paid off and paying off debts.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Thanks for clarifying that.

 

Why did Marcelo overrule it?

 

What assumption was Hesse operating under that 2.5 GHz to every site could be done? How would it have been paid for?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Hesse or Marcelo originally say that 2.5 GHz was going to be deployed on every tower?

 

Marcelo then changed the 2.5 GHz deployment strategy to be targeted deployments... but it's unclear if the "2.5 GHz on every site" promise still stands.

Hesse originally said, then when Marcelo took over he changed the strategy, however Marcelo and Son said Sprint would have a "Next Gen" network and be #1 or 2 by this time.

 

keep in mind they promised that before WiMAX was forced to stay on longer than expected, failed small cell roll out (not entirely Sprint's fault), IBez pushback, and among other things.

 

I swear Legere has a Sprint Voodoo doll lol. Sprint can't catch a break on some things lol

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their network is "usable" with in their foot print and large areas out side their footprint they have very usable pseudo native coverage and roaming agreements . They just don't have a competitive offer in some areas and for people that travail to rural areas often. The problem for sprint is they are heavily indebted and can't spend the money for something like a project ocean and their original densification plans. They should have be allowed to merge with T-mobile a couple of years ago.

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

I still do not agree with a merger. Prices will increase and innovation will slow.

 

TMobile is doing well enough on their own and Sprint is improving everyday albeit not fast enough for some, but improving.

 

At the end of the day, these companies are here to maximize profits and having only 3 major players in the field will impede competition.

 

Shuffling 130+ million customers apiece will suffice for the most part.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still do not agree with a merger. Prices will increase and innovation will slow.

 

TMobile is doing well enough on their own and Sprint is improving everyday albeit not fast enough for some, but improving.

 

At the end of the day, these companies are here to maximize profits and having only 3 major players in the field will impede competition.

 

Shuffling 130+ million customers apiece will suffice for the most part.

There is not reason to think any of those negative things will happen. Lets go back to late 1990s to early 2000s, how many companies where there providing wireless services? 8 or nine or so, who "cheap" was it? Do you remember regional plans? Compare the innovation of the wireless market from then until 2007 and 2007 -2017, which saw a faster pace of innovation? Which had a greater number of wireless players?

There are huge returns to scale in the wireless industry and thus the most efficient structure on the industry and thus the structure that will provide the cheapest services at the best quality will be one with a relatively small number of players. Is that 3 or 4 players? How would I know, but the market seems to think it is 3 and I would bet it is right.

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...