Sprint to enforce roaming data limits, send SMS notifications

[dnwk]

If Sprint is needing roaming overages to balance the ledger then the outlook for the company is looking dimmer.  While you like to characterize roaming usage as an option for folks, it's just as much an option and business decision for Sprint - balancing the needs of customers with the footprint of the network.  I find it ironic that a the native network gets more robust (I rarely bounce to roaming in native coverage anymore unless deep in some metal buildings and on repeaters for other providers) and the footprint for non-roaming coverage has shrunk in recent years (see KS now vs a few years ago) Sprint decides to clamp down on roaming.

 

It's pretty annoying to go on a roadtrip and spend 3 days on the interstate system stuck with 1x coverage - say what you want about customers and "misplaced" expectations, but I'm of the opinion that clamping down ahead of getting the new rural agreements in place is a bad business move for a company with a long disparaged network.

 

You probably won't be able to persuade Robert. 

I like the strategy of allow roaming on Sprint but no roaming on Virgin/Boost brand. And price on Virgin/Boost vs Sprint differentiate enough to reflect the omission of coverage. 

I guess the other argument is the new price reduce the difference thus justify lower roaming cap. If the roaming cap continue to shrink,  I don't think there is a reason to setup a separate prepaid brand. It was on quality vs value branding scheme.

[S4GRU]

The only thing I would do differently if I was Sprint is the roaming costs.  The 100MB/300MB limits are what they are.  But the one thing I would like Sprint to do is offer roaming prices that are reasonable beyond the limits.  If I were Masa/Marcelo, I would allow roaming at 10% markup on the most expensive rate.  And that has to be far less than $250/GB.

 

I know that Masa does not want to pay to enrich his competitors.  And that's a fine and worthy goal.  But ideally, Sprint should allow a reasonable roaming rate until the CCA/RRPP roaming is in place and functioning.  Just take the highest rate they pay, and mark it up 10%.  Sprint would have no extra burden this way.  Make people who want to data roam pay for their additional usage.  And even if they wanted to allow a fair roaming price on all providers other than Verizon, that wouldn't be so bad either.

 

So I'm a little critical of Sprint not offering a reasonable price for those who may need to exceed their roaming limits occasionally and willing to pay for it.  But no one is entitled to more roaming than what is in their plan.  The extra benefit they were allowed in the past was just a freebie and never promised by Sprint.

 

Robert

[drhenning]

I have told my phone plan users to turn off roaming data...  If they really need to get Data , then turn it on briefly to reduce the amount of roaming if they need to pull in email or something...  But keeping it off so these smart phones don't keep sucking data is the best approach....

 

The better Sprint coverage is also helping... 

[WiWavelength]

If Sprint is needing roaming overages to balance the ledger then the outlook for the company is looking dimmer.  While you like to characterize roaming usage as an option for folks, it's just as much an option and business decision for Sprint - balancing the needs of customers with the footprint of the network.  I find it ironic that a the native network gets more robust (I rarely bounce to roaming in native coverage anymore unless deep in some metal buildings and on repeaters for other providers) and the footprint for non-roaming coverage has shrunk in recent years (see KS now vs a few years ago) Sprint decides to clamp down on roaming.

 

No, you misinterpret.  I said to balance "that" ledger -- the roaming ledger.  You seem to be extrapolating to Sprint's entire balance sheet.

 

As for Kansas footprint, you probably are aware that the pseudo native coverage came from Pioneer, United Wireless, and Nex-Tech.  Pioneer, for example, took Sprint spectrum for seven years, then turned its back on Sprint, running off with the VZW LTE in Rural America program.  I recently had contact with Pioneer executive management about the Sensorly LTE tracks in Woodward, OK.  I asked a follow up question about the dissolution of its Sprint Rural Alliance partnership with Sprint.  I then got the cold shoulder.  No response.  Pioneer does not want to talk about it because Pioneer basically betrayed Sprint.  So, if you are going to blame Sprint for that, you are placing blame in the wrong place.

 

AJ

[Yuhfhrh]

We really have no idea what the progress and complexities of the RRPP deals are. But a lot of the RRPP members do not have CDMA networks.

 

But most of Sprints phones do support GSM/Edge/HSPA. With some software updates, roaming could really be expanded.

[WiWavelength]

The only thing I would do differently if I was Sprint is the roaming costs.  The 100MB/300MB limits are what they are.  But the one thing I would like Sprint to do is offer roaming prices that are reasonable beyond the limits.  If I were Masa/Marcelo, I would allow roaming at 10% markup on the most expensive rate.  And that has to be far less than $250/GB.

 

I disagree -- to an extent.

 

Many of you probably have not been Sprint subs long enough or simply do not remember that, prior to 2004, Sprint offered no included voice roaming and no data roaming, period.  All voice roaming was paid -- either in pre purchased allotments or by the minute.  Data roaming did not come into the mix until 2006-2007, as handsets required a data roaming setting be instituted in firmware.  Older handsets were never able to data roam.  And it was around this time that the voice and data roaming quotas were put in place.

 

Providing data roaming at just a 10 percent markup would be fine -- if all data roaming from the first megabyte were paid, much like voice roaming before 2004.  However, if Sprint cuts prices across the board and retains the 300/100 MB quotas, something has to cover the costs of those who routinely use most of their quotas but do not accrue overage charges.  The profitability of those subs is compromised.  As I see it, that is the business case for the sensibly capped yet large markup on roaming overage.  Let the overage charges subsidize the substantial amount of included roaming every month.

 

AJ

[dedub]

Let the overage charges subsidize the substantial amount of included roaming every month.

 

AJ

 

The "substantial included roaming", is paid for with the base payment. Not subsidized by the overage fees.

 

Why the pre-paid brands do not include roaming, with their cheaper rates.

[travismheim]

Roaming is available on virgin mobile via their new custom plans from Walmart with a paid add on. I don't remember what the allotments were per dollar, but at least roaming was available to purchase if needed. Maybe Sprint could do something similar for post paid, offer a data roaming package that can be added to current plans for an extra charge.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

I disagree -- to an extent.

 

Many of you probably have not been Sprint subs long enough or simply do not remember that, prior to 2004, Sprint offered no included voice roaming and no data roaming, period.  All voice roaming was paid -- either in pre purchased allotments or by the minute.  Data roaming did not come into the mix until 2006-2007, as handsets required a data roaming setting be instituted in firmware.  Older handsets were never able to data roam.  And it was around this time that the voice and data roaming quotas were put in place.

 

Providing data roaming at just a 10 percent markup would be fine -- if all data roaming from the first megabyte were paid, much like voice roaming before 2004.  However, if Sprint cuts prices across the board and retains the 300/100 MB quotas, something has to cover the costs of those who routinely use most of their quotas but do not accrue overage charges.  The profitability of those subs is compromised.  As I see it, that is the business case for the sensibly capped yet large markup on roaming overage.  Let the overage charges subsidize the substantial amount of included roaming every month.

 

AJ

 

And I guess the crux of our disagreement is that I see 100MB or 300MB of roaming paid for in the Sprint plans.  As a consumer, I would see that as included.  Heck, even as a contract manager, I'd see it that way.  Until Sprint creates new postpaid plans with zero roaming, then the place where any roaming charges incur is at the time of included roaming allotment in your plan is exhausted.  At least, that's the way I see it.

 

If Sprint wants to create special roaming plans that people can select instead of receiving any roaming allotment, that's fine with me.  That would just be an additional a la carte choice.  Then each MB is paid for when roaming.  But if the price was fair, like cost plus 10% markup, then that seems reasonable to me offer as an option.  I'd also be OK with reducing roaming on all plans at contract renewal to 100MB, and then charging the cost plus 10% to roam on those plans for each MB after 100MB is used in a billing period.  

 

There are lots of ways to skin the cat, here.  I just feel that the best course for Sprint is to find a way to allow roaming to continue where the cost is paid by the subscriber (at a reasonable cost) until the CCA/RRPP roaming is pretty functional.  All the specific details can be worked out and compromised, but around that basic premise.  No free rides on data, but minimize paying competitors (especially Verizon) while keeping churn and customers somewhat happy in the interim.

 

I would do some form of this without a doubt, if I was the head of Sprint.  Masa and Marcelo, make it so!

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

The "substantial included roaming", is paid for with the base payment. Not subsidized by the overage fees.

 

Why the pre-paid brands do not include roaming, with their cheaper rates.

 

Nope, that is eroding practically by the week, as postpaid plan costs approach prepaid levels.

 

If, for illustration, Sprint is paying an average of $0.05/MB to its roaming partners, then a sub on a 300 MB plan who uses the entire roaming quota has paid no overage and just chopped $15 off the top of Sprint's margin.  That is huge.  It could mean the difference between profit and loss on that line.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

But most of Sprints phones do support GSM/Edge/HSPA. With some software updates, roaming could really be expanded.

 

It's not quite most, but a lot of the recent flagships do technically support GSM/WCDMA functionality, etc.  But I don't believe that any of them do in dual mode.  You likely would not be able to drive along using CDMA/LTE and drive into GSM/LTE coverage seamlessly.  You would likely need to reboot your phone.  Or at a minimum, go into your hidden phone settings and change modes.

 

Sprint likely could work out the bugs with OEM's and GSM Providers to make that work, one model at time.  And then push the SIM updates to allow those providers to work on the same Sprint SIM card.  But it seems like a tall order.  I am not expecting this to happen.  If it does, it would likely be on new devices where they have a chance to test this out and create new guidelines for OEM's going forward.

 

I may be wrong.  But I would be shocked if Sprint started going back through all the older Sprint devices that support GSM/WCDMA and try to get them to roam off Sprint SIM cards domestically with new CCA/RRPP partners.  It would be great.  But I just don't see it happening.  Man, it's painful to be the pessimist.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

And I guess the crux of our disagreement is that I see 100MB or 300MB of roaming paid for in the Sprint plans.

 

Unless/until we know the actual costs Sprint absorbs for data roaming, this is all academic.  But I doubt my $0.05/MB example is that far out of the ballpark.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

Unless/until we know the actual costs Sprint absorbs for data roaming, this is all academic.  But I doubt my $0.05/MB example is that far out of the ballpark.

 

AJ

 

I would not be surprised in the least if that's the going roaming rate.

 

Robert

[dnwk]

It's not quite most, but a lot of the recent flagships do technically support GSM/WCDMA functionality, etc.  But I don't believe that any of them do in dual mode.  You likely would not be able to drive along using CDMA/LTE and drive into GSM/LTE coverage seamlessly.  You would likely need to reboot your phone.  Or at a minimum, go into your hidden phone settings and change modes.

 

Sprint likely could work out the bugs with OEM's and GSM Providers to make that work, one model at time.  And then push the SIM updates to allow those providers to work on the same Sprint SIM card.  But it seems like a tall order.  I am not expecting this to happen.  If it does, it would likely be on new devices where they have a chance to test this out and create new guidelines for OEM's going forward.

 

I may be wrong.  But I would be shocked if Sprint started going back through all the older Sprint devices that support GSM/WCDMA and try to get them to roam off Sprint SIM cards domestically with new CCA/RRPP partners.  It would be great.  But I just don't see it happening.  Man, it's painful to be the pessimist.

 

Robert

 

If Sprint open up GSM roaming, it will be very confusing to users on which phone can roam. They will keep asking why a fellow Sprint use have signal but they don't

[S4GRU]

If Sprint open up GSM roaming, it will be very confusing to users on which phone can roam. They will keep asking why a fellow Sprint use have signal but they don't

 

It would be confusing.  But it's something that has happened in the past, where some Sprint phones would roam only 1900, and others only on 850 Cellular.  And people survived.

 

Robert

[dedub]

Nope, that is eroding practically by the week, as postpaid plan costs approach prepaid levels.

 

If, for illustration, Sprint is paying an average of $0.05/MB to its roaming partners, then a sub on a 300 MB plan who uses the entire roaming quota has paid no overage and just chopped $15 off the top of Sprint's margin.  That is huge.  It could mean the difference between profit and loss on that line.

 

AJ

 

Welp, you might not like it, and sprint might not like it, but the fact is the allotted roaming is included with the base service at either 100 meg or 300 meg, is the way it currently is.

 

You could also say, that all the people who are *not* using the allotted roaming allowance, are the ones that are subsidizing those who do.

[Destroyallcubes]

OK my two cents. If you need more data than 300mb of roaming pick up an ATT hotspot at best buy, and pay $35,iirc, and get over a 1GB of data. Pay less than roaming fees and no complaint about 1x only roaming. Or substitute it with a Verizon Hotspot. There are cheapers alternatives you can use.

 

$25 for 1.5GB for Att. Why wouldn't you use that instead of expensive roaming. Get more data plus you can only activate it for those times you need it for vacation.

[S4GRU]

OK my two cents. If you need more data than 300mb of roaming pick up an ATT hotspot at best buy, and pay $35,iirc, and get over a 1GB of data. Pay less than roaming fees and no complaint about 1x only roaming. Or substitute it with a Verizon Hotspot. There are cheapers alternatives you can use.

 

This is what I have had to do for the past 3 years.

 

Robert

[Destroyallcubes]

This is what I have had to do for the past 3 years.

 

Robert

I am about to jump on one, just to track ATT new sites, but Will use it for if I travel.

[caspar347]

OK my two cents. If you need more data than 300mb of roaming pick up an ATT hotspot at best buy, and pay $35,iirc, and get over a 1GB of data. Pay less than roaming fees and no complaint about 1x only roaming. Or substitute it with a Verizon Hotspot. There are cheapers alternatives you can use.

 

$25 for 1.5GB for Att. Why wouldn't you use that instead of expensive roaming. Get more data plus you can only activate it for those times you need it for vacation.

This is a great way to deal with roaming. I know a few local Ingress players that use T-Mobile carry Verizon hotspots for when T-Mobile doesn't quite cut it.

[irev210]

This has been a very interesting thread.

 

I think it really shows that Dan Hesse seemed to be a big believer that overages were the #1 cause of voluntary churn - so no hard caps - when you are charging on parity with AT&T/VZN, this makes sense.

 

Masa is obviously taking a different approach focusing more on price and stripping out some of the services, which makes sense.  I think the new lower price points are pretty interesting.

 

I don't think one way is necessarily better than another but I will say as a Sprint subscriber, roaming has really saved my arse more than once and it's one of the big reasons why I've never left sprint.  That being said, I don't think I'll have issues having 300MB of roaming - most of the time it's used for google navigation driving through rural areas.

[mozamcrew]

This has been a very interesting thread.

 

I think it really shows that Dan Hesse seemed to be a big believer that overages were the #1 cause of voluntary churn - so no hard caps - when you are charging on parity with AT&T/VZN, this makes sense.

 

Masa is obviously taking a different approach focusing more on price and stripping out some of the services, which makes sense.  I think the new lower price points are pretty interesting.

 

I don't think one way is necessarily better than another but I will say as a Sprint subscriber, roaming has really saved my arse more than once and it's one of the big reasons why I've never left sprint.  That being said, I don't think I'll have issues having 300MB of roaming - most of the time it's used for google navigation driving through rural areas.

 

I've simply gone ahead and disabled data roaming while leaving voice roaming on. This way if I need to call/text I still have that option (and I will know I'm roaming when I decide to do these things), but I won't get stuck with some background data putting me over the cap.

[dnwk]

 

At the same time, Claure admits that he will have to eliminate certain segments of the business that are not thriving--or the "nice to haves," and instead focus on the must-haves. "In times of turnaround, we will focus on must-haves. Nice-to-haves will have to go. We have an extensive line of nice-to-haves."

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprints-claure-t-mobile-should-step-aside-we-are-new-industry-disrupters/2014-09-11

 

 

It looks like roaming is something he consider "nice-to-haves"

[S4GRU]

It looks like roaming is something he consider "nice-to-haves"

No. You mean additional roaming beyond your plan allotment. Right?

[dnwk]

No. You mean additional roaming beyond your plan allotment. Right?

Yes. I mean additional roaming