Jump to content

Sprint Q4 2014 earnings report


Ascertion

Recommended Posts

But it's not the govts. problem. It's the ceo's. Remember back to when the tmo/att merger was slapped down. TMO was in WAAAAAY worse position than now and maybe even worse than sprint and look where it is now. Sure profits aren't there but they're growing.

 

Also remember that CEOs WILL lie to get a merger past FCC.

 

Look at the att tmo merger. Att offered $39bil for TMO "to expand lte from 250 to 300 mil" yet this

http://www.broadbandreports.com/r0/download/1678331~018ee90413e657e412818181a5d840ff/DOC.pdf

 

accidentally leaked document shows that going from 250 to 300 mil lte would cost att $3.9bil i.e. 90% cheaper than buying tmobile.

 

I don't believe

 

And one could make the debate that the only reason T-Mo even got to the place they are now was their windfall from the failed merger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And one could make the debate that the only reason T-Mo even got to the place they are now was their windfall from the failed merger.

"Spectrum windfall + cash + MetroPCS" was a big part of their turnaround. Areas with no Metro like Chicago, Indy, NOLA, Louisville, Cincinnati, and most rurals are a little rougher spectrum wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4e695f491df2ed203c7c301aeb63104c.jpg

 

More shots fired, see the Magenta line?

 

From the conference call transcript:

 

This improvement was further validated by independent third party data provided by Nielsen, which showed that Sprint's drop call rate has been the lowest ever and improved by more than 50% year-over-year. You can probably guess from the carrier -- from the graph which carries continue to have the worst drop call rate in the industry.

Sprint's (S) CEO Marcelo Claure on Q3 2014 Results - Earnings Call Transcript $S

http://www.seekingalpha.com/article/2889416

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4e695f491df2ed203c7c301aeb63104c.jpg

 

More shots fired, see the Magenta line?

 

From the conference call transcript:

 

 

Sprint's (S) CEO Marcelo Claure on Q3 2014 Results - Earnings Call Transcript $S

http://www.seekingalpha.com/article/2889416

Tmobile is only carrier that doesn't have lowband 2g/3G voice spectrum. It's not level playing field.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And one could make the debate that the only reason T-Mo even got to the place they are now was their windfall from the failed merger. 

 

Imagine the landscape if AT&T never persued TMobile.  Tmobile would've been grasping at the straws.  The duopoly would be unbreakable.

 

it was a good thing for consumers that Tmobile got all that windfall.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tmobile is only carrier that doesn't have lowband 2g/3G voice spectrum. It's not level playing field.

 

I don't buy that. Sprint had PCS only for a long period of time and still managed to have less dropped and blocked calls than T-Mobile the whole time with the exception of 2013 and early 2014.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tmobile is only carrier that doesn't have lowband 2g/3G voice spectrum. It's not level playing field.

Sorry but you did not answer in the form of a question. 

 

You win the Internets today.  maximus is slayed in The Forums at S4GRU.

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4e695f491df2ed203c7c301aeb63104c.jpg

 

More shots fired, see the Magenta line?

 

From the conference call transcript:

 

 

Sprint's (S) CEO Marcelo Claure on Q3 2014 Results - Earnings Call Transcript $S

http://www.seekingalpha.com/article/2889416

They didn't deploy 800Mhz voice nationwide.  It's not available anywhere in Cleveland.

 

Everything else I agree with and I'm excited about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'd be nice for him to articulate what the status of ibez is.

 

That was addressed specifically today in the call.

 

"Our second focus area for the network is a continued build out of LTE on the 800MHz band.  We have 800MHz LTE on air across more than 60% of our LTE footprint and we are focused on completing the other 40% by the end of this year when rebanding is complete."

 

It will happen some time this year.  Soon enough that they can largely complete B26 deployment in the IBEZ by year's end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Our second focus area for the network is a continued build out of LTE on the 800MHz band.  We have 800MHz LTE on air across more than 60% of our LTE footprint and we are focused on completing the other 40% by the end of this year when rebanding is complete."

 

 

Its sometimes hard for me to hear through Marcelo's accent but I'm pretty sure he said "completing the other 40% by the end of the year WHERE rebanding is complete."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was addressed specifically today in the call.

 

 

It will happen some time this year. Soon enough that they can largely complete B26 deployment in the IBEZ by year's end.

But is rebanding same thing as ibez?

Maybe he's only talking about the public safety rebanding like in Miami.

Idk. You know more.

 

Gotcha, I thought that IBEZ issue only effected 800 LTE, not 800 voice.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

It depends how much spectrum on the other side of the border is rebranded.

In some areas NOT in ibez, I've read here that sprint has launched 1x800 first because that only takes 1.25fdd and then waiting for more public safety to be cleared before adding 800lte 5fdd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada IBEZ can get launched this year because Mike is really close to shut down. No mentions of Mike even exist on the Telus website.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_%28cellular_network%29

 

Also see http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php/1856468-Mike[emoji768]-is-retiring for the date - January 29, 2016. My guess is that a lot of the spectrum is already available.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada IBEZ can get launched this year because Mike is really close to shut down. No mentions of Mike even exist on the Telus website.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_%28cellular_network%29

 

Fully rebanding on the canuck side wont happen till late this year or early next year  which will allocate enough for 5x5 LTE 800 + 1x800. Full rebanding in the southern border will happen late this year and well into next year for 3x3 LTE 800 + 1x800.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully rebanding on the canuck side wont happen till late this year or early next year which will allocate enough for 5x5 LTE 800 + 1x800. Full rebanding in the southern border will happen late this year and well into next year for 3x3 LTE 800 + 1x800.

Is it possible to forego the 1x800, and do 4.25x4.25 LTE 800?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully rebanding on the canuck side wont happen till late this year or early next year which will allocate enough for 5x5 LTE 800 + 1x800. Full rebanding in the southern border will happen late this year and well into next year for 3x3 LTE 800 + 1x800.

See the edit with a lengthy letter from a Telus VP that explains their network transition from IDEN to 4G PTT services. That explains a lot more of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible to forego the 1x800, and do 4.25x4.25 LTE 800?

 

No.  A 5 MHz FDD carrier requires at least 4.5 MHz FDD.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible to forego the 1x800, and do 4.25x4.25 LTE 800?

Did you mean deploy a 3mhz LTE carrier, and another 1.4mhz LTE carrier? Or deploy 3mhz LTE and a 1.25mhz CDMA carrier?

 

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully rebanding on the canuck side wont happen till late this year or early next year  which will allocate enough for 5x5 LTE 800 + 1x800. Full rebanding in the southern border will happen late this year and well into next year for 3x3 LTE 800 + 1x800.

I thought they would have 5.5x5.5 along the southern border?

So they could do 3x3 LTE and 1x800 or 5x5 LTE.

Link to comment
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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...