Jump to content
Ascertion

Sprint Q4 2014 earnings report

Recommended Posts

Don't get me wrong, Marcelo and crew are not sitting there with thumbs in their ears and blinders on their eyes. They know that speed is essential, but it shouldn't be at the expense of true network density, which is what they want to focus on.

 

Once the holes are filled in the core network, they can focus on other things. The beauty of fiber/ethernet based sites is the scale able nature, so getting it upgraded is relatively painless.

 

But all that is moot if there are coverage gaps, and I strongly believe that Marcelo and team know that, and are working towards a solution.

Yes. Specifically, I think Sprint has accelerated process since they moved engineers to KC after killing the merger idea off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm talking about getting to "good enough" data speeds.

In rural areas where it's only the duop, whoever gets there first with usable, consistent data at a better price will win.

 

What exactly will they win? For rural areas where dial-up is the predominate form of Internet, having 2-5-6mbps on a phone should be a god-send.

 

For the rural areas, with Sprint having 5mhz in PCS and 5mhz in eSMR available, they will be able to offer a much better consistent and usable experience. Unfortunately there will be those folks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly will they win? For rural areas where dial-up is the predominate form of Internet, having 2-5-6mbps on a phone should be a god-send.

 

For the rural areas, with Sprint having 5mhz in PCS and 5mhz in eSMR available, they will be able to offer a much better consistent and usable experience. Unfortunately there will be those folks 

Win customers there who probably won't switch to whoever's second to arrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if it is a short yet really fat pipe?  You know, hung like a can of tuna.  Kind of like Sprint BRS/EBS.

 

;)

 

AJ

 

Just bugs me man, sorry for violating rules by cursing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are also thousands of sites which are upgraded, leaving only a small % left nationwide.

 

Going off the last NV Sites Complete map, 14.75% (if Clear sites are counted, higher if not) isn't a, 'small %'. But I see the point you're making and agree. Somehow, we've been extremely lucky in MN with regards to backhaul, save the Winona area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Win customers there who probably won't switch to whoever's second to arrive.

 

I'll be honest with you, and blunt, since you're here as a thinly veiled T-Mo lover. 

 

Regardless of what company shows up, first or second after the incumbents in that area, unless they are also bringing network expansion, nothing good will come out it for those who live and work in those areas. It may work for folks to travel to the areas, but not for those who make their living and home there.

 

For example, small town in Iowa, served by only highway Sprint and T-Mobile sites, miles away from town center and population center. The center of the town has a single cell tower, hosting all four carriers. Say both Sprint and T-Mobile get the tower upgraded with LTE, Sprint with 800mhz and 1900mhz, and T-Mobile with PCS (based on what they are doing now with EDGE sites). Right out of the gate, Sprint will have better coverage, but without a native retail presence, the customer base won't change as much. Some folks who had Sprint will benefit, and perhaps recommend their services to others. But the vast majority who live away from that single cell tower, and away from the highway, will not benefit, thus they will remain with the incumbents. 

 

In this scenario, neither Sprint or T-Mobile win, with the only benefit coming that existing Sprint customers will get access to the 800mhz 1x, and LTE, and potentially convert some others. The T-Mobile customers will see LTE when they come into town, but will revert back to EDGE/no signal once they leave.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest with you, and blunt, since you're here as a thinly veiled T-Mo lover. 

 

Regardless of what company shows up, first or second after the incumbents in that area, unless they are also bringing network expansion, nothing good will come out it for those who live and work in those areas. It may work for folks to travel to the areas, but not for those who make their living and home there.

 

For example, small town in Iowa, served by only highway Sprint and T-Mobile sites, miles away from town center and population center. The center of the town has a single cell tower, hosting all four carriers. Say both Sprint and T-Mobile get the tower upgraded with LTE, Sprint with 800mhz and 1900mhz, and T-Mobile with PCS (based on what they are doing now with EDGE sites). Right out of the gate, Sprint will have better coverage, but without a native retail presence, the customer base won't change as much. Some folks who had Sprint will benefit, and perhaps recommend their services to others. But the vast majority who live away from that single cell tower, and away from the highway, will not benefit, thus they will remain with the incumbents. 

 

In this scenario, neither Sprint or T-Mobile win, with the only benefit coming that existing Sprint customers will get access to the 800mhz 1x, and LTE, and potentially convert some others. The T-Mobile customers will see LTE when they come into town, but will revert back to EDGE/no signal once they leave.

 

I was thinking more about tmobile upgrading its 2g sites to full build sites. If you look at tmo's sites, in many places they offer good coverage - if only 2g - and once they're upgraded, there should be good enough coverage for the locals, not only traveleres.

 

https://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/pcc-customer.php

click on 2g

zoom to see signal gradients

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess for that reason tmo won't seek to compete with sprint in rurals. Just put up a "travelers network".

 

That serves their need, which is to focus on their core urban markets, and token coverage elsewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going off the last NV Sites Complete map, 14.75% (if Clear sites are counted, higher if not) isn't a, 'small %'. But I see the point you're making and agree. Somehow, we've been extremely lucky in MN with regards to backhaul, save the Winona area.

 

Say it was 14%, that is still pretty good, and keep in mind, sites are getting upgraded daily. On top of that, there is a HUGE percentage of sites > 95% which are at NV upgraded, so that's a win all in itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more about tmobile upgrading its 2g sites to full build sites. If you look at tmo's sites, in many places they offer good coverage - if only 2g - and once they're upgraded, there should be good enough coverage for the locals, not only traveleres.

 

https://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/pcc-customer.php

click on 2g

zoom to see signal gradients

 

 

Yep, and we all know how accurate those maps are :)

 

At the end of the day, where Sprint will win out is that the low band spectrum they own will give the optimal 1x experience for voice. That alone will help out. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am testing Chester's T-Mobile EDGE for the heck of it today. It is kind of stark knowing what LTE is like for VZ here then jumping back to 2006. The tower location and coverage in town is good - I get decent in-building coverage most places due to a really good tower location by T-Mobile. That said, EDGE is like sucking a turd through a straw. I have a hard time loading Tapatalk on T-Mobile EDGE.

 

That's a big part of why there aren't any T-Mobile subscribers here.

 

Bonus: bad EDGE T-Mobile speed test with geotagged location.

 

0fee7816f571357e62982300a556ffd6.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what company shows up, first or second after the incumbents in that area, unless they are also bringing network expansion, nothing good will come out it for those who live and work in those areas. It may work for folks to travel to the areas, but not for those who make their living and home there.

 

I don't know if I agree with this.  People here in my market are starving for another provider.  It is a frequent conversation point around here with folks asking when Tmo or Sprint will come to our area.  Or even Viaero or USCC.  Starving.  And when I explain that they would only provide coverage in the large towns and along the highway, most don't care.

 

In reality, people in the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana spend 99% of their time in the bigger cities and along highways just like suburbanites in major metros.  They want choice.  And a lower bill.  They know what life in a Duopoly world looks like.  And they don't like it.  Whoever shows up first, whether Sprint or Tmo, will be rewarded with a significant market share in 12 months.  Equalling or surpassing metro areas.

 

It looks like Tmo is planning a Western South Dakota expansion.  They purchased some AWS-3 in the last auction in my area.  I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a 700-A move around here soon too.  It would make no sense to buy that AWS spectrum if they weren't planning to.  And Sprint has to at least expand some native coverage with G block build out requirements.

 

There will be a significant portion of our population, maybe 30% to 40% that will not be able to live without the rural coverage Verizon (and to a lesser extent AT&T) provides.  But the remaining 60% to 70% are ripe for the picking for someone.  And in this age where nearly everyone has a smartphone, subscriber growth is going to have to come from somewhere.  And these may be the easiest folks to pick up.  Especially if you do the build out creatively and precisely in a way to maximize benefit and minimize expense.  

 

A perfectly spaced low frequency spectrum position allows you to do that in the unserved/underserved rurals.  And if you are rewarded with loyal customers from these areas in enough numbers, then you can build out more density to better serve the growing numbers and possibly expand your base further.  And your urban/suburban subscribers that feel like they have to use the Duopoly have much more travelling coverage.  And the postpaid cream of the crop customers you can get from that is huge.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am testing Chester's T-Mobile EDGE for the heck of it today. It is kind of stark knowing what LTE is like for VZ here then jumping back to 2006. The tower location and coverage in town is good - I get decent in-building coverage most places due to a really good tower location by T-Mobile. That said, EDGE is like sucking a turd through a straw. I have a hard time loading Tapatalk on T-Mobile EDGE.

 

That's a big part of why there aren't any T-Mobile subscribers here.

 

Bonus: bad EDGE T-Mobile speed test with geotagged location.

 

 

Can you stream any audio?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if it is a short yet really fat pipe?  You know, hung like a can of tuna.  Kind of like Sprint BRS/EBS.

 

;)

 

AJ

 

This just made me die of laughter!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you stream any audio?

Pandora works sometimes. Depends on where I'm at and signal strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pandora works sometimes. Depends on where I'm at and signal strength.

Looks like there's a 2g tower right in Chester and east, TMO is on a tower with sprint lte; should be soon-ish when TMO activates lte.

 

Is Carbondale the college town that you thought TMO should buff up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like there's a 2g tower right in Chester and east, TMO is on a tower with sprint lte; should be soon-ish when TMO activates lte.

 

Is Carbondale the college town that you thought TMO should buff up?

Indeed it was - T-Mob only has one cell there on EDGE. Even with 10x10 LTE (which they would have to deploy on AWS, otherwise it's 5x5 or kill most GSM) one cell would swamp. College kids would kill it.

 

Sprint, Verizon, and AT&T are all at six cells all on LTE. Verizon has an on campus DAS. I think I may have even spotted Nokia 2.6 GHz RRU's on a few of the Sprint sites but I couldn't stop and photograph.

 

Fun part is Sprint and probably could build out the whole area now after Alltel-AT&T and regain their costs now that AT&T pissed off all the old Alltel customers. :lol:

 

For what it's worth I see no activity yet on the Chester T-Mobile tower. No new base station, microwave link, or fiber. The site is fed by an Ole Frontier T1. IBOP Southern would have to run fiber from the grade school (only 1/4 a mile away) for T-Mobile to use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it matters how fast it gets better vis a vi tmobile.

You just can't help yourself can you? Maybe try something productive and/or positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This just made me die of laughter!!!

 

Only the good die young.  So, you must have been good.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...You know, hung like a can of tuna...

 

;)

 

AJ

LMFAO!! Quote of the day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Flags on the field! You and I cannot have it both ways. Each company is where it is because of decisions that have been made. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flags on the field! You and I cannot have it both ways. Each company is where it is because of decisions that have been made. Period.

How is it TMO's fault that it doesn't have lowband 3G spectrum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it TMO's fault that it doesn't have lowband 3G spectrum?

Decisions made in the past. Some people can and will complain about favoritism by the FCC but when it comes to it, T-Mo because of decisions that it made and its predecessors made put it in a position where it was unable or unwilling to effectively compete in the auction. Or maybe they just undervalued the future importance of lower frequencies. Likewise, I won't give Sprint a pass on that situation either. Some may say that cash was tied up in the Nextel merger debt or the Wimax roll-out. Still comes down to decisions. Every company is free to make their own and live by the consequences. T-Mo is no different.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decisions made in the past. Some people can and will complain about favoritism by the FCC but when it comes to it, T-Mo because of decisions that it made and its predecessors made put it in a position where it was unable or unwilling to effectively compete in the auction. Or maybe they just undervalued the future importance of lower frequencies. Likewise, I won't give Sprint a pass on that situation either. Some may say that cash was tied up in the Nextel merger debt or the Wimax roll-out. Still comes down to decisions. Every company is free to make their own and live by the consequences. T-Mo is no different.

When it comes to 3G, there's only 2 blocks of 850.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to 3G, there's only 2 blocks of 850.

I misread the 3 g part and just read low band spectrum. I still stand by my opinion. Verizon and Sprint did not have 800 mhz fall magically into their laps. They made decisions that landed them those frequencies. T-Mo did not.

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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • It seems really big to me, but I have to admit I'm considering it.  The dual screen thing seems moderately interesting.  I'd be interested in trying it out.  EDIT:  But Best Buy has the G8X on sale right now at a very sensible price.  It's comparable in size to my G6, versus the V60 which, having looked at the dimensions, seems enormous by comparison.  My G6 is already at the very top end of what would fit in my hand.  If I got the V60, it'd be solely for the ability to use 5G, which I don't really need other than for tracking purposes--and right now, I think it's pretty safe to assume that a site with 600 MHz LTE on T-Mobile or a Massive MIMO antenna on Sprint is running 5G without having to prove it that way. - Trip
    • Official LG intro video:  
    • Any thoughts on the included dual-screen? Doesn't seem like something I'd use, would be nice to have an option where it's not included, maybe for a slightly lower price.  Battery size is nice! LG lagged a little behind on the battery for the G series for a while. https://www.cnet.com/news/hands-on-lg-v60-thinq-5g-with-8k-video-and-dual-screen/
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...