What would you do if Sprint eliminated "unlimited" data? Poll thread.

[dedub]

(disclaimer, this is not a thread to argue about the merits of unlimited vs shared/tiered data, it's simply to explore the potential future where unlimited is no longer available and why you would or would not stay with sprint)

 

So I ask all of those who are so anti-unlimited, why haven't you already left for those awesome tiered plans you keep raving on about ?

 

And I ask myself, what is the point of staying with sprint without unlimited?

 

I've been a sprint fan since the original EVO 4g, but If it ever comes where I am forced to switch to a tiered data plan, why would I continue to choose sprint instead of ATT/VZW ?

 

Assuming TMO also was out of the unlimited business, I wouldn't choose TMO over sprint, while they may be fast in some places, they still lack coverage.

 

But ATT/VZW both have better coverage in more places than sprint (but not necessarily always better speed or reliability), so unless sprint was significantly cheaper with their tiered rates, why would I pay the same or even slightly less, for less coverage (and/or speed/reliability)?

 

What exactly would keep me or you with sprint, with only tiered data plans?

 

[travismheim]

(disclaimer, this is not a thread to argue about the merits of unlimited vs shared/tiered data, it's simply to explore the potential future where unlimited is no longer available and why you would or would not stay with sprint)

 

So I ask all of those who are so anti-unlimited, why haven't you already left for those awesome tiered plans you keep raving on about ?

 

And I ask myself, what is the point of staying with sprint without unlimited?

 

I've been a sprint fan since the original EVO 4g, but If it ever comes where I am forced to switch to a tiered data plan, why would I continue to choose sprint instead of ATT/VZW ?

 

Assuming TMO also was out of the unlimited business, I wouldn't choose TMO over sprint, while they may be fast in some places, they still lack coverage.

 

But ATT/VZW both have better coverage in more places than sprint (but not necessarily always better speed or reliability), so unless sprint was significantly cheaper with their tiered rates, why would I pay the same or even slightly less, for less coverage (and/or speed/reliability)?

 

What exactly would keep me or you with sprint, with only tiered data plans?

Higher data buckets for the same relative cost.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Yuhfhrh]

Your poll forces an answer to both questions, yet those on unlimited are likely not on shared data plans and vice versa.

[avb]

If Sprint works great in your area why wouldn't you take more data vs AT&T/Verizon?

[dedub]

Your poll forces an answer to both questions, yet those on unlimited are likely not on shared data plans and vice versa.

 

Ok I added additional option for each question, I didn't see any option on the poll to make either question optional, but obviously if it doesn't apply to you then I guess you can just not vote and hit view results.

[Trip]

I am not on unlimited, and mine is a little bit of two options, but I voted for the better coverage option.  I get a much better price on Sprint than I had with US Cellular or than I would have for the same service with Verizon, but Sprint will roam onto US Cellular and thus works in areas I frequent where no other national carrier will work.

 

- Trip

[Ascertion]

Our family often doesn't use an average of more than 4GB per line, but having the data available for times when usage may be higher than normal, is reassuring since there are no overages or throttling in place.  Sprint has spoiled me with unlimited data, and I do agree, that Sprint should definitely remove data abusers from the network, but do not hurt the people that's supported Sprint for years upon years while the network was being built. (ie: not grandfathering people into their old plans.)

[joshnys8913]

The new future is not having unlimited so everyone might as well start getting used to it, but if you have unlimited keep it as long as you can!!

[WiWavelength]

The thread title "What's the point…?" is inappropriate.  It is a question already loaded with negative meaning toward Sprint.  Staff will be changing the thread title to something more neutral.

 

AJ

[jroepcke51]

I have been with sprint for 10 years b/c it worked well when I was at school in springfield, mo and home in Albuquerque, NM. Still the reason I stay.  Works at all the places I travel for work (Gallup, NM, NYC, St. Louis, Des Moines, Seattle).

 

I personally have a connection with sprint beyond my unlimited plan. I have been treated very well over the years.  That is why I stay.

[BenChase7]

I voluntarily switched to a Sprint Family Share Pack (40GB) because it provided me with better features (i.e. tethering included).  Additionally, it costs less and still provides me with about 5x more data than I use.. so, it was a no brainier for me.  

[clbowens]

I voluntarily switched to a Sprint Family Share Pack (40GB) because it provided me with better features (i.e. tethering included).  Additionally, it costs less and still provides me with about 5x more data than I use.. so, it was a no brainier for me.  

How many phones do you have on that plan?

[BenChase7]

How many phones do you have on that plan?

3 phones, 1 tablet.

[floorguy]

I have been on unlimited, everything 1500 and Framily and now the family share....I keep track of 2 separate groups of phones, those with data and those who dont care or need it.... 4 who dont, and 9 that do

 

They NEED to come up with pricing inside of your group plans for those who dont want data, and only want to call or the occasional text (no MMS) with out it being confusing as hell..and actually i am finding the framily one works well, because you have that gig if needed for pretty much $25 (over 7) 

 

I to have been treated pretty good by sprint (sure they have their hiccups, they all do) but this last go round, they gave me a deal of deals. and have found i still dont use as much data as i thought i would.....and i use my phone the same now as i did with unlimited....

in the end, a decent price for a pool of minutes will be best, because pretty much EVERY family will probably have at least 4 lines of some sort where a pool would work better, wether its phone or tablet...

[dnicekid]

I have been on the other plans as well.

It made more sense to give up framily and move to a shared plan. Why? First and foremost they gave me the 20+ 20free gb for $100 bucks. Second, considering I have 2 tablets and a hotspot it made more sense for me. Finally, I have never gone over 10gb on a phone my tablets were the highest users.. Soooo 40gb is way more than what I use and the extra 20 is like insurance for the future.

[jamesinclair]

I rarely go over 3GB (if ever) but I like the peace of mind of unlimited.

 

I would most likely switch to Tmobile, assuming they kept unlimited, and my experience in the 14 day trial period was good.

[cletus]

I moved to Sprint because of the deals they offered on the shared data plans. When my promotional rate expires I will re-evaluate and go from there.

 

I've always been a Sprint fan and even though I left Sprint I only went to Ting because the Sprint network wasn't worth the plans they were charging. Now the network is great and seems fully fleshed out.

 

Unfortunately that has definitely taken some of the fun out of being on S4GRU because now I don't really have any questions about why the network is slow or why I can't get LTE everywhere. The only hitch I have is my wife's iphone 5 only gets 1 LTE band so she isn't as impressed by the turnaround as I am on my Nexus 5.

[BenChase7]

I would support Sprint in terminating the unlimited data plans.  In many places, the abolishment of unlimited data would likely have a positive effect on network performance. 

[dedub]

I would support Sprint in terminating the unlimited data plans.  In many places, the abolishment of unlimited data would likely have a positive effect on network performance. 

 

That of course is your opinion, but do you have what empirical, indisputable, evidence to substantiate that view?

 

How positive of an effect has it had on vzw/att network performance?

[Yuhfhrh]

That of course is your opinion, but do you have what empirical, indisputable, evidence to substantiate that view?

 

How positive of an effect has it had on vzw/att network performance?

 

It would have some sort of positive effect. A lot of users who are pulling 70GB+ likely won't continue to use that much. Those that continue will pay more, and in turn give Sprint more cash flow for capacity increases.

[BenChase7]

Just a couple users using their Sprint phone as their home ISP can certainly have negative effects on network performance. 

 

 

 

How positive of an effect has it had on vzw/att network performance?

I don't know.

[cyclone]

I don't see how doing away with unlimited would cause any change in the network's performance. If someone tried to argue that an unlimited user would have a point where they stop burdening the network, then I would simply argue that with everyone having a new allowance at the beginning of their new cycle and with everyone having a staggered cycle across the nation, that there would be no change noticed on a national scale to the network. The noticed effects would only be on a specific site where the heavy user repeatedly hinders the network once that user reaches the end of their allotment AND ONLY if that user decides to not use beyond their allotment and pay overage charges . Removing the unlimited plan and forcing a charge of a data bucket would only be a financial gain to Sprint.

[joshuam]

I don't see how doing away with unlimited would cause any change in the network's performance. If someone tried to argue that an unlimited user would have a point where they stop burdening the network, then I would simply argue that with everyone having a new allowance at the beginning of their new cycle and with everyone having a staggered cycle across the nation, that there would be no change noticed on a national scale to the network. The noticed effects would only be on a specific site where the heavy user repeatedly hinders the network once that user reaches the end of their allotment AND ONLY if that user decides to not use beyond their allotment and pay overage charges . Removing the unlimited plan and forcing a charge of a data bucket would only be a financial gain to Sprint.

I think it really depends on how many "heavy users" there are.

[sbolen]

I have a 30% AT&T discount, a 24% Verizon discount, and a 20% Sprint discount. If unlimited was ever discontinued, I'd be ok because of the corporate discounts.

 

That said, I work across the street from a kick ass tower and I'm pulling down ~30Mbps in every corner of my building on B41, so... I'd likely stay with Sprint.

[WiWavelength]

I don't see how doing away with unlimited would cause any change in the network's performance. If someone tried to argue that an unlimited user would have a point where they stop burdening the network, then I would simply argue that with everyone having a new allowance at the beginning of their new cycle and with everyone having a staggered cycle across the nation, that there would be no change noticed on a national scale to the network. The noticed effects would only be on a specific site where the heavy user repeatedly hinders the network once that user reaches the end of their allotment AND ONLY if that user decides to not use beyond their allotment and pay overage charges . Removing the unlimited plan and forcing a charge of a data bucket would only be a financial gain to Sprint.

I think it really depends on how many "heavy users" there are.

 

From Arysyn's poll thread on monthly data usage, I have updated the histogram:

 

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/6992-s4gru-members-average-monthly-data-usage-with-poll/

 

To add some statistics, those in the 52.5, 67.5, 82.5, and 97.5 bins -- representing the 45-90+ GB users -- make up five percent of all users, but they consume 30 percent of total data usage.  If we also add in the 37.5 bin -- representing then the 30-90+ GB users -- they make up eight percent of all users, yet they consume 41 percent of total data usage.

 

Now, if Sprint were to eliminate "unlimited" data or price it accordingly (i.e. astronomically), most of the users in the uppermost four bins, maybe even the uppermost five bins would not be able to maintain their usage levels.  They would not be able to afford it or would not be willing to pay that much freight.

 

Most likely, the "standard" data tier would be 10 GB or 15 GB.  Smaller 1 GB and 5 GB tiers could be available for small discounts.  But from the poll, a 10 GB tier would cover 69 percent of users, a 15 GB tier, 83 percent of users.  Beyond that level, data would become considerably more expensive.  Would those in the 22.5 bin -- representing the 15-30 GB users -- be willing to pay an additional $20-30?  Would those in the 37.5 bin -- representing the 30-45 GB users be willing to pay an additional $40-60?  And 45 GB (or less) likely would be the cap, overage, or throttle point.  Sprint offering greater than a 45 GB tier on consumer plans would be unlikely.

 

So, back to an earlier point, those above a certain level probably would have to curtail their usage -- or pay for it.  And I am not sure how anyone could rationally conclude that would not have an effect on network performance.  If those in the uppermost five bins, for example, had to manage their usage down to 15 GB, the net effect would be a 30 percent reduction in total data usage across all users.

 

AJ