Jump to content

Sprint wants to save $1B by relocating towers


Recommended Posts

Posted

attachicon.gifCapture+_2016-01-21-05-11-091.jpg would these speeds be considered enhanced LTE or still 700 mhz10 by 10 for at&t

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

CA for Sure. at&t doesnt have CA in my area. They need it tho Speeds are slow without it.

Posted

Jeez. That's a long way from "Network Vision". Ridiculous title.

Also ridiculous claims.

 

As we were discussing Sprint’s plans with the industry this week, more than one person commented that Sprint’s pole-based network plan would never work in Dallas or Houston.

Most of Southwest Texas is Pole country. Inner Houston is filled with utility poles EVERYWHERE! Heck, some neighborhoods even have major overhead power lines running through the heart of neighborhoods. T-Mobile, at&t, and even Sprint use some of them right next to Downtown Houston and where available. The author may live in suburban Katy or Sugarland since anything inside the city limits of Houston runs above ground. The only concern would be maintenance of such poles since a lot of the poles aren't supported by concrete foundations. The swampy soil causes a lot of the poles to lean in some places and whichever agency is in charge of them will wait until repair is really necessary.
  • Like 1
Posted

In some way, I agree. I like information. Lots of it. And all the nerdy details. Don't hold anything back.

 

But, when you look back at all major upgrades from the other carriers, they don't provide those kinds of details. The best you will get is...'this is what our over inflated coverage map will look like at the end of the year.' I suppose Sprint could do that. But they aren't really planning expansion. This is about densification and in footprint infill. Which really only can be measured by performance after the fact.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

The difference is two fold. First, sprint is struggling bad finically, which means the markets need clarification on how they spend there money. Second, sprint is under going its third massive, transformative network mega project in 8 years ( WiMAX, Nv 1.0, NGN). On top of that sprint is attempting a massive cost savings effort. None of the other carriers have attempted something like this and none have sprint's balance sheet. So, sprint shouldn't expect to be treat by analyst and the media the same way.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Posted

CA for Sure. at&t doesnt have CA in my area. They need it tho Speeds are slow without it.

I thought so. I've seen some work being done on towers, im guessing it was AT&T.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

Posted

The difference is two fold. First, sprint is struggling bad finically, which means the markets need clarification on how they spend there money. Second, sprint is under going its third massive, transformative network mega project in 8 years ( WiMAX, Nv 1.0, NGN). On top of that sprint is attempting a massive cost savings effort. None of the other carriers have attempted something like this and none have sprint's balance sheet. So, sprint shouldn't expect to be treat by analyst and the media the same way.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sprint doesn't need to give away their playbook because they have a lot of debt coming due. They need to give financial clarity on how they will handle it. Which is what they did this morning.

 

Sprint has just as many mega projects as everyone else in the past 8 years. VZW...LTE > XLTE/VoLTE > B2/Small Cells/Marco Site Expansion. AT&T...FauxG (HSPA+) > LTE > VoLTE/B29+B30. T-Mobile...FauxG (HSPA+) > LTE/VoLTE > B12/Expansion. It's just that these guys all have been under the radar, low key and vague.

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

Posted

So the small cell deployment is an integral part of VoLTE?

 

Can't have VoLTE without ubiquitous coverage. Look at Verizon's push for small cells.

Posted

In all honesty this is Sprint's fault. By being mum on it's NGN work plans and failing to increase capital expenditure guidance, sprint force the media and industry analysis to talk to tower companies, vendor partners and others, who probably only have parts of sprint's plans, in order to piece together what is going on. Sprint created the environment for this kind of speculation.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You know something, being mum is the better way to go. Why continuously have to overshare information, just ready and easy pickings for the trolls?

 

Let's just get it done, and slap the competitors in the face with a 1/2 price deal.

  • Like 3
Posted

Sprint doesn't need to give away their playbook because they have a lot of debt coming due. They need to give financial clarity on how they will handle it. Which is what they did this morning.

 

Sprint has just as many mega projects as everyone else in the past 8 years. VZW...LTE > XLTE/VoLTE > B2/Small Cells/Marco Site Expansion. AT&T...FauxG (HSPA+) > LTE > VoLTE/B29+B30. T-Mobile...FauxG (HSPA+) > LTE/VoLTE > B12/Expansion. It's just that these guys all have been under the radar, low key and vague.

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

I think vzw CTO said it best when he explained the difference between what his company has done (and att) with their network and what Sprint has done. He said that vzw has had a steady progression on technology with each upgrade building on what came before, sprint is a company that has had several pivots, where they have attempted to leap from one point to another. I think he pretty much nailed it. Only sprint has decommission a 3G technology and a 4g technology, only sprint significantly reduced the number of cell sites owned (went from 60 to 40 thousand when they shut off Nextel) and only sprint did a full rip and replace of their network (which is still only largely complete).

 

What sprint has done is materially different than what other companies have done and to this point hasn't been rewarded. It will be interesting to see if they make the latest pivot work for them.

 

Look, what adding the detail they did add today do for the tone of the reports and the stock.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted

Verizon and T are never telling the world what they are doing with their network. I am glad Sprint is taking that approach because the haters in the tech media and trolls will shred their goals to the ground if they disclose what they will do.

Posted

I think vzw CTO said it best when he explained the difference between what his company has done (and att) with their network and what Sprint has done. He said that vzw has had a steady progression on technology with each upgrade building on what came before, sprint is a company that has had several pivots, where they have attempted to leap from one point to another. I think he pretty much nailed it. Only sprint has decommission a 3G technology and a 4g technology, only sprint significantly reduced the number of cell sites owned (went from 60 to 40 thousand when they shut off Nextel) and only sprint did a full rip and replace of their network (which is still only largely complete).

 

What sprint has done is materially different than what other companies have done and to this point hasn't been rewarded. It will be interesting to see if they make the latest pivot work for them.

 

Look, what adding the detail they did add today do for the tone of the reports and the stock.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Those are just words from an executive. Talking points. I can also say with just words that Sprint has had a steady progression of technology. Steady is a relative term. If this is the crux of your argument, we need to move on to something else to discuss.

 

I'm bummed that the Cardinals lost so embarrassingly in the NFC Championship. The Cardinals are my NFC team. What do you think of Carolina advancing?

 

And they did what I expected yesterday. Added a lot of financial clarity and very little network playbook clarity. That's what they needed to do. Even if I would have preferred lots of network info.

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

  • Like 2
Posted

I'm bummed that the Cardinals lost so embarrassingly in the NFC Championship. The Cardinals are my NFC team. What do you think of Carolina advancing?

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

As a cardinals fan, myself. I am disappointed with how things turned out. We dropped the ball (literally) too many times. That one punt where Panthers recovered basically cost us the game. Palmer wasn't on his A-Game, neither was Fitzgerald. Both missed great opportunities.

 

But, I have no grudge against Carolina. They are good and I can see them winning the Superbowl.

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

  • Like 4
Posted

As a cardinals fan, myself. I am disappointed with how things turned out. We dropped the ball (literally) too many times. That one punt where Panthers recovered basically cost us the game. Palmer wasn't on his A-Game, neither was Fitzgerald. Both missed great opportunities.

 

But, I have no grudge against Carolina. They are good and I can see them winning the Superbowl.

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

That about sums it up for me too.

 

Sent from OnePlus 2 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted

Just a question....i don't know if this thread is already up.... but would sprint need a chunk of the 600mhz spectrum or will they be fine without it?

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

Posted

Just a question....i don't know if this thread is already up.... but would sprint need a chunk of the 600mhz spectrum or will they be fine without it?

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

There's a thread for that...

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

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

    • Vinegar Hill is getting the Brooklyn Heights treatment now with regard to small cells. I mapped two more small cells in the neighborhood in the past few days so now T-Mobile is up to 8 of them in such a tiny neighborhood. While it's cool they're doing this since it means outdoors you get a consistent 400Mbps+ almost everywhere, it sucks because they're obviously deploying so many of them to make up for their lack of a macro site in the entire neighborhood. Because there isn't a macro, the small cells have a greater coverage area than you see in other neighborhoods and you often connect to them while indoors but coverage and speeds fall off indoors much faster on small cells than on macros in my experience.  Even Dish has better coverage than T-Mobile in Vinegar Hill since they added the site on top of the Extra Space Storage building alongside AT&T and Verizon. T-Mobile needs to get in line with their competitors there.
    • It seems like that is the smallest Google Play System change that google releases. I see 12 MB updates really regularly. 
    • Went back to Greenville last week and what an insane change 4 years has made! Every site in the city has n25/41/71 now and T-Mobile has even added new sites in the city since the last time I was there. As a result, their coverage and speeds are great everywhere. Unfortunately I don't have my Verizon line anymore so I'm unable to compare their performance to T-Mobile but they definitely had better coverage and speeds than AT&Tin my testing.  On the LTE side of things, T-Mobile has 5MHz Band 71, 10MHz Band 66, and 5MHz Band 2 deployed. On the 5G side, they have 190MHz n41, 15MHz n25, and 15MHz n71 deployed. As you'd expect 5G is several times faster than LTE here because of that. One thing I noticed though is that T-Mobile's speeds pretty much never go above 1Gbps here. I'm not sure if it's a backhaul limitation or if they're seriously pushing their 5G home internet product here but on most sites I was seeing 500-600Mbps with some sites having peaks in the high 800s-low 900's. I also noticed that upload speeds weren't nearly as good as they were in NYC. I attribute this to the fact that site spacing often cause the phone to drop to n25 or n71 for uploads as opposed to using n41. I have a handful of high (>100Mbps) upload speed tests but that was with me virtually right next to a site. Since I drove my own car instead of riding with family, I used the opportunity to map a ton of rural roads outside to Greenville to see what kind of coverage I'd get. T-Mobile has stepped up their game a ton in this regard as I found that coverage matched and in many cases surpassed what I was seeing on AT&T. areas where AT&T dropped to 1 bar or even no signal, I held onto weak n71 and was still able to place calls using VoNR. There are still areas where I would drop signal but those were areas where I'm certain the only carrier available was U.S. Cellular since they still have a ton of macros that they're the only tenant on. The U.S. Cellular merger won't add much to T-Mobile's spectrum coffers there; they'll increase 600MHz from 20MHz to 30MHz, gain another 10MHz of AWS, and acquire the rest of the 24GHz band, but they'll gain a ton new sites to bolster their rural coverage in this area and make it pretty much the best in the region.  — — — — — I also mapped Dish while down there. Dish's doesn't have much spectrum in Pitt County, they only have 5MHz n71, 25MHz n70 and 5MHz n29. This lack of spectrum combined with what is pretty much a skeleton/license protection network meant that in most cases I was only on 1-2 bars of n71 indoors and while outdoors I wasn't seeing speeds nearly as good as I get in NYC. While directly in front of a site I could get over 300Mbps but in most cases while out and about I wasn't seeing over 100Mbps. In fact, at my hotel I was only able to get about 5Mbps down and 2Mbps up on n71. Maybe as they densify I'll see more consistently high speeds but their lack of spectrum will remain a huge bottleneck much like it was for T-Mobile pre-Sprint merger. — — — — — AT&T and Verizon are the only carriers with small cells in Greenville. Verizon has a significantly larger deployment than AT&T though, with AT&T having it along some roads where they have weaker coverage while Verizon seems to be using them for added capacity Uptown and especially around ECU. They started being installed around 2019 but none of them have 5G as far as I can tell, only LTE. AT&T also has C-band and DoD deployed on every site in the city, giving me speeds in the range of 350-400Mbps in most areas. — — — — — Here are some photos of small cells in Greenville.  
    • Just checked and found a 12MB Google Play System update ready to download.    Still October 1 for the date after however. 
    • Looks like my little area finally has some decent mobile connectivity. Still have a few dead spots on both tmo and firstnet... https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/10549791800  
  • Recently Browsing

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