Jump to content

Q4 2015 Sprint Corp Earnings (Jan-Mar 2016)


NYC126

Recommended Posts

Depends on markets conditions. It still seems mobilitie and sprint is testing municipalities acceptance to their small cell deployments. By all means it's appearing to be going well where they've begun and I'm not just talking about Pico cells on light poles etc. Sprint is firing up in building and outdoor Das setups of numerous types too.

 

No volte time line.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

The nTelos execs hinted at it coming in 2017 for both networks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nTelos execs hinted at it coming in 2017 for both networks.

Hinted at what? Picocells?

As an aside, I wonder how much $3 billion buys in small cells with installation included. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I

 

Hinted at what? Picocells?

As an aside, I wonder how much $3 billion buys in small cells with installation included. 

 

 

I remember that back in 1999/2000, there was a small operator called Richochet, who offered mobile internet at 128KB download speed. They used city light poles and in SoCal I still see the old modems on poles even though the system went belly up many years ago. It sould not be too cost intensive to deploy small sites all over the place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I

 

 

I remember that back in 1999/2000, there was a small operator called Richochet, who offered mobile internet at 128KB download speed. They used city light poles and in SoCal I still see the old modems on poles even though the system went belly up many years ago. It sould not be too cost intensive to deploy small sites all over the place.

 

It's actually pretty easy to negotiate with one entity like a municipal body for municipal light poles and traffic lights vs a few hundred different site owners / leasees and companies. 

 

The problem though is when the municipal or local governing bodies don't want to play ball and have a first come first serve policy. Many many, cities have restrictions against building cells ites and a large number only approves sites where all carriers colocate together. 

 

Since small cells are unique to different carriers, a lot of municipalities fear that they're going to have 3 or 4 sets of different small cells on every light pole, telephone pole, or traffic light. Partly nimby but also a valid concern since it sure would be an eye sore. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem though is when the municipal or local governing bodies don't want to play ball and have a first come first serve policy. Many many, cities have restrictions against building cells ites and a large number only approves sites where all carriers colocate together. 

 

Since small cells are unique to different carriers, a lot of municipalities fear that they're going to have 3 or 4 sets of different small cells on every light pole, telephone pole, or traffic light. Partly nimby but also a valid concern since it sure would be an eye sore. 

Are carrier-agnostic ODASs a thing yet? Just looking at the hardware it looks like the Crown systems could be in theory, but I don't know anything about the back-end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carrier agnostic antennas seem to be the best solution but who would pay for them? Municipalities probably couldn't and I dont think the carriers are going to get together and launch a system where there isn't a competitive advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen any B41 Clearwire site in the Bay Area going B41^2 at all. I see plenty of Sprint B41^3 at work.

 

I think it depends on who's equipment is on those Clearwire sites. The entire NY Metro market is Samsung I believe which supports 2 B41 LTE carriers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carrier agnostic antennas seem to be the best solution but who would pay for them? Municipalities probably couldn't and I dont think the carriers are going to get together and launch a system where there isn't a competitive advantage.

 

In New York City for example, Transit Wireless came in and put DAS systems throughout the subway system, and allowed all 4 carriers to use them for service. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In New York City for example, Transit Wireless came in and put DAS systems throughout the subway system, and allowed all 4 carriers to use them for service. 

 

 

The City of Los Angeles is installing hundreds of Philips SmartPoles throughout the city.

 

Supposedly any carrier can use them via Crown Castle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The City of Los Angeles is installing hundreds of Philips SmartPoles throughout the city.

 

Supposedly any carrier can use them via Crown Castle.

Pittsburgh has a similar program within the city limits. It seems like it would be cheaper to co-locate/share the node with Verizon than build a monopole that will need conditional use permits and take 6-9 months to get approved, let alone build.

I know the relay system is supposed to save on backhaul but I hope sprint is considering time to completion as a valuable variable too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hinted at what? Picocells?

As an aside, I wonder how much $3 billion buys in small cells with installation included. 

 

No, VoLTE.

 

Are carrier-agnostic ODASs a thing yet? Just looking at the hardware it looks like the Crown systems could be in theory, but I don't know anything about the back-end.

 

Yes, and you would be surprised how many

. I'm a big fan of the light pole systems that some cities are implementing.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of VoLTE, is Sprint still working on a VoLTE implementation with Single Radio Voice Call Continuity? That would be big for Sprint, and an innovation they could bring to the market as part of their value proposition? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of VoLTE, is Sprint still working on a VoLTE implementation with Single Radio Voice Call Continuity? That would be big for Sprint, and an innovation they could bring to the market as part of their value proposition?

Yes but it's not working out as Verizon has figured out years back.

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of VoLTE, is Sprint still working on a VoLTE implementation with Single Radio Voice Call Continuity? That would be big for Sprint, and an innovation they could bring to the market as part of their value proposition?

While a true and major innovation, I don't think it would add much value to the company given that by the time it's perfected and live nationwide, Verizon would have fixed its VoLTE problems

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but it's not working out as Verizon has figured out years back.

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

 

Are there lessons learned that Sprint can take from Verizon on their VoLTE deployment woes so far that Sprint can avoid to properly deploy VoLTE at some time in the future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there lessons learned that Sprint can take from Verizon on their VoLTE deployment woes so far that Sprint can avoid to properly deploy VoLTE at some time in the future?

 

Deploy a dense LTE network with the quickness and then introduce it as an opt in option. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

U.S. Cellular recently made a comment about its migration to VoLTE. Basically they echoed the need for dense network but also said that they are moving a lot of their equipment to the top of monopoles in order to broadcast farther and get better indoor penetration so that they can match or exceed their CDMA coverage.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deploy a dense LTE network with the quickness and then introduce it as an opt in option.

They can also optimize their low band for seamless coverage, crippling congestion be damned. (Just be extremely aggressive about keeping devices off of it unless actually needed). This is how Verizon works with their B13.

If they're smart, this is exactly what they will do.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there lessons learned that Sprint can take from Verizon on their VoLTE deployment woes so far that Sprint can avoid to properly deploy VoLTE at some time in the future?

It will be very hard to complete for them...when Verizon started volte there customers were dropping calls left and right.. So sprint can't afford that kind of negativity about the network... Sprint has to build a dense tower Grid which Verizon has been able to do over the last 24 months.. I use both Verizon and sprint.. Volte works great on Verizon, but in comparison (where sprint cover a area let's say a 2 mile radius with one tower Verizon has 3 nerby cell sites in that same area huge difference)

 

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can also optimize their low band for seamless coverage, crippling congestion be damned. (Just be extremely aggressive about keeping devices off of it unless actually needed). This is how Verizon works with their B13.

If they're smart, this is exactly what they will do.

Yes, I only connect to band 13 15 to 20% of the time the rest I'm on band 4. Inside of building is when I usually see band 13.

 

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can also optimize their low band for seamless coverage, crippling congestion be damned. (Just be extremely aggressive about keeping devices off of it unless actually needed). This is how Verizon works with their B13.

If they're smart, this is exactly what they will do.

T-Mobile does the same in areas they have 20x20 AWS LTE. I noticed my phone will only hop on Band 12 if AWS is unavailable. As soon as AWS becomes available, the network will aggressively throw me back to Band 4, even if B12 is faster than B4.

 

I wish Sprint's network was this aggressive, especially with Band 41. I can still get stuff done with Band 41 at -122 but unfortunately the network is too quick to throw me back to B25/B26. B26 should be last priority in markets where Sprint has 2 B25 carriers on-air.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile does the same in areas they have 20x20 AWS LTE. I noticed my phone will only hop on Band 12 if AWS is unavailable. As soon as AWS becomes available, the network will aggressively throw me back to Band 4, even if B12 is faster than B4.

 

I wish Sprint's network was this aggressive, especially with Band 41. I can still get stuff done with Band 41 at -122 but unfortunately the network is too quick to throw me back to B25/B26. B26 should be last priority in markets where Sprint has 2 B25 carriers on-air.

In all my observation and first hand experience, It seems Sprint's engineers have approached overall signal optimization as an after thought. Or at least they could've approached it better straight from the beginning. The thing is, optimization is everything when it comes to network performance and customer experience. Optimization is one of the most important aspects to any system of any sort. Verizon has won when it comes to signal optimization hands down IMO, and T-Mobile is right up there with them. AT&T does a good job optimizing it's signal but not as good as those two. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

U.S. Cellular recently made a comment about its migration to VoLTE. Basically they echoed the need for dense network but also said that they are moving a lot of their equipment to the top of monopoles in order to broadcast farther and get better indoor penetration so that they can match or exceed their CDMA coverage.

US Cellular's stock plunged yesterday.

 

Is it a good opportunity for an individual investor or bigger company to buy?

 

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AUSM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US Cellular's stock plunged yesterday.

 

Is it a good opportunity for an individual investor or bigger company to buy?

 

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AUSM

Hell yeah only worth $3.2B in market cap! Slap a little extra dressing on that salad and it's an easy postpaid subscriber gain as well as spectrum. In the case of Sprint getting USCC, they can sell the 800MHz and 700MHz to the other 3 which sweetens the pot. And due to access to cheaper goods/services due to the size and the bulk deals a larger carrier would make, they can reduces expenses and make that sad USCC income go up up up.

 

Furthermore, in the case of Sprint, it might also be helpful to see if operating under the US Cellular name improve net additions.

  • Like 2
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 assume that any agreement is not perpetual and has an end date. - Trip
    • 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.
  • Recently Browsing

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