Jump to content
Nextel49

Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

Recommended Posts

I am VERY much against the merger, for one thing most of the people I know like options (more the better I think) Plus I always wonder who will gobble up US Cellular eventually. I don't know much about US Cellular since I don't live in any of their areas. Secondly the only way I would (if I was the FCC) to let T-mobile/Sprint merge would be for Sprint to distribute Spectrum to Verizon and AT&T for FAIRNESS purposes. If the merger goes through that means T-mobile would have the most spectrum on top of the 600MHZ they just bought. I don't know I just think Sprint can do it on their own, in my opinion what really has held Sprint up is the 800 IBEZ issue. Again just my point of view, not that it matters really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dro1984 said:

I don't feel an apology is necessary.    It's your personal take on a given event (Events) many both from a technology standpoint and an Investment strategy...   

Some of the past decisions by Sprint's upper leadership left the company holding the "bag of nothing".   The WiMax decision was huge!   WIthin a month or two after it was announced with huge fanfare, Sprint would use WiMax.   I remember other notables being Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile choosing LTE.   The LTE standard wasn't complete at the time, but quickly came to be..., but being the odd kid on the block, going it alone on a technology nobody wanted to share with them, was a huge blunder that hurt the company for many years and still hasn't completely recovered from.   Scale of economics.    

The inability to police all of their partners at the time (Affiliates) and make sure the network was providing customers a good experience... The lack of them adding CDMA to all of the Nextel Towers.... On and on... yes, it would have taken money, but they ended up wasting millions of dollars regardless by not doing it.    Pay a little now.... or a LOT later!   

That was yesterday.... Let's hope, and it sure does look like now, Sprint is on the right track and is taking their network very seriously!   It is truly a breadth of fresh air! 

Yes thank you. I do feel that it's sprint can actually get their Network together they stand a very big chance at becoming a serious competitor to T-Mobile and the other carriers. They just need to expand their actual coverage footprint. But that obviously doesn't happen overnight that takes a long time. T-Mobile has done it very quickly but unlike Sprint they have money. So obviously this hold Sprint back but if they can turn their money problems around they can definitely become a serious competitor. I still wish though the market would stay four carriers. But also then as I saw in one of the other posts Sprint can't really go it alone because of their money problems. If they would have invested in LTE like the other carriers have done then they probably would not be in this situation today. But at the same time though if they can leverage better coverage within their footprint and actually increase their positive capex then they stand a very good chance at coming out of the so-called death spiral I have been seeing in the news articles. But nothing is for certain yet so I will be interested to see what happens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being greedy, but man, I'd sure love to be able to access some 600MHz and 700MHz from time to time.    One of many reasons I'm pro merger.   That and more focus on network and less about "We're talking (re; trying to merge)  to Comcast, on Monday, we're talking to T-Mobile on Tuesday, We're talking to Altis (or who-ever) on Wednesday.    I feel like sprint is like trying to jump in bed with anybody... just as long as we're unloaded..It makes Sprint appear desperate and not very valuable....   It's old.   Get it over and lets move on.

Edited by dro1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dro1984 said:

I guess I'm being greedy, but man, I'd sure love to be able to access some 600MHz and 700MHz from time to time.    One of many reasons I'm pro merger.   That and more focus on network and less about "We're talking (re; trying to merge)  to Comcast, on Monday, we're talking to T-Mobile on Tuesday, We're talking to Altis (or who-ever) on Wednesday.    I feel like sprint is like trying to jump in bed with anybody... just as long as we're unloaded....   It's old.   Get it over and lets move on.

the more built out the network the better it would be for everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, joshnys8913 said:

I am VERY much against the merger, for one thing most of the people I know like options (more the better I think) Plus I always wonder who will gobble up US Cellular eventually. I don't know much about US Cellular since I don't live in any of their areas. Secondly the only way I would (if I was the FCC) to let T-mobile/Sprint merge would be for Sprint to distribute Spectrum to Verizon and AT&T for FAIRNESS purposes. If the merger goes through that means T-mobile would have the most spectrum on top of the 600MHZ they just bought. I don't know I just think Sprint can do it on their own, in my opinion what really has held Sprint up is the 800 IBEZ issue. Again just my point of view, not that it matters really. 

If AT&T or Verizon want spectrum they can buy Dish. 

Edited by bigsnake49

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am extremely pro-merger.  I would have rather 3 very good networks than two good networks and 2 hit and miss networks, even if prices go up(this isnt a for sure thing). Further, with the amount of spectrum the new company would have (and hopefully the capital to deploy it!) They could compete against traditional fixed line broadband, a plan masa aluded to last time he attempted to merge the two companies. 

 

The low end of the market can be served by MVNOs. 

 

Remember this is a capital intensive business, which means the market is better served by fewer players with larger scale and there is another round of massive capital expenditures right around the corner.  

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

If AT&T or Verizon want spectrum they can buy Dish. 

At&t buying Dish? Not a chance!

Now if Dish were to divest their unused spectrum, then that's a different story.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

I am extremely pro-merger.  I would have rather 3 very good networks than two good networks and 2 hit and miss networks, even if prices go up(this isnt a for sure thing). Further, with the amount of spectrum the new company would have (and hopefully the capital to deploy it!) They could compete against traditional fixed line broadband, a plan masa aluded to last time he attempted to merge the two companies. 

 

The low end of the market can be served by MVNOs. 

 

Remember this is a capital intensive business, which means the market is better served by fewer players with larger scale and there is another round of massive capital expenditures right around the corner.  

This merger would stagnate the wireless market it would stink almost immediately.  You are pro-merger but already wondering if they would have capital to build and expand the network.  Sprint now has positive revenue to increase CAPEX for additional B41, MIMO, and 5G why hault the improvements that Sprint has been making?  

You guys screaming pro merger really need to sit back and really think, are you willing to see less competition and increasing wireless bills?  Not to mention that unlimited will be a thing of the past, after all it was Sprint and T-Mobile that made the big two offer unlimited.  If this merger goes through I don't want to hear complaining I am taking names...

  • Like 7
  • Love 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, JossMan said:

This merger would stagnate the wireless market it would stink almost immediately.  You are pro-merger but already wondering if they would have capital to build and expand the network.  Sprint now has positive revenue to increase CAPEX for additional B41, MIMO, and 5G why hault the improvements that Sprint has been making?  

You guys screaming pro merger really need to sit back and really think, are you willing to see less competition and increasing wireless bills?  Not to mention that unlimited will be a thing of the past, after all it was Sprint and T-Mobile that made the big two offer unlimited.  If this merger goes through I don't want to hear complaining I am taking names...

No. You are not based in reality if you think the wireless market is going to stagnate if Sprint and T-Mobile merge. 5g is coming and will be pushed by everyone in the market place. 

 

The question is weather you want it to follow the same pattern LTE did or not. Would you like the big two to deploy a really solid 5g network and the other two to deploy an uneven networks or 3 solid th networks? 

 

You anti-merger people dont understand the role capital intensive industries play in shaping such markets.  If a market is capital intensive it is more efficient with fewer players. Imgaine if the market still looked like it did in 2003, we would have plenty of players and regional plans with not even 3g deployed.

 

Sprint has 30 billion. They are able to increase CAPEX this year because they don't have much maturing this year.  This is not the case the next two years which means they are likely to starve their network again over that time. Mean while the big two aren't going to stand still. Sprint isn't growing top line income fast enough to make themselves viable on their own.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, utiz4321 said:

No. You are not based in reality if you think the wireless market is going to stagnate if Sprint and T-Mobile merge. 5g is coming and will be pushed by everyone in the market place. 

 

The question is weather you want it to follow the same pattern LTE did or not. Would you like the big two to deploy a really solid 5g network and the other two to deploy an uneven networks or 3 solid th networks? 

 

You anti-merger people dont understand the role capital intensive industries play in shaping such markets.  If a market is capital intensive it is more efficient with fewer players. Imgaine if the market still looked like it did in 2003, we would have plenty of players and regional plans with not even 3g deployed.

 

Sprint has 30 billion. They are able to increase CAPEX this year because they don't have much maturing this year.  This is not the case the next two years which means they are likely to starve their network again over that time. Mean while the big two aren't going to stand still. Sprint isn't growing top line income fast enough to make themselves viable on their own.  

 

 

How is Canada's three wireless companies working out...

  • Like 4
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JossMan said:

How is Canada's three wireless companies working out...

There are really two providers in Canada: ROGERS and TELUS/Bell. TELUS and Bell operate the same network. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JossMan said:

This merger would stagnate the wireless market it would stink almost immediately.  You are pro-merger but already wondering if they would have capital to build and expand the network.  Sprint now has positive revenue to increase CAPEX for additional B41, MIMO, and 5G why hault the improvements that Sprint has been making?  

You guys screaming pro merger really need to sit back and really think, are you willing to see less competition and increasing wireless bills?  Not to mention that unlimited will be a thing of the past, after all it was Sprint and T-Mobile that made the big two offer unlimited.  If this merger goes through I don't want to hear complaining I am taking names...

... I thought about it.   I'm pro Merger!  Bring it on!   Already been through the WORST Cellular merger in history!   No worries!    Inspite of how bad the Nextel merger was, Sprint got loads of band 41 out of it.   Wouldn't be here today if not for that!    Try to open your mind up of some of the possible positive outcomes... not focus on only cost fears.

Edited by dro1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting read from Seeking Alpha Business...   Here is a snippet.   I would post the entire article link but you have to subscribe to see it in it's entirety.   This was interested as it measured the 4 main carrier's spectrum holdings...

Quote

Bottom Line

It's been said before but it merits repeating now -- this is a merger that needs to happen, and the sooner the better. The longer AT&T and Verizon are allowed to enter new business lines and the longer Sprint is allowed to flounder, the more difficult it becomes to catch up with bigger players and fix what's broken at Sprint.

Article Link

 

Edited by staff to comply with fair use. Don't post 3/4s of an article and always link to the source.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the graph above it is evident that contrary to popular belief, T-Mobile has been cannibalizing Sprint mainly. That's not really competing against the big 2 now, is it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, greenbastard said:

At&t buying Dish? Not a chance!

Now if Dish were to divest their unused spectrum, then that's a different story.

I meant their spectrum mainly but Verizon could buy Dish with no anti-trust problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The total percent of subscribers graph shows everything you need to know about the current US wireless industry.  Verizon has ~35%, AT&T has ~35%, and all the other competitors are competing for the final 25% to 30%.  This also means that 70% to 75% of all the profits are split between AT&T and Verizon which gives them the money to keep deploying and keeps them with much larger, stronger networks.  If AT&T and Verizon can each afford to spend $10 billion+ on their networks each year, no smaller competitor can hope to keep up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a merger will help consumers much.  TMobile capex is $5b.  Sprint might spend $5b. A merged company still could have $10b, but it will take years and a LOT of money to consolidate assets. There is going to be a lot of work, and a lot of money that will not go into making the network better, but making 2 networks 1.

If you want to see a combined company make ProjectFi your carrier.

Just look at some recent mergers.  Charter is doing horrible. AT&T and DirecTV brought no value but just increased TV bills. Large acquisitions tend not to benefit the customers but more so investors and those on the board who get millions for making a deal happen.

As an investor I can see the excitement, but not so much a customer.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are positives to be had if there is a merger, for sure.  I don't believe a merger is bad in every way. And if it happens, there will be things that I will like. I just believe, at this time, all things considered, I'd prefer they'd be separate.  Just my opinion, and I respect the opinions of others points as well.  Because I considered them, and they are marked in the 'pro' column for me.

I like where Sprint is going now more than ever in its past.  And Sprint's road to "5G" is less capital intensive than the others because of spectrum and equipment deployed. 

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, red_dog007 said:

I don't think a merger will help consumers much.  TMobile capex is $5b.  Sprint might spend $5b. A merged company still could have $10b, but it will take years and a LOT of money to consolidate assets. There is going to be a lot of work, and a lot of money that will not go into making the network better, but making 2 networks 1.

If you want to see a combined company make ProjectFi your carrier.

Just look at some recent mergers.  Charter is doing horrible. AT&T and DirecTV brought no value but just increased TV bills. Large acquisitions tend not to benefit the customers but more so investors and those on the board who get millions for making a deal happen.

As an investor I can see the excitement, but not so much a customer.

Where did you see that Charter is doing horribly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JossMan said:

How is Canada's three wireless companies working out...

Wireless service in Canada is expensive because Canada has a huge land area with a small population spread out across it.  Why would you think wireless service in Canada would be the same price as here? The fixed cost are only slightly less and the customer base to spread those cost across are tiny compared to the US. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

Wireless service in Canada is expensive because Canada has a huge land area with a small population spread out across it.  Why would you think wireless service in Canada would be the same price as here? The fixed cost are only slightly less and the customer base to spread those cost across are tiny compared to the US. 

 

 

but coverage is very spotty....outside of those areas so they dont have the same foot print that verizon or att has...you basically need a satellite phone to make calls out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

Where did you see that Charter is doing horribly?

You would think this would be a easy merger for Charter to absorb TWC beings that they served different areas. 

But just Google it.  Charter is raising prices in their own markets.  Upgrades that TWC was conducting have been stopped.  Charter is pulling back higher speeds / lower prices that TWC was offering in favor of their own slower more expensive offerings.  Service quality is going down.  Charter isn't meeting buildout obligations in the state of NY so are willing to take a penalty fee. They city of Lexington, KY is pressing Charter very hard right now due to poor service and high/increased prices.

In this news report there is some revenue per customers here. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/charter-has-moved-millions-of-customers-to-new-and-often-higher-pricing/

You'd think more volume/customers = lower prices.  But they are trying to increase revenue per customer.  These mergers want you to think that more customers will lower prices, but when you are this big it is all about the money. They do the same thing for TV. "Oh, if we merge with another cable operator we have greater bargaining power to reduce the cost of channels" yet the first thing they do is up TV prices *looking at you AT&T/DirecTV!

Sprint+TMobile will not lower prices at all.  It will take a lot of time for the networks to fully merge together and redundant systems/towers removed, which will eat away at CAPEX. It will slow down all existing projects or completely stop them.  And why even be concerned with buildout, being on par with VZW/ATT coverage?  From TMobile's own reports/projections they should be on par with VZW coverage very shortly WITHOUT Sprint! And even with a spectrum disadvantage, they are practically #1 in terms of data speeds. There is a lot of spectrum out there to still be had for increased capacities if it was a real concern.

  • Love 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charter is raising prices because of the content providers. Nothing new, every cable co is raising prices. All I can speak for is my area and they have kept the internet prices the same as Brighthouse Networks which they acquired. In our area, their cable prices are very reasonable. Their internet speeds are better than what I pay for by a good 10-15Mbps.

TWC was the troubled franchise and were despised in pretty much all of their areas with the exception of NYC. It will take a little while for them to straighten everything out. Just like it will take a little while for T-Mobile to straighten Sprint out, although Sprint is on its way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Most people here are already aware... and I for one am not looking for a price reduction nor do I expect the cost of service to stay at the current level. You will be sadly mistaken if you think prices are going down with or without a merger.  Why do we keep going down this road??    I don't think anyone thinks prices will go down.    

The focus is on a stronger combined company that can better utilize it's available resources and to be able to compete on nearly the same turf as Verizon and AT&T .    For those of you thinking prices will stay the same or go down, please explain your thinking?  How?  How do you expect the network to grow or be updated at the current rates?  

 5G is about 1-2 years away.  Strategy and ground work is being layed... vendors are, or soon will be lined up to order equipment.   Do you think "Free service for a year" or "Free or 1/2 off IPhone's" or "5 lines for $60" are going to pay for it?    

Edited by dro1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bigsnake49 said:

Charter is raising prices because of the content providers. Nothing new, every cable co is raising prices. All I can speak for is my area and they have kept the internet prices the same as Brighthouse Networks which they acquired. In our area, their cable prices are very reasonable. Their internet speeds are better than what I pay for by a good 10-15Mbps.

TWC was the troubled franchise and were despised in pretty much all of their areas with the exception of NYC. It will take a little while for them to straighten everything out. Just like it will take a little while for T-Mobile to straighten Sprint out, although Sprint is on its way.

I also stated that they are raising prices for internet as well, and in TWC areas are actually reducing speeds.  TWC was pretty much in an entire network upgrade with many areas done.  Those done areas had access to speeds over 300Mbps, and now under Charter are being limited to 100Mbps.  The areas in the process of upgrades are in limbo. People are fighting tooth and nail to keep their prices and higher speeds in these old TWC markets.

Plus one of the many arguments of mergers is to reduce the cost of TV content due to greater bargaining power.  Yet the first thing AT&T and Charter did was raise the cost of their TV content.

This is also kind of the point I am making in a TMobile/Sprint deal that you pointed out.  It will take time to merge the companies.  Even more so for these carriers because they both are nationwide providers with greatly overlapping coverage. This will be capital taken out of CAPEX or still count towards CAPEX but used for merging purposes.  While that happens, don't count on price decreases nor magically superior service.

For Charter and TWC it has been 100% downhill 1yr later and they had no overlapping markets.

DirecTV/ATT was fairly smooth due to nature of businesses, but there has been 0 savings here.  The only way to save money is to bundle the services. TV services did not get cheaper at all outright for either DirecTV or UVerse customer. I was a DirecTV customer and my bills only continued to go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I received the below email today about Google shutting down its Fusion Tables tool. I know many of us have and still use fusion tables for our market maps here on S4GRU. Looks like we've got a year to migrate to a new platform.   Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk    
    • Have you ever been down there? Sprint's small cell deployment is paltry compared to AT&T and Verizon's C-RAN deployments.
    • What about the 2500MHz RRHs?
    • The new T-Mobile is going to boil down to a neighborhood by neighborhood decision for Sprint customers, some of which will depend on what work gets completed by Sprint assuming merger is successful.  I am assuming former Clear sites that do not get Triband upgrades are typically toast.  Sites with more recent investments stand a better chance of surviving, assuming they are not co-sites.  Of course all existing equipment could still be junked.  800 RRHs have the best odds, given they will likely be the last bastion of Sprint CDMA.  We are seeing some 1900 firmware changes that would allow for more spectrum to be used for LTE that may affect these RRH's retention.  I would also assume cabinets are toast or at least retrofitted. The main factor in keeping some of the equipment would be new equipment shortages and future 5G compatible replacements being needed in coming years. Network needs and leasing costs would be main individual site factors.  I would think markets with a low Sprint Market share would lose the most Sprint sites while those with a large Sprint Market share would have better odds for unique Sprint site retention.  Of course the FCC might mandate that VoLTE must cover all areas covered by Sprint CDMA, but this would mostly affect rural areas.  I am also assuming that the new T-Mobile will start urban in the larger markets given T-Mobile's past history.
    • Second Helping

      Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

  • Recently Browsing

×