Jump to content
Nextel49

Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

Recommended Posts

Just now, Brad The Beast said:

If they could, why haven't they done it yet? I think that would be a good question to ask also.

It's a shockingly bad strategy that benefits nobody.  They should not.

Sprint has the ability to become the premier urban carrier at prices lower than the rest.  The money is in urban areas.  VZ and AT&T *need* the urban customers to subsidize their rural builds, so VZ & AT&T will compete on price to keep them.  This lowers prices for rural customers of theirs too.

Sprint trying to do coverage expansion without scale is a dumb idea..they have a mediocre network in urban areas and a poor network in rural areas and have no ability draw customers from the other carriers, reflecting rising prices for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And Sprint just cut over $1 billion from ongoing OpEx...they have the money.  No matter how much you might try to deny it.  Sprint will be perfectly fine and thrive on their own.

I mean we can spin this to be really positive. Yes, the government will bail them out and restructuring for debt will keep happening. But how competitive does that make sprint? Customers are leaving almost 2/1. The adds this quarter came mostly from prepaid migrations they only gain roughly around 40k new adds. And some analysts are already predicting as soon as the merger is a no go that sprint cuts capex down between 2/3 billion no matter what sprint is saying And yes we can also say that they are owned by someone with 10 of billions of dollar if ya wanna throw that in as a positive

 

Its laugable to think that it's the DOJ's job to bail out a Japanese company that has tens of billions of dollars at their disposal.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Accept if Sprint doesn't do anything outside merger areas then people will continue to leave coverage is a big deal and why I support the merger. Plus the fact that I'm using the S9+: and still can't use VOLTE. Both of these things are becoming deal breakers and if the Merger fails and I don't see any signs I'll ever get to use VOLTE I will be switching carriers for good. Sprint can't afford for people to keep leaving.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

This is incorrect.  Cricket (pre AT&T) and MetroPCS (pre T-Mobile) show customers are willing to have lower price for reduced coverage.  Sprint will absolutely have a winning strategy by building the best network in urban areas.  They would be fools to chase coverage, and their management said that yesterday.

 

EDIT:  Likewise I-90 coverage.  They don't need it.  They can roam for that.  I don't think I've ever been on I-90 up there enough to justify not roaming...nor has probably 95% of my neighbors in Los Angeles.  I go to LA, Chicago, New York, Miami, San Antonio, Vegas, Dallas, etc.   And, I travel a lot internationally....jet-setting urban crowds want the best network where they actually go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is incorrect.  Cricket (pre AT&T) and MetroPCS (pre T-Mobile) show customers are willing to have lower price for reduced coverage.  Sprint will absolutely have a winning strategy by building the best network in urban areas.  They would be fools to chase coverage, and their management said that yesterday.
 
EDIT:  Likewise I-90 coverage.  They don't need it.  They can roam for that.  I don't think I've ever been on I-90 up there enough to justify not roaming...nor has probably 95% of my neighbors in Los Angeles.  I go to LA, Chicago, New York, Miami, San Antonio, Vegas, Dallas, etc.   And, I travel a lot internationally....jet-setting urban crowds want the best network where they actually go.
I have been there and plan to go again. I was tied to a att hotspot when I when I when their last year as they wouldn't unlocked my phone. Roaming is terrible idea.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

They at least need to add coverage to i90 in South Dakota including mount Rushmore as everyone else covers that

They need to add coverage a lot of places lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've got 7  or 8 reports between two threads right now which tells me either people are being overly sensitive and/or people need to tone it down. We'll be reviewing posts as we can, and vacations may be warranted but consider this a further warning to anyone from this point on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

I have been there and plan to go again. I was tied to a att hotspot when I when I when their last year as they wouldn't unlocked my phone. Roaming is terrible idea.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

They do not need to do that to serve you as an individual--that's the problem with coverage-build mentality.   Rural builds are not as profitable.  Sprint needs to focus on profitable urban builds to attract the greatest numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, newyork4me said:

They do not need to do that to serve you as an individual--that's the problem with coverage-build mentality.   Rural builds are not as profitable.  Sprint needs to focus on profitable urban builds to attract the greatest numbers.

In the long run, wouldn't roaming be more expensive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, newyork4me said:

No.  Because Sprint does not intend on retiring all their debt.  They'll reissue it...corporate notes are a little like credit cards.  Sure the full balance may come due every month ("mature"), but a whole lot of people let the vast majority of it roll over to the next month ("reissue a new corporate note").

And how long can Sprint keep that up for without sufficient free cash flow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They do not need to do that to serve you as an individual--that's the problem with coverage-build mentality.   Rural builds are not as profitable.  Sprint needs to focus on profitable urban builds to attract the greatest numbers.
Just another reason to buy unlocked when using Sprint then you can switch when traveling. I'm thinking TMO on my next vacation

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RedSpark said:

And how long can Sprint keep that up for without sufficient free cash flow?

Where is the notion they don't have sufficient cash flow coming from?  They are significant generators of cash flow from operations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where is the notion they don't have sufficient cash flow coming from?  They are significant generators of cash flow from operations. 

You gotta convince me on this one, cause after all the gains quarter after quarter for tmo they only post about 618 million free cash flow which is pennies compared to what Verizon and att make


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:

I mean we can spin this to be really positive. Yes, the government will bail them out and restructuring for debt will keep happening. But how competitive does that make sprint? Customers are leaving almost 2/1. The adds this quarter came mostly from prepaid migrations they only gain roughly around 40k new adds. And some analysts are already predicting as soon as the merger is a no go that sprint cuts capex down between 2/3 billion no matter what sprint is saying And yes we can also say that they are owned by someone with 10 of billions of dollar if ya wanna throw that in as a positive

 

Its laugable to think that it's the DOJ's job to bail out a Japanese company that has tens of billions of dollars at their disposal.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Not allowing anti-competitive conglomeration is not a bailout.  Sprint will not be getting government money.  This post does not make sense.

3 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

In the long run, wouldn't roaming be more expensive?

Nah.  Voice roaming is just about free.  At the start of last year, it was down to just under 1 cent per minute.  Sprint can limit data to control those costs, but still likely less expensive.  The vast majority of their customers will not roam there.

2 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Just another reason to buy unlocked when using Sprint then you can switch when traveling. I'm thinking TMO on my next vacation

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

Unlocked is always the way to go--especially in dual sim devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unlocked is always the way to go--especially in dual sim devices.

So, it is not the DOJ's job to protect debt and equity holders? in telecom..doors dont close, debt gets restructured is the bail out I’m speaking off .. not a money bail out from the government


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:


You gotta convince me on this one, cause after all the gains quarter after quarter for tmo they only post about 618 million free cash flow which is pennies compared to what Verizon and att make


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, for their last quarterly results (reported yesterday), they generated $10.429 billion dollars in net cash from their operations in the year.  That means they had over $10 billion to invest in network CapEx, devices, or to service debt.

They are also having revenue growth as customers are upselling into the Plus and Premium add-ons as the network gets stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tyroned3222 said:


So, it is not the DOJ's job to protect debt and equity holders? in telecom..doors dont close, debt gets restructured is the bail out I’m speaking off .. not a money bail out from the government


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not.  At all.

And that is assuming an action nobody is seriously talking about--judicial restructuring.  Sprint can, on their own, reissue new notes to pay off their current ones.  That's not a restructuring; it's a retirement and reissuance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  So, for their last quarterly results (reported yesterday), they generated $10.429 billion dollars in net cash from their operations in the year.  That means they had over $10 billion to invest in network CapEx, devices, or to service debt.

They are also having revenue growth as customers are upselling into the Plus and Premium add-ons as the network gets stronger.

 

Yes, but how much of this is actual profit? As of yesterday it was loss of 539 million, but as you stated which could of been cash flow positive? How much is my question?? Sprint was negative on cash flow 1.28 billion in 2018 I believe

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, newyork4me said:

Where is the notion they don't have sufficient cash flow coming from?  They are significant generators of cash flow from operations. 

From one of Sprint’s FCC Filings: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1041986365867/Sprint Standalone Ex Parte Revised - REDACTED - 4.19.2019 AS-FILED.pdf

Relevant statements about Sprint’s cash flow issues appear throughout it. See Pages 1,4,6,8,9,13,17,18,19,36,37,39,40,41 and read the main section about cash flow/debt from Page 36 - Page 42.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not.  At all.
And that is assuming an action nobody is seriously talking about--judicial restructuring.  Sprint can, on their own, reissue new notes to pay off their current ones.  That's not a restructuring; it's a retirement and reissuance.

On 40 billion in debt ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

From one of Sprint’s FCC Filings: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1041986365867/Sprint Standalone Ex Parte Revised - REDACTED - 4.19.2019 AS-FILED.pdf

Relevant statements about Sprint’s cash flow issues appear throughout it. See Pages 1,4,6,8,9,13,17,18,19,36,37,39,40,41 and read the main section about cash flow/debt from Page 36 - Page 42.

I've already read it.  Sprint is trying to use a failing firm argument to have their objectively verifiable competition-reducing merger approved.  It's hard to dispute the porting ratios, the HHI screen, and the spectrum screen, so they are doing the best they can by claiming they need it or else.

It's literally hogwash.  Read the earnings transcript from yesterday and closely pay attention to the words--Sprint is doing just fine.  They are one year into their network improvement plan and they are already noticing it is working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:


On 40 billion in debt ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Verizon had about $120 billion in debt and AT&T over $110 billion.  It's not all due at once.  Within the next year, Sprint only has $4 billion maturing, and that's easily reissued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've already read it.  Sprint is trying to use a failing firm argument to have their objectively verifiable competition-reducing merger approved.  It's hard to dispute the porting ratios, the HHI screen, and the spectrum screen, so they are doing the best they can by claiming they need it or else.
It's literally hogwash.  Read the earnings transcript from yesterday and closely pay attention to the words--Sprint is doing just fine.  They are one year into their network improvement plan and they are already noticing it is working.

Try more like 5 years of network improvement plans lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tyroned3222 said:


Try more like 5 years of network improvement plans lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ha.  Sprint is discounting their prior disaster of NV, etc., and just focusing on their John Saw network improvement plan when they talk about it.

I'm a believer.  If you go back in my post history, I didn't think Sprint could turn it around.  Los Angeles was a disaster.  They've bumped capacity like crazy, fixed coverage holes, and now have low-band LTE and VoLTE live.  It's night-and-day from a year ago.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha.  Sprint is discounting their prior disaster of NV, etc., and just focusing on their John Saw network improvement plan when they talk about it.

I'm a believer.  If you go back in my post history, I didn't think Sprint could turn it around.  Los Angeles was a disaster.  They've bumped capacity like crazy, fixed coverage holes, and now have low-band LTE and VoLTE live.  It's night-and-day from a year ago.

The network is better that’s a big fact.. what would you say about the future and sprint bad brand image to the public .. how is that fixed ?

EDIT: buddy of mine says they are now outperforming tmo in Phoenix

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tyroned3222 said:

The network is better that’s a big face .. what would you say about the future and sprint bad brand image to the public .. how is that fixed ?

Could do a re-brand. 

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

    • Do any of the experts around here how much of the Sprint network assets will be reusable by another carrier, eg the mythical 4th player, let's call them Dish? 1. EPC 2. eNodeB 3. RRH 4. Routers 5. Back-end infrastructure (customer facing and internal business servers)    
    • Ok I've now set up my third A4 and it doesn't seem to be getting a WAN connection. The WAN light is blinking green (same sequence of lights after about 12 hours). It's plugged in directly to my Netgear cable modem (which is not a router, just a modem). Can anyone assist? Thank you in advance.
    • I don't believe so. None of the Airaves have. I also heard that 1x HD Voice does not work on any device which supports VoLTE (including devices which support it but don't have it enabled yet, such as the S9). It has something to do with the way calls are routed in the backend, VoLTE capable devices are routed differently than non-VoLTE ones. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
    • Thank you!  After my initial experience when the A4 was first set up and my phone did not stay consistently connected to it, I went back to their residence about 5 hours later (and I also updated the profile & PRL on my phone) and my phone latched on and stayed connected to the A4 for the entire time I was there (about 2 hours).  During my initial experience 5 hours earlier, I made a Sprint to Sprint test call on the A4 and HD Voice was not working (HD Voice does work in their area on the macro network).  I forgot to make a test call during the time I was there 5 hours later.  Does the A4 support HD Voice for Sprint to Sprint calls? 
    • For mine it took about 1-2 days before phones would even see it in neighbors. Then they started connecting to it about a day later. Basically, I think there's some sort of automatic integration that has to go occur at the network level. I say this because when it was finished, my MB had changed PCIs. I think anytime a device like this comes online, all the others like it in an area change PCIs. Small cells behave the same way. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

×
×
  • Create New...