Jump to content
Nextel49

Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, chamb said:

Charlie needs help.  Without Sprint and/or T-Mobile help, he will never make a network fly.  Nobody should have to GIVE him anything.

T-mobile should never divest any spectrum. On the other hand they should be forced to host Dish's spectrum for 5 years for commercially reasonable terms and Dish should be given a 5 year term to build a network. They could probably purchase some of Sprint's network assets and or backend systems for a substantial discount.

Edited by bigsnake49
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think that this means that New T Mobile will have access to Dish's spectrum holdings while they "help Dish out"?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think that this means that New T Mobile will have access to Dish's spectrum holdings while they "help Dish out"?   
They very well could

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has literally turned into dish needs help to build a cell phone network, lets try and screw over t-mobile and sprint to make this happen. I wonder who charlie knows at the doj to make this happen. So stupid, I am normally have a lot of patient with things like this. But I agree with bigsnake, tell doj to go pound sand. They are giving them a far shot to get the cell network going and they get boost customers to start this network. What a hell of a deal

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2019 at 2:14 PM, RAvirani said:

If I were in charge of Sprint and the merger fell through today, here are the changes I would make:

  • Day 1 changes:
    • Drop the L800 Qrxlevmin to -128.  I don’t want users falling off L800 at -120 or -122 because:
      • L800 will almost always offer better speeds than CDMA at those signal levels.
      • This will reduce the reconnect time to usable LTE. 
      • The pocket 3G problem will be eliminated.  
      • VoLTE reliability will skyrocket.

This is a terrible idea for various reasons. For starters B26 is mostly congested, so once you get to -118 to -119 RSRP, you're probably better off falling to PCS EVDO (which is slightly more robust than LTE 800 MHz and less congested). 

Second, VoLTE can start experiencing hiccups around -117 RSRP (a lot of it depends on the device). Once you get to -120, you're going to be screaming "can you here me now?" just like in the old days. UEs can't function properly with the parameters you've suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, greenbastard said:

This is a terrible idea for various reasons. For starters B26 is mostly congested, so once you get to -118 to -119 RSRP, you're probably better off falling to PCS EVDO (which is slightly more robust than LTE 800 MHz and less congested). 

The way LTE is optimized in my market, I often fall from L800 straight to 1x800. There is no gain in data speeds when this happens.

Additionally, I've never experienced usable EVDO when I fall off L800. I think this is the rule, not the exception, as only either one or two EVDO carriers are left in all major metros today.

Lastly, falling to CDMA severely delays the reconnect time to LTE.

If your data is going to be useless regardless of which network you're on in that location, it's wiser to leave you connected to LTE so you reconnect to something usable sooner. SRLTE will ensure that voice reliability is not impacted. 

26 minutes ago, greenbastard said:

Second, VoLTE can start experiencing hiccups around -117 RSRP (a lot of it depends on the device). Once you get to -120, you're going to be screaming "can you here me now?" just like in the old days. UEs can't function properly with the parameters you've suggested.

Good QoS can take care of this, especially with lowband 4x2/4x4 MIMO, which Sprint is aggressively deploying (via RFS 8-port dualband antennas and KMW 16-port triband antennas). Recall that AMR-WB only requires 12.65 kbps and that AMR-NB doesn't even require that (as little as just 5-6 kbps depending on configuration).

If you ever have the chance to use the TELUS network in British Colombia, you should note their TM parameters. They run 5x5 L800 with a Qrxlevmin of -128 alongside 15x15 L1900 and 20x20 L2100 (note the similarity to Sprint's network in many markets). VoLTE calls work comfortably at -126 on their 800 LTE because their QoS is well configured and the network moves users up to midband quite aggressively. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RAvirani said:

VoLTE calls work comfortably at -126 on their 800 LTE because their QoS is well configured and the network moves users up to midband quite aggressively. 

Never been a fan of using b26 for capacity. Sprint needs the tribanding of former clear sites or more b26 small cells on billboards etc. (I have heard there is a height requirement to use b26).

Share this post


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

The way LTE is optimized in my market, I often fall from L800 straight to 1x800. There is no gain in data speeds when this happens.

I can definitely echo this for my own experience in Boston's suburbs. At times I wonder if EVDO still exists since my phone drops from LTE straight to 1x. And it's not as if I'm dropping to a strong 1x signal either. More often than not, the signal on 1x is extremely weak, near the point of having no signal altogether.

You can definitely tell that Sprint has been putting in a ton of effort to match their 1x footprint as close as possible in many markets. Most recently on the portion of I-84 near the CT/MA border that I used to complain about dropping to 1x in and even occasionally roaming, I can now hold onto (weak) LTE the entire way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

I can definitely echo this for my own experience in Boston's suburbs. At times I wonder if EVDO still exists since my phone drops from LTE straight to 1x. And it's not as if I'm dropping to a strong 1x signal either. More often than not, the signal on 1x is extremely weak, near the point of having no signal altogether.

You can definitely tell that Sprint has been putting in a ton of effort to match their 1x footprint as close as possible in many markets. Most recently on the portion of I-84 near the CT/MA border that I used to complain about dropping to 1x in and even occasionally roaming, I can now hold onto (weak) LTE the entire way.

They might have fixed things so you can use VOLTE at -120 or worse, but they sure did wreck using normal data on your phone in weak areas.  Normal data does NOT work well below -120 and especially on band 41. Lately I am being held on very poor signal levels when much better levels are available on other bands.  Yesterday, I was sitting in  a parking lot trying to look at my Gmail.  SCP showing I was rotating over 3 different sites. I was getting band 41 from all 3 of these sites but all 3 were at levels worse than -118. I was not able to see any e-mail especially if it had any graphics.  Very aggravating.  I could not get away from the weak band 41 when the other two bands would have worked fine.   Somehow they need to make sure you are not held on these weak signals to the point that you can not use normal data.     I am also being held to extremely weak data on other bands at time too. a transfer to other bands does not happen when it should.  Just not working right.

I am in Shentel territory if it makes a difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exclusive: U.S. clears SoftBank's $2.25 billion investment in GM-backed Cruise
$2.25 Billion would go a long way for Sprint.... I hope the DOJ sees this. This merger isn’t necessary.

There are additional reasons why SoftBank can’t invest in sprint. They don’t want to own sprint 100% and that’s the reason I believe japan banks won’t allow it until SoftBank buys sprint 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


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


There are additional reasons why SoftBank can’t invest in sprint. They don’t want to own sprint 100% and that’s the reason I believe japan banks won’t allow it until SoftBank buys sprint 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has SoftBank’s inability or unwillingness to invest in Sprint been put forth as a justification for the merger?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has SoftBank’s inability or unwillingness to invest in Sprint been put forth as a justification for the merger?
I would say yes. I'm not really sure why they ever bought Sprint.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would say yes. I'm not really sure why they ever bought Sprint.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


I agree! SoftBank never had any intentions to fully fund or grow sprint. They wanted to merger with tmo since day 1. Even now I don’t see SoftBank purchasing sprint 100%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tengen31 said:

I would say yes. I'm not really sure why they ever bought Sprint.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

They bought Sprint with the intention of merging with T-Mobile, but as the majority owner in such a transaction. That’s not what’s happening now.... and SoftBank shouldn’t be bailed out on its inability/unwillingness to invest in Sprint by the DOJ or by the market.

Share this post


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

They bought Sprint with the intention of merging with T-Mobile, but as the majority owner in such a transaction. That’s not what’s happening now.... and SoftBank shouldn’t be bailed out on its inability/unwillingness to invest in Sprint by the DOJ or by the market.

This sums up the view of a lot of merger opponents: Sprint/Softbank should die so I can have cheaper phone service for a few years (maybe they won't really die).  In fairness, I think the view of many merger proponents is the duo needs real competition and the merger is the best way to do it. Ignored alternatives include anti-trust against the duo.  Of course technology and other market forces may eclipse all of this and find another alternative... or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, dkyeager said:

This sums up the view of a lot of merger opponents: Sprint/Softbank should die so I can have cheaper phone service for a few years (maybe they won't really die).  In fairness, I think the view of many merger proponents is the duo needs real competition and the merger is the best way to do it. Ignored alternatives include anti-trust against the duo.  Of course technology and other market forces may eclipse all of this and find another alternative... or not.

I don't believe Sprint/SoftBank will die. SoftBank has simply never given Sprint the capital it needed to compete. Masa put Marcelo in there to slim the company down and prepare it for a merger. At the same time, Marcelo fed the market stories like this: https://www.cnet.com/news/sprint-ceo-give-us-two-years-and-our-network-will-blow-past-rivals/ (May 27, 2015)

It's unfortunate that in the dogged pursuit of a merger that Masa passed on the 600 MHz spectrum to pursue a monopole deployment strategy, which everyone in traditional tower telecom (given their own inherent self-interest of course) said wouldn't work... and it didn't (costing $180 Million in the process).... and now Sprint is in the position of having to deploy 5G on a nationwide scale, without the economic benefits associated with having lowband spectrum to do it. Furthermore, Sprint's lack of lowband spectrum is one of Sprint's primary justifications for the merger with T-Mobile.

The DOJ and the market at large shouldn't grant SoftBank a merger under these circumstances. Real competition is keeping 4 carriers on the market. Reducing the market to 3 competitors is a net negative overall in my opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe Sprint/SoftBank will die. SoftBank has simply never given Sprint the capital it needed to compete. Masa put Marcelo in there to slim the company down and prepare it for a merger. At the same time, Marcelo fed the market stories like this: https://www.cnet.com/news/sprint-ceo-give-us-two-years-and-our-network-will-blow-past-rivals/ (May 27, 2015)
It's unfortunate that in the dogged pursuit of a merger that Masa passed on the 600 MHz spectrum to pursue a monopole deployment strategy, which everyone in traditional tower telecom (given their own inherent self-interest of course) said wouldn't work... and it didn't (costing $180 Million in the process).... and now Sprint is in the position of having to deploy 5G on a nationwide scale, without the economic benefits associated with having lowband spectrum to do it. Furthermore, Sprint's lack of lowband spectrum is one of Sprint's primary justifications for the merger with T-Mobile.
The DOJ and the market at large shouldn't grant SoftBank a merger under these circumstances. Real competition is keeping 4 carriers on the market. Reducing the market to 3 competitors is a net negative overall in my opinion.
Best performing network within two years, which never happen

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Best performing network within two years, which never happen

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


That is right. They bragged and then lied about the network the past two years. Obviously there’s been improvements which is obviously very evident. But they have not risen to what they said in the advertising. I find that to be deceptive. I get it improving a network cost a lot of money which sprint obviously doesn’t have.

I have noticed in South Jersey a improvement in band 41 deployment. On the route I drive in South Jersey sprint actually has extremely consistent LTE coverage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, danlodish345 said:


That is right. They bragged and then lied about the network the past two years. Obviously there’s been improvements which is obviously very evident. But they have not risen to what they said in the advertising. I find that to be deceptive. I get it improving a network cost a lot of money which sprint obviously doesn’t have.

I have noticed in South Jersey a improvement in band 41 deployment. On the route I drive in South Jersey sprint actually has extremely consistent LTE coverage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think their more typical pattern is to have a good idea, publicly disclose it, then take a while to give it funding, then begin, then financial numbers don't quite come in as expected so accounting pulls out the rug from underneath the project.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kct1975 said:

Not sure if you all have seen this article yet...

Google to be 4 Carrier

https://nypost.com/2019/07/07/google-joins-dish-network-in-talks-to-create-4th-mobile-carrier/

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
 

:popcorn:

if you look at Google fiber, Masa does not look bad.

:popcorn::popcorn:

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think their more typical pattern is to have a good idea, publicly disclose it, then take a while to give it funding, then begin, then financial numbers don't quite come in as expected so accounting pulls out the rug from underneath the project.

i just want sprint to continue improving.... I m on boost mobile and I would hate to see it become part of dish...at the point I would dish them out a port out...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, danlodish345 said:


i just want sprint to continue improving.... I m on boost mobile and I would hate to see it become part of dish...at the point I would dish them out a port out...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't see resolution of this issue coming anytime soon (could be wrong).  DOJ and others keep stirring the pot so nothing settles out.  Meanwhile more and more sharks in the water.  Wonder when Space-X will have leaked results from their initial 60 satellite internet?  This dealt is starting to resemble a black hole -- everything technical appears possible to get sucked in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see resolution of this issue coming anytime soon (could be wrong).  DOJ and others keep stirring the pot so nothing settles out.  Meanwhile more and more sharks in the water.  Wonder when Space-X will have leaked results from their initial 60 satellite internet?  This dealt is starting to resemble a black hole -- everything technical appears possible to get sucked in.

Good because i like boost mobile on sprint and it works right where I need it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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.


×
×
  • Create New...