Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

So, if this merger goes through and it seems that it will, the New T-Mobile will have a very nice swath of 30x30MHz of 1900MHz. However it seems to me that they will have to go through a lot of swaps again to consolidate it into continuous spectrum. Are there any other spectrum swaps that they might do to simplify things? Like lets' say AWS for PCS? 

I think they might try to get 20x20 of contiguous PCS (possibly at the cost of some AWS spectrum) everywhere because that can be immediately deployed on all modern (600/700/1900/2100) and legacy (1900 only) T-Mobile sites as well as all Sprint sites. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

They can 100% go at it alone, but I kinda understand Softbank point of view, they do not want to go on a 3-5 year journey for 30% marketshare.

What do you base this on? What market research? I'll bet zero. Nothing is 100 percent in business or in life.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not noticed any more or less aggressive hand downs to 3G here in Atlanta. Same very few trouble spots as always that still somehow lack 4G after 6 years of deployment. Frustrating but overall, things are good here. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, utiz4321 said:

What do you base this on? What market research? I'll bet zero. Nothing is 100 percent in business or in life.

 

First off, I don't know what part of my comment your protesting? Sprint going at it alone? Or my speculation on how much market share they could end up with 3-5 years down the road with the proper investments from Softbank into Sprint as a standalone company?

 All of my comments are based on speculation, and my guestimations are just that, guesses. Sorry if you intercepted them as facts, that's on you.

Don't see them (Softbank) pumping $20B+ into the Sprint network having three other competitors to fight and end up with just over a quarter of the market share.

Softbank's intentions are now clear, Sprint needs to self sustain until the merger is approved. They are not going to invest further into Sprint until they have no other option.

These are my opinions, simple as that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

First off, I don't know what part of my comment your protesting? Sprint going at it alone? Or my speculation on how much market share they could end up with 3-5 years down the road with the proper investments from Softbank into Sprint as a standalone company?

 All of my comments are based on speculation, and my guestimations are just that, guesses. Sorry if you intercepted them as facts, that's on you.

Don't see them (Softbank) pumping $20B+ into the Sprint network having three other competitors to fight and end up with just over a quarter of the market share.

Softbank's intentions are now clear, Sprint needs to self sustain until the merger is approved. They are not going to invest further into Sprint until they have no other option.

These are my opinions, simple as that...

No one has any intension of pumping 20 billion into sprint because they won't get a return on their money. I am 95 percent confident of that. 

Obviously I objected to the part of your statement the "100 percent" was refering to as i called that out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, I don't know what part of my comment your protesting? Sprint going at it alone? Or my speculation on how much market share they could end up with 3-5 years down the road with the proper investments from Softbank into Sprint as a standalone company?

 All of my comments are based on speculation, and my guestimations are just that, guesses. Sorry if you intercepted them as facts, that's on you.

Don't see them (Softbank) pumping $20B+ into the Sprint network having three other competitors to fight and end up with just over a quarter of the market share.

Softbank's intentions are now clear, Sprint needs to self sustain until the merger is approved. They are not going to invest further into Sprint until they have no other option.

These are my opinions, simple as that...

I agree, a reuter article came out earlier

 

Source here: https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1KR22P?__twitter_impression=true

 

The approval period could last longer then a year.. Now my take on might be called crazy , but this gives Sprint time and a roaming agreement from tmo that will help with customer satisfaction could lower their churn and help them gain market share. Now I'm not saying that softbank did it this way to buy them time, but 6-12 months (possibly longer)in the wireless industry is a long time lots can change.. Sprint is making strides as shown by John saw and the improvements at the Yankees stadium today... Sprint could make some great strides on their wireless network...

 

Market share is important, but the wireless industry isn't going anywhere and there is always room to grow.. I think Sprint need to start offering unlimited hotspot and better push on marketing and I think it will work .. just my opinion 18c3557923658bbd76da611a9b8113fd.jpg

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, a reuter article came out earlier 
Source here: https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1KR22P?__twitter_impression=true
 
The approval period could last longer then a year.. Now my take on might be called crazy , but this gives Sprint time and a roaming agreement from tmo that will help with customer satisfaction could lower their churn and help them gain market share. Now I'm not saying that softbank did it this way to buy them time, but 6-12 months (possibly longer)in the wireless industry is a long time lots can change.. Sprint is making strides as shown by John saw and the improvements at the Yankees stadium today... Sprint could make some great strides on their wireless network...
 
Market share is important, but the wireless industry isn't going anywhere and there is always room to grow.. I think Sprint need to start offering unlimited hotspot and better push on marketing and I think it will work .. just my opinion 18c3557923658bbd76da611a9b8113fd.jpg
 
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
 
 

The only problem I have with Sprint is the roaming holes In their native network footprint here. Like they can improve upon that by densifying and adding some sites. Obviously that’s a given the cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for even a couple of them. But something has to be done because it’s really bad where my parents are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2018 at 7:42 PM, Dkoellerwx said:

I don't think any bands would be blocked, but CA while roaming using Sprint handsets would be very unlikely. 

Carrier Aggregation, while useless due to the throttle, can be used by Sprint handsets that support CA on AT&T's bands.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, greenbastard said:

Carrier Aggregation, while useless due to the throttle, can be used by Sprint handsets that support CA on AT&T's bands.

Are you saying devices support it or you've seen it connected? I'm aware some devices may support it, but I hadn't seen roaming CA occur before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RAvirani said:

I think they might try to get 20x20 of contiguous PCS (possibly at the cost of some AWS spectrum) everywhere because that can be immediately deployed on all modern (600/700/1900/2100) and legacy (1900 only) T-Mobile sites as well as all Sprint sites. 

You're underestimating the pace at which T-Mobile moves in order to deploy LTE. I've seen some sites with SISO and then some other sites with satellite backhaul on 600 Mhz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dkoellerwx said:

Are you saying devices support it or you've seen it connected? I'm aware some devices may support it, but I hadn't seen roaming CA occur before.

It happened on my old Nexus 5x before I switched. I'll see if I can find an old screenshot.

Don't know how useful it is to us due to the throttle Sprint has on AT&T LTE. I'm pretty sure CA works on USCC roaming if it's working on AT&T roaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, RAvirani said:

I think they might try to get 20x20 of contiguous PCS (possibly at the cost of some AWS spectrum) everywhere because that can be immediately deployed on all modern (600/700/1900/2100) and legacy (1900 only) T-Mobile sites as well as all Sprint sites. 

Hell, Sprint can get 20x20 alone once EVDO clears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell, Sprint can get 20x20 alone once EVDO clears.
Some markets, such as most of Northern California (SF, Sacramento, etc) only have 30 (15 fdd) MHz total, and it's not contiguous.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ingenium said:

Some markets, such as most of Northern California (SF, Sacramento, etc) only have 30 (15 fdd) MHz total, and it's not contiguous.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

Have they not yet swapped spectrum in those markets with other carriers?

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

why isnt tmobiles 600 mhz listed here?
It is, it just further up the page. It doesn't all fit on one screen, I was just showing relevant information38d73cdd186092711848d559b36da634.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is, it just further up the page. It doesn't all fit on one screen, I was just showing relevant information38d73cdd186092711848d559b36da634.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


OK now I understand. That’s one heck of a lot of information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ingenium said:

Nope. All the other carriers are already aligned.8dcdf61d148ceffe7508e5fd6a3b8f41.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

They can definitely exchange their 10x10 with Verizon's 10x10 thereby creating a 15x15 block. Are you sure it has not been done? How old is this bandplan?

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can definitely exchange their 10x10 with Verizon's 10x10 thereby creating a 15x15 block. Are you sure it has not been done? How old is this bandplan?
Oh yeah they can. Hmm, not sure how I missed that. And yes, that is the current band layout. That's Alameda county in California (SF area). As of 2 weeks ago, the second b25 carrier is still at earfcn 8115, so a center downlink frequency of 1937.5 MHz.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

They can definitely exchange their 10x10 with Verizon's 10x10 thereby creating a 15x15 block. Are you sure it has not been done? How old is this bandplan?

What incentive does Verizon have to assist their competitor?

- Trip

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Trip said:

What incentive does Verizon have to assist their competitor?

- Trip

Somewhere else in another part of the country, Verizon may need Sprint's help. Helping another carrier isn't uncommon if the favor is returned in another market.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, greenbastard said:

Somewhere else in another part of the country, Verizon may need Sprint's help. Helping another carrier isn't uncommon if the favor is returned in another market.

I was under the impression that most of the spectrum swaps necessary had already happened--many of which happened without Sprint in the mix.

- Trip

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 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.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

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