Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, bretton88 said:

So if CPUC denies it, but the feds approve it, does it matter that California denied it?

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
 

New York would say no it does not matter.  I assume Sprint could close down or sell its California business if needed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, dkyeager said:

New York would say no it does not matter.  I assume Sprint could close down or sell its California business if needed.

Sell all the Sprint cell sites and stores to some type of holding company.  Then start quietly moving all customers and employees over to T-Mobile.  Surely there would be  away to get around some politicians.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York would say no it does not matter.  I assume Sprint could close down or sell its California business if needed.
I could see, if necessary, Sprint and T-Mobile selling all California assets and the possibilities of completely pulling out of California if necessary.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kct1975 said:

I could see, if necessary, Sprint and T-Mobile selling all California assets and the possibilities of completely pulling out of California if necessary.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
 

There are ways to get around the political bull.  T-mobile-Sprint would not ever totally pull out.  Just go with t-mobile, quietly move all Sprint subscribers to T-mobile, close sprint stores or re-name them.  You can bet it would get done somehow.  Sprint would just disappear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see, if necessary, Sprint and T-Mobile selling all California assets and the possibilities of completely pulling out of California if necessary.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

California if it was its own country is something like the 6th largest economy in the world. The companies won't pull out.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will have to be sufficient grounds and California law to be able to deny it and let it stand (or any state for that matter).  California has courts too.  And something like this would be unprecedented and could end up in the Supreme Court pushing the bounds of the 10th Amendment.

Robert

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, danlodish345 said:

I personally want Sprint to stick around for a long time.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk
 

I think Sprint can expand on its own, but it will just take longer than people want them too. Sprint (on their own) has made great strides just in the past two years in my opinion). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Sprint can expand on its own, but it will just take longer than people want them too. Sprint (on their own) has made great strides just in the past two years in my opinion). 
Okay I don't disagree with you there. They have definitely made improvements. I just want to see overall coverage expansion and some more densification. Obviously that would take lots of time and lots of money. And we all know their financial situation. So I'm waiting to see with interest what happens here.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't good news [emoji438] for the merger...

 

Democrat 2020 hopefuls press Trump to sink T-Mobile, Sprint $26.5 billion merger

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/democrat-2020-hopefuls-press-trump-administration-to-sink-26-5-billion-t-mobile-sprint-merger

 

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kct1975 said:

This isn't good news emoji438.png for the merger...

 

Democrat 2020 hopefuls press Trump to sink T-Mobile, Sprint $26.5 billion merger

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/democrat-2020-hopefuls-press-trump-administration-to-sink-26-5-billion-t-mobile-sprint-merger

 

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

It will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, danlodish345 said:

Okay I don't disagree with you there. They have definitely made improvements. I just want to see overall coverage expansion and some more densification. Obviously that would take lots of time and lots of money. And we all know their financial situation. So I'm waiting to see with interest what happens here.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk
 

Sprint is spending lots of money. TMobile has been doing just fine with $4~5 billion on CapEx for several years.  Sprint is back up at this level.  If they maintain it, it just depends where they'd want to put that money.   They have excellent extended roaming agreements, and have one with TMobile for three more years. Out of site upgrades, site density, market growth expansion and new native coverage, I can see new native coverage being at the bottom of the list due to these agreements. Especially if Sprint wants to be a city leader in 5G NR.

Edited by red_dog007
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint is spending lots of money. TMobile has been doing just fine with $4~5 billion on CapEx for several years.  Sprint is back up at this level.  If they maintain it, it just depends where they'd want to put that money.   They have excellent extended roaming agreements, and have one with TMobile for three more years. Out of site upgrades, site density, market growth expansion and new native coverage, I can see new native coverage being at the bottom of the list due to these agreements. Especially if Sprint wants to be a city leader in 5G NR.
Hmm thats a solid argument which I wont disagree with but...in my area sprints density is terrible especially off of the main highway.. A new cell site or two is needed for sprint to fill in two roaming holes that are huge.....and the same could be said for tmobile with density...

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, red_dog007 said:

Sprint is spending lots of money. TMobile has been doing just fine with $4~5 billion on CapEx for several years.  Sprint is back up at this level.  If they maintain it, it just depends where they'd want to put that money.   They have excellent extended roaming agreements, and have one with TMobile for three more years. Out of site upgrades, site density, market growth expansion and new native coverage, I can see new native coverage being at the bottom of the list due to these agreements. Especially if Sprint wants to be a city leader in 5G NR.

If T-Mobile would keep the Sprint roaming agreements after they merge with Sprint, the combined company would have incredible coverage.  The Sprint roaming agreements are extremely useful (and expensive) in keeping Sprint mobile devices usable in coverage holes.  The T-Mobile network is a little better than Sprint's in some areas but in other areas is far worse and just goes to no service since T-Mobile currently has many areas with no roaming agreements.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If T-Mobile would keep the Sprint roaming agreements after they merge with Sprint, the combined company would have incredible coverage.  The Sprint roaming agreements are extremely useful (and expensive) in keeping Sprint mobile devices usable in coverage holes.  The T-Mobile network is a little better than Sprint's in some areas but in other areas is far worse and just goes to no service since T-Mobile currently has many areas with no roaming agreements.
Actually if TMobile can continue to expand coverage that would be absolutely fantastic. And not just rely on roaming agreements. As you just said roaming Agreements are pretty expensive. So it would really be and the new carriers interest in building out new coverage. Obviously that's a very expensive and complicated process logistically. So I would really like to see what would happen.

Sent from my SM-T837T using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, radem said:

If T-Mobile would keep the Sprint roaming agreements after they merge with Sprint, the combined company would have incredible coverage.  The Sprint roaming agreements are extremely useful (and expensive) in keeping Sprint mobile devices usable in coverage holes.  The T-Mobile network is a little better than Sprint's in some areas but in other areas is far worse and just goes to no service since T-Mobile currently has many areas with no roaming agreements.

Forgot all about T-Mobile roaming, I haven't seen it in a long time all I get is 3G when I lose LTE now.

  • Like 1
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

×
×
  • Create New...