Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

[tyroned3222]

We need to post the links for these filings and see what they say.
 

The deal is in trouble from a What I’m ready and understanding.. the change of direction hasn’t worked for TMO.. It’s the 3rd change of direction. First it was 5G, then it was better able to compete with VZW and AT&T, now it’s we’ll challenge cable.
This is John and team throwing a Hail Mary trying to save the deal playing the long game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RedSpark]

1 hour ago, dkyeager said:

We need to post the links for these filings and see what they say.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/7/18254853/tmobile-sprint-merger-5g-home-internet-service-promises

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/new-t-mobile-fixed-broadband-alternative

The filing link in the article doesn’t load. 🙁

[tyroned3222]

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/7/18254853/tmobile-sprint-merger-5g-home-internet-service-promises
https://www.t-mobile.com/news/new-t-mobile-fixed-broadband-alternative
The filing link in the article doesn’t load. [emoji853]

The change of direction competing against cable the FCC/DOj are already aware that as a merged company they wanna compete on home broadband .. this stoppage is concerning it was unexpected


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[belusnecropolis]

Is the EBS/BRS spectrum partition an issue in NR deployments, or are they able to gather these disparate blocks into an 60MHz carrier like we have been hearing will be deployed? Is time division in NR a solution to the blocks being '16.5MHz down at this end and 6.5MHz up at this end but look out for that other leased block in the middle' scenario? I don't know if it relevant to NR as a tech but I wonder how it will work.

We just curious about how some of these blocks get aggremugathered together in the new airlink. Thanks!

[dkyeager]

4 hours ago, belusnecropolis said:

Is the EBS/BRS spectrum partition an issue in NR deployments, or are they able to gather these disparate blocks into an 60MHz carrier like we have been hearing will be deployed? Is time division in NR a solution to the blocks being '16.5MHz down at this end and 6.5MHz up at this end but look out for that other leased block in the middle' scenario? I don't know if it relevant to NR as a tech but I wonder how it will work.

We just curious about how some of these blocks get aggremugathered together in the new airlink. Thanks!

In areas where Sprint controls all the 2.5 spectrum you end up with 3 carriers, buffer, 2 carriers, buffer, 3 carriers.  The FCC can allow access to these buffer zones (J &K).  With 194 MHz you could get 9 20Mhz carriers and a 10Mhz carrier.  However Sprint 4G LTE B41 carriers are actually 19.8MHz wide, would give you 9 carriers plus 15.8MHz for possible a 15Mhz carrier.  We don't fully understand how 5G will handle spectrum allocations.   It may be more oriented toward 15MHz.  If so,  in many areas you could end up with 40MHz for 4G LTE (CA) plus 15MHz for 5G.

To truly pull off wireless internet in rural areas, the allocation/auction of the remain 2.5 spectrum would be needed.  It is not guaranteed that Sprint would win.  If it does not have to be leased, Verizon may be interested.  AT&T has already played the spoiler in places like San Francisco.  You also have a number of WISPs already present and various spectrum hoarders.

 

 

6 hours ago, RedSpark said:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/7/18254853/tmobile-sprint-merger-5g-home-internet-service-promises

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/new-t-mobile-fixed-broadband-alternative

The filing link in the article doesn’t load. 🙁

It says access denied.  I went and looked at the FCC docket and no other documents yet made public other than announcement.  I prefer not to trust the uneducated press on wireless matters.

[Trip]

It usually takes ECFS a day or two to make public things that are filed.  I'm not sure why T-Mobile included a link that didn't work yet in their press release, but it may well start working later today.

Here's the FCC PN announcing the clock stoppage:  https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-19-161A1.pdf

This appears to be the February 22 document:  https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/102221766502159/Feb 21 Public Ex Parte.pdf

I do not see the March 6 filing yet.

- Trip

[bigsnake49]

7 hours ago, tyroned3222 said:

The change of direction competing against cable the FCC/DOj are already aware that as a merged company they wanna compete on home broadband .. this stoppage is concerning it was unexpected


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

T-Mobile has touted the fixed broadband angle before, nothing new. They probably submitted a lot of deployment details in their filings which prompted the FCC to stop the clock.

[utiz4321]

On 3/6/2019 at 5:50 AM, tommym65 said:

Actually, it is a real issue. While presidents are not supposed to be involved in merger approvals, this one has already (so far unsuccessfully) tried to block the AT&T-Time Warner merger (for apparently personal reasons), and who can predict where he will go next. 

That doesn't make any sense and you are confusing what you see in the media with reality. The DOJ under Obama stared the process of stoping the Time warner/ATT merger. The Trump admin merely continued this policy.   Your paraniod and basely claims are why we can't have nice things on the internet. 

 

Unless, you have proof Trump personally  intervened in this case? I mean I doubt a random person on the internet does but you never know.

[tommym65]

14 minutes ago, utiz4321 said:

That doesn't make any sense and you are confusing what you see in the media with reality. The DOJ under Obama stared the process of stoping the Time warner/ATT merger. The Trump admin merely continued this policy.   Your paraniod and basely claims are why we can't have nice things on the internet. 

Unless, you have proof Trump personally  intervened in this case? I mean I doubt a random person on the internet does but you never know.

1. I recognize the site rules regarding political discussion.  This political topic is directly relevant to the pending Sprint/T-Mobile merger.

2. The previous administration was known to be broadly opposed to large corporate mergers, including AT&T/Time Warner, a fact well known and not germane to this discussion.

3. The reality is: Many sources (including, but not limited to: The New Yorker, The Washington Post, Market Watch, Slate, CNN, PolitiFact, NBC News, Politico . . .) have reported that the President personally instructed Gary Cohn, formerly director of the National Economic Council, to contact officials at the Department of Justice to attemp to intervene in the merger, reportedly because of the President's extreme antipathy toward CNN.

4. The US House of Representatives is reportedly investigating this interference, which certainly lends credance to the whole story..

No, I don't have "proof".  My "paranoid and basely claims" (I can only assume you meant "baseless") are, in fact, neither paranoid nor baseless, but are widely substantiated.  Moreover, insulting me, however vaguely you do so, is inappropriate on this forum.

[utiz4321]

14 hours ago, tommym65 said:

1. I recognize the site rules regarding political discussion.  This political topic is directly relevant to the pending Sprint/T-Mobile merger.

2. The previous administration was known to be broadly opposed to large corporate mergers, including AT&T/Time Warner, a fact well known and not germane to this discussion.

3. The reality is: Many sources (including, but not limited to: The New Yorker, The Washington Post, Market Watch, Slate, CNN, PolitiFact, NBC News, Politico . . .) have reported that the President personally instructed Gary Cohn, formerly director of the National Economic Council, to contact officials at the Department of Justice to attemp to intervene in the merger, reportedly because of the President's extreme antipathy toward CNN.

4. The US House of Representatives is reportedly investigating this interference, which certainly lends credance to the whole story..

No, I don't have "proof".  My "paranoid and basely claims" (I can only assume you meant "baseless") are, in fact, neither paranoid nor baseless, but are widely substantiated.  Moreover, insulting me, however vaguely you do so, is inappropriate on this forum.

So a justice department under obama started an anti-trust investigation because trump wanted it? Weird.

Did i hurt you feels, i am sorry but grow up. You are making wild and dumb claims. Both Dems and Rs are for and against this merger and two admins tried to stop it and you want to blame Trump because "orange man bad". Any insults you feel you earned. 

[tommym65]

10 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

So a justice department under obama started an anti-trust investigation because trump wanted it? Weird.

Did i hurt you feels, i am sorry but grow up. You are making wild and dumb claims. Both Dems and Rs are for and against this merger and two admins tried to stop it and you want to blame Trump because "orange man bad". Any insults you feel you earned. 

That is not what I said, and you know perfectly well that it is not what I said. 

Do not pretend to know what my politics or my motivation are, and do not put words in my mouth that I have not said. 

You are obviously spoiling for a fight. Cut the shit, learn to read what other people actually say, and try to be at least a little respectful. 

"Did i hurt you feels?" Really? Why, I'm asking myself, am I even bothering to react? 

Edited March 9, 2019 by tommym65
To remove offensive content

[twospirits]

You both need to stop it and stop it now. Any further arguments between the both of you will result in a time off on the forum.

TS out

[greenbastard]

On 3/7/2019 at 11:51 PM, tyroned3222 said:

this stoppage is concerning it was unexpected


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It actually isn't concerning or unexpected since the stoppage was expected by all parties. New fillings were submitted by T-Mobile/Sprint. It is all part of the process. 

This merger is still likely going to happen. Some people in power will question it in order to toot their horn (it's politics 101), but will ultimately not stand in the way.

Edited March 10, 2019 by greenbastard

[tyroned3222]

It actually isn't concerning or unexpected since the stoppage was expected by all parties. New fillings were submitted by T-Mobile/Sprint. It is all part of the process. 

This merger is still likely going to happen. Some people in power will question it in order to toot their horn (it's politics 101), but will ultimately not stand in the way.

 

New info was submitted because the direction they were taking wasn’t working ..

1st: pushing the narrative of lower pricing didn’t seem to work

2nd: first to 5G race didn’t seem to work

3rd: better competition against att and Verizon didn’t seem to work

Now the direction is going towards cable ( briefly mentioned to all in prior meetings. So everyone is aware) but now in more detail. So, to me it is concerning

 

Remember this was supposed to be all smooth and about 30 days or so away from being ether approved or not.. so, this change of direction leads me to believe tmo is getting negative reactions from DOj

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dkyeager]

Or it could be the DOJ and FCC drilling further into the data and scenarios.

There  is a disconnect between the policies of the current administration and the bureaucratic responses.  Global warming is a good example of this. This adds unpredictability to how this proposed merger will be resolved.  Logically you would think if they don't allow T-Mobile and Sprint to merge then AT&T and Verizon should be broken up.  I sincerely doubt the later would happen.

I am also not certain that T-Mobile or Sprint are that politically aware either, given these multiple public revisions.

[dkyeager]

link is now live: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10308962711593/(Public) In-Home Ex Parte with CL - FINAL v2.pdf

[S4GRU]

Ehhh, I don't think the rougher waters is not technical in nature.  It started when some Democratic lawmakers started to speak negatively.  Their friends on the bureaucratic side are starting to explore their concerns.  That's my theory.  It was all but approved until the publicly made negative comments started.

Robert

[dkyeager]

My comments on https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10308962711593/(Public) In-Home Ex Parte with CL - FINAL v2.pdf

1) I do see an issue in entering the address for qualification -- many rural addresses are P.O. Boxes or rural routes not pinned down to a lat long.

2) They guarantee a  "minimum speed of 25/3Mbps".  Much lower speeds would be likely acceptable by the customers, especially if they could use satellite for download.

3) let us not forget that SpaceX and others have also targeted these customers in future years.

4) It will be restricted in area: "T-Mobile’s network engineers ... calculated the areas within the In-Home Broadband Coverage Area where sufficient network capacity existed to offer in-home broadband services (the “In-Home Broadband Eligible Area”)"

5) "While many of these areas need some 2.5 GHz to be deployed in order to provide sufficient capacity to meet New T-Mobile’s performance thresholds, traffic in these areas would end up putting very little load on  the 2.5 GHz spectrum, leaving much of it available to provide wireless fixed broadband service. The result is that New T-Mobile will gain substantial excess capacity in a number of areas for a very low cost."

The issues with this are many:  1) Many rural areas don't currently have much in the way of 2.5 spectrum.  2) WISPs may already be operating in the area, but possibly with less technical expertise.  3) Sprint users may already have heavily taxed this resource.

6) there is no discussion of the priority of mobile versus fixed wireless customers.  They do discuss limiting the number of wireless customers in a given area in a technical appendix.

7) It would give the new T-Mobile more revenue in some rural areas that would otherwise not be worth serving.

 

 

[runagun]

7 hours ago, S4GRU said:

Ehhh, I don't think the rougher waters is not technical in nature.  It started when some Democratic lawmakers started to speak negatively.  Their friends on the bureaucratic side are starting to explore their concerns.  That's my theory.  It was all but approved until the publicly made negative comments started.

Robert

I agree with Robert.  Typically, Democrats tend to focus on helping the little guy.  And with this merger, which ironically I want to happen for Sprints sake-It's going to fuc* all of us in the long term tho.

Now the D's are grabbing on to that platform . I can see some trouble for the merger.  I guess we'll just see what happens.  

Giving back to what I said a few weeks ago. About TMobile team staying @ Trump's place of business is smart. They wash his back. He washes their back.  Pay for play my friends.  

[dro1984]

I think the longer this takes and the more they review... the more the opposition comes out.   I wish they'd hurry the heck up!   

[bigsnake49]

12 hours ago, runagun said:

I agree with Robert.  Typically, Democrats tend to focus on helping the little guy.  And with this merger, which ironically I want to happen for Sprints sake-It's going to fuc* all of us in the long term tho.

Now the D's are grabbing on to that platform . I can see some trouble for the merger.  I guess we'll just see what happens.  

Giving back to what I said a few weeks ago. About TMobile team staying @ Trump's place of business is smart. They wash his back. He washes their back.  Pay for play my friends.  

Just remember that Congress has no say in this merger, the administration does. I mean they can talk but they don't get to approve or turn down the merger.

The fault for stopping the clock lies with T-Mobile and to a lesser degree with Sprint. They keep on adding documentation to support their case which then prompts the FCC to stop the clock for public comment. In the end the public comments don't really make a bit of difference. The professionals at the FCC and DOJ have to cross their t's and dot their i's in support of or in opposition to the merger.

[utiz4321]

On 3/10/2019 at 11:04 PM, runagun said:

I agree with Robert.  Typically, Democrats tend to focus on helping the little guy.  And with this merger, which ironically I want to happen for Sprints sake-It's going to fuc* all of us in the long term tho.

Now the D's are grabbing on to that platform . I can see some trouble for the merger.  I guess we'll just see what happens.  

Giving back to what I said a few weeks ago. About TMobile team staying @ Trump's place of business is smart. They wash his back. He washes their back.  Pay for play my friends.  

Why would you think Dems. Are for the "little guy"? Why are we F... In the long run if the merger goes through? What do you think would happen if we get to three carriers though bankruptcy and VZW and ATT snatch up most of Sprint's spectrum? What does the industry look like then? Are we not F with two strong players and a weak third? 

Dems raise more money from billionaires than Rs, seem weird they are for the little guy or weird that stoping this merger would un F us. 

 

If you want to have a understanding of the world that explains more of reality that Dems are for the little guy and Rs are for the rich you might want to think about the fact that both parties need money and get most of their money from billionaires. Once you do that you can ask which billionaires give to which parties and that leads you the fact that telecom tends to spend more with Rs and content (like google) spend more on Ds. This way of viewing the world allows one to understand why each party takes the position it does much better that D are draped in light and good and Rs are the exploiters. 

[PythonFanPA]

I'm no moderator here officially, but I've served as one on many other sites, both private and commercial/for profit, and just want to underscore for you guys continuing this:  both Robert and other mods have warned you, and yet you're continuing the political-based discussion. 

Just to interject a friendly alternative suggestion before one of them comes in here and acts on that timeout threat - you could just as easily continue these back-and-forth arguments directly via private messaging, which the site supports.  It's your choice whether or not to do that, but you can continue as you are, or have that choice forced on you the hard way.

[Paynefanbro]

Going off topic a bit, the merger that I wished would've happened a long time ago is MetroPCS and U.S. Cellular. Their networks would've complimented each other so well and they would've been a decent 5th nationwide carrier with a combined 14 Million customers. 

[belusnecropolis]

Sprint roaming on T-mobile in market, aggregating all channels, 4x4 MIMO enabled from a site both carriers occupy at 1.2 miles Nlos.