Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

[Tengen31]

Yes I'm curious as to how much they have with band 71

 

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

 

Not as much as TMobile so B26 will be there coverage band. Spectrum Omega will show you. Tho B29 it's low band also. It will require band 66 to give a upload speed. Not sure if they can aggregate it with 26 or 71

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[danlodish345]

Not as much as TMobile so B26 will be there coverage band. Spectrum Omega will show you

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

Okay I'll check it out

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[Cardsfan96]

4 minutes ago, danlodish345 said:

Yes I'm curious as to how much they have with band 71

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk
 

Spectrum gateways site shows they have nationwide 600 MHz. Most areas only have 5x5 mhz.

[Tengen31]

Spectrum gateways site shows they have nationwide 600 MHz. Most areas only have 5x5 mhz.

Pretty much 5x5. I think everything is 5x5 accept B66. They might need to buy more spectrum in the future

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

[danlodish345]

Pretty much 5x5. I think everything is 5x5 accept B66. They might need to buy more spectrum in the future

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

I have a feeling they will need to buy more

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[Tengen31]

I have a feeling they will need to buy more

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

They will have time as they will run off TMobile for the next 7 years. Not sure if they will sign a roaming agreement USCC and or att

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

[danlodish345]

They will have time as they will run off TMobile for the next 7 years. Not sure if they will sign a roaming agreement USCC and or att

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

I have a feeling that they will need roaming agreements as they build out their infrastructure. Until then it's only an mnvo

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[Tengen31]

I have a feeling that they will need roaming agreements as they build out their infrastructure. Until then it's only an mnvo

 

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

 

The T-Mobile network will be priority over any other network

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[danlodish345]

The T-Mobile network will be priority over any other network 
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 
 
 

Good that's what I expect.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[Mr.Nuke]

7 hours ago, greenbastard said:

I don't think anything specific has been said about T-Mobile users being able to use Sprint towers. Why give T-Mobile users extra coverage if you're just going to shut off most of the Sprint towers 3 years later?

If a given Sprint tower would be giving T-Mobile users "extra coverage" odds are it is probably going to be kept post merger.

4 hours ago, RedSpark said:

So basically the entirety of both networks is getting a coverage and capacity audit?

Probably not in that sense... This is one area that they were fairly forthcoming the day the intent to merge was announced.

The combined company is going to have approximately 110,000 macro sites at the time of the merger. 35,000 of these sites will ultimately be decommissioned either due to co-location or redundant coverage (not on the same tower, but close enough). These sites will almost certainly be predominantly Sprint sites; which makes sense because they're effectively being acquired and T-Mobile's management and network teams are going to be running the show.

Like I said in the article at the time though in terms of co-location, In actuality we'll see what they do. All things equal, if two sites are co-located the greater synergies are in eliminating the tower rack with less favorable lease terms or worse rack location. But to circle back to your question, basically in your terms T-Mobile's network is the one getting what you are calling a "coverage and capacity audit." They'll fill their network with selected Sprint keep sites they've identified that will add coverage or capacity or both, plus an additional approximately 10,000 new macro sites in the first several years post-merger. I expect this process is probably quite far along on T-Mobile's end in terms of site identification as their numbers were pretty specific at the time of the merger and they've had an additional year plus to work on this.

[mattp]

how will the new company be able to keep the same data rate   to the mvno out there like tello   with out rasing the rate by a lot 

[danlodish345]

Probably not in that sense... This is one area that they were fairly forthcoming the day the intent to merge was announced.
The combined company is going to have approximately 110,000 macro sites at the time of the merger. 35,000 of these sites will ultimately be decommissioned either due to co-location or redundant coverage (not on the same tower, but close enough). These sites will almost certainly be predominantly Sprint sites; which makes sense because they're effectively being acquired and T-Mobile's management and network teams are going to be running the show.
Like I said in the article at the time though in terms of co-location, In actuality we'll see what they do. All things equal, if two sites are co-located the greater synergies are in eliminating the tower rack with less favorable lease terms or worse rack location. But to circle back to your question, basically in your terms T-Mobile's network is the one getting what you are calling a "coverage and capacity audit." They'll fill their network with selected Sprint keep sites they've identified that will add coverage or capacity or both, plus an additional approximately 10,000 new macro sites in the first several years post-merger. I expect this process is probably quite far along on T-Mobile's end in terms of site identification as their numbers were pretty specific at the time of the merger and they've had an additional year plus to work on this.

For me I really don't care about 5G or speed this or speed that. The only things I care about is usability coverage and quality. If I just have even 10 megabytes a second but Nationwide coverage I'm happy.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[mattp]

Just now, danlodish345 said:

For me I really don't care about 5G or speed this or speed that. The only things I care about is usability coverage and quality. If I just have even 10 megabytes a second but Nationwide coverage I'm happy.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk
 

i agree i dont using more then 2mb/s and even when i do it is done in second i only use it for website face book  the odd face book video not very offten so far only  2 in month  and  chat area and email and listen to musice most what  i care about is good ping and coverage

[danlodish345]

i agree i dont using more then 2mb/s and even when i do it is done in second i only use it for website face book  the odd face book video not very offten so far only  2 in month  and  chat area and email and listen to musice most what  i care about is good ping and coverage

The only time I use above 5 megabytes a second as if I'm watching YouTube that's it. So for me 5 megabytes a second is plenty for most thanks. I really don't care about next generation networks the only thing I care about is coverage and as you said good pings other than that I'm content.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[mattp]

Just now, danlodish345 said:

The only time I use above 5 megabytes a second as if I'm watching YouTube that's it. So for me 5 megabytes a second is plenty for most thanks. I really don't care about next generation networks the only thing I care about is coverage and as you said good pings other than that I'm content.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk
 

yep which i have issue with time to time get great performence in the middl of town i doint live in city   but at the edge i seen  a 2k ms  ping once to google  when i norml get 100ms right before that 

[danlodish345]

yep which i have issue with time to time get great performence in the middl of town i doint live in city   but at the edge i seen  a 2k ms  ping once to google  when i norml get 100ms right before that 

I mean lucky for me I live in an area where the nearest cell site is 8 miles away from me. So obviously I'm going to have good service here. even in areas in between cell sites T-Mobile does a better job and most cases than even Verizon.

Sent from my Phone 2 using Tapatalk

[Trip]

21 hours ago, Trip said:

I'll post my screenshot of it in SCP after work.

- Trip

Here it is.

https://imgur.com/a/W6wxVTd

- Trip

[dro1984]

Very cool Trip!    Were you on the Metro in Pentagon City?   Kinda appeared like it.     Was there a few times... I really liked it.   

[dro1984]

Okay... so something to think about here... I have included an excerpt below,  from the T Mobile earnings call on Friday.   In it, it says that they will keep all of Sprint's "PCS" (1900) and 2.4G bands and gain access to some or all of Dish's 600 mhz.     Combined with T Mobile's existing 600, 1900 bands, how much "depth" will that give new T Mobile spectrum wise...   or (I'm not sure how to say this) but will it give them 20X20 1900 mhz nationwide or more etc and the same for 600?   Has anyone taken a look at this?   It could only mean really good things for all of us as far as capacity is concerned I would think....  Should help alleviate network congestion in some areas?

Excerpt below:

We also announced today that we have reached agreements with DISH to divest all of Sprint's prepaid businesses at close, including Boost Mobile, Virgin Mobile and Sprint-branded prepaid customers, as well as Sprint's 800 megahertz spectrum licenses after a 3-year period for aggregate proceeds of $5 billion. Importantly, we are going to keep Sprint's entire 2.5 gigahertz and PCS spectrum, which is so important for fully realizing the 5G efficiencies promised by the merger.

Additionally, upon the closing of the divestiture transaction, new T-Mobile will enter into commercial arrangements that will support the transferred prepaid customers and provide DISH wireless customers access to the new T-Mobile network for 7 years. DISH will also have an option to take on leases for certain cell sites and retail locations that are decommissioned by the new T-Mobile, and both parties agreed to discuss how we would get access to some or all of their 600 spectrum to use on our T-Mobile network.

...I might just say on that, too, Mike. DISH's press release and their filings were very comprehensive. So if you get a chance to look through those. One of the ways I look at this is if you look at the full utilization of the 2.5 that we're acquiring from Sprint as well as the unused spectrum of DISH, this is a great day for American networks. It'd be about 150 megahertz at least of spectrum that will now be put to use that, before these sets of agreements, were not going to be. And certainly, DISH's commitments, which have penalties associated with them, are a big part of it. So I'd read those filings and certainly, DISH can comment on those.

Edited July 30, 2019 by dro1984
added additional info and included bold text

[Tengen31]

Okay... so something to think about here... I have included an excerpt below,  from the T Mobile earnings call on Friday.   In it, it says that they will keep all of Sprint's "PCS" (1900) and 2.4G bands and gain access to some or all of Dish's 600 mhz.     Combined with T Mobile's existing 600, 1900 bands, how much "depth" will that give new T Mobile spectrum wise...   or (I'm not sure how to say this) but will it give them 20X20 1900 mhz nationwide or more etc and the same for 600?   Has anyone taken a look at this?   It could only mean really good things for all of us as far as capacity is concerned I would think....  Should help alleviate network congestion in some areas?
Excerpt below:

We also announced today that we have reached agreements with DISH to divest all of Sprint's prepaid businesses at close, including Boost Mobile, Virgin Mobile and Sprint-branded prepaid customers, as well as Sprint's 800 megahertz spectrum licenses after a 3-year period for aggregate proceeds of $5 billion. Importantly, we are going to keep Sprint's entire 2.5 gigahertz and PCS spectrum, which is so important for fully realizing the 5G efficiencies promised by the merger.

Additionally, upon the closing of the divestiture transaction, new T-Mobile will enter into commercial arrangements that will support the transferred prepaid customers and provide DISH wireless customers access to the new T-Mobile network for 7 years. DISH will also have an option to take on leases for certain cell sites and retail locations that are decommissioned by the new T-Mobile, and both parties agreed to discuss how we would get access to some or all of their 600 spectrum to use on our T-Mobile network.

...I might just say on that, too, Mike. DISH's press release and their filings were very comprehensive. So if you get a chance to look through those. One of the ways I look at this is if you look at the full utilization of the 2.5 that we're acquiring from Sprint as well as the unused spectrum of DISH, this is a great day for American networks. It'd be about 150 megahertz at least of spectrum that will now be put to use that, before these sets of agreements, were not going to be. And certainly, DISH's commitments, which have penalties associated with them, are a big part of it. So I'd read those filings and certainly, DISH can comment on those.

Depends if the spectrum is contiguous some places it is. In my area they will have a full contiguous 30x30 TMO owns 20x20 A+D and Sprint 10x10 A block. So since TMobiles last 5x5 is on H+ that means B2 will go from 15x15 to 20x20. Then 2 5x5's after that.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

[bigsnake49]

2 hours ago, Trip said:

Here it is.

https://imgur.com/a/W6wxVTd

- Trip

Thanks Trip! So bands 2, 25 MFBI fully in effect on the T-Mobile side. Probably on the Sprint side as well.

[Trip]

1 hour ago, dro1984 said:

Very cool Trip!    Were you on the Metro in Pentagon City?   Kinda appeared like it.     Was there a few times... I really liked it.   

No, that was south of the beltway on the way to the Alexandria Wegmans, near the intersection of Telegraph and South Kings Hwy.  Right now, with the south end of the Metro closed, I've not been through the Pentagon City Metro station since the end of May.  Won't be again until September.  I've been taking the free shuttle from Huntington to Pentagon via I-395.

T-Mobile has done a lot of densifying around here, but still has some really strange gaps in service.  I'm hoping they keep the Sprint sites in those areas.  As an example, Sprint works in the Old Town Alexandria Trader Joe's, while T-Mobile does not, because T-Mobile has nothing at all in the northeastern part of Old Town.  It's an enormous hole that is very obvious if you look at the tower sites on a map.  But then go to the southwestern part of Old Town and T-Mobile has a whole pile of sites seemingly right on top of each other.

Given a choice, I'd rather use the T-Mobile network in this area than the Sprint network, though the T-Mobile network, itself, needs work.  But in the Shentel region?  I'm never happier to be a Sprint customer than when I'm in the Shentel region, particularly when my T-Mobile phone, and sometimes my AT&T and Verizon phones too, spend extended periods of time telling me "no service".  Shentel in the Shentel region, perhaps with Shentel getting even more of the network in weaker areas for Sprint/T-Mobile, and T-Mobile elsewhere with improvements, is basically my dream network.

- Trip

[bigsnake49]

I do believe that integration of the two networks will be faster than 3 years. T-Mobile and Sprint teams have been working feverishly since the merger was proposed to identify which sites will be eliminated and which sites will be kept and what will happen to each site's equipment.

[dro1984]

I agree big time.     John Legere also basically said that in the earnings call, that they had much more time than originally planned to look at the networks from both sides to see what is needed to integrate.    

 

Here's a piece from the transcripts regarding this very subject:

Mike Sievert

Got it. I could start with the integration piece. We're really pleased with how it's going. I'll tell you that we've had a little more time to plan this than we would have expected when we launched our integration plans. And that's generally speaking been frustrating, but on the other hand, it's given us a fantastic chance to be very, very thoughtful and get out of the gates quickly.

As Braxton and John reinforced in their remarks, what we have today is a plan that is fully intact versus all of the goals and ambitions for long-term profitability, enterprise value and synergy attainment that we laid out for you in April of last year. And we're very, very pleased with that. What's different now versus April from last year is that, that's backed by detailed operational plans in every function of this company. And so, we're planning to get out of the gates very quickly and hit the ground running.

Edited July 30, 2019 by dro1984

[tyroned3222]

I do believe that integration of the two networks will be faster than 3 years. T-Mobile and Sprint teams have been working feverishly since the merger was proposed to identify which sites will be eliminated and which sites will be kept and what will happen to each site's equipment.

The integration will virtually happen day 1 as Neville changed plans. He will do what 2 carriers are doing in Canada called (MOCN). Which basically uses a virtual single core network that routes services to the tmo core. it will move existing T-Mobile and Sprint customers to a common core network. That will require T-Mobile’s engineering team to bridge the two standalone core networks together.At the same time, T-Mobile engineers will increase the scale of T-Mobile’s core network to handle increased traffic created by the new Sprint customers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk