Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

[tyroned3222]

All 4 carriers have raised prices this year or added a new premium tier.

Yup and that's just based on more recent 4G investments.. once 5G starts those prices will keep rising

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[utiz4321]

6 hours ago, derrph said:

I’d it goes into 2020, who will really care at that point besides Sprint and T-Mobile. Both their networks will be pretty built out. I would assume at that time Sprint will have a pretty strong 5G network....if they keep investing their 6b per year. 

I dont think sprint will have a strong 5g network. They will have a 5g network and it will be somewhat more dense in some markets than today but they dont have the resources to do it right. That has been their problem since the Nextel merger. 

[tyroned3222]

I dont think sprint will have a strong 5g network. They will have a 5g network and it will be somewhat more dense in some markets than today but they dont have the resources to do it right. That has been their problem since the Nextel merger. 

I don't think it's the resources anymore at this point.. Sprint has enough spectrum to where they won't need as many tower to bring capacity to certain areas.. I think it's SoftBank not fully 100% confident/behind Sprint to fully go at it alone...and Sprint brand image.. I think that's about it really .. the network will tag along piece by piece.. imo

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[greenbastard]

25 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:

I don't think it's the resources anymore at this point.. Sprint has enough spectrum to where they won't need as many tower to bring capacity to certain areas.. I think it's SoftBank not fully 100% confident/behind Sprint to fully go at it alone...and Sprint brand image.. I think that's about it really .. the network will tag along piece by piece.. imo

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

On the contrary. Sprint needs to add towers. B41's reach is Sprint's achilles' heel in the 4G race. El Paso is devoid of trees and foliage so tower spacing may not be an issue for you. But in areas that are not deserts (like the rest of Texas), B41 his hurt by trees, large buildings, and rolling hills. B26 is so congested in my area that I used to find myself better off on 1x at certain times/locations.

More macro additions are needed. It wouldn't hurt if Sprint started splitting sectors as well to double it's capacity on B25 in areas where they lack midband spectrum.

[bigsnake49]

19 hours ago, marioc21 said:

Hmm.... not certain what this means.  

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/fcc-says-it-is-pausing-180-day-shot-clock-on-its-review-of-a-merger-between-t-mobile-and-sprint.html

 

Well it turns out that the FCC stopped the clock on the merger because T-Mobile/Sprint submitted new documents on the network integration side to the FCC.

"The newly-provided network engineering model is significantly larger and more complex than the engineering submissions already in the record. It appears to incorporate new logic, methodologies, facts, and assumptions, on a subject central to the Applications-the transaction's claimed network benefits. Accordingly, the Commission and third parties will require additional time to review it.”

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-354053A1.pdf

[RedSpark]

On 9/12/2018 at 12:11 PM, bigsnake49 said:

Well it turns out that the FCC stopped the clock on the merger because T-Mobile/Sprint submitted new documents on the network integration side to the FCC.

"The newly-provided network engineering model is significantly larger and more complex than the engineering submissions already in the record. It appears to incorporate new logic, methodologies, facts, and assumptions, on a subject central to the Applications-the transaction's claimed network benefits. Accordingly, the Commission and third parties will require additional time to review it.”

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-354053A1.pdf

I wonder what changes they made...

[derrph]

Each carrier gave their thoughts on their 5G yesterday. Vzw, Sprint and AT&T give some good thoughts overall. However, T-Mobile gave its thoughts that was a eyeroll. They pretty much said that the customer doesn’t care about what is running their phone Conntion as long as it works. If memory serves me correct they said this same thing about coverage. No one cares about coverage in the middle of no where. Now that they have the low band, the new tune is we cover as much as Verizon. I’m sure if they had/have the spectrum for 5G it would be, we will be the fastest and blah blah. 

 

https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-sprint-t-mobile-verizon-ctos-give-their-takes-5g

[bigsnake49]

6 hours ago, RedSpark said:

I wonder what changes they made...

 From the pdf, there were three additional pieces of information 

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by bigsnake49

[bigsnake49]

Now I don't know what the new network engineering model they submitted, Build 9 or the new financial modeling of Applications. I wonder if it is classified as Confidential or Highly Confidential so that we can't see it.

Edited September 14, 2018 by bigsnake49

[bigsnake49]

Holy Crapola, this is sh@tload of info that the FCC is asking from T-Mobile:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353599A1.pdf

and Sprint:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353601A1.pdf

I am guessing this is going to take a little while to provide and then review.

Edited September 14, 2018 by bigsnake49

[RedSpark]

46 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

Holy Crapola, this is sh@tload of info that the FCC is asking from T-Mobile:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353599A1.pdf

and Sprint:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353601A1.pdf

I am guessing this is going to take a little while to provide and then review.

Wow...

I would especially like to see the answers to questions 8, 16, 17, 24, 26, 28 and 38 on the Sprint document.

FCC don’t play...

[bigsnake49]

13 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

Wow...

I would especially like to see the answers to questions 8, 16, 17, 24, 26, 28 and 38 on the Sprint document.

FCC don’t play...

Me too! I guess they are engineers and they need solid answers to solid questions.

[derrph]

32 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

Wow...

I would especially like to see the answers to questions 8, 16, 17, 24, 26, 28 and 38 on the Sprint document.

FCC don’t play...

Really don’t. I’d like to know as well. How they’ve committed to spending $5-$6b per year for the next few years one would think, do you really need the merger?  T-Mobile has spent that much on the network per year and look where it’s gotten them. What they are doing and what they are “claiming” on their merger promo run are two different things. 

[RedSpark]

5 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

Me too! I guess they are engineers and they need solid answers to solid questions.

Yeah. This seems like a very thorough review by knowledgeable people.

However... the answers either matter or they don’t. It’s the way the town runs.

I forgot to add 27 to that list... I wonder what Sprint is claiming it can accomplish on its own without a merger.

[IamMrFamous07]

On 9/12/2018 at 2:02 AM, tyroned3222 said:

I don't think it's the resources anymore at this point.. Sprint has enough spectrum to where they won't need as many tower to bring capacity to certain areas.. I think it's SoftBank not fully 100% confident/behind Sprint to fully go at it alone...and Sprint brand image.. I think that's about it really .. the network will tag along piece by piece.. imo

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Didn’t sprint admit they won’t be able to compete without the merger? 

[Thomas L.]

2 minutes ago, IamMrFamous07 said:

Didn’t sprint admit they won’t be able to compete without the merger? 

They didn't necessarily admit it - they just claimed it as a way of garnishing support for the merger.

[tyroned3222]

Didn’t sprint admit they won’t be able to compete without the merger? 

It was more to get support for the merger then anything

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[utiz4321]

6 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:

It was more to get support for the merger then anything

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

They wont be able to compete. I don't why anyone thinks that a company has: the highest debt load in the industry, falling service revenue, the worst margins in the industry, the worst scale in the industry and spectrum assets that require a denser macro network than the competition, stands a chance as an independent player. It is merger or irrelevancy for Sprint. 

[Dkoellerwx]

2 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

They wont be able to compete. I don't why anyone thinks that a company has: the highest debt load in the industry, falling service revenue, the worst margins in the industry, the worst scale in the industry and spectrum assets that require a denser macro network than the competition, stands a chance as an independent player. It is merger or irrelevancy for Sprint. 

We've already seen them turn the corner on network investments and revenue. For the next several years they would be fine. If investment continues at the current rate and they can get subscriber numbers up, they would absolutely be able to compete. You assume they will continue to fall behind in subscribers. If that happens, sure they wouldn't last for more than a few more years, but that assumption is not a guarantee. 

[Paynefanbro]

2 hours ago, utiz4321 said:

They wont be able to compete. I don't why anyone thinks that a company has: the highest debt load in the industry, falling service revenue, the worst margins in the industry, the worst scale in the industry and spectrum assets that require a denser macro network than the competition, stands a chance as an independent player. It is merger or irrelevancy for Sprint. 

How many times are you gonna write this same comment?

[utiz4321]

1 minute ago, Dkoellerwx said:

We've already seen them turn the corner on network investments revenue. For the next several years they would be fine. If investment continues at the current rate and they can get subscriber numbers up, they would absolutely be able to compete. You assume they will continue to fall behind in subscribers. If that happens, sure they wouldn't last for more than a few more years, but that assumption is not a guarantee. 

Not with the kind investment they will need to make. Top line revenue isnt growing. Cash flow has been improving do to operating cost reduction. You can't cut your way to growth, it has never happened and never will. 

[Dkoellerwx]

1 minute ago, utiz4321 said:

Not with the kind investment they will need to make. Top line revenue isnt growing. Cash flow has been improving do to operating cost reduction. You can't cut your way to growth, it has never happened and never will. 

Still, you are stating guarantees off of assumptions. There are ways that Sprint could remain competitive with the other carriers going forward, it just seems like you refuse to see them. It wouldn't be easy sure, and it's quite possible they wouldn't be able to keep going after several more years, but to say unequivocally that they would fold is not true.

[S4GRU]

And the same was said years ago.  Yet.  Here.  We.  Are.

Still going.  Craig Moffet has been disappointed for years.

Not that it matters.  The merger is very likely to happen.

[utiz4321]

4 hours ago, S4GRU said:

And the same was said years ago.  Yet.  Here.  We.  Are.

Still going.  Craig Moffet has been disappointed for years.

Not that it matters.  The merger is very likely to happen.

Here we are with a company that is limping along and is not likely to make the kinds of investments it needs to make to have a competitive network, just like a year ago. If you add subs at the price of topline revenue growth you are eating your future. 

[dkyeager]

20 hours ago, bigsnake49 said:

Holy Crapola, this is sh@tload of info that the FCC is asking from T-Mobile:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353599A1.pdf

and Sprint:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-353601A1.pdf

I am guessing this is going to take a little while to provide and then review.

I see a small army of consultants for T-Mobile to pull this together.   It could be the bureaucracy fighting back and wanting to kill the merger. Definitely a totally regulated industry.  You would always have to be careful with what you put in writing. 

Many of the Sprint questions are about why the past mergers did not succeed.  I had an interesting discussion with a high ranking industry veteran about the Nextel merger and he put the blame on 9/11 and homeland security forcing greater use of Sprint's 800 MHz for first responder use.