Jump to content

SuzieTuesday

S4GRU Premier Sponsor
  • Content Count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

43 Excellent

About SuzieTuesday

  • Rank
    Member Level: Digital

Profile Information

  • Phones/Devices
    GS3, Nexus 5, Nexus 6P, Pixel 2 XL
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Arizona
  • Here for...
    4G Information

Recent Profile Visitors

1,270 profile views
  1. I've only scanned this article and the accompanying 33 page PDF but both seem quite interesting. Internal T-Mobile documents show the company considering a Comcast merger Title should perhaps have stated "was considering" as the report is from 2015...?
  2. Yeah nice try, I provided plenty of info to start with. It's clear to me you didn't read it. I'm not gonna waste any more of my time. So how about answering this question. You made the assertion, "The fact is, the states' "anti-trust" case has no legal merit, because anti-trust is under the exclusive purview of the Department of Justice..." If your assertion is true why isn't the merger proceeding? I mean according to BS49 state AGs have no legal merit and the DOJ has exclusive purview. What are they waiting for? I mean lets merge - BS49 says it's A-OK.
  3. Frankly that question and statement illustrate that you're likely uninformed regarding what state AGs do and have done, not only in the 3 cases referenced but in 100's if not 1000's of others. The info is out there it just requires some time and effort to discover.
  4. This is simply not true. State attorneys general can play an important role in antitrust enforcement on matters of particular concern to local businesses or consumers. States AGs actually have quite a rich history in antitrust. State Attorneys General often investigate antitrust violations – ranging from price fixing to anticompetitive mergers – in conjunction with the federal antitrust enforcement agencies (the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission). But recently the nation’s AGs have more frequently taken the lead, conducting their own investigations and initiating independent enforcement actions. They went after the AT&T / T-Mobile merger in 2011, Verizon / Alltel in 2008, AT&T /Cingular in 2004 for example. More supporting evidence: Over the past year, State Attorneys General have stepped into what they describe as a void of antitrust enforcement at the federal level. AGs have commenced investigations and brought antitrust actions across industry segments, including financial services, healthcare, telecommunications, technology and others. The substance of the actions cover the waterfront of antitrust including price-fixing, merger enforcement and unfair trade practices.
  5. True dat! And in case there was any doubt it's always amusing to browse this list: https://killedbygoogle.com/
  6. I'm starting to think Delrahim doesn't want to be in the unpleasant position of saying yes or no to this deal. To this end he (and the DOJ?) are imposing increasingly onerous concessions in hopes that T-Mobile / Deutsch Telekom eventually opts to walk away.
  7. I believe the reason merger talks are so nonsensical is that the whole thing is very political. "They're obviously trying to place pressure on Delrahim to do the right thing," said Sohn, now a distinguished fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology Law & Policy. "They’ve seen all the same evidence that he’s seen. They know that his decision is political, and not based on the substance at this point. They’re basically calling him into question." This Politico article IMHO reveals at least some of the politics of the merger. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/11/lawsuit-block-t-mobile-sprint-merger-1359851
  8. You kind of have to put on your common sense hat. Hey I've got this nifty solution for easing the transition from 4G to 5G it's called DSS. The only bad news is that all of your existing customers who have 4G phones well... they won't work, they all have to be upgraded to be DSS compatible. Yeah obviously that's a non-starter. The beauty of DSS is that it works with existing LTE phones. Yep absolutely true. Oh believe me he's doing both, adding a bit of FUD and pointing out pitfalls. No question at all that Nokia will implement DSS. "The live demo will use a 4G and 5G capable radio from Ericsson Radio System, Intel’s 5G Mobile Trial Platform and a commercial 4G smartphone." https://www.ericsson.com/en/press-releases/2019/2/ericsson-and-intel-to-show-live-demo-of-4g--5g-dynamic-spectrum-sharing-at-mwc-2019 This point is stressed numerous times in videos of this and several other DSS demos. I don't have time to do the leg work for you, but Google should be able to help. Yes! Again the beauty is that DSS allows mobile operators to use existing spectrum for both 4G and 5G at the same time. A much better solution than having to try to decide how to divide spectrum between 4G and 5G as was required in most every other transition from xG to (x+1)G. Sorry for giving DSS a life of it's own in this thread, I yield my time to Sprint Tmobile merger Disc. 😀
  9. Thanks. First thing to note is that Steve Scarlett works for Nokia. Ericsson has been the market leader re: DSS. So I'm not surprised he's spreading a bit of FUD. I've read that paragraph several times and am still not sure what he's trying to say. "...depends upon the availability of 5G handsets that have the spectrum sharing capability..." No surprise. "...because existing LTE handsets won’t be able to take advantage of the network upgrade..." What network upgrade, 5G, of course not. Any way there's more to this story, I don't have time search at the moment but the DSS demo at MWC 2019 was done with a commercial off the shelf 4g smartphone. I mean that's the whole point.
  10. Do you have a link/reference to verify this statement? From what I recall a core requirement of 5GNR was interoperability with legacy LTE UE.
  11. Without being a fly on the wall where lobbying is going on it's hard to know for sure. But yeah no way it's gonna be available tomorrow. There does seem to be some support for allowing C-band satellite operators to bypass the FCC/auction process and sell spectrum directly to mobile operators. This would likely be the most expedient route, but on the surface seems chaotic to me.
  12. Presumably refarming is a thing of the past due to Dynamic Spectrum Sharing. "This technology essentially will allow 4G and 5G users to take turns using the exact same chunk of spectrum. Initially, the line of 4G users will be much longer, so they'll take most of the turns. But as the number of 5G users grows, they'll take an increasing number of turns using a given chunk of spectrum."
  13. Yep certainly neither is going to happen tomorrow, and yeah valuable spectrum is expensive. However these are just details that will get hammered out. Well yeah CBRS is a different animal, and although there is an existing structure for 3 levels of access, Incumbents, PALS, and GAA there is certainly lobbying going on to make PALS more favorable for LTE/5G usage. However "a ton of chunks" obviously just my opinion but highly doubt it. Again there is NO question regarding the value of Sprint's B41 holdings. While global roaming is a convenience I don't see it as the main advantage of CBRS. Today global roaming is enabled by vendors ability to shoe horn many bands into a phone. I suspect this will happen for 5G too. Finally lets not forget the mid-band spectrum Dish is essentially sitting on. This expires in roughly 10 months, 11 days...😀
  14. The intent of my post was simply to point out the "two voices" of N Ray. For Verizon mmWave is bad, for TMUS it's good. Not sure how often it needs to be repeated until people are no longer surprised by the characteristics of mmW spectrum. Certainly Sprints 2.5 GHz spectrum is enviable at the moment. C-Band and/or CBRS if and when available will certainly tend to reduce or even eliminate Sprints advantage.
×
×
  • Create New...