Jump to content

Mr.Nuke

S4GRU Staff
  • Content count

    3,281
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Mr.Nuke last won the day on June 3

Mr.Nuke had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,126 Wireless Expert

About Mr.Nuke

  • Rank
    S4GRU Moderator

Profile Information

  • Phones/Devices
    Pixel 2 XL
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Omaha
  • Here for...
    4G Information

Recent Profile Visitors

18,762 profile views
  1. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    Lets be clear the guidance is $5 to $6 billion per year over the next 3 years. That would breakdown to $1.25 billion to $1.5 billion per quarter, but I wouldn't be looking at it at that micro of a level. The fact that $1.1 is close enough to $1.2 though right now tells us guidance is holding fairly well right now. We'll revaluate that next quarter when we're half way through the year. No this is Sprint following its CapEx plans and assuming it may have to continue operating on its own if a merger fails to go through. The merger documents and terms are public. This was not part of it. Given new T-Mobile would be decommissioning 35,000 sites with most of them predominately being Sprint sites, it would actually be the exact opposite. If you were T-Mobile management in an ideal world you could tell Sprint where to dictate their $5 to $6 billion in spending i.e. keep sites. If not you'd probably prefer them not to be spending a bunch of money on equipment that you at the very least are going to end up having to pay to move and at the most that your going to throw away. You'd rather have Sprint target that $5 to $6 billion on debt reduction or ideally have it sitting there in cash for when you take over and can spend it right away as you see fit. Or we could all just realize the context of the comments and the FCC document they were made in. Sprint had no problem borrowing the $5 to $6 billion for this year. As long as lenders are willing to continue to lend them money at decent terms, as a company they're fine. Near term they're in ok shape. Longer term that becomes a bit more problematic.
  2. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    They did so last quarter??? And we've seen ample anecdotal evidence that they're spending in user tracked markets here.
  3. No I'm talking about a very specific part of a specific state, which neither carrier currently natively serves. Please take a second and go back and read the post, because the last words you left off are very important. " If the merger goes through, that will switch over to T-Mobile's roaming deal with Viaero." Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with Sprint and T-Mobile's separate roaming deal, which almost certainly covers only T-Mobile native coverage.
  4. Pretty much the entire Nebraska panhandle is verizon roaming. If the merger goes through, that will switch over to T-Mobile's roaming deal with Viaero.
  5. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    I haven't ready his testimony and probably won't have a chance to until late tonight or tomorrow, but much like the FCC document, why is this a surprise? Part of the sell job to the regulators and anyone like congress that could potentially step in the way of this is that Sprint (and T-Mobile makes the same argument themselves in their portion of the FCC filing as well) are in precarious position going forward with significant competitive disadvantages to AT&T and Verizon. Selling this, and specifically selling this angle is why Claure is no longer the CEO and why Combes and the rest of the executive team is on a cross country roadshow telling employees the exact opposite of what Claure is telling the regulators. It is all part of the dance.
  6. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    Quite the premise for an article based on a document that is doing everything it can to sell the FCC idea on the notion that the two companies need to merge to survive...
  7. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    It would be a lot more juicy without the redactions. Great.
  8. Presumably this marks the departure of the free year BYOD plan as there isn't a compelling reason to have both.
  9. Why? They're significantly cheaper than deploying 8T8Rs. So if you have say $10 million to spend in an area in a given year what gets you more bang for your buck 550 8T8Rs or 1650 mini-macro sites?
  10. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    Yeah I used that presentation and the analyst call as the source for the front page article here.
  11. Mr.Nuke

    Sprint Tmobile merger Disc.

    Still vague on the details, but it will be curious to see how they go at this assuming the merger is approved. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-hopes-for-sprint-merger-approval-as-soon-as-next-month
  12. Mr.Nuke

    Official Magic Box discussion thread

    I would try one more time leaving it say overnight in what you think is the optimal position.
  13. Mr.Nuke

    Official Magic Box discussion thread

    How long were you letting this process play out?
  14. I did on that too in the same post 😀 Yeah with merger approval prospects 50/50 at best each company needs to continue operating as if the merger isn't going to go through to an extent. An analyst tried to address the following on the call, but Marcelo didn't really give a great answer and it didn't come up on T-Mobile's earnings call at all... The question to ask Neville Ray or John Legere and even to an extent Marcelo, Combes, and Saw is ok you guys have indentified approximately 35,000 sites between the two networks that would be decommissioned under a merger, how solid is that estimate? Have you actually started to go through and identify specific sites or are we just talking general estimates right now? Because if they've reached the specific site stage (and it is possible that they have especially on T-Mobile's side as part of their due diligence) does Sprint have T-Mobile's list? With T-Mobile spending $4.9 to $5.3 billion and Sprint spending $5 to $6 billion this year, ideally (again especially of you are T-Mobile) you'd find a way to have that money spent intelligently.
×