Mr.Nuke

Or the bandwagon fallacy which goes under various alternatives including: ad populum (appeal to the people), appeal to popularity, argument by consensus.

The only real positive in that report is Rootmetrics likely somehow exposed a huge 8T8R configuration oversight by Ala-Lu, Ericsson, and Sprint somehow missed. It apparently got fixed and if it was more systematic beyond Las Vegas it hopefully is fixed or being fixed as well. That is about the only good take away from that report. Sprint had to have known the window that Root was likely going to be testing, and the fact that they were able to effectively double their speeds with a retest points to a huge screw up.

Already posted.

Buy an android device.

It isn't a matter of being defensive per se. This is an auction unlike any other thus far in that they're auctioning off spectrum that in many cases presently has an owner. Incumbent tv stations need to be incentivized to participate. If there is a lack of interest from the wireless industry, the tv stations have little incentive to sell. Again, see above. This isn't the 700 auction. This is predicated on 1) incumbent tv broadcasters in the 600 MHz range participating and 2) reserves being met. Neither point has any prevalence to the 700 auction. The problem is this whole auction was prepared under the assumption that there would be multiple competitive bidders. If the perception is that T-Mobile is the only big boy showing up to bid there is no incentive for the existing rights holders to participate and little incentive for the FCC to go forward with it right now. This was setup to create a competitive bidding situation among the big 4 in order to raise funds for the government and payoff the tv stations to vacate the spectrum. If T-Mo is the only bidder those goals are in serious jeopardy. This isn't a traditional auction though. Broadcasters could easily postpone or cancel the auction by signaling to the FCC they aren't willing to participate in a farce of an auction (which very likely happens if it is only T-Mobile at the table). And to your last paragraph there, going back to Robert's post this afternoon, as of right now based on the comments of the other 3 carriers it is potentially setting up to be only T-Mobile at the auction for all practical purposes.

This entire auction was predicated on television broadcasters vacating the spectrum in exchange for a portion of the proceeds aka the reverse auction. If it is only T-Mobile and a couple of rural carriers bidding, the tv broadcasters have very little incentive to participate in the process. So no, I don't think the auction proceeding is a forgone conclusion. The other factor on the back-end is that If the other big 3 sit out it is questionable that the forward auction meets the price per Mhz-POP criteria as well.

You are making a huge assumption that it will.

FWIW I didn't have to sign for a Note 5 from Sprint today.

Yes and no, mainly no. You are essentially putting a $400 down payment in by trading in the 6.

The price point makes it a difficult candidate. A device starting at $300 to 500 or even the 6s entails us taking on substantially less risk than an iPad Pro.

I'd still tweet Marcelo or email Marci (Marci@Sprint.com), explain the situation and see what happens.

The 9/29 event is confirmed. http://www.androidcentral.com/google-confirms-next-event-september-29

Where on this site was that said? What was actually said is it came out during the Shentel nTelos deal that there is a clause in Sprint's affiliate deal with Shentel that allows Sprint to purchase Shentel's wireless business if the deal isn't renewed. We do not know if Sprint has similar language in their Swiftel contract and or how Swiftel being owned by a public utility might affect that.

As of Friday 3% or approximately 119.1 million shares or $602.6 million.

MCI has free wifi.

Eh, we gladly gave you Enron* and Ken Lay. #scoreboard. *and then Buffett bought back the only legitimate part of the company that was still earning money on the cheap after the collapse.

As well as several others that are in the Fortune 700s that most cities would kill for like TD Ameritrade, Valmont (center pivot irrigation), West (telecommunications), Tenaska and Green Plains (both agri-energy companies). Two of the top 25 largest architectural firms in the country (Leo A. Daily and HDR), Gallup (polling), Omaha Steaks etc. It does lead to some interesting scenes...

Then Fabien showed up...

Yeah. It shows what he is trying to setup with the iPhone plans As well as hinting at a very good Root Metrics report for somewhere (probably Chicago) next week.

We have nothing against the WSJ. The only issue with their content is that it is behind a paywall (can be solved by the google workaround). In a case like this where there really isn't any original reporting going on; it would have probably been better to link to a Bloomberg or Reuters type article that tells the same thing in the open. The problem yesterday was the posting of two graphics from a WSJ article. That is a copyright issue and it would be an issue with any publication, arguably more so when it is behind a paywall.

Two issues 1) I'm not sure what the licensing agreement is for Virgin, there could be financial implications there and 2) I don't know that the Virgin brands have a lot of value in the US. Too close to US Cellular Given the separate operating nature of each company, there really isn't any synergistic benefit of having them named the same thing. Neither way makes sense. First, Softbank has no reason to change their name in Japan. None. Things are going well over there and they've built up brand equity. And as others have pointed out naming a phone company "bank" in the United States or any English speaking country doesn't make sense from a branding stand point. Secondly, post 2008 banks dominate lists of the most hated companies in America. And then as others have pointed out as well "soft" while not necessarily having a negative connotation per se, can symbolize weakness. It doesn't make sense either.

The whole Deutsche Telekom suddenly giving them money to buy another carrier when they haven't seemingly offered a lot of support/had been actively shopping T-Mobile seems sketchy too.

For the PCS "C" block in Omaha