Mr.Nuke

Clearwire/Sprint didn't bid or win spectrum everywhere. Most of these places they don't have a lot of spectrum happen to be more rural areas where Sprint either doesn't serve or wouldn't deploy Band 41 even if they do. The Quad Cities is one of the rare cases of a native Sprint market where they don't have any significant BRS/EBS holdings. Sprint only has 6 MHz of BRS/EBS in the Quad Cities. SpeedConnect has the rest, recently launching an LTE ISP network there.

No it doesn't (assuming you are talking about Las Vegas). But yes, as soon as the San Bernardino County issue is resolved sites will start going live assuming equipment has been installed, and if it hasn't, installing it will be a high priority.

They did leave us the lovely Nebraska loop though.

Like AJ said there is a maximum attainable speed on Band 25 and 26 of 37.5 Mbps per sector. . I think the better way to look at it is a second carrier would effectively double capacity on each site. In general though speeds would theoretically "double" as instead of everyone on a single carrier on a given sector you would have that same number divided in half between two carriers. It depends where we are talking too. In Nebraska and Iowa in a lot of places outside of cities particularly along interstates and highways many sites are only two sectors. In the Quad Cities though nearly all of the sites are 3 sector sites. It seems probable. Sprint's coverage should drop quite a bit South of I-280.

Just to revisit this it is hard to say. Like bmoses said 3 weeks ago when you initially posted, outside of a few towers LTE work substantially completed in the Quad Cities. It has also recently come to our attention that East Iowa by-and-large is one of the few native Sprint areas where they don't hold signficant EBS/BRS spectrum for Band 41 LTE. The internet service provider SpeedConnect has it. The bright side is the Quad Cities do have enough PCS spectrum for a second carrier. If they chose to deploy a second carrier that would help with congestion.

You live in a city where they've probably "deploy"ed their 2.5 "fully" more than anywhere else in the country...

You may want to flip that around, and this is one of the things some on this site have been trying to tell you. Root Metrics methodology may not be perfect, but them conducting 103,399 individual tests in Chicago and driving 4,343 miles gives me a heck of a lot better picture of the market on the big 4 carriers than your individual observations.

Apparently not... Or maybe i'm just too naive to believe someone would pick this report of all reports to complain about Sprint being last in speed hence why I gave you an out in asking if you were talking about Austin or overall. Sprint's median download increased 27% in the approximately half year between root's Austin tests. I'd consider that speeding up. Again, yes per Rootmetric's own methodology Sprint and Verizon were tied for 3rd or last place. If you are going to argue that Sprint is last due to being .21 Mbps slower on median download have it it. I find that argument a bit ridiculous given that root itself says the difference is negligible. Like I said above the difference between first and last in this market on a 10 mb file is approximately a second, a 100 mb file is only 9 seconds. Sprint has closed the gap considerably in Austin (so much so that root metrics has tied them for first overall in the market). That is something to be celebrated.

In Austin or overall? If we are talking this specific root metrics report then yes Sprint is still last in speed (in a two way tie for 3rd) but it isn't as if they are significantly lagging. They're within two tenths of a Mbps of Verizon down (beating them slightly on upload) and within 1.5 Mbps of AT&T the market leader. That 1.49 Mbps means an AT&T user would download a a 10 mb file a second earlier (6 seconds instead of 7 on Sprint). The horror!

That information, if it exists would be at the premier sponsorship level of this site.

The article was already posted last night and is being discussed here.

But you can be of the former mindset; that unlimited data is being abused by a certain portion of the consumer base, potentially negatively impacting the remaining majority and still not believe this:

From the paragraph immediately following the 1 or 2 comment Yeah I'd say it went alright...

Something I don't think anyone is arguing???

Except Sprint doesn't have negative brand equity Maximus. Their Q score was neutral as of last fall, which I'd expect has probably improved slightly since then. Intermediate to long term they certainly need to get better in this area.. Compared to the other 4 carriers they're certainly behind here here, but I expect this to continue improving as a lagging indicator following continued network improvements.

Your post was moved to this thread as it was deemed it didn't warrant its own topic. Why did it end up here? The Northern Georgia sites within the Atlanta market near the North Carolina border are the closes Sprint sites to Brasstown.

Back in the day when they were actually offering this plan more widespread it was known as the Sprint Employee Referral Offer. That is part of the reason so many have or had it. All you needed was a valid employee email address. The other big part was that Russ McGuire and Sprint put out his email and pin basically allowing anyone to sign up for the plan for a certain amount of time. The plan hasn't been publicly offered in that form since 2008. They are still offering it to separating employees under the new Separating Employees name that you noted. Either way though, I think we are somewhat hesitant to allow a discussion on how to get on an 8 year-old plan.

I doubt it, and their test drive page doesn't mention anything about it.They have no need to run a credit check given they have a hold on your credit card for the amount of the device. You have to return the device to a t-mobile store where you'd theoretically sign up for service. At that point they'd do a credit check. Having holds wouldn't raise red flags. As AJ mentioned many gas stations put a temporary hold on a credit card, most hotels will, same with rental car companies, etc.

No and it won't be happening. As S4GRU already said it has been done before and is off-topic for a Sprint centered site. Plus anything you would find is anecdotal at best to your personal situation at your own very specific location. A website like rootmetrics, all though far from flaw free, can and does a much better job of evaluating the major 4 carriers' networks in most mid to major US cities than any individual could come close to doing.

So how do you go from that to Son isn't willing to pump money into Sprint if they need it? That is still a huge logical leap with nothing to support it in your underlined portion.

Yeah shutting down an outpost office in California clearly means Masa is throwing in the towel...

What is the point of posting this when there is already a discussion of Sprint's quarterly earnings (or lack thereof) and Moffett's analysis in another thread? I think I know the answer to the question (rhymes with polling), but I'll sit back and wait.

The way his post is worded, he is talking about post-paid phone customers. The net adds includes tablets pumping things up (Sprint isn't the only carrier doing this). The bullet immediately below is Postpaid phone losses of 201,000 improved sequentially for the fourth consecutive quarter and improved by nearly 500,000 year-over-yearStill signs of things potentially turning around...

SFO, LAS, and SJC all have free wifi. I'm not sure what your point here is.

Heck of an improvement from 1H 2014 http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/las-vegas-nv/2014/1H The McCarron DAS still needs some attention. http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/las-airport/2015/1H