GinaDee

Well at least nobody can say you aren't arrogant old man. T-Mobile and the US industry would be better suited if they tied themselves to DISH. I'm almost positive we have not heard the last from Dish. T-Mobile should run from clutches of Sprint at least until they get their stocks up high enough. You can't demonize AT&T for trying to purchase T-Mobile then turn a blind eye to this. Sprint paraded for government pity and welfare citing the former would lessen competition with a competitor gone. Suddenly their tune changes. Let's see this for what it is: T-Mobile is kicking @zz right now and Sprint is flopping around like a fish out of water. Sprint needs nothing more than to kill a competitor.

I somewhat agree with #4. But isn't Sprint currently investing in nationwide 800 MHz CDMA? I disagree with #5. Legere is not only the best thing that's ever happened to T-Mobile but the best thing that has happened to this industry. Regardless of how weird or UN-CEO like he might appear compared to the stuffy suits he's made a huge impact and the other 3 have responded with me-too rate plans and offerings.

Most people are against everything that isn't self serving. Not saying AJ is self - serving but he makes no quim about how much he hates the incumbents and would prefer Sprint to dominate.

Depends how much you want to pay hot stuff!

Might be your location. AT&T may not be investing the dollars in your state like they do in places like CA or New York. The best voice quality I've ever experienced on a mobile phone when using T-Mobile's AMR WB network. They only advertise HD voice when calling other T-Mobile users but in my local tests it sounds good even when calling other mobile's or landlines.

Even old dogs can be taught new tricks. Glad I can share.

Need to step out of the bubble AJ and try AT&T for yourself. It's adaptive multi rate... dynamic based on network load. The days of AT&T forcing and locking down phones to HR 100% of t the time are over. The bit rate lowers when absolutely needed but it no longer camps out there full time.

AT&T is using a FR voice codec in most markets. Can you screenshot the codec you use when making an outbound call? In my experience AT&T to AT&T calls sound great. AT&T to CDMA customers don't sound so great.

Remember a lot of polls measure perception. Perception doesn't always equal reality but it does affect what consumers purchase with their wallets. As someone who works in marketing I can tell you that unless you market with a message that resonates to the customer it doesn't matter. Consumers are less forgiving and even less likely to return to a carrier who left a sour taste in their mouths. And even if they do come back they are still skeptical and will utilize the 14 or 30 day return window really quick if they start noticing the issues that caused them to leave the first time around. I know people with terrible service on one of the two largest carriers but they won't leave because they think everyone else sucks. There is another segment of industry watchers who are skeptical of Sprint because of the promises of yesteryear that never came to fruition. Sure we can argue "but it was different back then.... Softbank was not in the picture," but again you are going to have a hard time convincing people who don't trust you. Then you have the various delays of LTE and backhaul deployment (not entirely Sprint's fault) but you can't blame people for rolling their eyes at this either). Sprint will get there if their management is serious. They will have more delays and setbacks but that's part of the game. Look at AT&T. All the money in the world but for the longest time their network has had to take a backseat to Verizon. Money isn't everything and promises of grander will only attract the fanboys. If T-Mobile keeps kicking Sprint's butt in LTE deployment and net adds then there is nothing more to do but sit back and keep arguing. Investors want to see Sprint win back marketshare or they will remain cynical.

It's not AT&T or Verizon's fault that people love or hate Sprint. Sprint has its own reputation that is earned and will need to earn it it wants to grab marketshare.

Do you have proof that Verizon only installs LTE on 30-40% of their cell sites? I'm not sure how that correlates to not getting a good signal inside a building?

I'm sure certain areas will benefit from lower band spectrum. Low band spectrum however doesn't always equal great reception or fast internet speeds even if rural coverage is enhanced. I've been in plenty of buildings and underground garages where Verizon is utilizing cellular spectrum and the service is poor to non existent.

Reading some of the comments here I feel that many do not want to hear negative news about Sprint. Truth is that the negative news is needed so consumers can understand how their potential purchase will work for them "now," not 2 years into the future. Geeks obsess with the technical specs and theoretical download speeds. Consumers shouldn't have to be Sprint network experts and put up with sub par network performance laced with promises of a better tomorrow. There are areas today and there will be areas tomorrow for Sprint that just suck or are extremely good. It may have nothing to do with Network Vision coming or going. Consumers deserve to know this and shouldn't be led to believe that poor service at their house will be magically cured once NV is done in 2015.

AT&T will have claim to over 300 million POPS of LTE by next year. Soon there should be a great blue map to match that great red map. Truth be told though: That red map is a bit too red for so many extremely remote areas and unless people are there to validate the accuracy of these maps there is just no way to tell for sure. I'm pretty sure some of these areas have little to no backhaul to support anything too fast.

Thanks for moving on Milan. I know you couldn't wait to use a thread about AT&T VoLTE to promote the Verizon network.

Your comical. "Desperately needs?" When AT&T does it first and better they are desperate. Right! I'm sure by your own analysis Verizon desperately needed LTE because their 3G network sucks right? When AT&T goes and bids on 600 MHz spectrum please don't be the first in line to shout they already have too much spectrum and don't need it

Nice to hear. Looks like AT&T (and Verizon) will be pioneers of Carrier Aggregation too. I remember reading on here where people were trying to paint AT&T as a carrier of limited spectrum and no path for LTE-A. Looks like this is not the case. Just because it ain't greenfiled doesn't mean it can't be done. AT&T has plenty of PCS and Cellular spectrum to re-purpose for their Aggregation strategy. In the next 2 years I'm interested to see how they plan to use WCS. Although AT&T plans to cover over 300 million with LTE by mid next year with their initial LTE phase from all accounts VoLTE can fall back seamlessly onto their HSPA network for calls outside of LTE's reach. This is a good strategy.

I'm not for more government intervention here. AT&T is trying to compete where they can as any American business in their shoes would. It's an American company vs a Japanese company we're dealing with now. Softbank can hold their own with their massive spectrum holdings.

Good for AT&T. I was thinking for a moment they were interested in buying US Cellular???

Verizon Wireless is composed of and later did buy legacy networks and gear but had to invest heavily in them to modernize them and make them work. Softbank will have to do the same with Sprint. OTOH you have companies like DT who bought a nationwide GSM 2G network called Voicestream and decided to only upgrade metro areas with modern technology while allowing their legacy 2G network to rot in rural markets.

Airtouch Cellular did suck at first but then again all of them did. I had Airtouch back when most of the coverage was analog out here in SoCal and digital reception was hit or miss. Certain features only worked while in Digital mode and only when not roaming out of your home network coverage area. Calls were full of static and wind noise. Verizon Wireless has come a long way since 2001. A long way. Now they finally become an fully integrated American company.

Reality Check: As long as Sprint enthusiasts have to pack up and drive hundreds of miles on a road trip to find an active 2.5 GHz site broadcasting LTE I can assure you that they are no credible threat to Verizon and I'm no fan of Verizon. T-Mobile enthusiasts to some degree do the same thing.... find an intersection where they get an incredible download speed on some mobile speed-test app then they post it on the internet and claim T-Mobile has the fastest network in their area. What they fail to tell you is that walking 30ft in any direction their phone falls back to GPRS or No Service. Sprint is getting better but to some extent I don't give them a free pass for finally doing what they should have done years ago. Adding fiber backhaul and new remote radio heads at the 11th hour is not revolutionary although to some it appears to be. It's something they have to do in order to catch up then they have to worry about competing which will require additional CAPEX. A Japanese CEO who was successful in Japan does not guarantee a successful network strategy in the good ol' US of A. Everything stated is forward thinking and invalid until properly executed. Let's give Verizon Wireless a little credit here. They build networks like no other and short term capacity issues are a barometer of their own success. They are pioneers of US LTE deployments and have the broadest LTE coverage... at least until AT&T catches up with them early next year.

Lots of speculation on this thread. We forget the political winds of change that can be a friend or foe to the incumbents. Right now a democratic DOJ helps Sprint. If that were to change who knows? Sprint can never be as successful as Verizon or AT&T as long as T-Mobile's around. The stronger T-Mobile gets the harder it will be from Sprint. They are getting nipped from both sides. T-Mobile will keep pushing the barrier on price forcing Sprint to respond and lower its margins. Eventually they will have to decide if buying out T-Mobile will give them the scale to compete with the big boys. Maybe then the Sprint fan boys will finally get why the incumbents buy out smaller carriers to kill competition. They are like annoying flies that keep trying to land on your dinner plate until you swat 'em. Just being real here.

I'm glad AT&T is doing this as opposed to just neglecting markets where they lack enough 700 MHz spectrum. I'd like to see them use PCS spectrum as well. I'm really interested long term if they can make a success story out of carrier aggregation. According to this article AT&T is serious about shutting down their 2G network so they should have more spectrum to use: http://cd2migration.att.com

I think they will be a great #3 option for years to come although T-Mobile will best them in terms of LTE deployment for at least the next 6 months to a year. Everyone knows I am no fan of T-Mobile but I can't believe Sprint is allowing them to run neck and neck and in some cases even best them in LTE deployments and performance. Which Sprint executive was asleep behind the wheel when T-Moble was getting fiber ethernet to their cell sites?