Conan Kudo

small world

And I think that's what will win over customers.

Has it? It doesn't appear to...

Looks like sprint is going to start allowing customers to bring your unlocked iphone from at&t and tmobile.

Only current generation models, if I remember rightly...

Maybe he means your speed should be inversely proportional to amount of data used so far in given month.

That would be problematic and invite disincentive to utilize the service. At what level do you start degradation? What's the rate of degradation? Do you filter by airlink? Band? Cell load? It's incredibly complicated to make that work, and the end result may not be attractive to current and potential subscribers. After all, who wants to use a service that's designed so that you don't use it?

The only reason the full speed bucket thing works is because there's no step-wise degradation. It's all fast until you hit the limit. Not only that, there remains an option to have unlimited full speed data.

While true - I've seen people get their AT&T/T-Mobile branded iPhones to support VoLTE on Verizon (some struggle, others report no issue).

iPhones are special. Apple implemented a proprietary method using its iPhone Carrier Configuration system to dynamically rewrite portions of the baseband software and operating system configuration when SIM cards are switched. No other platform is capable of that, and technically, iPhones are not compliant with the spec because of it. Apple gets away with it, of course, because they are Apple.

fried fries

Cheese bread

nail biter

The recommendation for ntelos area is usually not sprint. I have heard good things about uscc. I normally roam on uscc when i have to roam. Off the interstate I have weak to no signal or roam on uscc. Verizon I think is your only other real option.

AT&T has 850MHz A block, 700MHz C block, along with ~20MHz FDD across multiple blocks of PCS, and ~15MHz FDD across a couple of blocks of AWS-1 in the area. I would imagine that AT&T has a better performing network than nTelos with that much spectrum.

Does anyone know what T-Mobile plans on doing with the Metro PCS small cells deployed throughout the Los Angeles area?  Are they needed anymore?

 

They are mostly omnidirectional antennas on utility poles connected to NextG (now Crown Castle) equipment.

 

What I'm ultimately wondering is, if T-Mobile doesn't want them, can they be used by Sprint for B41?

MetroPCS metrocell and DAS systems are being repurposed as much as possible for T-Mobile. If they are CDMA/LTE small cells, they are going to be replaced with HSPA+/LTE small cells. If they are DAS, then T-Mobile will just reconfigure them for HSPA+/LTE (since DAS is generally airlink agnostic).

They can't be used for Sprint because they are designed for AWS-1. Band 41 is 2496-2690 MHz, while AWS-1 is 1710-1755 / 2110-2155 MHz.

beauty contest

That's awesome. So will the spark cells would be equipped with 8t8r and be able to do carrier aggregation?

While it is technically possible to put all that stuff into small cells, you don't want to because it makes them too big. No small cell I know of supports more than 2T2R and none are capable of carrier aggregation. Small cell sites support less than a seventh of the users/capacity of a macro site for the same reason. And of course, small cells have less than one-twentieth the range of a macro site.

"May I interest you in a leased phone? You'll always have the latest technology that works on our bleeding-edge network, all for a low monthly cost."

You sound like an oily used car salesman when you say that... It's rather creepy...

(The concept of leasing itself is fine, but sometimes people present it in creepy ways...)

Natural Gas

Since it's T-Mobile, obviously it's going to be the best thing evAr!

Firstly, LAA-LTE is not designed to operate on a primary basis. Secondly, it's not designed to operate on macrocell systems. Any approach involving LAA-LTE will be extraordinarily different from how 2.6GHz LTE is deployed for this reason.

AT&T has a history of doing this -- as they did with AMPS/TDMA sites when they phased over to GSM.

That's true, so it's not really a surprise.

Time Out

Okay, tell that to T-Mobile.

 

Many forget that T-Mobile was down in the dumps, losing subs for various network coverage, 3G, iPhone, and LTE shortcomings during the period roughly 2005-2012.  I think many Magentans fail to appreciate this -- because many were still in high school, even middle school, during that dark period.  That is true of you, Neal -- you did not live through much of that time as an adult, and I say that not to pick on you but just as a fact.

 

In its attempted sale to AT&T, T-Mobile almost closed up shop in the US.  I think that sellout also gets a free pass from Magentans, but that is not my point.  No, T-Mobile came out of that experience and increased its network deployment -- even though T-Mobile, at the time, was in a position of weak subscriber growth.  T-Mobile did so in the hopes of "if you build it, they will come."

 

So, does Sprint have to be any different?  Are you going to lecture us that T-Mobile has the right ideas, while Sprint has an inferior network, leadership, or plan?

 

In the end, Sprint losing subs by draining the network of malcontents and data abusers is not necessarily a bad thing.  Maybe those subscriber losses result in a net cut in CAPEX.  But it is also possible that, even with a net cut in CAPEX, those subscriber losses result in a net gain in capacity per capita for those who remain.

 

We all know that T-Mobile is currently a cause célèbre for its data speeds.  But that is largely a product of T-Mobile having a small subscriber base with a lot of spectrum per capita -- and T-Mobile even promotes that latter fact.  So, call a spade a spade.

 

AJ

I am not ignoring that at all. And you know extremely well that I don't. Sprint has not invested substantially on the ESMR and 2.6GHz networks since 2007 up until 2013, and T-Mobile stopped in 2009 for the majority of its AWS network stuff until 2012. Both did quite a bit of work on PCS in the meantime, though.

The issue is that Sprint is not following the "if you build it, they will come" strategy right now (or if they are, they have a poor showing of it). And Sprint has a ridiculous amount of spectrum per capita, so throwing that in my face isn't going to work either. Sprint also has the lowest deployed spectrum per capita anyway, so even with the losses, Sprint's capacity levels are totally out of whack with its actual subscribership.

Like it or not, anyone who pays for service is not a "malcontent" or a "data abuser", provided they are following the TOS (that is, not running warez servers, torrents, and the like off of it). You absolutely do not want people not using the network, because then there's no point to invest. And it's not fair to denigrate those who may have it as their only Internet connection because it may be all they can afford. That all being said, at the end of the day, a capex cut is a capex cut, because the network is largely fixed once deployed. Capacity isn't very fluid in the network because spectral resources generally remain in play once deployed.

We all know that Sprint has not fared well recently in subscriber acquisition/retention.  Honestly, many of us do not care -- we care about the network deployment.  Sprint is not going bankrupt, so we do not tie our egos or personal concerns to Sprint's net adds/losses.

Don't discount the power of growth (or lack thereof) in influencing network decisions. They are tied very closely together, so it's critical to understand the effects of one on the other. This is true with Sprint and T-Mobile, as well as AT&T/Verizon.

Yes, T-Mobile, but it has to use two antenna panels per sector to accomplish that.

 

AJ

Only in Ericsson territory. In Nokia territory, it's a single antenna panel with one RRH and they operate in 4T4R on 700MHz, AWS, and PCS.

Frequency bandwidth isn't the reason against 8T8R for PCS and ESMR. RRH and Antenna sizes/weights would be enormous for 8T8R. As it is, PCS and 4T4R would be twice the size of the current 2T2R systems in most of the country. ESMR 2T2R systems are already pretty huge, because wide frequency (low-band) spectrum requires wider panels. Going up to 4T2R or 4T4R systems would make it too big and heavy for most of Sprint's cell site structures.

Time Lords

Thank you.  Sincerely, I appreciate that.  I don't think that you and I are in serious disagreement on this topic.  If T-Mobile and Sprint cannibalize each other, the only winners will be the Evil Big Two.

And that's why they are targeting the demographic of people coming out on their own from their parents' AT&T/VZW plans. They have a good chance of getting them to become customers for life if they can satisfy them. They are the least-sticky of AT&T/VZW subs because they consume mobile services differently from their parents. AT&T/Verizon plans (and some Sprint ones) aren't really designed to allow the kind of usage of the mobile network that these folks want, and that's what makes T-Mobile (and to a lesser extent, Sprint) attractive.

Okay, Neal, calm down.  I did not intentionally mis-spell anyone's name -- I have a friend who spells his name LeGere, and I spelled the T-Mobile CEO's name the same way out of habit.  There is little question that he (deliberately) cultivates an off-the-wall image.  As to "hating" anyone's demographic, you are distorting an observation into a (non-existent) opinion.  Some of my best friends (including 2 of my daughters and my son-in-law) are in that exact demographic.  I am merely pointing out (entirely without bias) that Mr. Legere himself kept repeating the same mantra over and over.

 

Nor am I in any way denigrating T-Mobile's success.  There is no question that Legere and his team have brought back T-Mobile from the dead, especially since the failed merger attempts and the essential abandonment by the German parent company. (And, yes, I expect that you or someone will attack that statement also.)

 

At no point in my post did I state, or even suggest, that Sprint has had more recent marketing success that T-Mobile.  In fact, I didn't directly mention Sprint at all, except to point out that I think that Sprint would be foolish to closely follow this particular marketing path.

 

You and I have never exchanged views before, although I have watched with interest your discussions with senior members of this forum.  You will never, in my 800 posts here, find that I have gone off on emotional tangents, diatribes, or rants.  My post was intended to be an objective summary of some of Mr. Legere's statements, for those who may not have had the patience of time to watch the whole stream.  I find your accusations and tone in this instance to be somewhat inappropriate, and suggest that you reread my posts objectively.

After going back and reading much of what you've written (yes, I actually did it!), you're right. I was off the wall there. I've been in a bad mood since I've had to verbally defend the strategies of both companies to people a few minutes earlier. And having to read messages from people (who keep messaging me despite the fact I don't want them to) who intentionally mock Masa, Claure, and Legere by doing exactly that all day has driven me crazy.

Yeah, Sprint's in a bad place, and they're trying to fix things. Will they be successful? Objectively speaking, the track record across multiple executive teams really isn't good. I don't know.

And I agree that Deutsche Telekom basically abandoned T-Mobile USA for many years. But now that Legere is at the helm, it doesn't matter anymore. DT's hands-off (but cash-on) approach helps T-Mobile US substantially by allowing the company to be extremely agile in the decision-making process.

<rant>

But I keep being told (even by other folks who basically live on this forum, many of whom ignore that Sprint targets this demographic too) that the demographic of people that T-Mobile and Sprint target are worthless, either explicitly or implicitly. It makes me especially mad because it makes it sound like my dollars are worthless. I am part of that demographic. I make money, and I want to get a good deal, especially since money for me is slightly tighter than older folks, and I'm more willing to try new things than they are.

I like what T-Mobile is doing. To a lesser extent, I like what Sprint's doing too (they need more tweaks to their approach for me to be happy with them). 

Also, I don't want to sound arrogant or anything, but we are the future. Capturing the demographic I'm part of is critical for the long-term health of the company in terms maintaining lifetime subscribers. Aging subs will fall off and they simply won't matter over time. AT&T acquired Cricket for the purpose of targeting that market without diluting the "old people brand" of AT&T. Verizon ignores them entirely, which I think will be their undoing.

</rant>

Beach Boys