greencat

They are similar. You need to say they are similar. Don't do it, and your post will be removed.

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

I'm just supposed to take your word? LOL, That's not shady at all.

And yet it's as complete as AT&T's LTE 700 network and Tmo's LTE AWS network, nationwide.

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

You can 80% of $10 or 80% of $10 million. They're both 80%. However, they're not even close to equal. Which would you take?

Lou is that you? 

Grow up.

Every time you reference that Sprint is incomplete with their initial LTE deployment, you must reference that Tmo and AT&T also have not completed their initial LTE deployment by pretty similar margins.  If you fail to do so, moderators will remove your post.

You'll need to provide me with their data if I'm going to reference them. I have the data on Sprint's.

It's as complete as AT&T's LTE 700 network and Tmo's LTE AWS network, nationwide.  You're done harping about this here.  From now on every time you reference Sprint not being done with LTE 1900 deployment, you must also add the caveat that AT&T and Tmo have completed the same amount of initial LTE deployment, or your post will be removed.  Moderators take note.

Are we talking about those companies or Sprint?

Once again, you're saying completion but you're referring to things that will never be complete. As long as Sprint is still investing heavily into it's network with small cells, new sites, increasing backhaul, etc., nothing will ever be complete. No matter how many times you say it, no carrier is anywhere close to your definition of complete.

So you're telling me LTE 1900, the base LTE service of the entire network will never be complete to the level that they said it would be 4 years ago?

If I said the sky was blue would you tell me it was actually some shade of azure and it never will actually be blue because of how it filters through earth's atmosphere?

Everyone keeps tossing around the word complete but what constitutes "complete". Sprint has ta lot of spectrum to deploy, is constantly deploying new sites and is even beginning small cells (at least Shentel is). As far as I'm concerned, it'll never be complete. Just as Verizon's network isn't complete and they have been working on LTE since 2010/2011.

C'mon don't be silly. All sites need to have new equipment (they're within 5% so that's close) and back haul on them . Getting LTE 1900 running on all sites that are going to get it would be a completion. Finishing B26 would be a completion. These are the basics. You complete phases. And it is a fact they haven't completed what they said they're going to do.

Verizon's network might not be "complete," but how much 700 mhz do they have left to deploy? How much 1900?

I know this has been discussed previously, but I'm okay if Sprint decides to raise their unlimited plans. I think as long as people get good quality service and can use their phone how they like, they should pay more.

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprints-claure-unlimited-prices-might-go-later-year-network-getting-better/2015-06-19

We're already paying too much. Are they bringing on enough customers at the current price point? It doesn't appear so. So how are they going to bring on more at a higher price point? This might be shrewd sales-talk to prod the fence sitters. If it is then very well played by Claure.

I suppose there is always the chance prices could increase, but also consider the overall trend across the entire wireless environment is for costs to go down.

If you look at most of the world, Sprint's network would measure very well at this point. The problem seems to be that the other networks are even better here. Lots of people miss the global perspective.

 

Sprint has already significantly increased their cell count and we're in 1H 2015. It's good to see positive momentum for a change.

 

That said, there's still a long way to go.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can't compare it to the rest of the world. That's like saying housing in the US is going to measure very well compared to Africa. No crap. If you compare the Sprint service to the UK or Europe or Korea or Japan you're probably going to be pretty disappointed.

A site without LTE does not mean that it hasn't been upgraded. There are plenty of sites with NV equipment that don't have LTE due to Sprint's poor handling of backhaul orders.

 

Being at lower completion in a single market does not make it difficult to be at <5% completion nationwide. Sprint has many markets with 99-100% completed physical upgrades.

THANK YOU!!!

If you wanna be technical, no carrier has 100% site upgrade completion.  That's just the way things are right now.

 

Where are you pulling this 15-20% figure from? It's not that high, it's more like 5% or less.  

I think WiWavelength said there are "over 32,000 sites with LTE on them" (paraphrased) just the other week. Sprint had approx 38,000 sites, so roughly, not counting for new sites 15-20% don't have it, still. Believe me, I want them to have it done. It'd make me happy for it to be 5%. But when they're below 90% in major markets like LA and NY and then also behind in others mathematically it gets pretty difficult to only have 5% of sites not done.

Side note: "Substantially complete" is one of the stupidest things ever said. It was stupid last year and it makes you guys look silly to parrot it over and over again after 1000's more sites have been completed since it was 1st said by Sprint. Unless those were perhaps unsubstantial sites? LOL.

NV1.0 is substantially complete.  Only a few thousand sites nationwide remain untouched by upgrades, and some of those are under extenuating circumstances or in areas where Sprint has not deemed it a priority.  The network rip and replace had a huge impact on Sprint's service quality, and for all intents and purposes, it is finished.  The massive service interruptions are over, and Sprint now has the modern network platform they need to continue upgrading and improving.

So I'm right. You just want to add a footnote because why? To not make it seem as bad as it is/was? We know there has been an improvement. There would have to be, it couldn't get much worse. As far as areas where Sprint has not deemed it a priority, I highly doubt they decided 15-20% of their network is not a priority. Maybe they'll fix those sites when they add in the 9,000 towers? You gonna hold your breath to wait and see?

That is a grossly inaccurate assessment of what Sprint accomished with NV1. Sprints call quality has improved to match Verizon in many markets, HD voice was launched, texting performance is significantly better, LTE launched and covered 225m or more POPs. Of course their competitors worked on their networks too, that is a dumb argument. Sprint now has a brand new network that has uniform gear, and will be easier to maintain moving forward...something none of their competitors can claim.

I don't think you have a firm grasp of what "grossly inaccurate" means. Yes Sprint's call quality improved, but here we are 3-4 years later and it still isn't finished. Did it take too long and was it over budget? Yep. Let us please hope that fiasco isn't repeated in the future, but I don't think any of us will be holding our breath.

Offering tethering is not an industry trend, it's a desperate move by John 'The Candy Man' Legere. Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, they are all businesses. They don't make money by not charging people. Fair tethering prices, sure, but free tethering is forgoing profits they would otherwise earn on something that isn't typically a deal breaker for customers. It would be throwing money away. I hope Sprint doesn't offer free tethering, B25 and B26 are already insanely congested, and profits are good.

 

Legere gives and gives and what happens when you feed the animals? They keep coming back begging for more. Claure is a brilliant CEO, he wouldn't be foolish enough to give Sprint profits away to win some ego-stroking contest Legere is having with himself. 

You'd be a good Wireless Industry corporate drone. Just because it isn't a deal breaker doesn't mean it couldn't be a nice differentiator, possibly something that could drive business to Sprint.

Btw, Claure can't give away Sprint profits if they don't have any... And right now Sprint would be a lot better off getting more $60+/month customers than trying to squeeze an extra $20 from their existing base. There are 2 things that are going to make Sprint look good to customers: More customers and a better network.

If they merge kiss competition in the wireless industry goodbye.

Two can play this game...

 

By your benefit rationale, what does serving Sylacauga, AL at all do for Sprint?  If so few people use Sprint that you still get 15 Mbps on a single band 25 carrier after two years, then Sprint is losing money serving your town.  Subscriber fees are not covering infrastructure costs, site leases, and electric bills -- not to mention, other less tangible, per capita debits.

 

Forget band 41 in Sylacauga.  Sprint should cancel its site leases, then take down its infrastructure and move it somewhere that benefits Sprint.

 

See what I mean?

 

AJ

Sprint benefits from the sum of its parts. Less parts, less benefit for Sprint.

Their customer service could absolutely be fixed, it's a complete joke. Same for TWC though I'd say they're less of a bag of hurt than Comcast.

That's like asking which you like better: dog crap or cat crap?

Could you imagine Comcast trying to do mobile phone customer service? Maybe churn would drop because they wouldn't let anyone disconnect? LOL

In the Kansas market, you are just about the only one here at S4GRU who is complaining.  Basically, everyone else speaks highly of what Network Vision has done for Sprint service in the area.

 

Anyway, your posts are now bordering on rants, which are not allowed at S4GRU.  So, please watch your posting behavior.  Or simply stop posting.

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/1197-s4gru-posting-guidelines-aka-the-rulez/

 

AJ

What borders a rant?

I have said myself that when you're near a tower it works fine, does that mean we can't acknowledge that they currently have significant holes in the coverage that the 600mhz service would help to plug? Does it also mean that we can't talk about the 1000's of sites that don't have lte yet (which you dodged)?

Will Sprint be getting this?

ATT just announced the Galaxy S6 Active which is close relation to the sport... One huge difference between the regular s6 and the Active is the battery size. The active has a much larger 3500 mah battery compared to the S6 2550 mah.

You know, you are just about the only one who rails on coverage holes in Wichita and Kansas City.  Most everyone else is pretty satisfied with coverage now in the Kansas market.  Maybe the issue is with you and your expectations, not with the network.

 

Additionally, you felt it necessary to respond to a two and a half month old post only now.  That seems like dredging up a post just so that you can say something negative.

 

Next, I do not know where you get the idea that Sprint might not even be finished with band 25 deployment by the time that 600 MHz can be used.  You are not a sponsor, so you are not privy to timetables or completed sites.  But Sprint is mostly finished with band 25 deployment.  Some sites linger, but over 33,000 have band 25.

 

Finally, even if the 600 MHz auction happens next year and comes off without a hitch, it will take years for the affected TV broadcasters to relinquish their channels and the FCC to repack their vacated spectrum.  Estimates are that 600 MHz may not be usable until 2019.

 

AJ

Yeah... it's completely my expectations and not Sprint's lack of towers, backhaul or completed work.

So approx 20% or more of their current sites don't even have band 25 running. In mid 2015. That is a problem. Not even accounting for the at least 9000 additional sites they want to add. At Sprint's pace there seems a very good chance that they might not have band 25 completed by the time 600mhz can be used. Especially if 20% of their current sites are "difficult" ones. 4 years later not having 1900 finished is a complete failure.

It can also be relieved by finishing deployment of the low band spectrum they already have and densifying the network, both of which they are actively working on. Both which will likely be finished before 600mhz can even be used.

 

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk

It obviously can not, or Wichita and KC wouldn't have the holes they do. Sprint might not be finished with 1900 LTE by the time 600mhz can be used. It'd be stupid to not get this extra service which would strongly bolster the network instead of being stuck 5 years later saying "gee I wish we would have bid on that spectrum when it was available." Sprint sorely needs the building penetration and propagation properties of 600mhz spectrum to make it competitive.

 

*This* is the real "100% truth".

 

"Sprint haters" does happen, but is for the most part, an internet-only phenomena (e.g. FierceWireless comments)

 

From what I've seen it is much more widespread than internet-only.

FWIW -- my take is still that SoftBank assumed it was going to get everything it asked for.... 

 

 - buy sprint

 - buy clearwire

 - buy TMO 

 

I'm still taken back that SB assumed --- hey yeah the American's will let us come in and buy three (2 national and one semi-national/local) networks in less than 24 months???   

 

With that I believe SB wanted (will) invest gobs of cash to be in the top 2, BUT didn't count on also battling for the number three spot at the same time!  Which is in my opinion diverting much needed cash for becoming No 1 or 2.   

 

 

THAT all said -- SB might see this as a harder fight and may want to slow its roll on Sprint at the moment.  Especially if Crazy Uncle Charlie buys TMO.   

 

 

okay have fun with that post now :-)  

 

john

Fix the coverage and everything else will be a lot easier. It should be their #1 priority. And places like airports should be towards the top. That'd go a long way to improving the perception among decision makers.