RedSpark

Correct. 90 days. Per this News Release as well:

Indeed: They were throwing tons of money away. What bothered me so much about these costly deals is that they were done in such a vacuum with no respect for ROI, no respect for the overall state of the legacy network and what needed to be done, and no seeming awareness of the mass customer exodus which was occurring. In my opinion, these kinds of initiatives showed total detachment: a complete disregard for the state of the company overall and the employees. I have to guess the running narrative in marketing was: "If we can put our name/logo on the NBA half-time show, or all over NASCAR's Victory Lane, etc. then everyone will believe our network and customer metrics are just fine." No coincidence that the chief marketing guy was shown the door in November 2014 shortly after Marcelo came on board. Thank goodness Marcelo pulled the plug on these things, because stuff like this was sinking the whole ship.

See: http://www.sprint.com/sponsorships/

I'm glad these sponsorships are coming to an end. They just seemed to have very little ROI, especially given the deficiencies in the legacy network. Hey, there's no coverage or slow speeds outdoors at this NASCAR event unless we bring a COW in, but let's plaster our name/logo everywhere for advertising. Same goes for indoor NBA arenas without good speed/coverage or DAS builds that supported Sprint's network. What's the point of plastering your logo everywhere during the half-time show or at the arena when the network isn't up to par? Thankfully, this spending is being brought under control now. Run a commercial during the game or something, but that's all. Much better off putting it into the macro network or DAS builds like Kauffman Stadium: and Levi's Stadium:

Thanks for the link. How about that... Had no idea.

Oh? Which one is that?

Well said. In my opinion, the most egregious thing the author did was say how T-Mobile built its own fiber network to the towers but not actually acknowledge why it did. Of course, acknowledging why T-Mobile did this would have undermined the whole premise of his article to begin with.

Sprint can increase the power/range of the AIRAVE upon request?

Me too. They were pretty mum on NGN. Hopefully the 2H 2015 and 1H 2016 RootMetrics results speak for themselves as Carrier Aggregation is deployed across the country. Sprint has established a good foundation getting churn down to a record low (The lowest in Sprint's history). Next step is to control/cut costs and keep the quality Postpaid adds coming. The Profits will come.

Sprint Hits Inflection Point in Its Turnaround by Reporting Positive Postpaid Phone Net Additions and Record Low Postpaid Churn in the Second Fiscal Quarter of 2015 It's happening. Go Sprint Go! Earnings Call Slide Deck (PDF)

See: https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/media-kits/4g-lte-cellspot.htm

You certainly did.

Sprint First U.S. Carrier to Sign Direct Cuba Roaming Agreement Some big news today....

Makes sense. So what's the point of USCC being mum about it? In this article, Sprint didn't name all of its LTE Roaming Partners. Perhaps USCC was one of the unnamed ones?

Love it!

It's got to be Sprint. US Cellular is only trialing VoLTE in a few markets at this point.

From The Kansas City Star: Sprint reduces severance pay as layoffs loom Marcelo sure seems pretty adamant about the new "trash policy" for executives...

Glad to see Sprint is on the leading edge when it comes to supporting the advanced features of iOS, but also for an innovative way to always have the latest iPhone. Marcelo's really pushing the iPhone as far as it can go on Sprint! I'm glad he was able to smooth over the relationship with Apple. Per Marcelo's comments in the Kansas City Star (November 2014): Now there's: "iPhone Forever"....Now there's Band 41 Carrier Aggregation and Band 12 support... Now there's enhanced WiFi Calling and Single Number Support. From what I can tell, Brightstar basically runs Apple's trade-in program and it can turnaround Sprint's devices from the "Forever" Program, And lastly... Sprint Zone's substantial redesign for iOS (Yeah, it's been a while since it was done, but hey, I'll take it, and it works pretty well!) Great work Marcelo and Sprint people! You've come a long way!

Some big news for iPhone users on Sprint: Sprint iPhone Customers Take Full Advantage of Wi-Fi Calling with Apple’s Latest Software Update

So he was appointed on January 2, 2013 to do what exactly? Did Marcelo essentially tell him to hit the road as part of the cost cutting Sprint's doing?

See this Article: http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/article39483489.html Has the scoop on the resignation of Sprint's senior vice president of corporate strategy and development: Interesting how he's not being replaced.

So here's my question: Marcelo has been responding to people asking about the 23 GB threshold on Twitter. He's making some good points about how it's real time/dynamic and how a congestion check is done every 20ms. However, when you look at the Network performance scores of Sprint compared to the other carriers in certain markets (Not Chicago/Denver or the other standout cities where CA has made a difference), are the slower data speeds/lower data scores for Sprint in certain cases a reflection of congestion or overall peak performance given the status of the network buildout there? If it's market-wide congestion, then people hitting 23 GB in those areas are going to be throttled no matter what for the remainder of their billing cycle/month until additional capacity comes online.

On a nationwide basis? Congestion should be handled on a market by market basis.

Because they didn't use a majority of the data in that new area, and now they're de-prioritized there, even if they use just a bit since they're tagged. Apologies for not explaining this clearly. It's just the geographical part of this that doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Because it's for the remainder of the bill cycle and if a tower becomes congested, they're affected, even though their usage in that new location could be low.