RedSpark

Good summary writeup of Saw's comments on 5G, Massive MIMO and intra-band carrier aggregation.

5 minutes ago, Brad The Beast said:

We still haven't heard what they got from the AT&T settlement. I'm quite curious when and if we'll find out what happened?

We might never find out if the settlement terms are confidential...

Of course it’s possible there could be a miscellaneous item indicated for it on Sprint’s balance sheet.

1 hour ago, Brad The Beast said:

I'm sure the AT&T settlement is causing some delays. 

As far as forecasting for next quarter, perhaps!

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/t-mobile-q1-2019-earnings

https://investor.t-mobile.com/financial-performance/quarterly-results/default.aspx

https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/t-mobile-racks-up-more-customers-as-it-awaits-fate-of-sprint-merger/

T-Mobile had a great quarter so it seems...

Sprint should be announcing earnings soon... Sprint’s Fiscal 4Q 2017 Earnings Call was held on May 2, 2018.... But we haven’t heard a word about it even being calendared yet for this year.

Perhaps Sprint’s delay/silence has something to do with the Merger?

50 minutes ago, dkyeager said:

 

Apple has go to be looking at all of Samsung's self-inflicted wounds in their quest to be first: folding phones that rip in half and Russian roulette for the s10 early adopters, both bring back images of exploding Note 7s.  The current finicky nature of 5G mmWave risks bringing back memories of Apple's antenna problems.  All for the current possible gain of a few counties worth of 5g territory in the US (Sprint and T-Mobile could dramatically change this, but the duo may go mid-range at the same time as T-Mobile.) 

Apple will also need to get used taking advantage of more of Qualcomm features after dumbing-down their phones to help Intel.

Hopefully for Sprint's sake, LG gets the V50 right.

Yeah, you're definitely right about that. Hopefully the days of Apple's antenna design issues are behind it now. I've been very pleased with how my iPhone XS performs.

I imagine that as far as mmWave goes, it's going to require a pretty substantial deployment by the carriers to meet Apple's standards/timing for releasing an iPhone capable of supporting it. Apple's rationale being that it would rather not support a feature at all than support it prematurely such that it won't result in a good customer experience on the device.

Yeah, Apple will have to get used to not detuning Qualcomm Modems! This actually leaves open the possibility of Apple using the Intel XMM 7660 Modem in Fall 2019 and then sole-source by using a non-detuned Qualcomm Snapdragon X24 Modem in Fall 2020, unless Apple decides to release a 5G iPhone with the Qualcomm X55 5G Modem in Fall 2020. Otherwise, Apple could use the Qualcomm X55 5G Modem or its successor in Fall 2021 if it decides to delay a 5G iPhone until then.

I wonder how quickly Sprint plans to ramp up beyond the 9 5G cities it's announced so far. We haven't heard anything else about that yet have we?

5 hours ago, dkyeager said:

Historically Apple is more concerned about a consistent customer experience, thus it could be 2021 for the next chipset/modem to support more bands or even further out.

That's true... I really hope this isn't the case. I guess it's all part of a consideration where the carrier networks stand at some point.

AT&T: https://www.att.com/5g/consumer/ --> AT&T has its "5G E" logo on select devices. Actual 5G is currently live in parts of 19 cities.

T-Mobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/5g --> Launching in the second half of 2019: https://www.engadget.com/2019/02/25/t-mobile-5g-launch-delayed/

Verizon: https://www.verizonwireless.com/5g/ --> Launched in parts of Chicago/Minneapolis... 20 more cities just announced for this year.

Sprint: https://www.sprint.com/en/landings/5g.html --> Launching in May for Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas and Kansas City. Houston, Los Angeles, New York City, Phoenix and Washington D.C. are slated to launch in the first half of 2019.

According to Dan Riccio in this Mashable interview, Apple locked down the design for the iPhone X in November 2016, and it launched in November 2017. Assuming the same lead time in the design cycle, perhaps Apple will evaluate where carriers' 5G networks stand in Fall 2019 and make a decision on what's coming as far as 5G for Fall 2020 and Fall 2021 iPhones.

The iPhone XS/XS Max has the Intel XMM 7560 Modem. In terms of available Intel LTE Modems that have been published, I think we're likely to see the Intel XMM 7660 Modem in the Fall 2019 iPhones. It's marketed as a Gigabit+ LTE Modem that supports more than 45 bands (vs. more than 35 bands in the Intel XMM 7560 Modem), and it has support for 7CA DL and 2CA UL.

As far as the modem pipeline beyond that, there's nothing else on Intel's website, save for the 5G modem that Apple/Intel has said it won't use, so I have a feeling Apple will switch over to Qualcomm for 2020.... or it could have decided to completely pull the rug out from Intel and use Qualcomm Modems in the 2019 iPhones. The iPhone 8/8+/X used the Qualcomm Snapdragon X16 LTE Modem (alongside the Intel XMM 7480 Modem).... and had Qualcomm/Apple made a modem deal for the iPhone XS/XS+ Apple would have likely used used the Qualcomm Snapdragon X20 LTE Modem alongside the Intel XMM 7560 Modem in the iPhone XS/XS+... but that didn't happen.

So I think we could see the Qualcomm Snapdragon X24 LTE Modem in the Fall 2019 iPhones, or Apple could decide to save this modem for Fall 2020 if it doesn't launch a 5G model in Fall 2020. It seems like it could potentially be a step up from Intel's XMM 7660.

As far as 5G modems go, I think this is the one we'll be seeing in a future 5G iPhone, especially given T-Mobile's 600 MHz holdings for 5G and the fact that Apple tends to like single chip solutions: Qualcomm X55 5G Modem

So to tie this back in, I believe mass network feature adoption happens primarily with Apple devices because of the upgrade cycle, such as with Sprint's "iPhone Forever" and Apple's "iPhone Upgrade Program". In so doing, I think Apple actually moves the carriers along on their networks more than other device manufacturers, even if they aren't necessarily the first to launch with those features, and this is because of the surge of new devices hitting the networks.

Hopefully Sprint doesn't implement a 5G upcharge like Verizon is doing for 5G....

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/25/18515605/verizon-5g-cities-galaxy-s10-5g-preorders

The S10 5G starts at $1,299, which is nuts in of itself in my opinion, but it's also $10/month extra for 5G..... This harkens back to the Premium Data Fee for Sprint when WiMax came out.

However, if you order right now.... Verizon "says it will waive the $10/mth 5G Ultra Wideband access fee, and toss in a free Samsung Wireless Charging Battery Pack and free pair of Samsung Galaxy Buds."

It also seems Verizon is counting on switchers and device trade-ins to offset the cost of the device for customers. I wonder if Sprint will utilize a similar promotion/adoption strategy going forward when the S10 5G arrives on its network.

I also wonder what say Apple has in plan pricing with carriers. When the 5G iPhone drops in 2020 (most likely), it may not be happy with carrier upcharges for 5G.

3 hours ago, nexgencpu said:

Most of the presentation is the stuff we already know about. But a couple of cool details

Over 1000 M-MIMO sites are live now!

Just waiting on final 5G NR software to be pushed

ENDC Bonded LTE/NR will allow the full 120Mhz to be used on 5G devices and still keep legacy devices up to 60Mhz of LTE

LG V50 will have a GLOWING 5G logo on the back LOL! (RGB everything life!)

**WOOOOOOOOOOOOW!!!**

They also have live QnA and I posted one question,. he actually ANSWERED LIVE! Intraband CA is coming in weeks guys!!!!!!

What does "RGB everything life" mean? 😀

T-Mobile, Sprint trash-talk their own networks in bid to merge

Here's the FCC filing from the meeting they had with FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10419537725960/4-19-19 Rosenworcel Public Ex Parte.pdf

1 minute ago, JimBob said:

 

Multiple securities class action lawsuits have now been filed against Sprint Corporation for lying about total postpaid net additions.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sprint-class-action-alert-hagens-001500130.html
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sprint-corporation-investor-alert-wolf-203509948.html
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/investigation-alert-schall-law-firm-203400191.html

Wow. Thanks for sharing these links. This seemed inevitable given the disparity between the financial statements/comments and the FCC filings.

13 hours ago, SuzieTuesday said:

Yet Neville Ray says, "T-Mobile also has mmWave spectrum that provides massive capacity over a very small footprint. It holds big promise for speed and capacity in dense urban areas and venues where large numbers of people gather."  I guess TMUS has special mmWave spectrum that is some how superior to VZ mmWave spectrum.

Here’s what Verizon had to say about Millimeter Wave: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/04/millimeter-wave-5g-isnt-for-widespread-coverage-verizon-admits/

Given all these shortcomings, Sprint should be in the driver’s seat with 2.5 GHz if it could make the appropriate capex happen.

57 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Yeah they said the same thing about LAA

 

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Yeah, but there's at least been some incremental progress on it:

https://newsroom.sprint.com/sprint-spidercloud-small-cell.htm

https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-achieves-120-140-mbps-laa-deployment-spidercloud-says-laa-long-term-roadmap

https://www.aglmediagroup.com/sprint-uses-corning-spidercloud-to-address-cellular-enterprise-market/

19 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

If Sprint ends up a stand alone, they will need more spectrum at some point,I do understand not using mm wave accept for malls and stadiums. They should use it there tho

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
 

Back in May 2018, Sprint said this about Millimeter Wave: https://www.fiercewireless.com/5g/sprint-millimeter-wave-spectrum-important-part-our-strategy-going-forward

Looks like AT&T and Sprint settled the "Fake 5G" lawsuit:

https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/22/sprint-att-5g-e-lawsuit-settlement/

Neville's latest thoughts on Millimeter Wave.... and why the merger needs to happen....

https://www.t-mobile.com/news/the-5g-status-quo-is-clearly-not-good-enough

Here's what Dr. Saw has said about Millimeter Wave previously:

https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/sprint-says-no-to-mmwave-yes-to-mobile-5g/d/d-id/739592

"What is the cost to deliver a bit over millimeter waves? Where is the business case on that?" John Saw asked at the Citi conference in Las Vegas.

and

"We need to solve the cost challenges before you can scale millimeter wave," Saw said.

I guess this is the new Merger strategy now?

16 hours ago, Brad The Beast said:

I think the investor reports would be more accurate since they can't lie to investors unless they want to end up like AT&T with a lawsuit. 

You're referring to this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/04/lawsuit-atts-directv-now-is-a-flop-and-att-lied-to-investors-about-it/

That's not beyond the realm of possibility for Sprint... especially given how any lawsuit would occur subsequent to the alleged "lying".

Sprint's FCC Filing is supported by empirical and highly confidential data on its adds/losses, churn, etc. throughout the report. I believe it shows a serious situation. Even more so, Sprint says in the Filing that its investor statements noting certain accomplishments shouldn't detract from the seriousness of its current predicament.

See Pages 36-42 of the FCC Filing, which includes this:

"The recent improvements in some financial metrics simply cannot, and do not, overcome these fundamental challenges:"

On balance, I'm more willing to believe the information in the FCC Filing which specifically references and dismisses the investor statements than in the investor statements alone. If the redacted "highly confidential" information in the Filing was made available to investors, I believe Sprint stock would be substantially impacted... as that information reflects the ground truth of what's happening with Sprint.

Dish, CWA and 22 other entities make case against T-Mobile/Sprint merger

https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/dish-cwa-and-22-other-entities-make-case-against-t-mobile-sprint-merger

16 minutes ago, S4GRU said:

You guys are just falling for the propaganda.  They all want us to think the Sprint's failure is imminent, if not even immediate, if the merger is not approved.

You guys all mocked Sprint when they first were using hyperbole about their network and prospects when they played that card initially.  And now going all ga-ga over the data again as if it was new info and now means even something more or different.

This is all OLD NEWS.  They want it rehashed and all of you to freak out and over talk about it, so genuine opinion is that Sprint is going to no longer exist with or without Tmo.  But the reality is, as Brad mentioned above, Sprint is in better shape than it was last year, two years ago and five years ago.

And also, I don;t get the comment that "Softbank is looking for a bailout by any means necessary."  Softbank is not looking for a bailout.  No request of government giving money to save Sprint financially.  That's a bailout.  Softbank is looking for a BUYER.  It's totally legit to look to sell the company.  Why would this be surprising?  Masa was discussing selling Sprint within weeks of buying it.  That's always been on the table. 

And frankly, I wouldn't mind for someone to take over than Masa.  A tie up with a cable company may be a very good thing for Sprint if the Tmo deal doesn't happen.  But I fully expect a legal challenge if not approved.

Robert

I respectfully disagree with you on this. The FCC Filing isn’t propaganda in my opinion. Rather, it’s the most realistic and honest assessment of Sprint’s situation given the underlying empirical data on which the claims are based. It reveals a number of truths, including the “Monopole or bust” strategy that Sprint attempted.

As far as anything being propaganda, I’ll attach that term to the investor statements, including the ones that Marcelo made over the years.... especially the time when he said this in May 2015: https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-s-claure-18-24-months-we-ll-be-no-1-or-2-network-performance

I don’t believe Sprint will go out of business quickly. However, based on the sobering business fundamentals outlined in the FCC Filing, I believe it will continue to go out of business slowly... and then enter Chapter 11 if SoftBank doesn’t pitch in additional funds or if the credit markets tighten.

“Churn-bomb” and “Liquidity wall” as used and supported in the report aren’t overstatements in my opinion. Sprint may be in better shape now than it was in certain respects in prior years, but it’s analogous to repainting a house when the foundation is cracking.

I’m perfectly fine with Masa looking for a buyer. What I’m not fine with is that Sprint has been brought to the brink of a steep downward slope by SoftBank’s mis-management and devalued by its failure to adequately support its asset.

Yeah, I think Sprint/T-Mobile will litigate this if the merger isn’t approved.

2 hours ago, Brad The Beast said:

I'm pretty sure they're making it sound doom and gloom to get the merger approved. We're seeing the opposite in the investor reports in which it would be illegal to lie to investors (AT&T is finding this out the hard way). I mean we've got 5G deploying in the 4 of the first 9 cities next month with the rest to follow in June. We're also already seeing them deploying these new Massive MIMO units elsewhere. If they're able to do that then they must be doing well enough. 

The redacted portions of Sprint’s FCC Filing contain some very hard truths and figures about Sprint’s current predicament. That information isn’t doom/gloom commentary. It’s a sobering fact-based report that Sprint is in big trouble as a company.

See Pages 1-7, especially Page 4: “Sprint’s Public Statements About Select Improvements in Financial Metrics Do Not Alter the Fundamental Challenges It Faces as a Standalone Company”

https://www.cnet.com/news/t-mobiles-john-legere-denies-justice-department-pushback-on-sprint-merger/

Hmmmmm.....

2 minutes ago, Mr.Nuke said:

I seem to recall this conversation 10 months ago.

https://s4gru.com/forums/topic/7845-sprint-tmobile-merger-disc/?do=findComment&comment=530234

Yes. I do recall that as well.

However, this Filing appears to be a much more bleak assessment of Sprint than before. Although we can't see the numbers/info behind the highly confidential redactions, it seems apparent from the visible language that explains these numbers/info in the Filing that Sprint is in deeper trouble than it was before, and it's only getting worse as time goes on. How would Sprint otherwise spin this empirical data that it's putting forward to the FCC?

17 minutes ago, Mr.Nuke said:

I'm glad to see no one is overacting...

Do you believe Sprint is being forthright/honest in its FCC Filing, or is it making gloom/doom embellishments for merger purposes?

Just now, tyroned3222 said:

As I recall .. SoftBanks banks are not allowing them to pour in anymore money in to sprint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Time for SoftBank to find some new banks... or it could find itself with a bankrupt asset.

49 minutes ago, tyroned3222 said:

it’s sad to say, but SoftBank is looking for a bailout by any means necessary.
In a note to investors, New Street Research analyst Pierre Ferragu estimated that Sprint would need a $20 billion capital injection if the merger doesn’t go through..
In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission on Monday, Sprint said it suffered from a “huge debt load” of $40 billion and cited an analyst’s report saying Sprint “could restructure their balance sheet through a Chapter 11 process” in U.S. bankruptcy court.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SoftBank doesn't need a bailout. That's the ridiculous thing. They have plenty of money on hand.... They're just not giving it to Sprint. It's pathetic.

Masa put Sprint in this position by trying to do a monopole build on the cheap as opposed to a traditional network build... and when that floundered because of regulatory issues that should have always been anticipated as a risk but weren't for some reason, Sprint had no viable backup plan because it had passed on the 600 MHz Spectrum it needed for a traditional network build. Marcelo went along with this because he was a "yes man" to Masa and wanted to ride his coat tails to SoftBank. The Former CFO even used the term "Spectrum of the past" to refer to 600 MHz because there was so much misplaced confidence about this strategy. Interestingly, Guenther got out... Perhaps he had a feeling this wouldn't work or he disagreed with the overall plan.... which is probably why Hesse got the boot by Masa as well.

Would Chapter 11 do Sprint some good at this point? If it's about to go off the rails and be relegated to carrier purgatory due to SoftBank's unwillingness to inject any capital, then perhaps it would. What a shame.