RedSpark

Hopefully Calling Plus stress tested the network sufficiently to ensure adequate VoLTE performance. Also, the relative maturity of VoLTE at this point may help Sprint’s deployment as well.

I agree that Sprint has plenty of potential, much more than its competitors have in certain ways as you mentioned. However, Sprint’s Band 41 deployment won’t be at a “substantial majority” until the end of Fiscal 2018, which is almost a year from now... and that doesn’t mean “completed”. Based on this disclosed timeline, I respectfully disagree with your characterization of “in no time”. Is this a “Balls to the Wall” deployment schedule? It’s hard to know for sure. What do you mean by “pity tour”? Is Sprint misleading Congress/FCC on the necessity of the merger? As for funding, Sprint needs to keep building/spending as if this merger won’t be approved, and accelerate it... because if it doesn’t and if the merger is rejected, Sprint could fall further behind with respect to the competition. As for building up the customer base, if the merger is rejected, Sprint will have years ahead of it to do that... and hopefully SoftBank is willing to pitch in some capital to help it along.

Exactly. Given SoftBank’s original intent was always to merge with T-Mobile, it should have provided the necessary capital to ensure Sprint would have the majority/controlling stake should it happen or to be a stronger competitor should the merger fail. It’s inexplicable to me why Masa didn’t ensure this.

That’s fair. According to this Wall article (http://s4gru.com/entry/429-psa-sprint-begins-band-13-deployment-in-puerto-rico/), Sprint’s Band 26 is either 5x5, 3x3 or non-existent.

One of Sprint’s primary justifications for the merger is the combination of T-Mobile’s 600 MHz holdings and Sprint’s 2.5 GHz holdings. Lowband is specifically highlighted as an essential part of a competitive 5G national footprint. (https://newtmobile.com/content/uploads/2018/04/CREATING-ROBUST-COMPETITION-IN-THE-5G-ERA-2.pdf) Masa’s/Marcelo’s decision (to the extent that Marcelo had any say or influence) to entirely pass on the 600 MHz auction meant that it could only come from T-Mobile through a merger. So if the merger fails, Sprint won’t get any of it, and SoftBank will be left holding the bag on an asset that I believe it further devalued to its detriment through taking this risky approach. As for Band 12 and Band 26 for T-Mobile and Sprint respectively: T-Mobile has had VoLTE for some time now (initial growing pains acknowledged) while Sprint still doesn’t have it live for customer use. (Sprint’s CEO has just said “coming soon” which is encouraging.) T-Mobile’s Band 12 helped make its network more reliable (as it now covers 80% of Americans) (source: https://www.t-mobile.com/news/extended-range-lte-puerto-rico) and 600 MHz will further help with overall network reliability and propagation. “Hanging onto LTE” and “less 3G” is what Sprint needs for VoLTE to be launched. From what I’ve heard, Sprint’s “Time on LTE” needs to be in the high 90’s percentage-wise to have a reliable VoLTE experience... and this ties directly into Capex aside from spectrum holdings. Sprint can’t deploy 800 MHz in a number of areas, and it’s not even a full 5 MHz in some cases. There’s no clear timeframe for when will this be resolved, but each month we hope to see an update in the FCC Filing Sprint submits (which also updates the typo on the second page: “toatl”, that I’ve seen for the past few at least.) (https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10702046805899/800 MHz Monthly Report for July 2018.pdf) 60 MHz+ of 600 MHz? How would this happen? (https://www.t-mobile.com/news/extended-range-lte-puerto-rico) “In April 2017, T-Mobile made its largest network investment ever, tripling its low-band spectrum holdings by purchasing 45% of the spectrum sold in the US government’s 600 MHz auction -- 31 MHz nationwide on average and a whopping 50 MHz in Puerto Rico! These holdings cover 100% of the US, including Puerto Rico.” ——————— Perhaps SoftBank’s case for a merger would have been undermined if Sprint had acquired lowband Spectrum. Maybe that’s why Sprint passed on the auction? If Sprint had acquired this spectrum, it wouldn’t have “the lack of it” as an argument for the merger. It would have to settle on arguing competitive scale, which is a less compelling case in my opinion. Regulators could simply see Sprint is an undercapitalized asset of SoftBank, a monster conglomerate, and not lacking in scale. That’s what we were all hoping for when SoftBank acquired it. So, if this merger fails to go through for whatever reason, I wonder what SoftBank will be willing to kick-in in terms of capital.

I agree with many of your points. It’s not my intent to stir the pot or engage in revisionist history. It’s also not my intent to come across as superior in any way. I apologize for any of this coming across to anyone here. I see two problems with this merger. One is that it reduces the number of carriers from 4 to 3. I think there will be a net loss of competition as a result, even if Sprint/T-Mobile claim they’ll be more competitive as result. The second is that the merger may not actually happen, and if it doesn’t, Sprint has a problem on its hands going forward that SoftBank didn’t effectively plan for. The FCC Filing and Marcelo’s congressional testimony each provided unambiguous (and truthful) declarations by Sprint of the current position it was in. Perhaps they exaggerate the negative to support the merger just like Sprint’s news releases exaggerate the positive on network news. As you said, Sprint was in a position of having to do this on its own. Some of the decisions Marcelo made confounded me, but as you said, he was put in a terrible position by SoftBank. We were all hoping for capital infusions from Masa, but they never came. The money went to ARM, Boston Robotics, Uber, etc. Marcelo told us that there was a turnaround plan in the works, but the capital to put Sprint ahead never came. By withholding the necessary capital, Masa essentially crippled and devalued his own investment (Sprint) in the process of pursuing the T-Mobile merger. This is inexplicable to me because it gave Sprint even less leverage in a merger deal, and in the event that the merger doesn’t go through, Sprint is left in a worse competitive position. Sitting out the 600 MHz auction was SoftBank’s decision ultimately, and it was a bet on the fact that they’d get the spectrum back with a T-Mobile merger. However, Masa was probably operating under the assumption at the time that he’d be running the combined company. That didn’t pan out, and so now if the merger doesn’t happen, SoftBank left Sprint without 600 MHz Spectrum and an insufficiently Capex’ed network which significantly limits its competitive strength going forward, which affects customer/investor sentiment, which affects everything else in a feedback loop.

As far as other options? No Idea... but given Apple’s design timeline, it’ll have to be locked down pretty soon. We’ll likely see the Qualcomm X16 in this year’s iPhones: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/modems/4g-lte/x16 We’ll also likely see the Intel XMM 7560 in this year’s iPhones: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/wireless-products/mobile-communications/xmm-7560-brief.html

Bad news for Intel... https://www.calcalistech.com/Article.aspx?guid=3741719

VoLTE! Think it will go live before or after the new iPhone launches?

The newest Samsung and LG Phones support it. Assuming the next iPhone coming later this year supports it, that’s substantial as well. As for walking and chewing gum at the same time, that’s a management issue. I don’t know what to say, but T-Mobile made this deployment happen in about 1-1.5 years. Sprint disclosed to the FCC the truth which I feared in the back of my mind as a worst case scenario despite Sprint’s assurances to the contrary: Even a complete Band 41 deployment isn’t enough for it to have a truly competitive national network footprint. The economics don’t come out favorably from what we’ve been told.

So even this amount would have effectively doubled Sprint’s lowband spectrum. That would have made a huge difference in Sprint’s national footprint. Neville was able to stand up this spectrum in an incredibly short period of time and have an appreciable number of devices support it.

T-Mobile is moving along quite rapidly on the 600 MHz rollout: https://www.t-mobile.com/news/extended-range-lte-puerto-rico (June 6, 2018) “The Un-carrier today unveiled that it has now lit up 600 MHz Extended Range LTE in more than 900 cities and towns across 32 states, bringing T-Mobile LTE coverage into 120 places for the very first time. Now, T-Mobile will bring 600 MHz Extended Range LTE to Puerto Rico this fall, providing more LTE coverage and capacity than ever before and laying the foundation for 5G with 5G-ready equipment.” Sprint had the finances to spend on overhauling retail stores, buying Radio Shack stores and doing the Carfone Warehouse experiment, none of which was necessary. This money should have gone towards 600 MHz. The “600 MHz ecosystem” part is already happening. These devices support it: LG G7 ThinQ™ LG K30™ LG V30™ Samsung Galaxy S8 Active Samsung Galaxy S9 Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus —————— Apple will likely have a 600 MHz compatible iPhone this fall as well. As we all know, Sprint’s 800 MHz also has very limited capacity versus T-Mobile’s 600 MHz. Even 10-15 MHz of 600 MHz deployed across Sprint’s footprint would have meant low band spectrum across the country, including in areas that 800 MHz isn’t yet available or very limited. I’m not exactly sure when the 800 MHz rebanding is finally going to finish up, but let’s say it takes another year or two. Where do you think T-Mobile will be with its 600 MHz deployment at that point? Furthermore, even with 2.5 GHz fully deployed with sufficient capex spend in in the last year or two, Sprint has said in its FCC Filing that’s not enough for a competitive national footprint.

I disagree. 600 MHz would have enabled Sprint to have a more efficient build and cover wider swaths of land including rural areas than a 2.5 GHz deployment provides, and in the short term, that could really help. We kept hearing from Sprint that 2.5 GHz was more cost efficient to deploy than Millimeter Wave. That’s true... However, the real truth/dirt came out in the FCC Filing and Congressional Hearing that Sprint couldn’t actually achieve an economically viable nationwide build on its 2.5 GHz and that combining with T-Mobile for its 600 MHz was essential. Meanwhile, T-Mobile is deploying 600 MHz across the country at tremendous speed. Of course we were told by the CFO of Sprint at the time (https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-cfo-robbiati-600-mhz-spectrum-past) “Why invest in 600 MHz spectrum if that spectrum doesn’t really cater for the future, and also it’s spectrum you cannot deploy for four years?” Robbiati asked rhetorically. Sigh...

Happy Fourth Everyone! What kinds of antennas are these?

How complicated is it to swap out that equipment?

Good point! Possibly. I’d love to see them strike a deal with Hyatt/Hilton/Marriott nationwide.

Progress! ? Seems like they’re working their way down the Vegas strip! “Better coverage keeps players at the tables longer” is a good selling point.

I agree. Sprint should also allow 480p/1080P HD/Ultra HD on a per line basis. Verizon allows mixing and matching of “Unlimited Plans” like this.

I certainly hope they haven’t stopped and I’m glad to see they haven’t. The issue is the disconnect between what Marcelo said in September 2015 (http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/18/technology/sprint-network/index.html) and where the Network is currently tracking as far as Band 41 deployment on Macro Sites goes (http://newsroom.sprint.com/triband-upgrades.htm). If Sprint was truly making “meaningful” investments since Marcelo said “leapfrog” in September 2015, wouldn’t Sprint be much further along than 60% by now? Wouldn’t they need to be if they wanted to deliver on his Network promises? The 60% figure is as of a June 5, 2018 Blog Post, so perhaps it’s a little higher by now as you said. Sprint says it will have Band 41 on a “substantial majority” of its Macro Sites by end of Fiscal 2018, and that’s April/May 2019. We don’t know what that amounts to though and there’s no mention of when 100% will be achieved. As you said, the work continues... hopefully ahead of schedule.

It would be nice if Sprint “yellow” could live on in some form, like the orange “Cingular” colors did for a while in the AT&T Wireless logo...

The truth about Sprint’s network progress and plans had to come out at some point, and it finally did. There’s no good way to spin the dirt, and it hurts a bit to see it in writing. They’ve now hit 60% of their Macro sites for 2.5 GHz. I recall in prior news releases from a while back where it said 50%. I was hoping Sprint would be further along than this by now, but when Sprint said it halted meaningful investments, it’s clear now what they meant.... and it all adds up to what we’ve been seeing. I want Sprint to succeed as its own company, but what we’ve been told now by them is that it’s at risk of being left behind vs the other carriers unless this merger happens. I’m starting to believe them. I think they’re telling the truth.

What are you referring to?

That’s exactly right. If we are being told by Sprint that as of June 5th (http://newsroom.sprint.com/triband-upgrades.htm), that Band 41 is only on 60% of its Macro sites currently.... and that it won’t be until April/May 2019 (End of Fiscal 2018, based on prior reporting dates).... what should be our expectations for network improvement over that time? Furthermore, what does “substantial majority” mean? How close is it to 100%? When does this hit 100%? By Fall/Winter of next year? What’s frustrating here is that we all knew this needed to happen for the Sprint network to improve to competitive parity. However, Marcelo told us back in September 2015 (http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/18/technology/sprint-network/index.html) that: Sprint CEO Marcelo Claure has made a bold statement: By 2017, its network will perform better than Verizon, AT&T or T-Mobile. "We will have the best network in the next two years," Claure told CNNMoney in an interview Friday. That echoes comments Claure made in May, when he said Sprint would be among the "top two" in terms of overall network performance in the United States. Now, he is throwing down the gauntlet, saying Sprint will leapfrog all the competition. Wow. Not only was he wrong. He was completely wrong. Sprint has 2.5 GHz on only 60% of its Macro sites at this point. There was no possible way this was ever going to happen given the Capex spend and deployment timeline, but he told the market and us consumers this anyway.... and I feel like a bit of a fool for believing it. Only way Sprint’s Network leapfrogs now is a merger... Or we wait for Sprint to grind along on its own and keep watching the calendar for the next year or so. This makes me sad as a customer, and mad as an investor.

DC has a way to go. Performance is inconsistent across the region. Downtown DC desperately needs Massive MIMO. Marcelo painted a very different picture back in 2015 of where the network would be: http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/18/technology/sprint-network/index.html It didn’t pan out. Not even close.

My guess would be the Samsung S10.... Hopefully real progress is being made in the network beyond this recent update... http://newsroom.sprint.com/triband-upgrades.htm We now have 2.5 GHz deployed on roughly 60% of our macro sites and expect to complete the substantial majority of our tri-band upgrades by the end of fiscal 2018. Hearing that we’re the better part of a year away from having 2.5 GHz on a “substantial majority” of sites feels like a really long time...