utiz4321

Your not speaking for anyone. Sprint's job is to manage the network it a way makes sense for their user base and they do a good job of it. If you are up loading a picture spoiler it can continue to happen when you put it in your pocket. Video calls are about the most taxing thing you can do on the upload side and it works just fine with sprint's current configuration.

Nope. Please learn about what you are talking about before you start posting nonsense all over the public space. The other carriers dont have the option of allocating spectrum the war sprint can or they would. It has nothing to do with what one of the companies "know" amd the others do not and all about the way the spectrum is used.

Yup Stick with them, they sound intelligent :).

No. The math says that. Which is why the designed their network the way they did. The amount of data used in uploads are a fraction of downloads.

Why would they? They dont need the bandwidth on the upload side. You down load far more than you upload.

It is a deliberate choice on the part of sprint on how it uses it's 2.5 spectrum. They can allocate the spectrum Used in their channels in multiple ways and they have choosen to maximize download speeds because you simply don't need as much band width on the upload side.

If it doesnt 5g is really going to suck.

My v30 just got done with doing a network update and resetting on its own. Unfortunately, I am not going to be able to test the roaming anytime soon.

You my missed my point. Sprint's debt is burdensome, to the point that they wont be able to pay it back and continue to invest. Sprint is me, VZW is warren buffet. I thought that was clear but maybe not.

Yeah, let's not look at the free cash flow, revenues, dividen payouts or anything else when we think about how burdensome the respective debt loads are. Let's just look at total debt, because that is the whole story. Look, warren buffet has more debt than I do, I must be doing better than him!

Yup we should have keep 8 wireless carriers with an average of 40 MHz of specturm each because of the job lose the mergers created. Those poor people, they never got another job again. Can you imagine how terrible that world would be?

Mass should have been able to buy T mobile right from the start. Sprint wasted years producing a network that was inferior to the competition.

Nope. The case in 2011 was T would be to dominate and the market would become two a player market. In 2014 no case was made, just a threat. I dont get people's fears here. We Will probably get a new fix home ISP player out of the merge and it is more rational for the wireless market. Either sprint or tmobile are going away during the transition to 5g, why not create a kick ass company instead of watching one slowly bleed out. Does anyone here remember when there where 7 national carriers? Imagine trying to keep 7 players going into a 4g world, it would have been a disaster.

It is hard to see the case that the DOJ would make. This is really a better structure for the market. We can either have 2 dominate players and two low end players or three major players.

I was just going to comment on that. It is probably a very good sign that the talks are pretty advanced and near a deal.

That doesnt seem like mass getting what he wants given that he said he wanted control. The other way around would seem to fit more with both companies stated interests.

The killer use case is capacity. Imgine if the carriers didnt have to build an entirely new network every 5 years, that would be your use case.

That is a rosy outlook. They are not going to leverage 100 percent of their spectrum and that is coming to an end. The brand is terrible and needs about a billion in investment to bring it back up to snuff, they are on their 4th network plan and no one can say with confidence that they will follow through, they are adding customer but topline revenue continues to shrink, sprints moves in the market place goes almost unnoticed by it's competitors (T mobile can but not always) and unless they start growing top line revenue they I dont think they will generate enough Free cash flow to pay off the debts without starving the network.

And that is what I said. An ATT/TMOBILE would have given the company alot of market power. Tmobile and sprint on their own compete on price alone. Their networks are no where near the quality of the big two. A combined T mobile and sprint would have two huge, powerful players to compete against. ATT/T mobile would have had one. The market is going to three players one way or the other. It Will either be sprint/T mobile or T mobile and the big two. Sprint alone goes bust or becomes a metro type player. It has no way to pay off its debt and as interest rates rise that will become harder and harder.

A 39 billion dollar investment that brings with it, 120 mhz of spectrum, 50 million subs, 50,000 towers, operation cost savings of 2 billion a year, increased market power, ECT.. probably has a much higher ROI than 3.8 billion to compete over 20 million subs. In fact, I would imagine alot higher. You cant simply look at the cost side and not the benefit side to see if an investment makes sense. The sprint/t-mobile merger gives the new company all the same advantages without the vast increase in market power. Given the billions and billions of investment that 5g will require I think it is going to happen at some point.

First, you are only looking at the cost side of ATT LTE roll out and not how long ATT thought it would take to get a return on their investment. Second, I was against AT&T buying Mobile and called the DOJ shooting it down. Third, anyone that knows the spectrum holdings, balance sheets, the last five years of these companies history and their network performance compared to the big two can see the obvious benifits to the consumers. The benefit to the consumer was no where near as obvious with a ATT and tmobile merger. That is one of the main reason ATT hammered home the dual LTE expansion, it was the only comsumer benifit they could come up with.

Save us from having a third company with the scale, money and spectrum to build an insanely awesome 5g network? Let the DOJ save you from it, let me have it.

Yeah, I dont get it. VZW has a great reputation in the valley but they have started to slip a bit, ATT IS mediocre and Tmobile has a pretty bad network in the east valley at least. If sprint made the commitment in the network here this could be a growth market for them.

It has been pretty quite here. I have noticed some mini macros in phoenix itself. But out side of that not much has changed in the last year.

Sprint needs to follow through with one of the 4 network plans it has come up with over the last couple of years.