ericdabbs

Sprint needs to deploy more HD voice devices. Having just the EVO 4G LTE phone with HD voice is not enough. Sprint needs to spread the love of more HD voice devices so that more and more Sprint customers who talk to each other can reap the benefits.

The only negative to Clearwire is their frequency that their network runs on. It's almost unusable indoors and it would also require Sprint to add yet another band of support into their devices and adds complexity. It would probably be best for Sprint to acquire one of the regional carriers like Leap or Metro PCS that have PCS spectrum and strengthen Sprint's spectrum holdings.

You do know that Sprint already plans to add 2.5 GHz support to their LTE phones in 2013 right? I mean its not like Sprint is even debating on whether they should do so. Starting July 2013, Sprint plans to start paying Clearwire for their TDD-LTE service on its 5000 sites even before the Softbank deal even existed so Sprint better have LTE devices that support the 2.5 GHz band.

Now with this Softbank deal, I am sure the Japanese are looking and advising Sprint to buyout Clearwire when it seems right so that they don't have to pay for their services and would be a subsidiary to Sprint.

Wow what a turn of events. Looks like MetroPCS shareholders are not happy with the reverse IPO merger of the two companies. I'll be interested to see how this unfolds.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57532960-94/metropcs-shareholders-sue-over-t-mobile-merger/

http://www.phonenews.com/metropcs-shareholders-file-suit-over-t-mobile-reverse-merger-21608/

I am really afraid of a Sprint LA LTE launch by end of October. It seems like Sprint hasn't made enough progress especially out in the LA suburbs to say its market deployable. I think a December launch would be better so that Sprint can get at least 25% of its sites up. Right now at 16% sites completed to me is just unacceptable since the land area is just too large in LA. Had Sprint actually spread out the 16% sites all over the LA Metro market, I would say it might be ok but I still would tread cautiously if I were Sprint.

Hmm 20 billion for a 70% stake is a lot to infuse into Sprint. At 12.8 billion Softbank that was originally reported I would say that what Sprint got is getting the low end of the stick but at 20 billion, I think its more fair if Softbak is going to get a 70% controlling stake of Sprint. With 20 billion, Sprint can easily snatch up Clearwire and make a play at MetroPCS itself away from Tmobile or the Tmobile/MetroPCS new co in 2 years.

I just want Sprint to speed up Network Vision because to me its getting a bit slow given all the delays experienced. Cities like NYC and LA do not look LTE deployable ready especially LA if its set to launch by end of October. I think for NYC and LA, December is more likely a better time to launch LTE in those markets since hopefully it will have more coverage.

In most areas but not all. Go compare the Nextel and Sprint coverage across Louisiana... zoom out where you can see Baton Rouge, Hammond, Slidell (northeast portion) and flip back and forth.

Yeah yeah I know all about New Orleans and Baton Rouge . I heard enough from you and 4ringsbnr a long long time ago about the lack of coverage in Louisiana.. Besides Louisiana, I would say what I stated is true.

hmmm.... Don't like the sound of 44% fewer towers. That sounds like a big reduction in coverage. Are they mostly gone already?

No only 9600 of the 30000 sites have been decommissioned so far since the Nextel network is not shut down yet until June 30, 2013. Keep in mind all the towers that are being decommissioned are Nextel sites and not Sprint sites which for the most part are located in areas where Sprint coverage overlaps. Don't think of Nextel and Sprint towers as being strategically located where they don't overlap each other and cover a lot more area. I am not sure about the statistics but maybe Robert can comment on this but I would guess that at least 70-80% of the Nextel towers are located in areas that Sprint overlaps in their coverage. With Sprint putting antennas on Sprint towers to use the 800 MHz frequency after Nextel shuts down it would appear as if it no tower was lost in terms of coverage.

Good luck OP...as in good luck finding a signal... outside the metropolitan area. Anyways you have to do what is best for you and live with your decisions.

I feel Nextel is a better than a name that sounds like a bank, a soft bank.

Oh please...if anyone is seriously thinking that Softbank will rename Sprint to Softbank after the deal is out of their minds. Keep in mind that Softbank wouldn't own Sprint outright since they would only be buying about 70% stake. That shouldn't give them the right to change the name. The Japanese are smarter to not to mess with a brand that is on the uprise and is known in the US.

Even if Softbank could rename the company it would be dumb to put their branding in the US when no one has even heard about Softbank until 2 days ago.

HA and they say CDMA 1x Advanced is outdated. VoLTE is no where near ready. I love how these carriers like MetroPCS and Verizon Wireless talk big like they have some aggressive plan to move everyone to VoLTE and ditch CDMA. I am glad that Network Vision contains the deployment of 1x Advanced because I have a feeling we will be using it for a while and is worth the investment.

Terrible idea of renaming Sprint to Nextel. People associate Nextel with PTT and old ancient iDEN technology that is about to be torn down forever. Not to mention that people think that Nextel was a failure which is why it had to merge with Sprint and how that company has ruined Sprint. To me Nextel gives off a negative connotation as a brand.

Sprint has reinvigorated its brand since Hesse has taken over with being the first carrier to launch 4G, Network Vision, unlimited data. If Softbank and Sprint get a deal for a majority stake, there are way more important things like how to strategize to compete against Verizon and AT&T, infuse a ton of money to speed up Network Vision and Clearwire to help them speed up the TD-LTE buildout. Changing the name from Sprint to Nextel would be a waste of time and certainly unnecessary.

When Cingular bought out AT&T wireless they changed the name to AT&T because AT&T has been a long time established brand in telecommunications. In that case it makes sense.

yeah, I understand not loading the NV contractors, but main thing that I wonder about is why pull the old equipment at all, especially if its working.

 

ie at what point does the cost removing it become less than the cost of leaving it there (unused/powered down, but ready to re-activate).

I would think it has to do with why have antennas that are not as efficient as the NV ones as well as having unnecessary operating costs like power. The RRUs and Antennas take up enough power as it is. Sprint needs to be aggressive in trying to lower its operating costs because it is affecting their balance sheet. With Sprint trying to shed 30,000 towers from 68,000 to about 38,000 is going to save Sprint a ton of operating costs in power, tower leases, backhaul, etc.

I wonder if Softbank and Sprint situation goes through if they would still try to counter offer for MetroPCS from Tmobile. If that were to happen, watch out because Sprint will be a force to reckon with a majority owner with infusing cash and trying to bring Clearwire from the grave to expose its massive 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings.

idk about sprintsoft...makes it sound like a software company....im putting my money on the name Nextel, im probably wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but I think that name has alot of positive press behind it. Then again i was a youngin when they merged so what do i know. Sprint becoming the new Nextel...for some reason it just sounds like a stronger company

 

<YAY!!!! i have three dots now

I absolutely think it will be a horrible idea to rename Sprint back to Nextel. When people think of Nextel they think PTT as well as how badly it failed as a company. I think keeping the Sprint brand name is what they should do given that Network Vision is associated with Sprint and not Nextel. No need to make unnecessary changes when the focus should be on how to catch up to Verizon and AT&T and how to infuse cash into speeding up Network Vision as well as Clearwire so that they can build out their TD-LTE network much faster.

Sprint is not backing off entirely from the MetroPCS deal. They are just saying that they are not going to make a counter bid offer to MetroPCS for now until they get a better understanding of how the Tmobile deal works. Also Sprint is a wait and see until MetroPCS investors have to vote 'yes' or 'no' on the proposed Tmobile/MetroPCS deal. Deals like this aren't approved over night and certainly before anything becomes official, the FCC has to bless it to ensure competition is not harmed by the merger.

Sprint has plenty of time to mull over any proposed counter bid and hopefully Sprint stock will continue to rise a lot over the next few months which would make a stronger case for a MetroPCS bid since their stock price is higher while hoping the MetroPCS stock goes lower or stays the same.

This is a better article to read than the one you posted since the one you posted is a small excerpt that doesn't explain what Sprint's position is.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-10/sprint-is-said-to-hold-off-on-metropcs-counterbid-for-now.html

Maybe you and Josh could set up an LG play date.

 

 

AJ

Unfortunately I am working in Salt Lake City on business for the next several months.

I am really interested in playing with the LG Optimus G. The rest of the devices are bleh.

Ouch. Tmobile is coming out with fighting words commenting on Sprint's latest attempt to counter offer the Tmobile bid. Lets just say Neville Ray is less than pleased with Sprint's latest efforts calling CDMA a "dying" technology as well as bringing up how Sprint failed horribly with the Sprint/Nextel merger with trying to maintain 2 different technologies. Also he couldn't help but bring up about the fact that Sprint's spectrum is incompatible with MetroPCS since MetroPCS mainly uses AWS spectrum vs. Sprint's PCS spectrum.

Boy I really hope Sprint snaps up MetroPCS.

http://www.kansascit...-at-sprint.html

Now that I am working in Salt Lake City temporarily, I would love to see Network Vision here in 2013. I just wish we had more info on 3rd round markets past June 2013. Hopefully Salt Lake City will be on there.

So it's my understanding that Sprint is sticking with 1x Advanced for calling due to the fact that it's more efficient than LTE. This will have some interesting implications with pretty much every other carrier moving to VoLTE. Are any other carriers using 1x Advanced? How will this impact their roaming agreement with Verizon? I suppose Verizon will have their 1x running for quite a while yet even once they start using VoLTE.

 

EDIT - Also, we can assume at some point Sprint will start using VoLTE, no?

So apparently VoLTE still has a long way to go. MetroPCS announced in March this year that it would be the first carrier to transition over to VoLTE in 2H 2012. However recent reports in September show that VoLTE is just not there yet and MetroPCS has delayed VoLTE deployment until next Spring. This tells me that there are still complications with VoLTE. I hope Sprint doesn't jump the gun on any VoLTE deployment. I hope Sprint waits until 2014 at least once Network Vision is done to start considering VoLTE. Let AT&T, Verizon, TMobile be the guinea pigs and iron the VoLTE bugs.

March 2012 article

http://www.fiercebro...2012/2012-03-25

September 2012 article

http://www.fiercewir...nths/2012-09-20

I don't think i've heard of any other US Carriers using 1x Advanced right now.

Actually Cricket announced intention of 1x Advanced deployment in 2012.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/leap-deploys-cdma-1x-advanced-more-efficient-voice-calling/2012-01-10

By way of contrast, MetroPCS has at most 10x10 of AWS in any given area. That's fine if you've already got an AWS portfolio, but as a nationwide network, their AWS doesn't quite do enough to merit integrating another band into devices (added cost), base stations (added cost) etc. Much easier to sell the AWS off or swap it for PCS.

 

Let T-Mobile and Verizon own AWS, and when T-Mobile needs more funding for expansion, buy PCS off of them.

If that is possible then yes, Sprint should pursue AWS to PCS spectrum swaps to bolster their PCS holdings. However, I don't see Verizon, AT&T or Tmobile parting with their PCS spectrum since they all use it heavily on their network. AT&T deploys the majority of HSPA+ and some GSM on 1900 MHz, Verizon deploys their EVDO and CDMA networks on 1900 MHz and Tmobile is now going to be relying on its PCS spectrum to migrate HSPA+ from 1700 MHz to 1900 MHz as part of their challenger program.

I just feel like it sounds great in theory but practically, I just don't see the 3 other major carriers easily parting their small amount of PCS spectrum they have even for a AWS swap since they still need to support their legacy systems. Since MetroPCS has about 20 MHz of AWS spectrum in a lot of the major cities, I just don't see any of the 3 major carriers swapping 20 MHz of PCS spectrum for 20 MHz of AWS spectrum if we want to be fair. I would much rather have Sprint keep the AWS spectrum and possibly deploy LTE on it in the future. Like I said in my other post that eventually Verizon and AT&T will have to deal with the same problem as Sprint of incorporating LTE support for all their LTE bands in the handset. AT&T would have the most with 5 followed by Verizon with 4 LTE bands. Lets not forget that the FCC is trying to expand the AWS band more so than the PCS band so there is potential growth that if Sprint were to pursue AWS that they can obtain the missing AWS spectrum they need in future auctions which would be lacking from a potential MetroPCS/Sprint deal.

While I hope that Sprint can obtain all of the PCS 'H' block spectrum licenses for their footprint, I just find it hard that no other carrier would come in especially AT&T and try to snap up key markets which would ruin Sprint's plan of having nationwide 10x10 contiguous block for LTE of which they need it most.

Why does everyone keep looking at this as a spectrum deal?

 

It's 10 million prepaid customers that will cost sprint little actual cash. They need the cash flow.

 

Keep the PCS, sell the AWS to VZN or T-Mobile, move on.

 

Back when Sprint's stock price was in the toilet, the market cap of Sprint was about 7.5 billion. When including the premium to acquire MetroPCS, their market cap would be over 5 billion.

 

The answer was simple - MetroPCS was not worth 2/3rds of Sprint. That's why the board turned the deal down.

 

Today, the picture is a lot different (though not ideal). Sprint's market cap is now 15 billion and so now Metro is only worth 1/3rd of Sprint.

 

 

In less than a year, we went from a small prepaid carrier being worth two-thirds of sprint down to one-third. It should be less, but it is what it is.

 

 

My question is - why not just acquire LEAP? For 6 million prepaid subscribers you could pay about a billion instead of paying 5 billion for 10 million prepaid subs. Let T-Mobile have PCS, Sprint gets LEAP, do spectrum swaps and sales and let T-Mobile have the AWS, Sprint have the PCS, and for once in the wireless world, the right people win.

I am starting to think that Sprint may want to get MetroPCS to get more spectrum even if it is AWS band. Lets just be honest, the PCS holdings for MetroPCS are pitiful. If you are telling me that Sprint is spending all this money to just get 10 million subs which can leave at any time and for PCS spectrum licenses that only benefit maybe 10 cities then that is a waste. However MetroPCS does have a considerable chunk of AWS spectrum enough for a 10x10 carrier in a lot of the major cities including LA, NY, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, SF, San Diego, etc. If Sprint bought MetroPCS, I would keep the AWS spectrum. If Sprint did sell the AWS and is betting on obtaining all of the 'H' block for its footprint and relying on PCS spectrum swaps with other carriers, I think its putting too many eggs in one basket and would be a dumb move IMO. With obtaining AWS spectrum, it is more of an insurance that Sprint has backup spectrum in case it can't obtain all the PCS spectrum it needs from the H block and PCS spectrum swaps from other carriers. Why would you sell any spectrum when it is so hard to bid and win spectrum licenses at auctions and in this case the MetroPCS AWS spectrum are in a lot of major markets in the US which is served to Sprint on a silver platter. Do not waste it by selling it. If anything Sprint should sell all of its WCS spectrum for cash.

I don't think its wrong for Sprint to start thinking of adding the AWS band since the FCC plans to expand the AWS band aggressively with new spectrum auctions and not so much the PCS band other than the 'H' block so the AWS band growth potential is there. I know this would add another LTE band to Sprint's lineup of 800, 1900 and 2500 MHz but the fact is eventually every carrier will have need to support multiple bands for LTE so I don't see any problem with Sprint adding AWS spectrum to its LTE lineup. The chipsets are out there in the market currently and it would be all about how to integrate the necessary antennas for all these bands into the handset. We know that all 2012 LTE phones will contain only 1900 MHz LTE support. 2013 LTE phones are expected to add 2500 MHz and most likely 800 MHz support. If Sprint were to obtain MetroPCS, they could add AWS LTE support as soon as 2014 LTE phones depending on how Sprint would approach deploying LTE in AWS band.

If you look at AT&T which still have 850 MHz Cellular, 1900 MHz PCS, 1700 MHz AWS and 2300 MHz WCS bands as potential LTE bands and that is on top of their 700 MHz LTE. That would be a total of 5 LTE bands to support. Same with Verizon, they still have 850 MHz Cellular, 1900 MHz PCS and 1700 MHz AWS bands that can be added for LTE on top of their 700 MHz LTE. That would be a total of 4 LTE bands to support which would be the same number of LTE bands Sprint would need to support. All this talk about..OMG Sprint shouldn't do it since it would have to add another LTE band to its lineup is just laughable if you consider that AT&T and Verizon would be in similar situations within the next 2-3 years.

I still don't understand why Sprint is so adamant on obtaining MetroPCS. Their PCS spectrum holdings are pitiful and of no significance. If Sprint did merge with MetroPCS it would only be to obtain AWS spectrum which none of their LTE devices currently use. I am not sure if Sprint really wants to enter into the hot AWS band which all the major carriers seem to be gravitating to start or supplement their current LTE.

At least a purchase of Cricket would have much better PCS holdings and a decent amount of AWS holdings. With the missed payment by Cricket recently, they should be able to be snatched up on the cheap. God I hope Hesse doesn't do anything stupid and overpay. I say just let Tmobile and MetroPCS merge. Sprint should be countering by finishing Network Vision, purchase Cricket and Clearwire outright and purchase all of the PCS 'H' block spectrum. By letting Tmobile have MetroPCS, they would have a sufficient amount of spectrum and with the recent spectrum deals of Verizon and Tmobile that should take them out of the running to bid on the PCS H block spectrum which is very valuable to Sprint. With the 'H' block spectrum, Sprint can run a contiguous 10x10 LTE carrier.

I am truly disappointed that Motorola has abandoned efforts for an ICS/JB upgrade after stringing us customers along for a year. This is unacceptable as a company who has many promises and then pulls it out of the rug. They should be ashamed of themselves and certainly has lost a customer in me. I will never buy another Motorola phone even if they make promises of improving updates.

Also their $100 offer is only good if you buy a new Motorola device. It is still unclear on whether the $100 is applicable if you buy the new Motorola device at the subsidized price of $200 or at full retail price. If the $100 is only good if you buy a phone at full retail price then the offer is completely useless. Unless Motorola is saying they are giving $100 to all Photon, Atrix and Electrify customers for not getting ICS this offer does nothing for me. Even their current offer does not entice me one bit to jump back in the sinking ship of Motorola.