bigsnake49

1 hour ago, chamb said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dish-network-ceo/dish-co-founder-ergen-steps-down-from-ceo-role-to-focus-on-wireless-idUSKBN1DZ1ZX

Charlie Ergen to step down from his position and concentrate totally on his wireless network.  Will be interesting to see where he goes with this.

I still think that Sprint can use some of Dish's mid and low spectrum capacity. Hopefully they can partner on Dish's deployment.

3 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

Oops yup forgot to mention that

Between Dish, Comcast and AT&T you might be able to assemble a nice little trove of 600MHz spectrum particularly in urban areas. If Sprint was not so cash strapped...

1 hour ago, RAvirani said:

Dish’s spectrum holdings are:

- 6 MHz 700 E Block (722-728)

- 15 MHz of AWS-3 (1695-1710)

- 10 MHz FDD PCS H Block (1915-1920, 1995-2000)

- 40 MHz FDD of AWS-4 (2000-2020, 2180-2200)

Plus 10+ of 600MHz

35 minutes ago, lilotimz said:

Plopping down 75-125' poles for small cells without asking local entities for permission is a great idea. We're going to use right of ways and not care about the locals. Lets see them fight this. ~mobilitie

>> gets all small cells deployment blocked and while deployed ones are forced to be removed by local authorities <<

^^ TLDR of sprints small cell deployment via mobilitie

For some reason neither Verizon nor T-Mobile had those problems with their small cell deployments. It's what happens when you go with the low cost bidder.

2 minutes ago, gusherb said:

Glad they figured that out. Small cells are a poor substitute for making up for bad macro coverage, but a great supplement to already good macro coverage. Verizon deployed a bunch of metrocells in my area 3-4 years back and seems to have figured out that they're pretty much useless unless one is within 500-1000' of one. They've replaced at least one that I'm aware of with a macro site. 

I believe that working with cable cos to implement strand and pole mounted small cells is the way to go forward. But yeah they cannot substitute for well spaced macros.

Meanwhile, DT chairman has left open the possibility of merger:

FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Deutsche Telekom (DTEGn.DE) left the door open to a merger of its T-Mobile US business (TMUS.O) days after the collapse of a deal between its U.S. business and Sprint Corp (S.N).

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/deutsche-telekom-raises-guidance-collapse-061452645.html

One thing that Marcello talked about is that the small cell strategy while successful in some areas was not as successful in others and that basically forced the pivot to traditional macro sites.

“The last year and a half, two years have been a great learning experience. We’ve tried to disrupt the way networks get built. We’ve been successful in certain areas and, to be fair, we haven’t been successful in others,” he conceded. “So we’re going to go toward a more traditional network build-out. Our friends at the tower companies I think are going to be very happy.”

http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-s-claure-tower-companies-going-to-be-very-happy-our-capex

2 hours ago, WiWavelength said:

Extending native footprint along I-80 is one thing.  But building new footprint off the beaten path in Fumblebuck, WY, as T-Mobile is doing, is another thing.  It has Magentans cheering, even though most of them will never ever use that coverage.

AJ

I would settle for any coverage on I-80.

10 hours ago, Fraydog said:

Also, I'm cool with the Altice deal, but as of right now, their cable assets cover a very small geographic area of the US. Xfinity and Spectrum, on the other hand, serve most of the US population. I can't see the Altice deal moving the needle much.

Sprint also has a danger in ramping up capital investment. In a market that is more increasingly competitive, will they be able to make return on investment? Let's not forget 5G is on the horizon. If Sprint doesn't get good results on this, I see Masa going back to the table with the Magentans waiving the white flag. That said, I am eager to see one last shot at making Sprint work. I personally wish Masa would take Sprint private as in buy up 100% under SoftBank. Maybe a SoftBank Mobile rebrand would do some good?

Sprint needs to finish densifying and expanding their coverage. They also need to refinance their debt with lower interest dates and pay some of it off. 5G can wait for a while...T-Mobile and Sprint can always l merge their networks and give them scale so that 5G won't be such a drain on resources. 

1 hour ago, Arysyn said:

Dish and T-Mobile together would make great use of that spectrum. Better for Sprint though to focus on densification of band 41.

If Dish and T-Mobile get together they will probably have to give up some of the 600MHz spectrum or allow roaming at very low rates.

At some point or another, Sprint needs to approach Dish about hosting their spectrum beginning with the 600MHz spectrum. Maybe not right away but if they want to be a truly nationwide carrier they need to reduce their roaming expenses and at least cover the highways.

15 minutes ago, kamiller42 said:

I am confused by Son's latest comments. Now, after the failed merger, they say they'll invest serious money into Sprint network. Softbank has owned Sprint for 5 years. 

What happened last 5 years? Spending just enough to get by? Are they saying NOW they are serious about rebuilding Sprint?

Yeah, it's a confusing message.

I wonder what the hold up was with Comcast and Charter about signing a comparable agreement. Strand and pole mounted small cells are a wonderful way to densify a network. I am thinking that the companies are looking to 3.5GHz carrier neutral small cells for the first layer of their wireless network with the Verizon MVNO network as a backstop too they can minimize their roaming costs. No reason why they can't accommodate both 2.5GHz and 3.5GHz. The only problem I see for the 3.5GHZ strategy is that once the incumbent and licensed users of the spectrum get their fair share of the spectrum there might not be a lot of spectrum left for the unlicensed users. Unless they decide to bid in the future 3.5GHz auction, I see the reliance on the unlicensed option to minimize the roaming cost on the Verizon network failing.

6 minutes ago, Fraydog said:

Those synergies can only be found in certain areas. Truth is, Sprint doesn't have to be doing a straight up merger with Charter (which doesn't seem to know what they are doing with their tech compared to Comcast) to get advantages. I'd prefer other ways of working with cable.

Let's not forget that linear cable channels over QAM have never offered less content or less value. Some cable companies still are pumping out analog QAM channels. Comcast over-compresses HD. Pay TV isn't even a good margin business any more because content providers are trying to milk customers out of everything they are worth through the cable companies.

Look at the Dodgers channel that Charter can't sell to anyone else. You really want that obligation on Sprint's books? I wouldn't.

AT&T and Dish have had cord cutting options but Comcast and Charter? Comcast won't even sell their OTT product outside their footprint.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

I get it, cable has basically been operating like it is still the 90s. But the great conflict between content providers and cable providers is coming. All cable has to do is to increase the bandwidth available to the cable modem so that people can stream different channels over the internet and hopefully from the cables cos own video servers. Something like Apple does with AppleTV. Apple takes a percentage off the top with no risk. The risk lies with the content providers. Heck they can partner with Apple or Roku or Amazon or Netflix. Provide access to content over wireless or cable. 

19 hours ago, Fraydog said:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Charter-in-Merger-Talks-140639

 

Charter back in it. I see the problem with this is that Rutledge and Malone will want control over Sprint and will put Masa in the back seat. When Masa meets with them, that will be the air let out of the Charter/Sprint balloon.

 

Also, cable and wireless tech isn't exactly complimentary at this point, though Sprint could push Charter off QAM to IP for wired video, they might also need a better DVR because Charter's current DVR sucks compared to Dish' s Hopper, DirecTV's Genie, or Comcast's X1. Even my local cable company has a whole home DVR. Charter got rid of theirs! It isn't like a combined Sprint and Charter will be able to bully people into getting wireless like Charter does with cable and Rogers can do with cable and wireless up in the frozen North. Rogers has one less national competitor for one. Only way Masa can replicate that is for DT to take over Sprint and with Masa playing backseat driver while Legere and Hottges trying to negotiate something with Comcast or Charter.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

There's a lot of synergies between a cable company and a wireless company. Strand mounted small cells and WiFi is one. Backhaul and fronthaul for another. Integration of fixed and mobile telephony. With cord cutters, a chance to capture some of the cord cutting crowd by offering them OTT choices. A way to pressure content providers to offer ala carte channels.

3 hours ago, JeffDTD said:

What a bore. I can’t help but think that time that could have been devoted to planning, promotions and strategy has been used to chase a merger. And that’s both carriers, not just Sprint. What do we really want? Reliable, competitively priced data, calls and text. I still don’t give a rats ass about 5g or coverage in the woods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am pretty sure that they did not put anything on hold because of the merger. Plenty of people available to plan expansion and network improvement.

1 hour ago, chamb said:

Possible silly question here. I know this has been discussed but maybe we need to talk about it again.

Talking about Band 41, slow upload.    Is it possible that some other lower frequency could be used somehow for upload? Leave band 41 configured as it is, but somehow have a completely different upload channel. If you were not having success with uploading on band 41, the second channel would carry the upload. Or something that would aggregate with the current B-41 upload. 

Can a phone transmit on one frequency for upload and another one for download?    Didn't we discuss uploading on 1900 and downloading on 2500?   Is that not possible?  

Do we know if any foreign cell companies that use band 41are trying anything like I mentioned?

I am seeing live feeds to TV networks from sudden hot news spots that break up at times.  I was not sure if they are using wi-fi or cell networks, but they sure are not using the expensive satellite trucks.

I am not sure if upload CA is released and in the field yet. There was also the possibility of using Band 25 for the upload.

30 minutes ago, lilotimz said:

Most sites from every carrier uses battery backup units. Fuel based backup generator are on the whole fairly rare and location dependent as there is steadily increasing upkeep cost as the equipment ages. In most circumstances battery powered backup units would suffice with minimal upkeep costs.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

Verizon's sites are probably 85-90% generator backed up. You get what you pay for.

14 minutes ago, Fraydog said:

Dish's stock is up on this... lol

Makes sense! Dish's spectrum might be attractive to T-Mobile. Actually its 600Mhz spectrum might be attractive to Sprint or some other spectrum holding company associated with Softbank . 

12 minutes ago, JustinRP37 said:

I'm seeing a lot of discussion about debt in here. Just to clear things up, most companies have massive amounts of debt. All wireless carriers have a bunch of debt. It is NOT cheap to build out a network. However, the reason why Sprint is 'beleaguered' is because of its debt load per customer, continual losses, and over the past decade subscriber additions (losses). It is OKAY and actually a good thing to take on debt if it means you will gain more customers, thus more revenue, thus expanding your market reach. This is why the debt of T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon is safe debt. It is safe to say that Sprint HAS turned a corner, but it MUST continually make subscriber gains and continue to stay net positive to pay down debt. Sprint has also leveraged a lot of assets to help ease the pain of the debt. Further, when you have poor financials, which Sprint had for years, your credit market is much tougher. You will be subjected to much higher interest rates, just like when you forget a credit card bill you are hit with a penalty APR. Don't forget Sprint is literally rebuilding their Puerto Rico network, had damage in Florida, Texas, and California. That hurt this quarter's financials a bit and they even admitted that. They are definitely on the right path, but people want miracles overnight. That does not happen and there are still many risks in the future. 

Actually Sprint has refinanced a lot of it's high interest debt and will continue to do so by putting up spectrum as collateral.

For those that think that Sprint is overleveraged, T-Mobile has an approximate $28B debt load. If it wasn't for the $5B debt forgiveness from DT at the time of the MetroPCS merger and the $6B AT&T breakup fee, T-mobile would be thought as beleaguered.

3 hours ago, dkyeager said:

According to root metrics, the real world coverage of T-Mobile and Sprint does not overlap as much a people think. Just by combining there would be a significant reduction in roaming from 26 to 28% to 16%. Many other interesting points as well.

http://blog.ihs.com/sprint-and-t-mobile-combined-the-implications-of-a-merger?utm_campaign=pc10030&utm_medium=social-network&utm_source=twitter&hootPostID=d3417d530a26b24dfc9e949c097b2e29

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk
 

I think that at some point they will need to promise to match or exceed Verizon's coverage.

21 minutes ago, utiz4321 said:

You are forgetting that another round of huge CAPEX expenditures are going to be needed over the next 3-5 years to keep sprint r elavent, while at the sametime sprint has massive debt payments due.  Where is that money going to come from? 

Yep and we're not even talking about 5G with an new air link protocol and probably new basestation updates.

49 minutes ago, JustinRP37 said:

The quarter was not a ‘great’ quarter. It was a highly mixed quarter. Yes, losses were not as bad as predicted, but revenues also fell short of what was predicted. There was still a net loss. Remember, they are still giving lines of service away for free to gain customers against the competition. In my opinion, this adds fuel to the a merger is needed camp. While I would rather have competition and 4 national carriers, they will use this to say they need to merge to strengthen synergies. 

Any time they have a positive free cash flow is OK by me but if they just accumulate cash by not spending on the network then it is a problem. Unless they are accumulating cash so they can spend it on the network :).

Sprint did have a good quarter overall although the debt load is worrisome.  They also spend $682M in Capex for the network.