maximus1987/lou99
-
Posts
1,072 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Articles
Media Demo
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Forums
Posts posted by maximus1987/lou99
-
-
I don't see them switching back to sprint. Companies don't switch suppliers unless the current supplier is not meeting needs. If Verizon's speeds are good enough for this guys company, why would they switch?That' sucks but I completely understand the business stand point. Maybe in time your company will switch back to sprint. I love sprint but I don't see their network being amazing and up to par with vzw and AT&T not until 2015. By then and hopefully we have LTE on 800 and 2500 nationwide
Maybe for lower price but Verizon is probably already giving them discounts and sprint wants to maintain certain margins.
This company will be in Verizon's arms forever. Too bad. 65k phones is a lot of revenue.
-
At my company, they use ATT and Verizon. Interestingly, IT told me they prefer Verizon because their automated menu is simpler for making changes to employee accounts.
-
1
-
-
At least everyone else's speeds will increase lol.2/5 of our plan members use their phone strictly for business. Come October we may not be with Sprint either.
-
How do wireless companies decide the split between dividends and investments?
As a reference, TDS/USM said:
On its Q2 earnings call, TDS' executives outlined a 75%-25% split in deploying capital; 75% would go towards investments in the business, both organic and inorganic, and the remaining 25% would be returned to shareholders, via both buybacks and dividends
http://m.seekingalpha.com/article/1605492 -
The problem is sprint could finish/expand faster with more Soft money.I have no doubts Softbank would throw more money at Sprint if it needed to. But if Sprint can pay for itself... what seems to be the problem?
-
1
-
-
They can. They won't. It's business.Why cant they give sprint some capital? They said that they are relying on "Sprint's ability to grow steadily" so why not give them the means to do so with all that damn money.. This whole thing sounds pointless now.
Why can't DT give TMO more $$$? They own 74% and are in similar situation as SoftBank. Business.
They give them $5bil.
-
He have them $5bil, could've been $8bil if it weren't for Charlie. He figures with the clearwire acquisition and TDD everywhere, sprint should at least be able to get better loan terms.Wow... just wow.. And thanks.. Not even a dime
-
How did Comcast block them?Comcast is the devil. They have a monopoly here in northeastern Florida. They blocked Verizon FiOS and AT&T so besides Comcast Internet, I have no DSL option and Clear never got a signal in my home unless I had it outside on top of the fence.
-
Nothing
"Softbank's 21.6 billion dollar takeover of Sprint includes $5 billion of capital to bolster the U.S. firm's balance sheet. Sprint is supposed to pay for network investments out of its own earnings, requiring no additional funding from Softbank.
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/softbank-set-to-invest-16-billion-at-sprint-20130707-00017
Finally! Thanks for posting this article. Confirmation of coverage plans.
If the network isn't good, customers are going to complain, Mr. Son said, adding that Sprint will seek to pull even with Verizon in high-speed coverage in about two years.
-
Wow. $8bil next year and no SoftBank help. Yowza!Nothing
"Softbank's 21.6 billion dollar takeover of Sprint includes $5 billion of capital to bolster the U.S. firm's balance sheet. Sprint is supposed to pay for network investments out of its own earnings, requiring no additional funding from Softbank.
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/softbank-set-to-invest-16-billion-at-sprint-20130707-00017
-
Nothing
"Softbank's 21.6 billion dollar takeover of Sprint includes $5 billion of capital to bolster the U.S. firm's balance sheet. Sprint is supposed to pay for network investments out of its own earnings, requiring no additional funding from Softbank.
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/softbank-set-to-invest-16-billion-at-sprint-20130707-00017
We've found that there is considerable possibility for cutting costs," Mr. Son said
Sprint employees are gonna be squeezed. Japanese companies - yes I've worked for one and all my peers agree - are brutal when it comes to personnel costs.
The upside is that consumers are gonna benefit.
-
TMO is adding LTE to 37k sites, sprint initially 39k. TMO has additional 15k rural sites so sprint's initial deployment is comparable to TMO's.
No, the point is that comparing the speed of Sprint's LTE rollout to T-Mobile's LTE rollout isn't an apples to apples comparison. Sprint is doing it on nearly EVERY site (even their rural ones unlike TMO which is still 2G EDGE in like half of their territory), and they aren't just adding LTE, they are upgrading their 3G equipment as part of the process and running proper backhaul.
-
That's why the carriers will never allow this without apple going thermonuclear on them.Holy Scheiße! That sounds cool! But seeing as though most of the U.S. population lives in urban area, wouldn't T-Mobile make insane amounts of money?
-
They don't NEED 3 bands. Look how ATT is densifying its 700 MHz to makeup for its lack of nationwide AWS. Someone here said that ATT is on every tower in their area but sprint is only on every other tower. Also, ATT is deploying 40,000 small cells to take care of capacity problems.I has it in MOST markets now with that purchase.
You will see a giant hole in West Texas and also in the WY,MT, ND, SD area as well, though admittedly those areas probably don't have many areas where VZW is spectrum constrained to begin with. They could probably use Cell and PCS in those areas for LTE offload. I was trying to point out that the other carriers don't have 3 and 4 bands they can put LTE on yet. They have 1 (TMO) or two (ATT and VZW in most markets).
ATT ???probably??? wont even deploy WCS everywhere, not even as widely as VZW is deploying AWS.
-
No it's way different. With current sims, if you have a sim from carrier X, you can only connect to network X. Apple wants to be able to dynamically switch from TMO to sprint to ATT to VZW to etc as often as it wants to.Reading the article, isn't this what Apple already does for the CDMA iPhone? It asks what carrier it's on when it powers up, and then activation goes through Apple's servers. This would just extend that 100% to GSM devices, from the 90% it already was.
This would turn cell service into an auction: the iphone would broadcast "hey orifices! Give me your best price" and the iphone would choose automatically the lowest price.
If you're in an urban area, your iphone will choose TMO. If you're in countryside, it would redo the auction and choose VZW or ATT (or maybe sprint if they buildout).
-
I'm on 1x. What is it?Indeed
-
-
Obviously, no carrier anywhere wants virtual sims.
What's it gonna take for this tech to make it into a phone? Apple could play hardball and withhold the iphone unless an operator allows it but that seems unlikely.
Is there a business case for operators to be in favor of v-sims?
-
Here's where cricket (and everyone else) has AWS licenses.
-
We already have a thread for the 1755-1780.From 7/23's WSJ: "Pentagon Offers Compromise on Spectrum Sought by Wireless Carriers"
-
VZW AWS in SOME markets? It has AWS everywhere. They also bought spectrumco licenses.I'd say TMO is stuck on AWS for the time being, VZW is stuck on 700 with AWS in some markets, and ATT is a mess with it's 700 and AWS holdings and WCS is at least a year from beginning deployments. ATT and VZW don't have enough 800 and PCS in their larger markets at their current site density, to begin converting that to LTE in most markets. Until they can get some voice/data off of their 800/PCS legacy networks, they will be in a crunch for a couple years, though ATT at least has WCS nearly everywhere.
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99&p=1495
What I don't get is why VZW doesn't densify like ATT.
-
With the IBEZ issue, will your phone "know" it's in the IBEZ and not scan at all for 800?
-
Lucky you. Stupid ibeZ.I think I speak for all of (some of) us when I say, awww!
Aaactually, here in Grand Rapids, there's only a (very) small handful of 800 MHz 1X towers turned on. I've seen some devices that, when stuck on 800 with low signal (and for some reason not jumping back to the superior 1900 signal (yes it happens)), have become "ear warmers" with bad battery life. I know it will get supremely better once 800 is everywhere, but it's not.
-
For the 2600 filling in, will that be using small cells or macro?First, the HTC One and GS4 were not surprising to me at all that they did not include LTE 800. They couldn't have. No one has ever used Band 26 for LTE. It only was FCC approved that wideband operations could be done in the SMR band in 3rd Quarter 2012. Then Sprint had to put together the very first lab and FIT for LTE 800. It took months of planning/testing. And then in March 2013 they were able to get the info to the OEM's about the band for inclusion in devices. The HTC One was complete and in production at that time. So the earliest devices can be out is about now. First USB/hotspot devices, then smart phones a few months later.
Second, Minnesota is not struggling. Compared to other markets, it is going quite well. Additionally, to add LTE 800 is not anything like what has gone on to date. All the equipment for LTE 800 was installed at each site when it received a Network Vision equipment upgrade. Someone just has to go back, install a carrier card and fire the thing up and test it. Some of the newer sites may even already have the carrier cards.
Also, you probably have not had the end of the year deadline explained. When they say done by the end of the year, they mean all the sites that have received their LTE 1900 upgrades will also have their LTE 800 turned on too. Then after that, every site from there forward will get LTE 1900 and 800 turned on at the same time.
As far as TD-LTE, it is much more than bragging rights. It does provide much faster speeds. But more importantly, it adds a lot more capacity. Each TD-LTE carrier has roughly three times the capacity of each LTE 1900 carrier. It will free up those LTE 1900 and LTE 800 carriers to only the people who need them because the 2600 won't reach them. And it will keep those 1900/800 carrier speeds much higher as a result of most of the traffic being carried on 2600.
Also, LTE on 2600 is much better than WiMax in signal propagation. WiMax petered out around -82dBm RSSI, but LTE goes out to about -95dBm RSSI. And on a hotspot, I can get it to stick around -100 to -103dBm. This is a significant coverage boost that will be seen between LTE and WiMax. I was able to use TD-LTE on my hotspot in Denver in many more places than WiMax.
SoftBank is putting TD-LTE 2600 on every single Clearwire WiMax site. They are now on 5,000 or so. They are trying to push up the deadline and may be able to get this done 1st quarter 2014. This will give Sprint the ability to close up entire coverage in most Top 100 markets pretty quickly. Because this is an overlay type of install, more like what Tmo has done. It will go much quicker than Sprint Network Vision, which involved so much planning, permitting and a complete rebuild at every site.
But SoftBank is not stopping there. The are requiring TD-LTE to be added to every single Sprint Network Vision site too. Every one. And then on top of that, they are committing to add lots more TD-LTE sites, in filling between sites in urban areas that have no 2600 signal, or would benefit from a stronger one.
And these are not just dreams of Sprint executives. These are concrete plans by our Japanese Overlords, who not only have the money to do it all, but have done exactly the same thing in Japan. I understand everyone's frustrations with the past. But this is not even the same company anymore, except in name.
Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk
Someone should start a small cells thread and explain how it's gonna be different compared to a macro site. Pictures would be nice.
Softbank - New Sprint - Discussion
in General Topics
Posted
Where's the Corleon family when you need them?