Jump to content

maximus1987/lou99

S4GRU Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,072

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by maximus1987/lou99

  1. maximus1987/lou99
    ^ At least someone gets it. I see everyone here blaming Sprint's lack of rural coverage but here in urban areas no one cares about rural coverage. I live in a city and everyone hates Sprint but it is NOT because of its lack of rural coverage. It's actually because WITHIN the city, it's coverage and signal penetration sucks. Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4 Beta May I ask which city? I'd like to go to the sponsor maps that indicate the "NV finished" sites to compare to my city.
  2. maximus1987/lou99
    If that were true to a large degree, rest assured Hesse will tell Son and they'll spend $$$ to expand coverage where needed. My girlfriend's parents are exactly like this: if you mention switching to another carrier, they'll knee jerk into "nope Verizon has the best coverage" but people like this will cling to Verizon even if Sprint, tomorrow, could expand coverage EVERYWHERE; they're the "uncovertables". So I guess I see AJ's point.
  3. maximus1987/lou99
    Ask yourself why it never has been done? It's because there is no return on the investment. In rural areas, you need a 30-40 share to get it pay for itself. If there is already two large carriers, it's not possible to get enough as the third carrier to make it profitable. You are asking Sprint to lose money to expand coverage. And then you would probably complain if Sprint raised their prices to pay for the unprofitable network expansion. Sprint monitors roaming very closely. They know very well the areas that roaming is occurring and the amount of usage the site would sustain. They do add sites in high roaming areas all the time. And I believe SoftBank will add even more. However, asking them to add unprofitable coverage for bragging rights is not a good way to run a business. I have a lot of confidence in SoftBank. They will add lots of coverage where it makes sense. The old Sprint often couldn't afford to add sites even when there was a pay off. The New Sprint under SoftBank will never say no because they cannot afford it. However, I do expect them to say no where it isn't going to pay off. Robert As an engineer, I can't imagine staying to work for Sprint throughout the network degradation. I think I would've crawled under my desk singing Barney songs lol.
  4. maximus1987/lou99
    If you're talking about dropped calls and no signal within a Sprint coverage area, that's one thing. But otherwise, as AJ addressed, most people live in metro areas and Sprint, unlike TMO, has coverage outside the metro areas. Where they don't have native coverage is in the truly rural areas and his point is: so what? How many Chicago-people are going to go in the truly rural parts of Illinois? The problem to which you're alluding is the one that Tmobile has: plenty of rural coverage, in certain areas, but it's all 2G with no plans to upgrade it. In fact, CEO of DT called EDGE "a world class technology" (in this thread not too far up). Sprint won't have that problem.
  5. maximus1987/lou99
    This is more and more why I believe that our wireless network -- at the very least, in rural areas -- should be nationalized. Then, let countless wireless operators buy capacity on that national network. AJ The comparison HAS been made between made between roads and wired infrastructure: on 1800s, many private toll roads existed but the state legislatures bought them and merged them into a state network. I'm sure the NSA would love it if there were only one network controlled by the government. So it's not gonna happen, especially not under Comrade Obama and the most transparent administration.
  6. maximus1987/lou99
    He answered it in what you quoted: they can't lose money doing it otherwise it's pointless. If you lose money rolling out coverage everywhere, what have you gained? Sprint's not gonna do something just to be the first to do it. They built out the fiber because they guessed I would make money, not to be the first to do it.
  7. maximus1987/lou99
    They are the freaking spawn of Ma Bell -- the biggest monopoly ever broken up in this country. Do you think it coincidence that the two biggest RBOCs are now the two biggest wireless operators? Do you actually think it is because of their superior vision and direction or because of their regional monopoly money over the past 30 years? AJ Pardon me but I'm not seeing the connection between my quoted post and your response.
  8. maximus1987/lou99
    You are asking Sprint to do something that no one has ever done. Build a nationwide network organically. VZW and ATT haven't even done that. They bought those networks to expand their coverage. Sprint would lose a lot of money doing it. Sprint's name is mud right now. Building new coverage in new areas will not mean new customers enough to justify the costs. They need to reduild their brand first. Then when they show up in new places, they might have a chance to compete and take customers away from the duopoly. I can tell you the old Sprint had no interest in expanding new coverage into new areas, except when it made sense because roaming costs in the area was high. However, the New Sprint under SoftBank may have a desire to branch out further. But if they do, it will be because they see a path to making it profitable. And that's the bottom line. The New Sprint will probably be open to all kinds of ideas, but there has to be a return on it. They are going to he very competitive with the duopoly, no doubt. And coverages are going to improve, both within the existing network and outside. But the scale is not known yet. And it probably will be less than what we'd prefer. Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta I agree with all that and the point that I'm fixated on is that Sprint will NEVER expand to cover 100% like V+T. I'm taking about 6+ years.
  9. maximus1987/lou99
    No, go back and read my previous post. A pro big business previous administration that could not see the forest for the tree and allowed the two biggest children of Ma Bell to acquire anti competitive market share in the new telephone paradigm is PATHETIC. And your attitude that Sprint must be self sufficient under those anti competitive circumstances is PATHETIC. AJ Sprint has SMR for voice and LTE, they have the cash-backing of SoftBank and they could expand native coverage over at LEAST 6 years. And we haven't even gotten to 600 MHz, which I think you've said could be activated by 2017? What's wrong with that thinking?
  10. maximus1987/lou99
    Nope, I do not think that will ever happen to the extent that some of you hope. I have said this time and again, but you have to realize that VZW and AT&T (arguably, collusively) bought up a quarter century of Cellular 850 MHz deployment. Sprint cannot compete with that, probably not ever. It is akin to allowing Ford to buy out the Interstate Highway System, then expecting GM to construct its own national highway system in parallel. AJ I call double standard. 1) You fault VZW and ATT for not overbuilding but just buying their way into rural America yet you give a pass to Sprint for applying the same logic. 2) If it weren't for SoftBank-daddy-warbucks I would happily concede that it would be irresponsible for Sprint to attempt ubiquitous buildout in the face of T and V BUT Sprint has the moola now. 3) But the most salient - not sure of use - point is that we're talking about 6 YEARS! I can concede that it would be foolish for Sprint, even with daddy-Softbank, to attempt a whirlwind rollout in 1-2 years, and expect a quick ROI, but not even an incremental rollout over 6 years, slowly expanding native coverage at the fringes?!?!? I mean at the very least, wouldn't such an incremental expansion reduce roaming costs over time AND slowly change perception in rural America of Sprint's rural coverage? It'd possibly advertise itself.
  11. maximus1987/lou99
    I've been thinking about this the last couple of days between this chat and a couple others. If Verizon is moving somewhat quickly to VOLTE and refarming EVDO carriers to LTE, once they get to a point where they have less CDMA and possibly no EVDO coverage wouldn't a large part of Sprint's roaming area all but disappear? With no roaming on LTE, what would Sprint's roaming coverage look like then? I know this is a long way off, just wondering. I agree with AJ. And I would further add that by the time CDMA roaming starts to disappear en masse, Sprint will probably have VoLTE devices out and Verizon will likely be providing LTE roaming either by choice or FCC requirement. Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta Or Sprint could just buildout its own 800 MHz LTE in 6 years time and acquire more SMR where it doesn't have enough for 5x5 LTE and 1x. For the remaining SMR license holders like Southernlinc, will they have any alternative but to sell to Sprint given that Direct Connect and LTE Band 26 will be the only use for their spectrum? Seriously, 6 years and we're still talking about Sprint roaming on Verizon? Kinda pathetic. Actually REALLY pathetic.
  12. maximus1987/lou99
    Verizon believes the 3G network reached its peak utilization earlier this year, but it will keep that system up and running at least through 2019, she said. http://m.computerworld.com/s/article/9240403/Verizon_notches_500th_LTE_market_declares_initial_rollout_done
  13. maximus1987/lou99
    VZW has announced no plans to refarm Cellular 850 MHz, only PCS 1900 MHz. And that comes as no surprise. Cellular 850 MHz regulations include strict geographic area coverage requirements. With current site density, LTE is not going to cut it. Loss of coverage would mean a violation of VZW's license terms and/or a contraction of VZW's licensed area. So, EV-DO may fall by the wayside sooner rather than later, but expect CDMA1X to stick around until roughly 2020. And that should present little disruption to Sprint roaming, since few Sprint PRLs enable EV-DO roaming on VZW anyway. AJ So is that when Sprint is gonna buildout its 800mhz LTE?
  14. maximus1987/lou99
    ...only if ALL of them are using their connection My point was that average speed is more important than peak speed. You're only gonna see peak speeds at 2am but average speeds are daytime, normal hours.
  15. maximus1987/lou99
    Capacity. The speed that a tower can provide to the average user depends on the number of users connected to that tower. Assuming the 100mbps is peak speed, that speed is divided by the number of people connected to the tower.
  16. maximus1987/lou99
    They had 35-36,000 of their own sites the rest of the 51,000 are MetroPCS sites. They don't need to upgrade the MetroPCS sites since those will be shutdown. Please provide your source.
  17. maximus1987/lou99
    I think this thread should be renamed: "Why Tmobile's LTE Network will suck (royally)" The reason: they're only upgrading 37k out of 51k towers to LTE; the rest will be EDGE forever. For more details, see the other Tmobile thread.
  18. maximus1987/lou99
    Since Sprint is upgrading almost 39k sites to LTE, will it in the near future increase site count to put further distance between Tmobile? It seems that Sprint would need to because it is setting itself up as an alternative to Verizon/ATT and their coverage, and not Tmobile. Sprint better start deploying that 800 MHz far and wide so it doesn't get stuck (in perception) between Tmobile and ATT/Verizon which would be bad for business: more expensive than bargain-mobile but not as much coverage as V-ATT; with the 800 MHz AND Softbank-daddy, there really are no more excuses.
  19. maximus1987/lou99
    The reverse is also worth asking: Why not just leave them? In this arrangement Sprint has less risk and less capital expenditure. If Shentel runs into problems then Sprint can probably buy them for cheaper than they could now. If it was prohibitively expensive for Sprint to run subs there then Sprint would do a cost analysis and determine if it is is worth it to buy them out. TBH, Shentel is probably better at running it's area than Sprint is at managing it's entire network. What if someone else buys them to screw with Sprint? Verizon is still allowed to buy Tier 3 carriers and recently - cant find article - it even bought a GSM carrier which it stated it would convert to CDMA.
  20. maximus1987/lou99
    Why not just buy them? Sounds like they're already part of the company.
  21. maximus1987/lou99
    World-class may be the only way to refer to EDGE in a positive manner. I wish someone would have the courage to call them out directly on their massive and deteriorating low speed footprint Millions leaving should be enough to get their attention. I wonder if he was snickering when he was saying "world class EDGE". I wonder what DT will do if by end of year 2014, as they're finishing their upgrades, customers start leaving cause of the coverage issue.
  22. maximus1987/lou99
    As for Shentel, they use each other's network interchangeable and it is all branded as Sprint. Shentel maintains the network in the areas they own. Sprint/Shentel have a formula they use based on how much usage occurs inside/outside their borders to determine how much $ Shentel is paid out of Sprint's revenue. Also, they own ~600 towers (580 some I believe) in PA/MD/VA. Who pays for the NV upgrades?
  23. maximus1987/lou99
    How much did TMO have before this transaction in those markets? Is there a map of the transfer?
  24. maximus1987/lou99
    I was on the same line of thinking too initially. We have to consider all of Sprint's native footprint, not just corporate owned sites when comparing the two. Start including Shentel, Swiftel, nTelos, Carolina Wireless, et al, to Sprint's 38,000 site total and the 51,000 site number for T-Mobile doesn't seem so far fetched. It would be great to see a specific breakdown on the Tmo side, but I feel pretty comfortable with Tmo having 51,000 sites now. And what does this really say? Tmo does not provide more coverage than Sprint. It means they have a lot of waste and redundancy that is costing them millions. And now, they are bringing in MetroPCS sites on top of this 51,000 number. Even more redundancy. Tmo really needs a Network Vision style project to consolidate and standardize, and most importantly, reduce redundant cost and shed some of these useless sites. And perhaps add some where they really need it. Robert MetroPCS is bringing in 11.5k additional sites but TMO has announced they're gonna retire 10k of them. I just called TMO customer service and for what it's worth, a "technical specialist" said "50k native and 7k roaming". Also, do you have a link explaining Sprint's relationship with their "affiliates"? It sounds like they're part of Sprint but not really.
  25. maximus1987/lou99
    Link please?
×
×
  • Create New...