milan03

Chicago is Verizon's 20MHz FDD market, speeds approaching 140Mbps.

Again, since I know that S4GRU members are much more technically savvy than most cellular users, I believe that it's very important to have the right expectations set in terms of what that TDD LTE coverage may look like. 8T8R radios won't magically extend 2.5GHz reach as that's physically impossible, but it should help those within the coverage area to get more usable TDD LTE experience. It'll mostly improve in building propagation when in close proximity to the cell site and usability in edge of cell situations only when on B41. That edge of cell on B41 should be well within the B25/B26 coverage area btw so you're most likely going to fall back to B25/26 anyway. That brings me back to my previous post... If you're not getting proper PCS G LTE coverage in Sprint's fully deployed and launched LTE markets, it would be unrealistic to expect that B41 deployment will bring any coverage improvements, which brings us back to the subject of this topic, and that is potential pCell deployment and densification of Sprint's LTE network. Without substantial densification and proper backhaul all that massive 2.5GHz spectrum doesn't mean much, and it's very easy to have a very inefficient high band LTE network.

Indeed, and that's why it's important to keep realistic expectations for Sprint's TDD deployment in terms of coverage. 2.6GHz can be a great capacity layer, but as far as conventional macro deployment goes, it's extremely uneconomic considering propagation and reach. It's not an easy task to seamlessly blanket suburban/rural with 2.6GHz. But if they do proper planning and leverage pCell with LoS mesh, all of a sudden the game can easily change. Assuming that pCell actually works as advertised...

Yeah, 5MHz LTE sector can provide downlink speeds of ~37Mbps as long the backhaul is in place, and cell site equipment isn't malfunctioning. But what's lowering that peak spectral efficiency is channel quality, SINR of the user device, which directly affects MIMO utilization, and therefore the throughput. Channel quality is directly affected by chatty devices, especially the ones in indoor environment accessing the outdoor macro sites. That's why it's extremely important especially for LTE operators with high band spectrum to deploy indoor solutions at least in enterprise environment. Otherwise, in busy metro areas, when large amount of users connect to that single high band 2.6GHz, PCS G-Block or AWS cell, it will shrink and perform poorly. Sprint needs to start leveraging DAS, Small Cell or pCell technology like yesterday...

It's as legal as delaying this whole merger for the purpose of banking during the auction lol. Do corporations lie all the time for the purpose of achieving their goals at all cost? Absolutely.

Indeed, but they could also totally keep that bidding war under control, behind the closed doors They'd be bidding against much smaller entities for that 30Mhz slice, of course if that 30MHz allocation is to actually happen.

If they're smart to wait with the announcement until after TV Incentive Auction, that SprinT-Mobile could end up doubling the amount of low band spectrum in 2015. That would be a real win. Otherwise, rushing to announce the merger could be a very costly move.

They are traffic shaping large udp and ftp downloads initiated on mobile devices in some areas/sites, but only for the duration of that specific data query, and not for an extended period of time. So if you're torrenting from your smartphone, you won't have the most exciting user experience. That also isn't limited only to unlimited data plans.

T-Mobile isn't throttling their $80 Unlimited Plans, but I see your point. Throttling Unlimited data plans did help AT&T, to a certain extent.

I'm not buying a theory that "data abusers" will go to T-Mobile and all of a sudden make Sprint's network perform like a champ. Doesn't work that way. T-Mobile has been gaining millions of subs over the past year, has almost the same amount of subs as Sprint, unlimited data, and consistently the fastest LTE network in the nation. It's actually getting faster as they're widening LTE channels according to netindex.com . On the other hand Sprint's subs base isn't growing, Sprint's been bleeding millions of subs over the past year, and the network is consistently the slowest, with highest latency. So that theory doesn't really fly anymore. Nothing will make Sprint's LTE super fast until they actually upgrade that backhaul, add B41 to capacity strained sites, and densify the LTE grid. That needs to happen ASAP. I wouldn't worry too much about throttling already strained network. That isn't a solution to this problem.

How is it extortion? Without Sprint, with only 70MHz of nationwide spectrum, T-Mobile has a much higher chance of getting a piece of that 30MHz allocated 600MHz slice during 2015 incentive auction. With Sprint, their merged spectrum portfolio is almost 300MHz, which will basically ensure that NewCo has absolutely no shot at that allocation. They'd be bidding against Verizon and AT&T all day long. So yes, a significant breakup fee is very important for T-Mobile if they ever want to stay competitive in Tier 1 market. It would probably be much smarter for Sprint to wait until after the auction, or possibly look into other spectrum holders.

I think that's the main reason why this proposal is taking too long. Masa is smart, probably working that T-Mobile management, proposing different and more favorable breakup fees. I'm guessing spectrum rather than cash.

Yeah, well that sounds great if this was in a totalitarian regime where an entity is getting overtaken without regulatory body. In this case, there is a high probability that the merger isn't happening, and T-Mobile USA has to protect itself, investors and subs. Plus Deutsche Telekom isnt desperate to sell US operations anymore. Good thing "you're not Softbank/Sprint"

And how would that benefit T-Mobile USA? Especially if they commit to halt their deployment like they had to during AT&T merger. They can agree to merge, but the effect of not being approved by FCC and DoJ would be devastating for T-Mobile USA without a breakup agreement. There is no way that kind of deal is going to happen.

If it works as advertised, it would be great for Sprint to overlay dense metro areas with pWave radios for TDD deployment. That has potential to deliver massive capacity, if Sprint keeps up with the high backhaul demands.

If the rumors are true, Masa certainly wouldn't agree with you. And let's be real here... As much as Hesse seems to be a lovable guy here, for his 7 years in charge of Sprint we've seen mostly struggle to innovate, struggle to deploy, struggle to meet the goals, and he's shown us how things are suppose to NOT get done. Lots of promises for the bright future, but that future never really came and we've been waiting patiently. And especially as of late, lot's of consumer unfriendly pricing schemes that squeeze even more of that hard earned cash out of Sprint's subscribers' wallets. It's starting to be very uncomfortable to watch him still talking about the future and how he needs even more time. I get the concern if most of people in here are stock holders or Sprint investors, but c'mon now... as a subscriber, consumer, tech lover, how can you truly believe that he's capable of creating a dramatic shift in his strategy, shake things around, and start delivering on all cylinders. Just doesn't sit that well anymore...

Stronger as 2G signal strength, data throughput, cell spacing? NYC metro market is one of the densest T-Mobile markets in the nation.

May I ask why would you want this merger approved so bad? Are you a stock holder/investor? Otherwise, how is the merger benefitting you as a consumer?

Got that, but also they don't have to provide voice service at all. They could chose to focus on data and video content only. We also don't know if Sprint would be their choice for voice if they chose to go that route, considering CDMA UE licensing cost.

They don't have to built traditional site layout if they decide to go pCell native for example. They could introduce their service in urban markets initially, remember LOS and mesh networking with serendipitous deployment is what Artemis guys are proposing.

This is something we should keep in mind as well: Going into 600MHz auction, Sprint's spectrum vest could actually hurt their chances of getting significant amount of 600MHz spectrum. Just imagine how much damage would that SprinT-Mobile merger portfolio do going into the incentive auction...

At 1:11:17 he totally disclosed the spectrum he's been using for testing lol... 2.6GHz (Sprint), 2GHz (Dish), and then he quickly realized that all he's allowed to say is 900Mhz (unlicensed). So Bigsnake49 could be right

On the other hand, here is Perlman's lecture at Stanford University, held on May 1st:

I'm pretty sure there isn't one. Things like that are never publicly disclosed by vendors or operators until ready for deployment.

Yeah, there are already some major markets like Detroit, Dallas, Chicago with HSPA+42 moved to PCS, while only a single HSPA+21 carrier remains in the AWS. This is how they have live 15Mhz and 20Mhz wide LTE channels.