milan03

It doesn't effect my peace of mind. In fact, for most people who will not even notice it at all, it won't effect them either. It's the 1 person, out of 20 that will notice. The one person who uses excessive data. And lets reiterate this for the 100th time. This is only during peak congestion hours, when the network needs it most and when the excessive data user probably isn't getting much better speeds anyhow. I don't want to give up my unlimited data because I don't want to worry about having a damn data cap. Eventually I might have too, and I accept that. 

 

Sprint is unlimited, and like conan said, I am surprised they did not do this sooner. It's not a huge loss. It's 5%. 95% of people will not be effected by this at all. And if T-Mobile decides to rollout advertisements on that and spend more money that they don't have, then so be it. The data abusers (and you know who you are, so don't assume I mean everyone who has higher than usual data usage) will head on over to T-Mobile, free up some stress on our network and T-Mobile will start feeling the weight.

 

Sprint is doing everything in its power to manage its ever growing network. Throttling is an excellent way to manage congestion issues in areas that do not have b41 and b26 in place. And it's an excellent way to benefit the remaining large percentage of single band phones out there with people who don't want to upgrade to a triband device, or can not afford to yet. This is a solution. It's an actual solution that could and probably will benefit everyone, and everyone seems to be focusing on the select few that might be effected. Lastly, this is ALOT better than having data caps and ACTUAL throttling. I'll take this over that anyway.

 

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. 

I don't think either one should pay if the deal is denied. That is just extortion or a bribe. If softbank asks tmo to put a halt to expansion like att did, then you might have something. Otherwise I don't see it.

 

Jim, Sent from my Photon 4G using Tapatalk 2

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.

Might be more devastating to sprint if the deal were rejected, especially with a payout to tmo. Att could afford such a fee, sprint not so much.

Jim, Sent from my Photon 4G using Tapatalk 2

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.

If I were Softbank/Sprint, I would not worry about T-mobile and any problems they might encounter if a merger fails.

T-Mobile wants/needs to be bought by somebody.   I would NEVER enter into any agreement that provides a break-up fee to T-mobile.

Softbank needs to drive the bus and make the rules.

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"

If all the players want this to happen, they should be able to come to an agreement that has NO BREAKUP FEE in the event that the merger can not be completed.

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. 

This technology may be Sprint, Dish, and T-Mobile's master plan to use all their frequencies without any problem. As Perlman stated that pCell can be used with any frequency. So this would be a great way to merge right?

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.

Yeah Legere, the guy who drove Global Crossing into bankruptcy after being their CEO for 10 years and is doing the pump and dump with T-Mobile.  I don't think it's worth his sit and spin.

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...

I think this would be an area where the merging of both networks would prove useful. I know that in NYC particularly you find many places where Sprint is stronger than T-Mobile and fewer places where T-Mobile is stronger than Sprint. Should they merge, all non-collocated sites would be able to be used to densify the network. That would be more useful in building out VoLTE rather than leasing and building thousands of new towers.

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

If the clown has to wear a crown to get the merger approved, id say it was worth it

 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

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?

The post I was quoting already said that. I was saying they won't have to build 45-50,000 sites if they go with pCell.

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.

There's no way they're going to build those sites. They'll host the spectrum on NV sites which goes nicely with them using Sprint voice coverage.

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:

 

Source where Sprint is testing?

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

If HSPA+42 is completeley migrated to PCS, then great, no problem!

 

The only problem that I see is CDMA on 1x/SMR and cellular. It will be available to Sprint customers but not to T-Mobile customers. Unless T-Mobile customers can roam on AT&T, then there will definitely an uneven network footprint.

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.

Call continuity between CDMA and WCDMA is not strictly necessary. It will be great if it can be continued from one network to the other, but lets' face it, both voice networks will be phased out in favor of VoLTE.

 

There will be plenty of PCS spectrum for not just 1 but 2 or 3 WCDMA PCS channels on the combined network. I would like to see the layout of T-Mobile/Sprint holdings in the PCS band. HSPA+42 is no longer necessary since the advent of LTE. 

 

Sprint is already going to use 700MHz for roaming purposes. They will bid on 600MHz but by all indications they will bypass AWS-3.

 

Which brings up what is the Feds's great fear that if Sprint and T-Mobile combine, the combined company will not bid on AWS-3, thereby reducing the auction proceeds considerably.

 

Sprint is paying for T-Mobile's customers and spectrum, not their network. I am sure certain network elements will be reused, certain T-Mobile sites will become NV sites.

I haven't seen any aggressiveness in Sprint's action plan to deploy VoLTE as of late. And considering a push towards EVRC-NW while everyone else is using W-AMR, I'd love to see that Multi-Operator VoLTE integration in action. May not be as seamless as we think.

 

HSPA+42 is still a viable airlink for data, voice and roamers. And it's being migrated to PCS which widens up contiguity for LTE in the AWS. Since T-Mobile has enough contiguous spectrum for two W-CDMA carriers, there is no reason not to have HSPA+42.

 

Worth saying that T-Mobile subs don't have CDMA capable handsets, and can't necessarily utilize Sprint's voice in the short term. Moving everyone to HSPA/LTE significantly cuts the manufacturing and licensing cost.

I am not sure that a call could be continue between CDMA and W-CDMA.

Pretty sure it can't.

 

The first slide above displaying the proposed path to convergence is way behind as we are still without VoLTE networks and UE, and Sprint doesn't necessarily have an aggressive strategy for VoLTE. Also under that slide, the article displaying proposed eNodeB sharing is targeted for LTE Release 12 which is still being finalized by 3GPP administration. The infrastructure is probably ~2years away...

 

Hate to be a Debbie Downer, but at the moment that is the reality. From the consumer standpoint, merging two operators won't provide us any short to mid term benefits. I'm sure executives and stock holders will be happy with the scale, but this is only going to slow down the disruption in the market. And with insane amount of spectrum, going into the 600MHz auction is going to be a bitch.

I wish.. but it could happen at least for Ericsson as I recall their radios already had WCDMA functionality but it was never utilize. Not sure about Alcatel-Lucent, Panasonic, and Samsung though. Sigh.. doubt Sprint would even do it.

 

Think about the existing Sprint subs without WCDMA compatible handsets. Not sure what the percentage is but it's a scary thought. The transition would involve a bit more than just the infrastructure vendor upgrades.

http://www.portal2sounds.com/67

I'm actually talking about your Class II post. 

True... Ericsson still has to push the software updates and they're doing a mighty fine job of pushing eCSFB updates to sites that were NV 3G accepted months ago...

Please tell me that you're kidding with that earlier post.

Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Panasonic, Samsung, and KMW is only one Class II permissive change away from WCDMA operations if they ever decide to do it.

Just flipping a switch, right? 

Heh, if it was only that simple...

Is that before or after Fcc came out against it?  $6B was a good hunk of change that really propelled T Mobile's reenergized network investments. DT at the time gave up on spending money on the network. They won't do that again.

From the moment they announced merger until it officially fell apart. For year and a half T-Mobile's network deployment was completely stalled. 

 

If T-Mobile and Sprint merge, at least one network will have to start transitioning onto the new technology. 

I don't think it will slow advancements on either of the networks. By the time it closes both networks, will be substantially complete.

Just remember what AT&T merger did to T-Mobile network deployment.

Does not a combined SprinT-Mobile have to lower prices and better its network in order to crack at dethroning AT&T + Verizon? I do not immediately see how a merger will not deliver value to consumers.

 

Cheap is great, but I am willing to later pay more for quality service.

Sprint should better it's network without a merger. Merger itself would only diminish the competitiveness in the wireless market, and only slow down network advancements on both networks. Not to mention the repercussions going into 600MHz auction.