Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 188

Thread: New York Attorney General and nine other states file lawsuit to block Merger

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,366
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    We know the FCC was oiled up to approve this merger and Pai give zero ***** about protecting the consumer.

    If the DOJ is truly concerned about consumer pricing, they should seek enduring, specific consumer friendly pricing concessions. This is how the consumer can be protected. If Dish buys parts of Sprint we all know Charlie won't do anything with Boost or whatever. Not a single buyer of Sprint who isn't T-mobile will independently pursue a nationwide 4g/5g network.

    T-mobile's agreement not to raise prices for 3 years is a joke.. why only 3 years? They'll have a 5g network built in 3 years, and those who want to use it and upgrade to newer phones will be baited into paying more for the better network. Why not make the pricing guarantee good for 5 years? Or require that the carrier offer unlimited data for the next 10 years at a specific price point? The price point guarantee is also rife for misuse because it leaves too much room for other change. T-mobile currently includes taxes and fees in the plan price. Want to drive new revenue? Tack the taxes and fees back on. Wouldn't be a rate plan change. Beyond that, MVNO's could be guaranteed price per minute and gigabyte rates for 10 years. The DOJ could require that the carrier unlock all phones and activate all devices. They could even require the carrier to invest and commit investment and pricing in low income CRA communities.


  2. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,097
    Device(s)
    Moto G7, Nexus 5X, Pixel 2, Pixel 3, Moto X4, Moto G6, iPhone 6s
    Carrier(s)
    Google Fi; Verizon Prepaid
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by Qt0 View Post
    We know the FCC was oiled up to approve this merger and Pai give zero ***** about protecting the consumer.

    If the DOJ is truly concerned about consumer pricing, they should seek enduring, specific consumer friendly pricing concessions. This is how the consumer can be protected. If Dish buys parts of Sprint we all know Charlie won't do anything with Boost or whatever. Not a single buyer of Sprint who isn't T-mobile will independently pursue a nationwide 4g/5g network.

    T-mobile's agreement not to raise prices for 3 years is a joke.. why only 3 years? They'll have a 5g network built in 3 years, and those who want to use it and upgrade to newer phones will be baited into paying more for the better network. Why not make the pricing guarantee good for 5 years? Or require that the carrier offer unlimited data for the next 10 years at a specific price point? The price point guarantee is also rife for misuse because it leaves too much room for other change. T-mobile currently includes taxes and fees in the plan price. Want to drive new revenue? Tack the taxes and fees back on. Wouldn't be a rate plan change. Beyond that, MVNO's could be guaranteed price per minute and gigabyte rates for 10 years. The DOJ could require that the carrier unlock all phones and activate all devices. They could even require the carrier to invest and commit investment and pricing in low income CRA communities.
    Instead of all this government overreach, why not simply let the free market settle all of this. If the merger goes through, which frankly most people give a rat’s a** about, the prices can’t be out of line or users simply won’t pay. They’ll be competitive products offered by Verizon and AT&T as well as prepaid MVNO’s and 4G/LTE plans that satisfy most users needs right now own’t be going away any time soon.
    Pixel 2, Moto X4 & Moto G6 on Google Fi
    iPhone 6S on Verizon Prepaid

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    15,422
    Device(s)
    Moto G7 Power, Nexus 5X
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by Peterfield View Post
    ..... why not simply let the free market settle all of this. .....
    The free market only works when you are dealing with freely marketed resources. When you are dependent on exclusive licenses to a limited public-owned resource (RF spectrum) there can be no "free market". The resource owner (the public) must assure that either rates are regulated or rate competition is active in order to avoid being gouged by government sanctioned monopolies.
    Donald Newcomb

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    283
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by Peterfield View Post
    Instead of all this government overreach, why not simply let the free market settle all of this. If the merger goes through, which frankly most people give a rat’s a** about, the prices can’t be out of line or users simply won’t pay. They’ll be competitive products offered by Verizon and AT&T as well as prepaid MVNO’s and 4G/LTE plans that satisfy most users needs right now own’t be going away any time soon.
    It's fine to say "let the free market sort it out", but then you need adequate competition, which requires 4 carriers, and thus would require the government to block this merger.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    18,114
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Problem is, that 4th carrier is currently on the brink of utter failure/bankruptcy. As it stands, whether or not the merger is approved, we may only have 3 carriers after all is said and done.
    Don't make me turn this car around.....

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles/Canada
    Posts
    11,129
    Device(s)
    LG G7 (T-Mobile), iPhone 8 (AT&T)
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by veriztd View Post
    Problem is, that 4th carrier is currently on the brink of utter failure/bankruptcy. As it stands, whether or not the merger is approved, we may only have 3 carriers after all is said and done.
    Yup.... Pretty much need to 'let the market do its job'. Propping up one at the expense of others (and taxpayers) it typically just kicking the can down the road. Business is business - if it can't survive on its own - let it go to a Dish/Altice or even a fire sale.
    Many businesses/industries have folded in the past... many will again in the future.
    Similarly, many new ones may start up (i.e. Carlos Slim may want a telco here)
    AT&T... your world, throttled.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,096
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    It's fine to say "let the free market sort it out", but then you need adequate competition, which requires 4 carriers, and thus would require the government to block this merger.
    You assume that you have that now. T-Mobile is only marginally competition and Sprint isn't AT ALL. I rather have a t-mobile that is ACTUAL competition. Sprint's existence doesn't matter since they are dead without it. And I wish you anti-merger people would get this. How many time do you have to be told something before you get it? does Sprint actually have to file for bankruptcy fire workers and start shutting down service before you believe that?

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,122
    Device(s)
    iPhone X, iPhone 7+
    Carrier(s)
    ATT Prepaid, RP
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    It's fine to say "let the free market sort it out", but then you need adequate competition, which requires 4 carriers, and thus would require the government to block this merger.
    What is the right number of competitors. 5 well financed and run national carriers would be even more competition

    It is hard to foretell the future. Dropping to 3 national carriers could lead to higher prices. Staying with 4 might work if Sprint works things out, and the other carriers make mistakes.

    Or trying to stay with 4 could result in Sprint failing, and T-Mobile not being as strong as they could be with Sprint's spectrum and customers. Or T-Mobile could have a lot of indigestion from this, waste a lot of time/effort trying to integrate, and fall further behind Verizon and ATT.
    iPhone X is my current primary phone. I have older model iPhones and Moto phones available on other lines. Currently prepaid, though would consider postpaid on right plan.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    283
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by formercanuck View Post
    Yup.... Pretty much need to 'let the market do its job'. Propping up one at the expense of others (and taxpayers) it typically just kicking the can down the road. Business is business - if it can't survive on its own - let it go to a Dish/Altice or even a fire sale.
    If Altice or another non-wireless company wants Sprint, then that's great. DISH and it's spectrum squatting need to get out of wireless.

    Similarly, many new ones may start up (i.e. Carlos Slim may want a telco here)
    It would be nearly impossible to start up a new nationwide wireless carrier at this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    You assume that you have that now. T-Mobile is only marginally competition and Sprint isn't AT ALL. I rather have a t-mobile that is ACTUAL competition. Sprint's existence doesn't matter since they are dead without it. And I wish you anti-merger people would get this. How many time do you have to be told something before you get it? does Sprint actually have to file for bankruptcy fire workers and start shutting down service before you believe that?
    Sprint and T-Mobile today put huge price pressure on the whole market, especially prepaid. T-Mobile is also quite innovative in offering perks like free global data roaming. I believe that Sprint has a path forward on their own. I think 5G could be their saviour, since they have the spectrum to deploy it in a much less capital intensive way than the big guys. Sprint could run a dirt-cheap mostly macro 5G network that's decent and focuses on major metros and I think they'd do fine. They might have to cut back coverage a bit in less urban areas, but that's OK, T-Mobile roaming works just fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by kevink1 View Post
    What is the right number of competitors. 5 well financed and run national carriers would be even more competition
    Yes. Our whole telecom market is sort of off of the rails. I think a lot of opportunities have been missed over the past decade or two in telecom in general. The overall management of spectrum in the US is a mess, and it's poorly utilized. There are several markets with only one CLR carrier, since one company scooped up both blocks, which gave them years to cement a near monopoly in those markets before 700mhz. There are some markets where one carrier owns a ridiculous amount of spectrum. T and Vz shouldn't have been allowed to keep their wireless businesses. The wireless businesses have an unfair advantage over other players due to cheap backhaul from their ILEC side, and the ILEC sides have been robbed of capital to fund fiber expansion by giving away this cheap backhaul to make wireless look more profitable. Roaming needs to be regulated so that smaller urban-centric carriers or regional carriers can offer service with nationwide roaming, and we don't have 3 carriers building redundant infrastructure in the middle of nowhere when one or two carriers could serve all the customers easily with roaming.

    A lot of bad business and technical decisions have been made too. Sprint had a fantastic position at one time, now they are a mess. WiMAX was a bad bet, they never did a tri-mode LTE/WiMAX/CDMA phone, botched that transition which came after the botched Nextel integration. Sprint missed a lot of opportunities. Verizon screwed up on spectrum, and missed the boat on FirstNET, which was a natural fit for them. AT&T hasn't finished a network upgrade in basically forever. They keep getting oh so close, but they blew it again with LTE. They had 2G and 4G LTE, now they've got 3G and 5G, although this time at least, the coverage areas aren't touching each other. Maybe they will soon.

    It is hard to foretell the future. Dropping to 3 national carriers could lead to higher prices. Staying with 4 might work if Sprint works things out, and the other carriers make mistakes.
    It WILL mean higher prices, at least for postpaid. It will probably raise prepaid rates as well, just due to having less competition.

    Or trying to stay with 4 could result in Sprint failing, and T-Mobile not being as strong as they could be with Sprint's spectrum and customers. Or T-Mobile could have a lot of indigestion from this, waste a lot of time/effort trying to integrate, and fall further behind Verizon and ATT.
    Sprint needs a plan. They have spectrum and customers, they've just executed poorly for years. If the merger does go through, T-Mobile will do fine with the integration. They've built a good suburban/urban network, and I don't think that will change. However, I also don't think T-Mobile will be competitive with T and Vz for rural coverage, as they've got a long way to go, and are going to have to lean really heavily on B71 due to how spread out their towers are compared to the 850 AMPS tower sites that T and VZ use that do have weird gaps on LTE, but are at least more dense than T-Mobile's bare minimum deployments.

    Of course then the big question remains about what the heck happens to USCC. They rely heavily on CDMA, and could roam on any carrier nationwide with VoLTE. They're in a world of hurt whenever they can't find CDMA phones to sell. They could probably buy CDMA gear from Verizon post-shutdown in the mid-2020's, but if the phones don't work on it, that's a problem. They would need a TON more sites to even get close to their current CDMA coverage with LTE to keep offering coverage in the middle of anywhere. I'm not too optimistic, but I hope that T-Mobile keeps CDMA roaming if they merge, but that remains to be seen. If a combined T-Sprint overbuilds too much of their territory, they're probably a goner, since they rely heavily on roaming revenue.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,096
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Sprint and T-Mobile today put huge price pressure on the whole market, especially prepaid.
    A) Most people are on postpaid plans
    B) if they have such pressure how come T-Mobile's Essentials plan which is $120 for 4 lines regular price and Verizon's Go Plan which is identical to Essentials is $160 for 4 lines? Where is the price pressure if Verizon can charge 33% more for the SAME plan without blinking an eye.

    If there was actual pressure Verizon would either be lowering prices or upping features. Their Beyond/New Verizon unlimited plan has been around for 26 months. It still has the same 22 GB depri level as it did in Fen 2017. Meanwhile T-Mobile Magenta Plus offers 50 GB. Video is still maxed at 720p. Where T-Mobile's Magenta Plus is 1080p if not higher. Verizon hotpot is 15 GB, Magenta Plus is 20 GB. AND Magenta Plus is cheaper. This would not be the case if there was actual pressure. T-Mobile includes taxes and fees( except Essentials ) and their prices are still cheaper than Verizon's not counting taxes/fees. Why hasn't Verizon adopted this approach if there was actual pressure?

    T-Mobile is also quite innovative in offering perks like free global data roaming.
    Like most people coverage means more than perks to me

    I believe that Sprint has a path forward on their own.
    yeah Chapter 7



    Verizon screwed up on spectrum, and missed the boat on FirstNET, which was a natural fit for them.
    You keep pushing this fantasy that at&t wouldn't have outbid them if Verizon did get involved in that auction. And you have nothing to base that on. Also it's 10X10 MHz where 1st responders get priority. Don't act like it was some great haul.


    It WILL mean higher prices, at least for postpaid. It will probably raise prepaid rates as well, just due to having less competition.
    Don't mean to be a Debbie Downer but most people don't give a F about prepaid. Also if Dish buys Boost doesn't that mean competition?


    Sprint needs a plan. They have spectrum and customers, they've just executed poorly for years.
    and that will somehow magically change if the merger is denied?

    Of course then the big question remains about what the heck happens to USCC. They rely heavily on CDMA, and could roam on any carrier nationwide with VoLTE.
    Actually they got 10X10 600 MHz in that auction in just about all their markets. It's just a matter of getting it deployed. A USCC phone with band 71 could roam everywhere in the US once t-mobile full deploys it's 600 MHz since it has nationwide licenses

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    15,422
    Device(s)
    Moto G7 Power, Nexus 5X
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by veriztd View Post
    Problem is, that 4th carrier is currently on the brink of utter failure/bankruptcy. As it stands, whether or not the merger is approved, we may only have 3 carriers after all is said and done.
    This is the only reason I support the merger. That and the fact that there's now enough unused spectrum around that someone could create a 4th carrier if they wanted and had enough money.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    2,169
    Device(s)
    Apple iPhone 6S, OG Pixel XL, Apple iPad 3 (VZW variant)
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless (Verizon), T-Mobile, FreedomPop (AT&T)
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    If there was actual pressure Verizon would either be lowering prices or upping features.
    Agreed. I donít expect lower prices from anyone on postpaid currently. More expecting a tacking a gradually increasing priced plan to a longer installment/leasing plan. Welp... that sounds like Canadaís setup as is and people worry we are headed that way. We already are, regardless of Sprintís fate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Like most people coverage means more than perks
    Yes and no. The value add perks like free Hulu/Netflix/Amazon/Music actually helped subscriber retainment. International (and even some domestic) roaming is nice but it really doesnít add value for most people.
    I feel coverage is why VZW/ATT donít feel price pressure. They still have the coverage-to-price advantage. If {New} T-Mobile actually had a comparable fully national network, along with pretty low pricing, turnover would happen more against the other three. T-Mobile ďshouldĒ stay a market disruptor, but they probably wonít because of stockholder pressures.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Don't mean to be a Debbie Downer but most people don't give a F about prepaid. Also if Dish buys Boost doesn't that mean competition?
    Not for postpaid, but maybe for prepaid if DISH actually pays attention. If DISH/Boost needs to primarily use T-Mobileís network, they better compete with all of the cheaper MVNOs out there. DISH would need to own most of Sprintís network to make it in the Postpaid business, as they wonít have their 600 MHz holdings useful for another couple years.

    As for the comment on prepaid in general: national media advertising dollars seem to indicate the opposite, as does prepaid company financials.
    Tracfone Wireless Inc. is unofficially carrier #5 if you look at customer count and revenue (likely #4 when Sprintís fate is determined), almost 5 times larger than USCC. Their revenue has been growing for a while. Carlos could just up and buy Boost and the spectrum and easily run away as #3-4. That would be a huge market disruptor.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    A USCC phone with band 71 could roam everywhere in the US once t-mobile full deploys it's 600 MHz since it has nationwide licenses
    I would welcome phones with more universal band support. It will be a while before band 71 is prevalent. I donít know if USCC can wait that out. Theyíll need one or two better roaming partners if the merger goes through.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    If Altice or another non-wireless company wants Sprint, then that's great. DISH and it's spectrum squatting need to get out of wireless.
    Besides DISH, Charter or Comcast, there really isnít a large enough non-wireless company that will be able to swallow $32B in debt and afford to upgrade an older network (expecting the CDMA holdings to be divested). Altice has nowhere near enough revenue to buy a non-bankrupt Sprint. A joint venture with others could, but I donít see that possibility happening.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    It would be nearly impossible to start up a new nationwide wireless carrier at this point.
    Agreed to an extent. From the ground up it would be as difficult as, or more so than, Sprintís current network situation. If someone bought a good chunk (or all) of Sprintís network backbone debt-free: maybe possible but it will take a lot of additional capex.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Sprint and T-Mobile today put huge price pressure on the whole market, especially prepaid.
    Not really. They indirectly affected prepaid because of low priced wholesale access given to MVNOs. MVNOs (running across all wholesale carriers) have done more for price competition in recent years than those two have directly. Look at MVNO brands as a indicator of prepaid competition rather than carrier brands. I expect prepaid pricing to stay consistent.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    I believe that Sprint has a path forward on their own. I think 5G could be their saviour, since they have the spectrum to deploy it in a much less capital intensive way than the big guys. Sprint could run a dirt-cheap mostly macro 5G network that's decent and focuses on major metros and I think they'd do fine. They might have to cut back coverage a bit in less urban areas, but that's OK, T-Mobile roaming works just fine.
    The problem with this: Sprint will still need positive revenue coming in to offset *any* sort of capex. That means a lot higher prices. Catch-22: T-Mobile still wins because they can successfully compete against a newly-rejected Sprint with a better operating network.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Yes. Our whole telecom market is sort of off of the rails.
    ...
    Roaming needs to be regulated so that smaller urban-centric carriers or regional carriers can offer service with nationwide roaming, and we don't have 3 carriers building redundant infrastructure in the middle of nowhere when one or two carriers could serve all the customers easily with roaming.
    Yes, I agree completely on this point. Our government would have to step in like the EU did in Europe. Politics and VZW/ATT lobbyists will get in the way unfortunately...
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    It WILL mean higher prices, at least for postpaid. It will probably raise prepaid rates as well, just due to having less competition.
    Prepaid will probably not see price inflation unless wholesale network access goes up. With all of the other MVNOs out there, thereís a good amount of competition to keep pricing low.
    Postpaid prices will go up regardless of Sprintís fate, due to eventual pressure by stockholders.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Of course then the big question remains about what the heck happens to USCC. They rely heavily on CDMA, and could roam on any carrier nationwide with VoLTE. They're in a world of hurt whenever they can't find CDMA phones to sell.
    This is a huge concern for rural carriers, and thatís due to Verizonís choices. Sprintís fate will only delay the inevitable by a year or so. I do not expect New T-Mobile to retain the CDMA network for roaming revenue once Sprint customers are off it. USCC will limp by... they might have to bite the bullet and sign a decent roaming agreement with VZW or AT&T. They will need to get on the ball with their VoLTE, and 600MHz, rollout.
    My common forum nick: GenesisDH.

    R.I.P. Circuit City

    We are the Bor... the new AT&T: Your World, Assimilated.

    1000th post: Sept. 29th, 2008, 17:42 CDT

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    283
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    A) Most people are on postpaid plans
    B) if they have such pressure how come T-Mobile's Essentials plan which is $120 for 4 lines regular price and Verizon's Go Plan which is identical to Essentials is $160 for 4 lines? Where is the price pressure if Verizon can charge 33% more for the SAME plan without blinking an eye.
    And Sprint has a promo plan 5 for $100/mo.

    If there was actual pressure Verizon would either be lowering prices or upping features. Their Beyond/New Verizon unlimited plan has been around for 26 months. It still has the same 22 GB depri level as it did in Fen 2017. Meanwhile T-Mobile Magenta Plus offers 50 GB. Video is still maxed at 720p. Where T-Mobile's Magenta Plus is 1080p if not higher. Verizon hotpot is 15 GB, Magenta Plus is 20 GB. AND Magenta Plus is cheaper. This would not be the case if there was actual pressure. T-Mobile includes taxes and fees( except Essentials ) and their prices are still cheaper than Verizon's not counting taxes/fees. Why hasn't Verizon adopted this approach if there was actual pressure?
    Verizon also has a lot of really cheap prepaid options on it's network both through the Verizon brand, and others like Total Wireless.

    Like most people coverage means more than perks to me
    And yet there are people for whom that's not that case, as evidenced by T-Mobile's wild success.

    yeah Chapter 7
    No, I think they have a path forward as an actual functioning carrier.

    You keep pushing this fantasy that at&t wouldn't have outbid them if Verizon did get involved in that auction. And you have nothing to base that on. Also it's 10X10 MHz where 1st responders get priority. Don't act like it was some great haul.
    Verizon could have outbid them. 99% of the time po-po, fire, and whomever else has the boondoggle phones aren't going to be using anywhere close to the capacity of B14. The boondoggle is a great haul for AT&T.

    Don't mean to be a Debbie Downer but most people don't give a F about prepaid. Also if Dish buys Boost doesn't that mean competition?
    Wal-Mart and the wireless market beg to differ. And what is DISH going to do with Boost?

    and that will somehow magically change if the merger is denied?
    Softbank will finally be forced to invest or divest.

    Actually they got 10X10 600 MHz in that auction in just about all their markets. It's just a matter of getting it deployed. A USCC phone with band 71 could roam everywhere in the US once t-mobile full deploys it's 600 MHz since it has nationwide licenses
    And that's relevant why? They still have to be profitable, and B71 LTE still doesn't have the range that CDMA/1x 850 does. If they want to keep anywhere close to the coverage, they're going to have to add towers in the middle of anywhere. They can already do nationwide VoLTE roaming, owning B71 doesn't help them there. It will help them build a somewhat better data network, but they already have B5 and B12 in a lot of those areas and have crappy speeds, so they appear to have backhaul issues or something else going on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Haas_Dave View Post
    International (and even some domestic) roaming is nice but it really doesnít add value for most people.
    I think you misunderestimate international roaming. It's anecdotal, but I have a friend whose family and extended family (two accounts) switch to TMUS because of the international roaming so they can use their phones when they're visiting family back in India.

    As for the comment on prepaid in general: national media advertising dollars seem to indicate the opposite, as does prepaid company financials.
    Just look at the shelves in Wal-Mart. They've got two aisles of prepaid in most stores now.

    Carlos could just up and buy Boost and the spectrum and easily run away as #3-4. That would be a huge market disruptor.
    That's an interesting idea. Could he drop $10B+ into a network? AT&T is in Mexico, so why not, right?

    I would welcome phones with more universal band support.
    Pretty much all flagships today have full LTE banding for the US, they just have them disabled in firmware, so they can enable them if needed for roaming or if they buy spectrum in those bands.

    It will be a while before band 71 is prevalent. I donít know if USCC can wait that out. Theyíll need one or two better roaming partners if the merger goes through.
    They can roam on any LTE carrier today, technically speaking. It's a matter of who wants to sell them roaming access.

    Besides DISH, Charter or Comcast, there really isnít a large enough non-wireless company that will be able to swallow $32B in debt and afford to upgrade an older network (expecting the CDMA holdings to be divested). Altice has nowhere near enough revenue to buy a non-bankrupt Sprint.
    Altice is a huge company, but they just aren't that big of a player in the US.

    Agreed to an extent. From the ground up it would be as difficult as, or more so than, Sprintís current network situation. If someone bought a good chunk (or all) of Sprintís network backbone debt-free: maybe possible but it will take a lot of additional capex.
    It's far harder to start from scratch than to take what Sprint has a build on it. Sprint already has a network and towers. Yes, it needs work, but it's already there.

    Not really. They indirectly affected prepaid because of low priced wholesale access given to MVNOs. MVNOs (running across all wholesale carriers) have done more for price competition in recent years than those two have directly. Look at MVNO brands as a indicator of prepaid competition rather than carrier brands. I expect prepaid pricing to stay consistent.
    Sprint has pushed prepaid pricing down, as prepaid wants to stay below where postpaid is, and Sprint has the cheapest postpaid in the industry.

    The problem with this: Sprint will still need positive revenue coming in to offset *any* sort of capex. That means a lot higher prices. Catch-22: T-Mobile still wins because they can successfully compete against a newly-rejected Sprint with a better operating network.
    Yes, Softbank would actually need to invest, which they can been failing to do. Sprint's CAPEX has been pathetic for years. T-Mobile would be in the same position they are now if the merger fails.

    Yes, I agree completely on this point. Our government would have to step in like the EU did in Europe. Politics and VZW/ATT lobbyists will get in the way unfortunately...
    What's nuts to me is that good roaming agreements are in the best interest of everyone. Compete where it makes sense, and then don't where it doesn't. Keep Sprint and T-Mobile out of rural markets by giving them good roaming deals, while recovering some of the extremely high cost of operations there.

    Prepaid will probably not see price inflation unless wholesale network access goes up. With all of the other MVNOs out there, thereís a good amount of competition to keep pricing low.
    Postpaid prices will go up regardless of Sprintís fate, due to eventual pressure by stockholders.
    That's what I'm concerned about without Sprint to keep Boost and Virgin prices rock-bottom and set expectations for prepaid pricing.

    This is a huge concern for rural carriers, and thatís due to Verizonís choices. Sprintís fate will only delay the inevitable by a year or so. I do not expect New T-Mobile to retain the CDMA network for roaming revenue once Sprint customers are off it. USCC will limp by... they might have to bite the bullet and sign a decent roaming agreement with VZW or AT&T. They will need to get on the ball with their VoLTE, and 600MHz, rollout.
    They can roam nationally with VoLTE. The problem is within their own territory. They have a lot of areas that will lose coverage when they eventually have to shut CDMA down. That's probably 5+ years down the road, but still. It is unfortunate that Verizon is shutting down rural CDMA, but the ship has sailed on that one, and they don't want to maintain a CDMA network just for rural coverage, and they skipped the whole WCDMA generation, which has generally worked out well for them, since they went to LTE just in time with a huge push, but as a result, they don't have that to fall back on either.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,096
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    And Sprint has a promo plan 5 for $100/mo.
    And yes they bleed customers and Verizon doesn't despite charging MUCH more. Which disproves your point that Sprint puts price pressure on Verizon


    Verizon also has a lot of really cheap prepaid options on it's network both through the Verizon brand, and others like Total Wireless.
    Cheap compared to who? Metro has better pricing than Verizon. Verizon has been losing prepaid customers every quarter for over 3 years maybe 4. In just the last year they've lost 12% of what little prepaid customer base they have



    No, I think they have a path forward as an actual functioning carrier.
    Name:  492914.jpg
Views: 83
Size:  25.9 KB


    Verizon could have outbid them. 99% of the time po-po, fire, and whomever else has the boondoggle phones aren't going to be using anywhere close to the capacity of B14. The boondoggle is a great haul for AT&T.
    So you have inside info at Verizon?

    And what is DISH going to do with Boost?
    Don't have to have a network to be a MVNO. I'm sure they can do some sort of bundle with their TV and streaming services


    Softbank will finally be forced to invest or divest.
    Forced by who? And divest to who?


    And that's relevant why? They still have to be profitable, and B71 LTE still doesn't have the range that CDMA/1x 850 does.
    A) you know that how?
    B) CDMA is dead in 195 days so what does it matter? And 850 is only used for calls not data. People care about data

    If they want to keep anywhere close to the coverage, they're going to have to add towers in the middle of anywhere.
    Oh you mean like my area where the county seat is 3500 and the whole county is 16,000 and t-mobile just put up another tower?

    They can already do nationwide VoLTE roaming, owning B71 doesn't help them there. It will help them build a somewhat better data network, but they already have B5 and B12 in a lot of those areas and have crappy speeds, so they appear to have backhaul issues or something else going on.
    T-Mobile has band 5 in ONE market in the entire US. In the Myrtle Beach area. Why they haven't sold it to at&t yet which lacks band 5 there is beyond me.


    Just look at the shelves in Wal-Mart. They've got two aisles of prepaid in most stores now.
    Most people are with a carrier. There are more postpaid customers on each carrier than prepaid. In Verizon case it's over 96%

    What's nuts to me is that good roaming agreements are in the best interest of everyone. Compete where it makes sense, and then don't where it doesn't. Keep Sprint and T-Mobile out of rural markets by giving them good roaming deals, while recovering some of the extremely high cost of operations there.
    Um no. We need a strong t-mobile that can force at&t Verizon to offer people in my area better plans or lower prices. With t-mobile now in my area and bands 12 and 71 finally deployed Verizon just may lose 4 lines soon.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,262
    Device(s)
    S9
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    vBActivity - Stats
    vBActivity - Bars
    Quote Originally Posted by veriztd View Post
    Problem is, that 4th carrier is currently on the brink of utter failure/bankruptcy. As it stands, whether or not the merger is approved, we may only have 3 carriers after all is said and done.
    Winner Winner Chicken Dinner as they say in Vegas.... Sprint can't even show a profit to pay for Network mantainces, new spectrum, new equipment, leases on towers or even to pay their massive loan payments. Sprint is slowly dying and then there will be only three networks but T-Mobile won't have the extra spectrum to compete against AT&T and Verizon. BTW, AT&T & Verizon only has to provide service where it can make a profit. Yet, the DOJ is worried that a merger of Sprint and T-Mobile will reduce competition.

    AT&T ends service to customers in northeast Montana

    AT&T/Verizon Roaming Agreement Ends in Montana; Rural Customers Left Without Service

    "Verizon Wireless customers and public safety personnel are upset that the cell phone company was caught unprepared after a rural roaming agreement with AT&T expired at the end of June, leaving police officers without communications and others with no way to reach 911."

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-24-2013, 06:55 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-07-2006, 07:12 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-05-2004, 01:10 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-06-2004, 11:35 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks