Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 52

Thread: T-Mobile three new Un-Carrier moves

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,464
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    I think they'll fold like a house of cards. It seems pretty obvious they don't have much to stand on with the vague, nebulous claims of "Jobs Lost, Higher Prices, etc". They will be laughed out of court.
    I doubt they'll "fold like a house of cards"- I suspect they'll fight for better (or at least longer) guarantees, and clear penalties/reparations if New T-Mo doesn't live up to their claims

    It's fairly obvious these "generous" offers of T-Mo are tailor-made to curry favor with regulators and opponents, since they come with the double-edged sword of a built-in time limit, and the threat of retraction if the merger doesn't happen.

    Why in God's name does T-Mo need a merger to offer a $15 2Gb plan with the built-in limitations this plan includes? MVNOs already offer similar plans everyday.

    And they certainly don't need Sprint's network or spectrum to offer a 100GB/year plan to low-income families in areas they have coverage if they actually cared to.

    If T-Mo is willing to offer these rainbows and unicorns under the threat of the upcoming trial, imagine what they may be willing to concede if the AGs really put the screws to them.



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    --
    Todd Allcock, Microsoft MVP: Mobile Devices 2007-2011

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,624
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    imagine what they may be willing to concede if the AGs really put the screws to them.


    As was previously mentioned, the AGs don't have the final say in the matter. The courts do. So that limits the number of screws that the AGs have to play with.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    3,109
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    This gives T-Mobile more in their arsenal to fight the states who are trying to block the merger.

    1. They're cutting the price of their lowest priced plan in half from $30 to $15. This directly addresses the argument that the merger will raise prices on low income customers.

    2. The offer of free hotspots and free data for low income households with children who otherwise would have no internet is an offer that will be difficult for these attorney generals to turn down.

    3. I think the free service for law enforcement is probably the weakest of the offer in terms of what could move the needle away from the opposition to the merger. But there are definitely some municipalities and agencies who would be happy to take advantage of this if T-Mobile has good service in their area.

    All in all, it sends the ball over to the court of the attorney generals---if they want these freebies, they have to allow the merger to go.
    Great, I hope this is one more reason the frivolous and mostly partisan-politics based anti-merger lawsuits will crumble.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,464
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    As was previously mentioned, the AGs don't have the final say in the matter. The courts do. So that limits the number of screws that the AGs have to play with.
    Ever see a protracted civil case? It's in everyone's best interest to settle this thing one way or another, otherwise cell carriers might be completing their 6G networks before the case is decided in the courts...





    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    I doubt they'll "fold like a house of cards"- I suspect they'll fight for better (or at least longer) guarantees, and clear penalties/reparations if New T-Mo doesn't live up to their claims

    It's fairly obvious these "generous" offers of T-Mo are tailor-made to curry favor with regulators and opponents, since they come with the double-edged sword of a built-in time limit, and the threat of retraction if the merger doesn't happen.

    Why in God's name does T-Mo need a merger to offer a $15 2Gb plan with the built-in limitations this plan includes? MVNOs already offer similar plans everyday.

    And they certainly don't need Sprint's network or spectrum to offer a 100GB/year plan to low-income families in areas they have coverage if they actually cared to.

    If T-Mo is willing to offer these rainbows and unicorns under the threat of the upcoming trial, imagine what they may be willing to concede if the AGs really put the screws to them.



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    He who laughs last, laughs loudest, so let's wait and see how it goes.

    Also, why does one of your sacred cows have to charge First Responders anything if they are so disappointed about TM making a publicity stunt out of it? Why not just step up and put their money where their mouth is?

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    Ever see a protracted civil case? It's in everyone's best interest to settle this thing one way or another, otherwise cell carriers might be completing their 6G networks before the case is decided in the courts...



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    I doubt the courts will even hear their unfounded case. They have not presented anything but conjecture.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Berkeley and Miami
    Posts
    4,779
    Device(s)
    Pixel 3aXL, wife S10
    Carrier(s)
    T-M
    Feedback Score
    0
    When disaster strikes, like hurricanes or fires, cell sites are bound to go down. At that point, the governor should issue an executive order demanding that all carriers have open roaming in the affected areas.
    GoogleVoice (domestic call forwarding and cheap intl. calls) Use GV to give us a "home" number in a 2nd location
    8 T-Mobile lines - Unlimited talk and text, data. TM One plan. Get $10/mo. rebate on 7 lines for low data use. Net cost about $185-190/mo. We haven't had a landline in more than 17 years.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,464
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    He who laughs last, laughs loudest, so let's wait and see how it goes.

    Also, why does one of your sacred cows have to charge First Responders anything if they are so disappointed about TM making a publicity stunt out of it? Why not just step up and put their money where their mouth is?
    I'm not sure who my "sacred cows" are supposed to be. I've been a T-Mo customer continuously since 2001, and am also a stockholder. That doesn't mean I think the merger is a good idea (I don't), that I shouldn't be critical of anything they do (I often am), nor does it mean I believe everything T-Mo says (I definitely don't!)



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    566
    Device(s)
    HTC Evo/Apple iPhone
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    I believe the states will settle. They are holding out for better terms. Litigation is always risky. It is all or nothing. If they don’t settle, the states risk getting nothing if they litigate and lose.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,345
    Device(s)
    S9
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    This Verge articulations says This was a very smart move by T- Mobile. Really good read for all the T- Mobile haters so they can whine more. I realized this is going to take a lot of revenue away from AT&T and Verizon with the first responders.

    https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/8/2...-merger-sprint

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,455
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    And they certainly don't need Sprint's network or spectrum to offer a 100GB/year plan to low-income families in areas they have coverage if they actually cared to.
    They'll need Sprint 2.5 GHz spectrum for fixed wireless. And no they can't use 600 MHz It won't cover it when the same 10 MHz-20 MHz of downlink spectrum is also being shared with phones, tablets, hotspot etc and split between 4G and 5G. There's not enough to also use for this. This is why at&t in my area uses WCS spectrum strictly for fixed wireless. And not their bands 2,4,14, 17 or 66. Even those certainly COULD be used and are lower frequency and would travel further and penetrate trees and such better.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,455
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    I doubt the courts will even hear their unfounded case. They have not presented anything but conjecture.
    You do realize there is trial on this matter starting on Dec 9th. So yeah the courts ARE hearing this.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    You do realize there is trial on this matter starting on Dec 9th. So yeah the courts ARE hearing this.
    That should be a preliminary hearing to determine if there is enough evidence to advance to a full trial. I don't believe the states have presented any solid arguments that are public that can support their claims. If you know what they base their theories on, it could clarify the issue. Otherwise, "Higher Prices, Lost Jobs, Less Competition" are just sound bites.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by thematch View Post
    I believe the states will settle. They are holding out for better terms. Litigation is always risky. It is all or nothing. If they don’t settle, the states risk getting nothing if they litigate and lose.
    Not to mention the fact that 9 of the original 19 litigants have already dropped out. So, 40 out of 50 state AG's don't seem to be going forward with any claims, and almost half of the those that thought they had an action have decided otherwise. Maybe TM could call them as witnesses in their behalf to explain to the others why they dropped out. LOL

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,455
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    That should be a preliminary hearing to determine if there is enough evidence to advance to a full trial. I don't believe the states have presented any solid arguments that are public that can support their claims. If you know what they base their theories on, it could clarify the issue. Otherwise, "Higher Prices, Lost Jobs, Less Competition" are just sound bites.
    No it's the actual trial

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 63
    Last Post: 09-09-2018, 01:30 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-30-2016, 07:15 AM
  3. T-Mobile becomes the "Un-Carrier" (No-contracts)
    By terryjohnson16 in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 356
    Last Post: 04-04-2013, 03:34 PM
  4. Nokia to unveil three new mobiles (clam shell/flip models)
    By eakenn in forum General Mobile Questions and Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-26-2003, 04:06 PM
  5. FS: Brand New Un-used Un-snapped T-Mobile SIM "Smart" Card
    By ProtoMan.EXE in forum GSM phone Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-11-2003, 09:41 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks