Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 132

Thread: T-Mobile three new Un-Carrier moves

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Greater Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,130
    Device(s)
    iPhone 11 Pro Max Series 4 Apple Watch
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile USA
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    In regards to the new prepaid plan, it's incredible to think just what kind of disruption and impact it may have. Take a look at the TracFone example:


    https://www.fiercewireless.com/wirel...undhouse-kicks


    The third move is T-Mobile Connect, a prepaid offer that provides 2 GB of data and unlimited voice and text for $15. In addition, every year for the next five years the data allowance will increase by 500 MB. T-Mobile Connect undercuts most competitors by $10 or more per month. It will put tremendous pressure on MVNOs in the market and potentially drive some of them out of the market.

    For example, Tracfone offers 2 GB of data unlimited voice and text for $25 per month and has an EBIT margin of 7%. A 7% EBIT margin indicates that Tracfone makes $1.75 on the $25 plan, which T-Mobile will sell for $15. Over the last few earnings calls, cable providers have earned T-Mobile’s color commentary as they have grown significantly by offering low cost plans. T-Mobile Connect is as squarely aimed at them as it is at Dish. As a new market entrant that will inherit Sprint’s struggling prepaid business, Dish will be particularly challenged by T-Mobile Connect.

    The New T-Mobile uncarrier moves are roundhouse kicks against the competition. It pressures AT&T and Verizon on the public safety market, opens up the fixed broadband market to wireless, and puts tremendous pressure on the low end of the market.

    They are also prime examples of how a company can use asymmetry to its advantage. T-Mobile identified segments where its competition is strong and profitable, such as first responder agencies, and where it has no meaningful business that would get cannibalized by an aggressive move. Connecting Heroes Initiative, even if nobody takes T-Mobile up on the offer, will be a success as it devalues AT&T’s and Verizon’s opportunity. If agencies take T-Mobile up, it will make money on the non-smartphone part of the business.
    “The Internet wasn’t meant to be metered in bits and bytes, so it’s insane that wireless companies are still making you buy it this way. The rate plan is dead — it’s a fossil from a time when wireless was metered by every call or text.” John Legere 1/5/2017

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,622
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny View Post
    In regards to the new prepaid plan, it's incredible to think just what kind of disruption and impact it may have...

    T-Mobile Connect undercuts most competitors by $10 or more per month. It will put tremendous pressure on MVNOs in the market and potentially drive some of them out of the market...
    Why are we looking at this positively?

    This is like when Walmart comes into a small town, undercuts the local grocery and hardware store, forcing them out of business, then a few years later decides that small-town Walmart isn't profitable enough so they pull up stakes and leave, leaving the town with no grocer, no hardware store, and no Walmart!

    So sure, T-Mo can sell a $15 plan, force AT&T and Verizon to sell similar competitive plans, and then drive all the MVNOs out of business (because they also set the price the MVNOs buy bulk talk/text/data from them!) Then we can all bask in the glory of artificially low prices for about five years; the length of time T-Mo promises to offer this plan as a condition of merger approval. Then the plan goes away, and the "big 3" sell wireless for whatever they like.

    So, be careful what you wish for kids...

    In the meantime, I'll set a Google Calendar reminder on phone for mid-2025 so I can come back and say "I told you so!"


    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny
    ...Dish will be particularly challenged by T-Mobile Connect.

    Which is even stupider, since DISH's wireless business is being created solely so the government can pretend this merger isn't hurting wireless competition. Creating a "competitor" so fragile that the big 3 can smother it before it leaves the crib proves that A) DISH is in no way a legitimate competitor, and B) T-Mo, Sprint, and the Feds are lying like a rug that this merger won't harm competition.

    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny
    They are also prime examples of how a company can use asymmetry to its advantage. T-Mobile identified segments where its competition is strong and profitable, such as first responder agencies, and where it has no meaningful business that would get cannibalized by an aggressive move.
    Connecting Heroes Initiative, even if nobody takes T-Mobile up on the offer, will be a success as it devalues AT&T’s and Verizon’s opportunity. If agencies take T-Mobile up, it will make money on the non-smartphone part of the business.

    Maybe, or perhaps AT&T and Verizon will just ignore Connecting Heroes long enough for a number of first responder agencies to try it, and run screaming back to a service that works and scales (it will take New T-Mo quite awhile, even with the new spectrum from Sprint, to match the coverage and network quality of the big two.)

    T-Mo's offer only devalues the big two's services if they allow it to. AT&T and Verizon are big enough to weather any short term defections to T-Mo's generous, albeit opportunistic offer, and have talented enough salespeople to point out the actual costs of using T-Mo's partially free service. They'll just hold their price, and tout the superiority of their networks and offerings, just as they do now in the face of cheaper competitors. Losing, say, 20% of their full-priced business to T-Mo, beats discounting their services 25% to everybody to try and save some of the defectors.



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

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Greater Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,130
    Device(s)
    iPhone 11 Pro Max Series 4 Apple Watch
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile USA
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    I don't think we can't have it both ways?

    For example I can't demand the merger be stopped on the basis of alleged future job loses and alleged (potential) higher prices....

    Then when they do plan to offer lower prices simultaneously cry foul because it'll allegedly (maybe) pressure others to lower their prices, layoff employees; making it unprofitable for them to be in business.

    Just my opinion.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,622
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny View Post
    I don't think we can't have it both ways?

    For example I can't demand the merger be stopped on the basis of alleged future job loses and alleged (potential) higher prices....

    Then when they do plan to offer lower prices simultaneously cry foul because it'll allegedly (maybe) pressure others to lower their prices, layoff employees; making it unprofitable for them to be in business.

    Just my opinion.

    Sure you can, when the latter is a limited time sham to cover up that the real plan is really the former.

    T-Mo's defenses so far against the allegations that the merger will increase prices have been:

    A) We won't raise prices for at least three years...

    And:

    B) Here's a new lower price rate plan than we've ever offered. We'll offer it for at least five years...


    Imagine a murderer at his parole hearing being asked if he feels he's ready to rejoin society...

    "Yes. I'm a changed man. And I promise not to kill anyone else...

    "...for at least five years..."



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    874
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Mint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    100 GB per YEAR not per month per YEAR. That's 280 MB a day. Most of these household will have the eaten up within the first week then complain their free internet stopped working
    Exactly. All of these offerings have very low data limits, this is just a PR move, and is set up so that it doesn't threaten to cannibalize any customers who want more than a very, very minimal service who would be on low-end MVNOs anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
    The fact is, after starting UnCarrier in 2013, the last 18 months have seen nothing but ReCarrier as T-Mo implements moves even Verizon envies. We've all seen it. And we have no reason to believe such won't continue.

    What one hand gives, the other takes away.
    Yup. T-Mobile is still sort of competitive because they've hit a sweet spot between the quality of their network and their pricing, especially on international, but they just can't bring their prices up to where T and VZ are, as their network just isn't there. I've had AT&T and Mint for the last couple of months, and T-Mobile's network just isn't the same quality as AT&T's across several markets, even where I was expecting T-Mobile to blow AT&T out of the water (NYC, LA). T-Mobile definitely beats AT&T on speed in some parts of some markets, but then T-Mobile will drop service completely elsewhere, while AT&T is reliable and works almost everywhere.

    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.
    It is clear and obvious to anyone with half a brain that there will be higher prices, jobs lost, and it will have a negative impact on low-income customers. That's not the question.

    The question is whether there is a legal basis for the AG's cases.

    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny View Post
    AT&T is calling T-Mobile’s promise regarding first responders a marketing ploy. In an email to FierceWireless, an AT&T spokesperson said, “We have a deep and genuine commitment to connecting first responders and using technology to enrich education, not marketing stunts contingent on getting something approved. If they believe it’s critical to offer free access to these communities they would do it today, no conditions or questions asked.”
    AT&T does have FirstNet after all. FirstNet is a giant government boondoggle to make a network that no one asked for and no one needs, since commercial LTE networks already exist, but good for AT&T for making lemons out of the lemonade of the B14 boondoggle.

    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny View Post
    They are also prime examples of how a company can use asymmetry to its advantage. T-Mobile identified segments where its competition is strong and profitable, such as first responder agencies, and where it has no meaningful business that would get cannibalized by an aggressive move. Connecting Heroes Initiative, even if nobody takes T-Mobile up on the offer, will be a success as it devalues AT&T’s and Verizon’s opportunity. If agencies take T-Mobile up, it will make money on the non-smartphone part of the business.
    Few agencies are going to want T-Mobile's less reliable network compared to FirstNet or Verizon.

    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    So sure, T-Mo can sell a $15 plan, force AT&T and Verizon to sell similar competitive plans, and then drive all the MVNOs out of business (because they also set the price the MVNOs buy bulk talk/text/data from them!) Then we can all bask in the glory of artificially low prices for about five years; the length of time T-Mo promises to offer this plan as a condition of merger approval. Then the plan goes away, and the "big 3" sell wireless for whatever they like.
    It's a merge gimmick and you're probably right about what it would do to the market... but then we have to ask ourselves... why the heck are the rates charged to MVNOs so high in the first place. If those were lower, we could have many $15/mo options out there on the market. And this begs the question of why the US wireless market is so expensive. It's not geography alone, as European carriers have more sites for a given sized population, and it's not lack of competition, as many countries have more competitive markets with 3 or 4 providers, and we have 4, and still aren't very competitive. I speculate that it's due to our sprawled out suburbs with relatively few places to put towers or sites in, and the resulting real estate market for that vertical real estate, as well as the telco system here and the cost of fiber backhaul.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,437
    Feedback Score
    0
    Half A Brain checking in here. I still haven't seen any reliable info regarding:

    "higher prices, jobs lost, and it will have a negative impact on low-income customers".

    Why don't you break the ice and trot out some facts and your sources instead of just mouthing the rhetoric of those who don't want TM to complete the merger?

    The merger is coming, deal with it.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,915
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Exactly. All of these offerings have very low data limits, this is just a PR move, and is set up so that it doesn't threaten to cannibalize any customers who want more than a very, very minimal service who would be on low-end MVNOs anyway.



    Yup. T-Mobile is still sort of competitive because they've hit a sweet spot between the quality of their network and their pricing, especially on international, but they just can't bring their prices up to where T and VZ are, as their network just isn't there. I've had AT&T and Mint for the last couple of months, and T-Mobile's network just isn't the same quality as AT&T's across several markets, even where I was expecting T-Mobile to blow AT&T out of the water (NYC, LA). T-Mobile definitely beats AT&T on speed in some parts of some markets, but then T-Mobile will drop service completely elsewhere, while AT&T is reliable and works almost everywhere.



    It is clear and obvious to anyone with half a brain that there will be higher prices, jobs lost, and it will have a negative impact on low-income customers. That's not the question.

    The question is whether there is a legal basis for the AG's cases.



    AT&T does have FirstNet after all. FirstNet is a giant government boondoggle to make a network that no one asked for and no one needs, since commercial LTE networks already exist, but good for AT&T for making lemons out of the lemonade of the B14 boondoggle.



    Few agencies are going to want T-Mobile's less reliable network compared to FirstNet or Verizon.



    It's a merge gimmick and you're probably right about what it would do to the market... but then we have to ask ourselves... why the heck are the rates charged to MVNOs so high in the first place. If those were lower, we could have many $15/mo options out there on the market. And this begs the question of why the US wireless market is so expensive. It's not geography alone, as European carriers have more sites for a given sized population, and it's not lack of competition, as many countries have more competitive markets with 3 or 4 providers, and we have 4, and still aren't very competitive. I speculate that it's due to our sprawled out suburbs with relatively few places to put towers or sites in, and the resulting real estate market for that vertical real estate, as well as the telco system here and the cost of fiber backhaul.
    T-Mobiles network will improve just like all the carriers will do so I think they will be competitive unless they really screw up the pricing.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,860
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    Sure you can, when the latter is a limited time sham to cover up that the real plan is really the former.

    T-Mo's defenses so far against the allegations that the merger will increase prices have been:

    A) We won't raise prices for at least three years...

    And:

    B) Here's a new lower price rate plan than we've ever offered. We'll offer it for at least five years...


    Imagine a murderer at his parole hearing being asked if he feels he's ready to rejoin society...

    "Yes. I'm a changed man. And I promise not to kill anyone else...

    "...for at least five years..."



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    The thing is in 5 years if the merger is not approved Sprint will either not exist or exist as a glorified version of Us cellular. Maybe only doing business in about 30 markets. Now if you can explain how this is going to help consumers and not cause job losses I'm all ears.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,437
    Feedback Score
    0
    Jack, your question and mine seem to be eliciting only replies from the crickets. I've asked this question before with the same lack of response. Somehow it's easy to claim all these dire consequences, but not be able to explain why. It would be fun to hear from the 9 states that dropped their "Me Too" lawsuit describe why they dropped out. They might be the best witnesses for T-Mobile.
    Last edited by daleraver; 11-13-2019 at 08:20 PM.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,860
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    Jack, your question and mine seem to eliciting only replies from the crickets. I've asked this question before with the same lack of response. Somehow it's easy to claim all these dire consequences, but not be able to explain why. It would be fun to hear from the 9 states that dropped their "Me Too" lawsuit describe why they dropped out. They might be the best witnesses for T-Mobile.
    The anti-merger people can do all this chicken little prediction and maybe some of that might be true. But they don't want to accept or admit that Sprint is dead without the merger. Maybe they think some white knight will come in and save Sprint. It's hard to think people are that foolish to believe that. I mean what's going to cost more jobs Sprint merging with T-Mobile or Sprint going under? And when they do if they think Sprint won't sell some of their spectrum to At&t and Verizon they are very mistaken. They'll sell to who offer the most

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,013
    Feedback Score
    0
    All these chicken little predictions....I remember when my state voted on prohibiting smoking inside public venues, period. Didn't matter what it was. No exceptions. Every bar, and many restaurants, predicted that all bars and bar areas would simply die out within a month if their customers couldn't smoke. They claimed people would simply stay away and drink at home, and that the law would ruin entire businesses, families who owned them, etc.

    Of course, absolutely nothing of the sort came about. One or two old school, old far bars resisted for awhile--and even put ashtrays out on the counter. They got some news coverage, but it all went away soon enough. And bar and restaurant business has never been better here, many many years later.

    The sky is falling, the sky is falling...

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,971
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    What are you talking about?
    Quote Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
    All these chicken little predictions....I remember when my state voted on prohibiting smoking inside public venues, period. Didn't matter what it was. No exceptions. Every bar, and many restaurants, predicted that all bars and bar areas would simply die out within a month if their customers couldn't smoke. They claimed people would simply stay away and drink at home, and that the law would ruin entire businesses, families who owned them, etc.

    Of course, absolutely nothing of the sort came about. One or two old school, old far bars resisted for awhile--and even put ashtrays out on the counter. They got some news coverage, but it all went away soon enough. And bar and restaurant business has never been better here, many many years later.

    The sky is falling, the sky is falling...

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,013
    Feedback Score
    0
    Chicken little predictions being meaningless.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,860
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
    Chicken little predictions being meaningless.
    Yep. And at least when I predict Sprint's demise I'm using logic and reasoning and not wish fulfillment

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,622
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by daleraver View Post
    Jack, your question and mine seem to be eliciting only replies from the crickets. I've asked this question before with the same lack of response. Somehow it's easy to claim all these dire consequences, but not be able to explain why. It would be fun to hear from the 9 states that dropped their "Me Too" lawsuit describe why they dropped out. They might be the best witnesses for T-Mobile.

    First, let's clear up your "nine states" misunderstanding...

    "Nine states" have NOT dropped out of the lawsuit, only the two that settled with T-Mo have (Mississippi and Colorado.)

    The "nine states" you are probably referring to are the nine that have joined the Dept. of Justice settlement (unlike the FCC who rubber-stamped the merger, the DOJ was initially against it until they negotiated the offer for new T-Mo to divest Boost and prop DISH up as a replacement 4th national carrier.)

    The states suing to block the merger (now fifteen that MS and CO settled) are:

    New York, California, District of Columbia, Oregon, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Texas.

    The nine supporting the DOJ settlement are:

    Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Dakota.


    As to the "crickets" replying to your "questions", perhaps we might ask you to prove your claim that the merger *won't* cause these "dire predictions" from happening. Plenty of economists seem to think this is a bad idea, ( points out what a sham the DOJ's "solution" of propping up DISH as the replacement for Sprint as a 4th competitor is) but what do experts know, when a bunch of armchair hobbyists on HoFo probably know better?

    But while we wait for Dec. 9th and hear what NY and California have to say about it, you could read this Verge piece for a general idea of how pretty much every merger ever works out:
    https://www.theverge.com/platform/am...erage-promises

    But seriously, how do you honestly expect two companies to merge and not have redundant jobs eliminated? Redundant customer service centers, redundant retail stores, redundant techs, etc. What tech merger *ever* increased jobs and lowered pricing?

    Sure, short term there will be a lot of work available to consolidate the two networks, integrate systems, etc., but eventually, New T-Mo will be streamlined and need fewer employees than the two separate companies do.

    And this idea that Sprint is a dead man walking is silly. Sprint has a TON of valuation and assets to p*ss through before they hit the point of no return.

    T-Mo was in as bad if not worse shape than Sprint it's today prior to their failed merger attempt with AT&T at the start of the decade. A few billion dollars of cash plus some roaming coverage from AT&T (from a penalty clause triggered by the merger failing) and new leadership under Legere turned T-Mo around. There's no reason some cash and better leadership couldn't fix Sprint too. The narrative that Sprint is a year or two from collapse is being spun by T-Mo and Sprint* to reinforce the idea that the merger is necessary.

    (*Of course, Sprint is talking out of both sides of their mouth. To the Feds they claim they're in trouble, to investors they claim while the merger would be preferable, they'll be just fine without it.)





    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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