Page 46 of 72 FirstFirst ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... LastLast
Results 676 to 690 of 1073

Thread: The final obstacle to the T-Mobile/Sprint Merger Begins Tomorrow

  1. #676
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    937
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    Every time someone doesn't like the content of a news report or article they attack the author, but they never are able to point out a single factual error. Yet anything that Legere says is taken as gospel─odd behavior.


    That about sums it up right there.

  2. #677
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    937
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    You mean the false allegation in the article that the DOJ is engaging in corruption in this matter:

    "And while US corruption is nothing new, we seem to be entering a new era where we can't even be bothered with the faintest pretense to the contrary. "

    So since SoxFan76 failed miserably in providing any example of corruption, maybe you can step up and point out where the bribery, fraud or even dishonesty is by the DOJ in this matter.
    Do some reading. Of course you don't care about the facts, like the FACT that there is corruption. Go read the article, it's all in there.

  3. #678
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    937
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdevnul View Post
    It's an opinion hit piece by someone who is rabidly against the deal. What's to prove? It did not change my opinion one bit that the deal should go forward expeditiously.

    The quoted observations of people at DOJ and FCC did not carry the day when it came to the decision to approve the deal by the ultimate people in charge. Differing opinions are not unusual in an agency.
    Karl Bode is one of the sharpest analysts of the telecom industry, if not the sharpest. It's not an opinion piece, it's simply laying out the reality of the situation.

    There are some arguments for the deal, mostly surrounding rural broadband on n41, but when looking only at the wireless market, there is no intellectually honest way to support this merger unless you're just a corporate apologist who wants less competition and higher prices in the US wireless market. It's as simple as that. DISH is not a competitor, it's a complete joke, and DISH will never be a serious competitor in the wireless market. They could survive on as some sort of MVNO, which is basically irrelevant.

  4. #679
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Norton, Ohio
    Posts
    2,976
    Device(s)
    HTC Amaze 4G
    Carrier(s)
    T-mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Karl Bode is one of the sharpest analysts of the telecom industry, if not the sharpest. It's not an opinion piece, it's simply laying out the reality of the situation.

    There are some arguments for the deal, mostly surrounding rural broadband on n41, but when looking only at the wireless market, there is no intellectually honest way to support this merger unless you're just a corporate apologist who wants less competition and higher prices in the US wireless market. It's as simple as that. DISH is not a competitor, it's a complete joke, and DISH will never be a serious competitor in the wireless market. They could survive on as some sort of MVNO, which is basically irrelevant.
    And that's your opinion. In my opinion the merger definitely should go through to help create broadband competition since there is none already even in populated areas, not just rural, and it's my opinion that Sprint really isn't a competitor and neither is T-Mobile to Verizon and AT&t. If allowed to merge they can compete in broadband and actually compete with Verizon and AT&t. Again that's my opinion, and you have your opinion, and neither one of them are actually facts because we cannot tell the future. I don't think the merger will affect prices in one way or another, they are going to go up whether or not the merge happens. I believe they will go up the same amount either way. But to put people down, calling them a corporate apologist for voicing their side of the story because it doesn't match with what you think might happen is just not right.

    Sent from my Lenovo TB-X505F using HoFo mobile app
    Last edited by MasonDoctorJT; 01-06-2020 at 04:10 PM.
    Speeds from my HTC Sensation The last one is Roadrunner-Way to impress, Time Warner


  5. #680
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DRNewcomb View Post
    Ever watch a soap opera then go away for a week then come back and find the plot pretty much where you left it. Like nothing has progressed. This thread reminds me of that.
    The best part is people in this thread post analyst editorials/opinions as news. Then they argue over it if its not inline with their opinion. Which is what the last 40 pages of this thread consists of.

  6. #681
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,982
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    No way not nowadays
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Karl Bode is one of the sharpest analysts of the telecom industry, if not the sharpest. It's not an opinion piece, it's simply laying out the reality of the situation.

    There are some arguments for the deal, mostly surrounding rural broadband on n41, but when looking only at the wireless market, there is no intellectually honest way to support this merger unless you're just a corporate apologist who wants less competition and higher prices in the US wireless market. It's as simple as that. DISH is not a competitor, it's a complete joke, and DISH will never be a serious competitor in the wireless market. They could survive on as some sort of MVNO, which is basically irrelevant.

  7. #682
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,886
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Do some reading. Of course you don't care about the facts, like the FACT that there is corruption. Go read the article, it's all in there.
    There are no "facts" of corruption--either in the article or anywhere else. It's just something you and others like Karl Bode made up. You don't present any evidence at all of any wrongdoing despite ample opportunity.

  8. #683
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,593
    Device(s)
    S9
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Wonder why all these T-Mobile haters that don’t even have T-Mobile service show up on this board to attack real T-Mobile customers and push their two overrated and overpriced networks. All they want to do is pretend we are a cult led by John Ledger when they are the AT&T and Verizon cult that are losing customers to T-Mobile. They are so ridiculous.
    Last edited by shilohcane; 01-06-2020 at 09:35 PM.

  9. #684
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    937
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MasonDoctorJT View Post
    And that's your opinion. In my opinion the merger definitely should go through to help create broadband competition since there is none already even in populated areas, not just rural, and it's my opinion that Sprint really isn't a competitor and neither is T-Mobile to Verizon and AT&t.
    So let's deconstruct that statement. So the first part you are saying that the merger should go through to provide broadband competition/access in more areas using n41 5G. That's fine, and that's a possible/likely outcome of the merger, but if you are going to be honest about it, you have to acknowledge that increased broadband competition comes at the price of less competition in the mobile market. Now you could argue that we have a bunch of monopoly cable providers and they need competition more than the mobile market, which would go from 4 providers to 3 in most areas.

    However, the second statement that Sprint isn't a competitor is only partially true, but not in the context of T-Mobile. Sprint competes pretty fiercely with T-Mobile, and T-Mobile competes a little bit around the edges with the big two, although they don't take them on directly, and there is no evidence that they would do so even if the merger were to go through. The simply fact of the matter is that if you remove Sprint from the market, prices will go up, and competition will be less, since you won't have Sprint around to offer rock-bottom prices. Further, people who today are happy with Sprint's service won't have the option to have Sprint's rock-bottom pricing, and this will disproportionately affect low-income people of color. That's simply a numerical, mathematical fact.

    If allowed to merge they can compete in broadband and actually compete with Verizon and AT&t. Again that's my opinion, and you have your opinion, and neither one of them are actually facts because we cannot tell the future. I don't think the merger will affect prices in one way or another, they are going to go up whether or not the merge happens. I believe they will go up the same amount either way. But to put people down, calling them a corporate apologist for voicing their side of the story because it doesn't match with what you think might happen is just not right.
    It's intellectually dishonest to say that somehow going from 4 to 3 competitors in the market is going to increase competition in wireless. No way, no how, that's not how economics works. That being said, you can argue that the increased broadband competition is worth a trade-off in having less mobile competition. I don't particularly agree with that argument, but it's a valid argument, so long as you acknowledge that it comes at the price of reduced mobile competition. If you fail to acknowledge the fact that it will create less mobile competition, then you are making an intellectually dishonest argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    There are no "facts" of corruption--either in the article or anywhere else. It's just something you and others like Karl Bode made up. You don't present any evidence at all of any wrongdoing despite ample opportunity.
    Blatantly lying and repeating your lies over and over doesn't make you right.

    Quote Originally Posted by shilohcane View Post
    Wonder why all these T-Mobile haters that don’t even have T-Mobile service show up on this board to attack real T-Mobile customers and push their two overrated and overpriced networks. All they want to do is pretend we are a cult led by John Ledger when they are the AT&T and Verizon cult that are losing customers to T-Mobile. They are so ridiculous.
    At least in my case, I have Mint Mobile, and it's not bad, but not as good as AT&T either. I can't directly compare speeds, as I have a much faster phone on AT&T than on Mint, but I can compare coverage, and while T-Mobile works most of the time, there are definitely some holes in their coverage that are pretty significant and would be rather bad if you relied on a T-Mobile MVNO as your only service. I presume that most of these holes have coverage on T-Mobile postpaid through AT&T roaming.

    You are a cult led by John Legere, and you prove it every time you worship him and T-Mobile, claim that T-Mobile is somehow equivalent to Verizon or AT&T, or defend everything that T-Mobile does. What is interesting is that this type of sort of fanboyism has almost totally died out from the Verizon fanboys, and never existed to a significant extent for AT&T and Sprint. Even the most hardcore Verizon fans today don't have a love affair for Verizon, they just want service that works in their market or where they travel. It's an even sharper contrast when you realize that the Verizon fanboys have actual facts to back them up, whether it was their giant industry-leading EVDO network a decade ago, or today's still largest LTE network (although native coverage may be surpassed by AT&T in the coming years).

  10. #685
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,706
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shilohcane View Post
    Wonder why all these T-Mobile haters that don’t even have T-Mobile service show up on this board to attack real T-Mobile customers and push their two overrated and overpriced networks. All they want to do is pretend we are a cult led by John Ledger when they are the AT&T and Verizon cult that are losing customers to T-Mobile. They are so ridiculous.
    Please try to explain two things to me...

    A) How do you explain the T-Mo customers like me, who are happy with their service, but are still against the merger and call out the ridiculous fanboyism. How am I a "hater"? Because I'm not hoping T-Mobile takes over the world?

    B) How do you take so much pride in a company you have nothing whatsoever to do with, other than paying them for service? You didn't build the network, you just pay your bill like the rest of us. It's like the Apple fanboys that seem to believe because they spent $1000 on a MacBook, they somehow became one of the designers who created it.

    On the other hand, it's a pretty harmless addiction, I guess. There are very few cults that let you become a member of for as low as $10/month (for a 2GB tablet plan...)

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

  11. #686
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    322
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    So let's deconstruct that statement. So the first part you are saying that the merger should go through to provide broadband competition/access in more areas using n41 5G. That's fine, and that's a possible/likely outcome of the merger, but if you are going to be honest about it, you have to acknowledge that increased broadband competition comes at the price of less competition in the mobile market. Now you could argue that we have a bunch of monopoly cable providers and they need competition more than the mobile market, which would go from 4 providers to 3 in most areas.

    However, the second statement that Sprint isn't a competitor is only partially true, but not in the context of T-Mobile. Sprint competes pretty fiercely with T-Mobile, and T-Mobile competes a little bit around the edges with the big two, although they don't take them on directly, and there is no evidence that they would do so even if the merger were to go through. The simply fact of the matter is that if you remove Sprint from the market, prices will go up, and competition will be less, since you won't have Sprint around to offer rock-bottom prices. Further, people who today are happy with Sprint's service won't have the option to have Sprint's rock-bottom pricing, and this will disproportionately affect low-income people of color. That's simply a numerical, mathematical fact.



    It's intellectually dishonest to say that somehow going from 4 to 3 competitors in the market is going to increase competition in wireless. No way, no how, that's not how economics works. That being said, you can argue that the increased broadband competition is worth a trade-off in having less mobile competition. I don't particularly agree with that argument, but it's a valid argument, so long as you acknowledge that it comes at the price of reduced mobile competition. If you fail to acknowledge the fact that it will create less mobile competition, then you are making an intellectually dishonest argument.



    Blatantly lying and repeating your lies over and over doesn't make you right.



    At least in my case, I have Mint Mobile, and it's not bad, but not as good as AT&T either. I can't directly compare speeds, as I have a much faster phone on AT&T than on Mint, but I can compare coverage, and while T-Mobile works most of the time, there are definitely some holes in their coverage that are pretty significant and would be rather bad if you relied on a T-Mobile MVNO as your only service. I presume that most of these holes have coverage on T-Mobile postpaid through AT&T roaming.

    You are a cult led by John Legere, and you prove it every time you worship him and T-Mobile, claim that T-Mobile is somehow equivalent to Verizon or AT&T, or defend everything that T-Mobile does. What is interesting is that this type of sort of fanboyism has almost totally died out from the Verizon fanboys, and never existed to a significant extent for AT&T and Sprint. Even the most hardcore Verizon fans today don't have a love affair for Verizon, they just want service that works in their market or where they travel. It's an even sharper contrast when you realize that the Verizon fanboys have actual facts to back them up, whether it was their giant industry-leading EVDO network a decade ago, or today's still largest LTE network (although native coverage may be surpassed by AT&T in the coming years).
    Well-stated. I don't know if the probability of more broadband competition, via mmWave 5G, is going to impress the judge enough to offset the decreased competition in mobile service. OTOH, you could argue that if the merger creates a third top-tier carrier then competition would increase, at least at the high end, but it would completely eliminate both of the second tier carriers that currently sell to price-sensitive customers and that compete on price for those customers. That would leave only the MVNOs at the low end, plus any prepaid services that the three top-tier carriers decided to offer.

    I worry about the MVNOs. The only reason that there are so many of them is that it's so hard for four separate carriers to collude to put the MVNOs out of business, and no carrier wants to lose the revenue that they get from selling excess capacity to the MVNOs. But clearly the carriers would prefer to be selling retail prepaid service, like Visible, Cricket, Metro, and Boost, than wholesaling their excess capacity out to Tracfone, RedPocket, Consumer Cellular, and all the other MVNOs. With only three carriers, it becomes easier to gently collude, just as airlines do now.

  12. #687
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    322
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    Please try to explain two things to me...

    A) How do you explain the T-Mo customers like me, who are happy with their service, but are still against the merger and call out the ridiculous fanboyism. How am I a "hater"? Because I'm not hoping T-Mobile takes over the world?

    B) How do you take so much pride in a company you have nothing whatsoever to do with, other than paying them for service? You didn't build the network, you just pay your bill like the rest of us. It's like the Apple fanboys that seem to believe because they spent $1000 on a MacBook, they somehow became one of the designers who created it.

    On the other hand, it's a pretty harmless addiction, I guess. There are very few cults that let you become a member of for as low as $10/month (for a 2GB tablet plan...)

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    Todd, there is no evidence that you are a member of a cult! I think that we all appreciate your knowledge and honesty.

    Personally, I have set up my Howard Forums' "ignore list" to not display messages from cult members. What's the point with arguing with them since they have no interest in facts and logic and contribute nothing useful. If you try to correct them then you risk being banned, so there's no upside in responding.

    But I do think it's interesting that you say that you are happy with T-Mobile service while at the same time complaining about the tiny amount of roaming data that you get and how that affects you when you are in areas with no T-Mobile coverage. Personally, that's what made me unhappy enough to leave T-Mobile. There were just too many places that I traveled to, or passed through, where T-Mobile did not have any coverage, and carrying a second phone on AT&T or Verizon was not something I wanted to do.

    That said, Verizon is by no means perfect. One person on my family plan lives in an in-law apartment in a big city and doesn't have coverage inside and relies on WhatsApp calling via Wi-Fi. The lack of Wi-Fi calling on most MVNOs is an annoyance. I solved it by porting my T-Mobile number to Google Voice and then getting a new native number from the MVNO (I can't even remember what that native number is).

  13. #688
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,886
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    Blatantly lying and repeating your lies over and over doesn't make you right.
    You don't point to a single lie I made. You don't point to a single thing that T-Mobile did that meets the definition of corruption.

    You just make continuous false accusations.

  14. #689
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,706
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    Todd, there is no evidence that you are a member of a cult! I think that we all appreciate your knowledge and honesty.

    Personally, I have set up my Howard Forums' "ignore list" to not display messages from cult members. What's the point with arguing with them since they have no interest in facts and logic and contribute nothing useful. If you try to correct them then you risk being banned, so there's no upside in responding.

    But I do think it's interesting that you say that you are happy with T-Mobile service while at the same time complaining about the tiny amount of roaming data that you get and how that affects you when you are in areas with no T-Mobile coverage. Personally, that's what made me unhappy enough to leave T-Mobile. There were just too many places that I traveled to, or passed through, where T-Mobile did not have any coverage, and carrying a second phone on AT&T or Verizon was not something I wanted to do.

    That said, Verizon is by no means perfect. One person on my family plan lives in an in-law apartment in a big city and doesn't have coverage inside and relies on WhatsApp calling via Wi-Fi. The lack of Wi-Fi calling on most MVNOs is an annoyance. I solved it by porting my T-Mobile number to Google Voice and then getting a new native number from the MVNO (I can't even remember what that native number is).
    Well, to be fair, you have no idea as to what companies I might be a cult follower of. Obviously you don't hang around the Sephora makeup boards, where you'll find me posting as BasicB*tch66!

    Kidding aside, sure I complain about the parts of my T-Mo service that inconvenience me. My two favorite pain points are rural coverage (particularly at places I visit semi-regularly, like my in-laws' farm in Sioux City, IA, and my mom's house in Providence, RI!) and domestic data roaming limits (ironic, from a carrier who gives me unlimited international roaming!)

    But as I've mentioned many times, T-Mo's strength (to me) is as a value carrier. I accept the deficiencies in service in return for (much) lower monthly rates. (Frankly, my brother's Verizon phone and my AT&T prepaid backup also get crappy coverage at my Mom's- she lives in a low-lying neighborhood with ancient, giant deciduous trees and NIMBY issues- so my cut-rate T-Mo service doesn't seem too bad at bill-paying time! I can't get 5 lines of unlimited talk, text and LTE data for $120 from a lot of companies! Most of the MVNOs in that price range have their own headaches, particularly with device restrictions, throttling, priority issues, etc.)

    As to why I'm willing to accept "bad" service, even at a lower price, I guess I have two major reasons. First is perspective- I'm over 50, so I'm probably in a minority here of folks who lived part of his adult life before the ubiquity of the cell phone, and somehow was able to make it through an entire day- (even a couple of decades!) without mobile connectivity, so managing with weak (or even no) signal for a few hours or even a weekend, while admittedly annoying, hardly gives me the shakes like a recovering heroin addict (or my teenage daughters!)

    Second, the "solution" to T-Mo's coverage for me doesn't necessarily mean switching carriers- occasionally carrying a backup phone doesn't bother me much. Just like I prefer to own a compact car, and occasionally rent a truck for a few hours when I need to move furniture, rather than be stuck with an ugly, fuel inefficient vehicle 24/7 for the one time or two a year I need it, I just "rent" better coverage, via AT&T or Verizon prepaid service, the few times I need it. My grandfathered T-Mo family plan is roughly $80-100/month cheaper than a comparable VZW or AT&T plan, so even if I spend $100-200 a year on backup prepaid service for the family as needed, I'm still way, way ahead. (In reality, I tend to spend anywhere from $20-60/year, typically on one data SIM we can hotspot and all share for T-Mo WiFi calling/texting and data. I've got an unlocked Moto E4 Plus with a 5000mAH battery that lasts all day even with hotspot turned on, and also works as a fairly decent phone. If I know I'll be out of a T-Mo service area all day, I'll just carry the E4, and use the T-Mo Digits app for calling and texting on my "real" T-Mo number.)

    Lastly, I personally never block/ignore anyone on these boards, no matter how stupid or offensive they get. It's cheap entertainment...



    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  15. #690
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,535
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MasonDoctorJT View Post
    ...I don't think the merger will affect prices in one way or another, they are going to go up whether or not the merge happens. I believe they will go up the same amount either way...
    I believe you are talking about broadband pricing. A combined TMSpr will not be a substantial competitor to major broadband providers. Certainly not enough of one to influence industry pricing.

    But as far as the cellular business. A merger will crush MVNOs left & right. The prices for service has been tumbling dramatically for at least 5 years. Within a year prices will soar. Good bye Tello, & other supper value MVNOs. The only MVNOs that will benefit will be the TF brands.
    If my actions include deeds of philanthropy in charity and acts of loving kindness I am living in my Faith.

    Red Pocket (AT&T) UTnT 5GB exp 09.27.20
    Good2Go (AT&T) UTnT recurring {12*26} $13.50otd/mo
    T-Mobile Gold Rewards $10yr exp 01.11.21
    Tello x2 (Sprint) $5 1-use/3mo no exp by 04.11.20

Page 46 of 72 FirstFirst ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-06-2019, 12:38 AM
  2. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 02-26-2019, 10:29 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-25-2008, 08:36 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-21-2003, 09:31 PM
  5. finally, i got the real answers to the a530
    By Vyruz Reaper in forum Verizon Wireless
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-29-2003, 12:49 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks