Page 56 of 72 FirstFirst ... 6 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 ... LastLast
Results 826 to 840 of 1073

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

  1. #826
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    322
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    The merger will definitely reduce competition at the low end. The U.S. would go from two high-end and two low-end postpaid carriers to two high-end and one low-end carrier, if John Legere and Charlie Ergen can be believed.

    The merger might eventually increase competition at the high end, if T-Mobile and Sprint can be believed that the merger will free up sufficient capital to build out the T-Mobile network, and if that freed-up capital will actually be used for that purpose.

    A new, independent, presumably low-end network, based off of Boost and Virgin subscribers and created by Dish, might emerge. That's a long-shot though.

    MVNOs could take up the slack at the low end.

    The judge will have to decide if he believes Charlie Ergen and John Legere; their credibility in the past has been low.

    The fact that the merger was approved by the FCC and DOJ is not going to matter much to the judge, given the facts that have emerged since those two approvals. In fact, the corruption that was proven may sway the judge in the opposite direction.

  2. #827
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,895
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    In fact, the corruption that was proven may sway the judge
    There was never any proven corruption. This is just more of your blatantly false, anti-TMobile propaganda.

  3. #828
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    235
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    The merger will definitely reduce competition at the low end. The U.S. would go from two high-end and two low-end postpaid carriers to two high-end and one low-end carrier, if John Legere and Charlie Ergen can be believed.

    The merger might eventually increase competition at the high end, if T-Mobile and Sprint can be believed that the merger will free up sufficient capital to build out the T-Mobile network, and if that freed-up capital will actually be used for that purpose.

    A new, independent, presumably low-end network, based off of Boost and Virgin subscribers and created by Dish, might emerge. That's a long-shot though.

    MVNOs could take up the slack at the low end.

    The judge will have to decide if he believes Charlie Ergen and John Legere; their credibility in the past has been low.

    The fact that the merger was approved by the FCC and DOJ is not going to matter much to the judge, given the facts that have emerged since those two approvals. In fact, the corruption that was proven may sway the judge in the opposite direction.
    I hope you're paid to post such FUD. You're accusing entities of such where evidence does not exist to support your claim. This is beyond a mere opinion.

  4. #829
    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 L33 View Post
    I hope you're paid to post such FUD. You're accusing entities of such where evidence does not exist to support your claim. This is beyond a mere opinion.
    LOL, probably not as much as you're paid to deny reality.

    Here are some more things for you to read and comprehend, all with cites:

    "DOJ Antitrust Boss Delrahim Ignored Hard Data As He Rubber Stamped T-Mobile Merger"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-merger.shtml

    "T-Mobile Execs Have Spent $195K at Trump’s D.C. Hotel Since Sprint Merger"
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ce-merger.html

    "T-Mobile announced a merger needing Trump administration approval. The next day, 9 executives had reservations at Trump’s hotel."
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...0a8_story.html

    "States Are Being Conned By Lobbyists Into Backing Off The T-Mobile Merger Lawsuit"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-lawsuit.shtml

    https://www.vox.com/2019/7/29/893202...-tmobile-hotel
    "Trump is approving an anti-competitive merger that will cost you money
    But he seems to have made money off the deal personally."

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t
    "If the merger is allowed to move forward, "consumers can expect to see higher prices, fewer choices, and less innovative offerings across the board," said Copps, who formerly served at the Federal Communications Commission. "Low-income and marginalized communities who rely on prepaid services from T-Mobile and Sprint will face significant consequences and potentially get priced out of wireless service."
    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t

    "FCC Approved T-Mobile Sprint Merger Without Even Seeing The Full Details"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-details.shtml

    "T-Mobile and Sprint Head to Court to Defend Their Very Bad Megamerger"
    https://gizmodo.com/t-mobile-and-spr...ery-1840317115

    "As Trial Begins, Evidence Shows Sprint, T-Mobile Know Merger Will Raise Prices"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-prices.shtml

  5. #830
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,596
    Device(s)
    S9
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by L33 View Post
    I hope you're paid to post such FUD. You're accusing entities of such where evidence does not exist to support your claim. This is beyond a mere opinion.
    I think a lot of the I hate T-Mobile & Sprint merger are people that have shorted T-Mobile stock. Or perhaps people that own AT&T and/or Verizon stock. Really without the merger both AT&T and Verizon will never have true competition that would force them to spend their money on better services instead of giving dividends income to stock holders. Really why would anyone that doesn’t have Sprint or T-Mobile service care about this merger that comes on this board to attack anyone that wants the merger so it’s customers get better faster coverage from their cell network?

  6. #831
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,979
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    LOL, probably not as much as you're paid to deny reality.

    Here are some more things for you to read and comprehend, all with cites:

    "DOJ Antitrust Boss Delrahim Ignored Hard Data As He Rubber Stamped T-Mobile Merger"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-merger.shtml

    "T-Mobile Execs Have Spent $195K at Trump’s D.C. Hotel Since Sprint Merger"
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ce-merger.html

    "T-Mobile announced a merger needing Trump administration approval. The next day, 9 executives had reservations at Trump’s hotel."
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...0a8_story.html

    "States Are Being Conned By Lobbyists Into Backing Off The T-Mobile Merger Lawsuit"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-lawsuit.shtml

    https://www.vox.com/2019/7/29/893202...-tmobile-hotel
    "Trump is approving an anti-competitive merger that will cost you money
    But he seems to have made money off the deal personally."

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t
    "If the merger is allowed to move forward, "consumers can expect to see higher prices, fewer choices, and less innovative offerings across the board," said Copps, who formerly served at the Federal Communications Commission. "Low-income and marginalized communities who rely on prepaid services from T-Mobile and Sprint will face significant consequences and potentially get priced out of wireless service."
    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t

    "FCC Approved T-Mobile Sprint Merger Without Even Seeing The Full Details"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-details.shtml

    "T-Mobile and Sprint Head to Court to Defend Their Very Bad Megamerger"
    https://gizmodo.com/t-mobile-and-spr...ery-1840317115

    "As Trial Begins, Evidence Shows Sprint, T-Mobile Know Merger Will Raise Prices"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-prices.shtml
    Most of that is not news it's OP-ed. Here is an example

    "States Are Being Conned By Lobbyists Into Backing Off The T-Mobile Merger Lawsuit"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-lawsuit.shtml

    I haven't even clicked the link let alone read the article but I'm 100% sure it's by Karl Bode. Now how could I possibly tell that if it was "just the facts, ma'am" news article? The title alone tells you it's not NEWS.

  7. #832
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    235
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    LOL, probably not as much as you're paid to deny reality.

    Here are some more things for you to read and comprehend, all with cites:

    "DOJ Antitrust Boss Delrahim Ignored Hard Data As He Rubber Stamped T-Mobile Merger"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-merger.shtml

    "T-Mobile Execs Have Spent $195K at Trump’s D.C. Hotel Since Sprint Merger"
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ce-merger.html

    "T-Mobile announced a merger needing Trump administration approval. The next day, 9 executives had reservations at Trump’s hotel."
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...0a8_story.html

    "States Are Being Conned By Lobbyists Into Backing Off The T-Mobile Merger Lawsuit"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-lawsuit.shtml

    https://www.vox.com/2019/7/29/893202...-tmobile-hotel
    "Trump is approving an anti-competitive merger that will cost you money
    But he seems to have made money off the deal personally."

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t
    "If the merger is allowed to move forward, "consumers can expect to see higher prices, fewer choices, and less innovative offerings across the board," said Copps, who formerly served at the Federal Communications Commission. "Low-income and marginalized communities who rely on prepaid services from T-Mobile and Sprint will face significant consequences and potentially get priced out of wireless service."
    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...r-sprint-and-t

    "FCC Approved T-Mobile Sprint Merger Without Even Seeing The Full Details"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-details.shtml

    "T-Mobile and Sprint Head to Court to Defend Their Very Bad Megamerger"
    https://gizmodo.com/t-mobile-and-spr...ery-1840317115

    "As Trial Begins, Evidence Shows Sprint, T-Mobile Know Merger Will Raise Prices"
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...e-prices.shtml
    As Jack has mentioned, these are editorials. Not news. Not facts. I stand behind my earlier statement. Based on your posts, I sincerely hope you're being paid to shill this narrative.

  8. #833
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    945
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    I've got over 14,000 posts on HoFo and yet you can't click the Quote button on a single one where I claimed that "T-Mobile's network is somehow as good as AT&T's or Verizon." That's quite telling.
    I'm not going to go read 14,000 posts of garbage and misleading, dishonest nonsense just to compile your greatest hits.

    I don't know what kind of concrete bunkers and underground sewer tunnels you're hanging out in with your Mint service whenever you lose coverage, and I don't really care. All I can speak to is where I go and where I use my phone. And when I land in a city and turn my phone on, I have service. Wherever I go in that city, I have service. On the highways and freeways I travel on, I have service. As I said, you have no specifics on these locations nor do you have any position to be stating that I'm lying about anything. It's clearly just some impulse that you have to attack T-Mobile customers by making things up.
    If you drive around, you will find deadspots. T-Mobile has more of them than AT&T and Verizon, but AT&T and Verizon have them too. The simple fact of the matter is that cell phone coverage is widespread, but not universal, and that's true of any carrier, even the mighty Verizon with it's claimed 81% CONUS LTE coverage (meaning that 19% of the CONUS doesn't have Verizon LTE). I doubt it's even that much, as all of the carriers exaggerate coverage to a certain extent.

    The simple fact of the matter is that your posts are misleading and dishonest. No carrier will provide service all the time, that's just not possible with current technology and wireless towers. The fact remains that you will see NO SIGNAL more often on T-Mobile than you will on Verizon/AT&T. People need to make their own value judgement as to how often they are willing to not have service, what plans are available, etc, and make a decision based on that. All carriers, including AT&T, have weak spots, dead spots, and areas that just don't work. That's the reality and nature of wireless service in the United States.

    I do hope that between the tower-sharing deal with AT&T and Verizon and AT&T's FirstNet, coverage improves in many areas, but obviously there will still be a lot of areas without coverage, and they won't get it until LEO or something else comes along that can provide wider area coverage than steel in the air can.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    My experience in visiting California when I was on T-Mobile was that Southern California was fine. But driving up the I-5 to northern California there were a lot of coverage gaps. It's like T-Mobile in general, urban areas are fine, rural areas are not so fine.
    Yeah, it wasn't far behind AT&T, and would probably be fine for a lot of people, but I was expecting it to beat AT&T significantly due to their heavy presence in California and Florida.

    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    Of course, because according to you, everyone who has T-Mobile has such, terrible, awful coverage issues. The true facts are, T-Mobile just added another 1.9 million customers last quarter and over 7 million customers in 2019. You just keep speaking about these great coverage problems, yet they continue to lead the industry in subscriber additions, quarter after quarter.

    Despite your propaganda about how bad coverage is, more and more people keep switching to T-mobile which must disappoint you terribly.
    Apparently a lot of people have decided that less coverage is worth a lower price and the other perks that are included with T-Mobile's service. That's fine. That's the market. What is not fine is to continually lie about T-Mobile's service and claim that it is somehow equivalent to Verizon and AT&T's service. It's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by MasonDoctorJT View Post
    But with finite resources of spectrum, T-Mobile will be forced to raise prices to slow growth or risk the network slowing to a crawl.
    Or denify. Verizon has roughly the same amount of spectrum as T-Mobile and over twice as many customers. That's why they are building out small cells like crazy in order to take the load off of macros. The interesting result is that their network is going to look totally different than the other carriers', at least outside of the center of urban cores where all carriers are using small cells.

    T-Mobile also has the worst spectrum management of any major US carrier. They have 2G, 3G, 4G, and now 5G all running at the same time, and they jumped the gun on 600mhz 5G, so that spectrum is unusable for 4G LTE while almost no one has 5G phones. Verizon has a long legacy and huge coverage with CDMA, so that transition takes time, but T-Mobile should have shut down 2G and 3G by now, given that they never had a significantly sized 2G or 3G network to begin with, and have been running LTE/VoLTE-only in many areas for a long time, so the switch should be pretty much painless.

    Given that they already wasted some of their 600mhz spectrum on n41, they should focus on mid-band deployments and refarming, as well as site densification and small cells where needed. Based on their subscriber numbers, it's just not nearly as hard a task as Verizon has.

  9. #834
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    945
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by formercanuck View Post
    Many do not follow the Prepaid delivery model due to their own preconceived ideas on the service... Even if it effectively is the same service that you currently have, sometimes minus a few fringe benefits, but with more often lower overall cost.
    In certain situations, with certain plans, it's a good deal, but you lose significant coverage, even on AT&T or Verizon, due to the loss of roaming partners and LTEiRA in the case of Verizon (other than their own branded prepaid, which is priced above the rest of the market for a reason). You also usually lose global roaming, again with the exception of Verizon prepaid. Then add in depri in busy markets, and it's a significantly different level of service.

    I think millions of additional users would probably be just fine with prepaid service, but it's really not the same thing as postpaid. Most postpaid users are also on family plans, which drops the cost significantly, in many cases close to what prepaid service is.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    A lot of people want the heavily subsidized flagship phones that the postpaid carriers offer. The MVNOs may offer a slight discount, but for the most part you're expected to either pay full price for a flagship phone or buy a low-end phone from the MVNO.
    Most people just don't switch. Most people I know have had Verizon as long as they've had a cell phone, and they're not switching anytime soon. Most of the accounts are from the 1990's. A few like myself have AT&T and are in a similar situation. I'm sure some markets churn more than the folks I know, but there is a LOT of inertia in the wireless market.

  10. #835
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,709
    Device(s)
    Any Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    In certain situations, with certain plans, it's a good deal, but you lose significant coverage, even on AT&T or Verizon, due to the loss of roaming partners and LTEiRA in the case of Verizon (other than their own branded prepaid, which is priced above the rest of the market for a reason). You also usually lose global roaming, again with the exception of Verizon prepaid. Then add in depri in busy markets, and it's a significantly different level of service.

    I think millions of additional users would probably be just fine with prepaid service, but it's really not the same thing as postpaid. Most postpaid users are also on family plans, which drops the cost significantly, in many cases close to what prepaid service is.



    Most people just don't switch. Most people I know have had Verizon as long as they've had a cell phone, and they're not switching anytime soon. Most of the accounts are from the 1990's. A few like myself have AT&T and are in a similar situation. I'm sure some markets churn more than the folks I know, but there is a LOT of inertia in the wireless market.
    Well *somebody* is switching. Even with low churn rates of 1%/month that means one out of every eight of a carriers' entire customer base leaves annually.

    And while I agree that prepaid doesn't always equal postpaid in service, it provides additional levels of service for consumers. For example, a "cheapskate" (like me!) on T-Mo who might want better coverage, but are unwilling to pay what AT&T is asking can look at AT&T Prepaid or Cricket. That would likely give a little better coverage for not much more expense. And while a little rare for prepaid, some MVNOs offer tremendous family plans- Cricket (AT&T), and Visible and Total Wireless (Verizon) do 4 lines of unlimited for $100.



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

  11. #836
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    945
    Device(s)
    Note9
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Google Fi, Red Pocket (VZ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    Well *somebody* is switching. Even with low churn rates of 1%/month that means one out of every eight of a carriers' entire customer base leaves annually.
    I have a feeling that when you drill down into the data, you'd find a population that switches often (once every few years), some that switch occasionally, and a lot that have never switched, or haven't switched in decades. That first population drives up the churn numbers.

    And while I agree that prepaid doesn't always equal postpaid in service, it provides additional levels of service for consumers. For example, a "cheapskate" (like me!) on T-Mo who might want better coverage, but are unwilling to pay what AT&T is asking can look at AT&T Prepaid or Cricket. That would likely give a little better coverage for not much more expense. And while a little rare for prepaid, some MVNOs offer tremendous family plans- Cricket (AT&T), and Visible and Total Wireless (Verizon) do 4 lines of unlimited for $100.
    True, it offers a lot of options. Cricket is the best value (not cheapest) in the industry, as you have AT&T's network, which is the best native network in the industry. For more money, Verizon Prepaid has more overall coverage, but Verizon MVNOs have horrible holes in the network due to not including LTEiRA. Both prepaid and MVNOs on Verizon are subject to depri, which is a much bigger issue on Verizon than AT&T. I guess they fill some needs in rural areas for people who don't travel often, but overall, I think with Verizon you either have to go all-in with postpaid that's not depri, or go somewhere else. True, those are very aggressive price points.

  12. #837
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,895
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    I haven't even clicked the link let alone read the article but I'm 100% sure it's by Karl Bode.
    All four of the techdirt articles she posted were by Karl Bode. The list is a bunch of opinion pieces. And the other articles accused Trump of favoring the deal because of people staying at one of the hotels owned by his corporation. How ridiculous is that? It's not like the hotel doesn't get plenty of business. She is really claiming he would need to agree to something as major as a T-Mobile/Sprint merger in order to get less than $200,000 in hotel business? What a joke!

  13. #838
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,979
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by L33 View Post
    As Jack has mentioned, these are editorials. Not news. Not facts. I stand behind my earlier statement. Based on your posts, I sincerely hope you're being paid to shill this narrative.
    No my posts are based on LOGIC. So you admit to passing off OPINION as fact. OK. If the merger dies at least I get the satisfaction of seeing you guys admit you were wrong when jobs cuts and higher prices( 2 things that were the reason behind the lawsuits ) still happen.

  14. #839
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,979
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    All four of the techdirt articles she posted were by Karl Bode. The list is a bunch of opinion pieces. And the other articles accused Trump of favoring the deal because of people staying at one of the hotels owned by his corporation. How ridiculous is that? It's not like the hotel doesn't get plenty of business. She is really claiming he would need to agree to something as major as a T-Mobile/Sprint merger in order to get less than $200,000 in hotel business? What a joke!
    Karl Bode is hack and th3 best thing DSLreports did was get rid of him but they do still link to his articles on occasion. Why Techdirt hired him is beyond me. But I'll never go there or read anything or take them seriously ever again

  15. #840
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,895
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SoxFan76 View Post
    I'm not going to go read 14,000 posts
    Right you're perfectly content to make up things that I did not say and try and attribute them to me. You know there's no point looking at any of the posts because you know I didn't say what you claim. You can't click the quote button so you make it up.

    No carrier will provide service all the time, that's just not possible with current technology and wireless towers.
    I never said that. I said I have coverage on T-Mobile wherever I go. Keyword there is "I". I don't go where you go and I don't really care how often you're getting No Signal wherever you're at. If you have coverage issues, go complain in the forum of your service provider. It's not my problem.

    I don't care if Verizon doesn't cover 19% of the Continental US. Clearly I have no reason to go to such backwoods out of the way places. If you do, fine. Complain to Verizon that they're not covering some place you're going.

    What is not fine is to continually lie about T-Mobile's service and claim that it is somehow equivalent to Verizon and AT&T's service. It's not.
    That's not fine? Well good, because I never made such a claim. When I challenged you to find a SINGLE post where I made such a claim you came up empty! You know why? Because there is no post where I said it.

    How sad is it that you are arguing with false statements (completely made up by you) and attributed to others?

Page 56 of 72 FirstFirst ... 6 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 ... 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