dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-07-16 08:14:48: In addition to their plans to announce a potential merger, Sprint and T-Mobile are looking to join forces and collectively bid on spectrum at next year's incentive auction. ..



IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

1 edit

1 recommendation

Again, this doesn't need to happen.

This merger is so ridiculous. Sprint has the SoftBank money/backing and can stand on its own. T-Mobile can as well.

This is sounding more and more like the failed AT&T acquisition.


tkdslr

join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Speakeasy

non-paywalled version

Going around WSJ...

»www.denverpost.com/business/ci_2···spectrum

»www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/···buy.html



SterlingJ85

join:2000-11-19
Voorhees, NJ

Regardless of the merger..

This is a GREAT idea to get comparable spectrum to CLR like Verizon and AT&T have, even if they end up sharing the spectrum that's won. At the very least if they go in together, they won't pay nearly as much as a standalone company. I'm not sure either company could stomach $10 billion on their own at this point.

Only question is, what chipset maker is now going to build 600 MHz in to smartphone radios?
--
-Sterling



swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS
reply to IPPlanMan

Re: Again, this doesn't need to happen.

said by IPPlanMan:

This merger is so ridiculous. Sprint has the SoftBank money/backing and can stand on its own. T-Mobile can as well.

This is sounding more and more like the failed AT&T acquisition.

and what does this post have to do with the story in the OP about both joining forces to bid on spectrum together?

The basis of the story is a good thing even if they werent merging since it keeps it out of the other twos hands.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts

78036364

join:2014-05-06
USA
reply to IPPlanMan

said by IPPlanMan:

This merger is so ridiculous. Sprint has the SoftBank money/backing and can stand on its own. T-Mobile can as well.

This is sounding more and more like the failed AT&T acquisition.

WRONG. yes 75 million people that have access to Verizon and At&t don't won't and never will have access to either. If they merger they can. Fact, 3 TRUE nationwide carriers of equal strength are better for competition than 2 TRUE nationwide carriers that are strong and 2 semi-nationwide carriers that are weak.

78036364

join:2014-05-06
USA
reply to SterlingJ85

Re: Regardless of the merger..

They'll have 3 years or so to figure that out.



why60loss

join:2012-09-20
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Wireless..

1 recommendation

reply to 78036364

Re: Again, this doesn't need to happen.

said by 78036364:

said by IPPlanMan:

This merger is so ridiculous. Sprint has the SoftBank money/backing and can stand on its own. T-Mobile can as well.

This is sounding more and more like the failed AT&T acquisition.

WRONG. yes 75 million people that have access to Verizon and At&t don't won't and never will have access to either. If they merger they can. Fact, 3 TRUE nationwide carriers of equal strength are better for competition than 2 TRUE nationwide carriers that are strong and 2 semi-nationwide carriers that are weak.

That's a joke right? Look up north to see how well that system worked.

Well that and sprint and T-mobiles foot prints have a lot of over lap. There will be next to no advantage to this deal other than T-Mobile customers having the new choices of $10 per GB, $10 per GB or $10 per GB.

Oh and many like my Dad will leave if sprint gets T-Mobile so then the big 2 will be getting more customers and sprint will just have a bunch of towers that over lap with a few more customers that want to stay.

All this deal is meant to do is get rid of T-Mobile who unlike Sprint is gaining customers and not losing them like Sprint is. If sprint wants to win then use 20-40 billion in the network, then I bet that would do it.


IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1
reply to swintec

What, Softbank doesn't have enough money to do it alone? They need T-Mobile?



cb14

join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·localphone.com
·callwithus
·Google Voice
·Callcentric
·AT&T U-Verse
·magicjack.com

2 recommendations

reply to 78036364

said by 78036364:

said by IPPlanMan:

This merger is so ridiculous. Sprint has the SoftBank money/backing and can stand on its own. T-Mobile can as well.

This is sounding more and more like the failed AT&T acquisition.

WRONG. yes 75 million people that have access to Verizon and At&t don't won't and never will have access to either. If they merger they can. Fact, 3 TRUE nationwide carriers of equal strength are better for competition than 2 TRUE nationwide carriers that are strong and 2 semi-nationwide carriers that are weak.

I hope that you get properly paid for your contributions because it has been so far nothing else than big corporate propaganda.
It has been proven in European countries that the idea of 3 national carriers does not work and does not guarantee competition.
TMO and sprint are not semi-nationwide. Thay are as nationwide as Tea or verizon, except they have weak rural coverage. And why do they have weak rural coverage? Because unlike tea and Verizon, they did not get the chance to slaughter Alltel which used to be the company with the largest geographical coverage .
To call a company with tens of millions of customers and gaining millions fast is truly an example of propaganda. You can call Amazon weak as well then.
Last not least, TMO/ Sprint merger will not noticeable increase their rural coverage, which is their weakest point, because their coverage is in both cases metropolitan based. In that sense, TMO customers would be even more screwed than after a merger with Tea.
Going together for the spectrum auction is certainly a good idea regardless.

Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX
reply to IPPlanMan

not that.. its more of a buddy move.., ill scratch your back if you scratch mine..


Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX
reply to 78036364

haha i dont think so sir, canada has the most expensive wireless in all the world!, not to mention there cable companies are excessively bad


Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX
reply to SterlingJ85

Re: Regardless of the merger..

T-Mobile surely can do 10 by 2017.. Sprint possibly to thanks to softbank carrier over seas.. 3 years is quite a bit of time to gather money and alot can happen



swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS
reply to cb14

Re: Again, this doesn't need to happen.

said by cb14:

Last not least, TMO/ Sprint merger will not noticeable increase their rural coverage, which is their weakest point, because their coverage is in both cases metropolitan based. In that sense, TMO customers would be even more screwed than after a merger with Tea.

Well, not anymore. With Sprints new RRPP they have increased rural coverage immensely and it will all be treated as native / sprint coverage on phones. I dont think people really realize how big this is and unless T-Mobile gets on board it effectively leaves them in the dust with no merger.

»s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entr···stomers/
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts


cb14

join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·localphone.com
·callwithus
·Google Voice
·Callcentric
·AT&T U-Verse
·magicjack.com

said by swintec:

Well, not anymore. With Sprints new RRPP they have increased rural coverage immensely and it will all be treated as native / sprint coverage on phones. I dont think people really realize how big this is and unless T-Mobile gets on board it effectively leaves them in the dust with no merger.

»s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entr···stomers/

Well, no matter how the coverage is semantically treated it is de facto a roaming agreement and they can come and go and be expanded. It is certainly in the best interest of small carriers and Sprint and TMO to enter such cooperative agreements. I do not know about the US Cellular talk, that company is deeply troubled and there is a justified merger candidate it's US cellular, not TMO. Also there is the unresolved issue GSM versus CDMA; the last thing I need is being forced to CDMA. And, before somebody posts that everything will be LTE soon- 2G and 3G GSM and CDMA will be around for at leat 10 more years.


swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

said by cb14:

Well, no matter how the coverage is semantically treated it is de facto a roaming agreement and they can come and go and be expanded.

I agree but to the average end user with their phone and even if the slightly more advanced user looks at coverage maps, it will all be displayed as native sprint coverage and you know as well as I do it will be advertised this way.

When traveling through these areas and sprint is in the only big carrier or 1 of 2 big carriers with LTE service...this helps sell the service as well.

T-Mobile will have lost decent service quite a ways back approaching these rural operators markets.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts

WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC
reply to cb14

I have heard AT&T is about to turn down their 2G network and reuse the spectrum. May have read it here.