Saint Louis, MO
|reply to verizon12345 |
Re: Karl although I love your commentary..
said by verizon12345 :He very much does.
You always write one-sided stories.
In your dramas all telcos are evil and everyone else is working for the better good of the people.
You're echoeing what ATT said. My question: Why does it matter?
The FCC report was actually just a draft and full of conjecture. I'm not sure why the FCC even published a "draft," since it was not a full report nor was it even voted upon.
ATT is extremely effective at marketing their point. They've been repeating their marketing statements for a year now. They have refused to back up their statements with any real data. The onus is on them to prove that they need T-Mobile.
There are always 2 sides to each story. Both the FCC and AT&T stories have holes but only one side is pointed out.
They aren't elected... They're appointed.
I have no confidence in the FCC They are politically motivated, just like the phone companies and are more interested in getting re-elected then serving the public good.
Because they continue to make money. By ATT's own admission, they would never have deployed anything about 7.2mbps HSDPA were it not for T-Mobile deploying 21mbps, and then 42mbps HSPA+. By deploying faster HSPA+, ATT benefitted ALL of its customers because it quadrupled their capacity (ie the same towers could provide data 4x faster to the same customers).
T-Mobile has been losing customers for over 2 years. Tell me how they are such a competitive disruptive force in our industry?
Again, the only reason you're seeing faster data speeds on ATT now than what you saw 2 years ago is because of T-Mobile's successful HSPA+ deployments that raised expectations for what a '3g' network is capable of.
This was Spring of this year:
I don't even know where to start with this stupid remark.
DT has no plans to pour the billions and billions in capital required to build out a nationwide LTE network for T-Mobile much less fill in all their GPRS only areas with HSPA +. How is a company like this in any good shape to operate competitively on its own?
1. While this whole buy-out business was going on, T-Mobile has continued to see investment.
See: 42mbps HSPA+ deployments, 49.95 Unlimited Everything Plan introduced, etc. etc. etc.
2. GPRS areas will eventually be upgraded to HSPA+ - this was already layed out in T-Mobile's business plan. In fact, upgrading those areas to HSPA+ is deemed very important to T-Mobile, as they want to re-farm their 1900mhz network for LTE/further HSPA+ deployment.
Context. Learn it.
The FCC themselves have stated the "dire needs," of spectrum needed by wireless telcos like AT&T yet in the same draft they claim they have "more than enough." Total discrepancy here.
For FUTURE growth, a LOT more spectrum is necessary. Eventually the desire is that Cellular internet will compete directly with landline internet (cable/dsl/fiber). But there simply isn't enough spectrum to dedicate right now to making this possible nationwide. So when the FCC speaks to CONGRESS, they inform them that for the FUTURE, there isn't enough spectrum based upon current growth models.
But as far as ATT is concerned, they're just sitting on spectrum that they're already supposed to be using. And while small players like T-Mobile, Leap, and Metro are fighting for spectrum ATT is letting it sit unallocated for years.
Put differently: If other carriers (say, T-Mobile) had the spectrum that ATT is simply sitting on, they'd be able to have an LTE plan without having to refarm their old networks.
ATT is trying to have its cake, and eat it too. They're sitting on spectrum so that their competitors can't use it. Then they're telling the world that they should gobble up their competitors because obviously there isn't enough spectrum to go around.
The statements add up. You just need to read up more on the technology at play.
Again all the "what if's," and "what not's," are all conjecture on anyone's part. You can hate AT&T and everything associated with them but the statements made by the FCC don't add up either and people will continue to believe only what they want to regardless of merit or facts.
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara