dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
18

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

cb14 to jseymour

Member

to jseymour

Re: I've Said It Before

Softbank/Sprint have to get rid off T-mobile ASAP. Without that, they are going into chapter 11. For ATTea and Verizon, TMO is a big nuissance. For Sprint,TMO is a disaster. Sprint's performance is so miserable and their prices so high that they cannot survive in a competitive environment.
BTW if Forbes criticizes Sprint, that's really something, since they are as pro big corporate as one can get.

jseymour
join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

2 recommendations

jseymour

Member

said by cb14:

Softbank/Sprint have to get rid off T-mobile ASAP. Without that, they are going into chapter 11. For ATTea and Verizon, TMO is a big nuissance. For Sprint,TMO is a disaster.

I think you nailed it. This has been on my mind, as well.

It's really the only thing that makes sense. TMO has little coverage outside the areas that Sprint has coverage, so it's certainly not footprint. The technologies are incompatible, anyway. Being in the middle of their own network upgrade, I'm hard put to see how they'd expect to convert T-Mobile towers over to NV CDMA towers in a decent time-frame. Hell, they're not even keeping up with their NV schedule.

Only answer is: Eliminate a competitor who, by doing what they used to do, is eating their lunch.

If this is what's happening: They're dreaming if they think regulators won't figure it out. "at&t" is far better at baffling with BS than Sprint, and they couldn't pull it off.

Hopefully, if true, TMO has arranged for a nice breakup fee again. The cash infusion, when this, too, goes south, will be nice for TMO and its customers

Jim
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Crookshanks to cb14

Member

to cb14
said by cb14:

BTW if Forbes criticizes Sprint, that's really something, since they are as pro big competent corporate as one can get.

Fixed it for you.

swintec
Premium Member
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME

swintec to jseymour

Premium Member

to jseymour
said by jseymour:

The technologies are incompatible, anyway. Being in the middle of their own network upgrade, I'm hard put to see how they'd expect to convert T-Mobile towers over to NV CDMA towers in a decent time-frame. Hell, they're not even keeping up with their NV schedule.

Network wise, Sprint could integrate T-Mobile pretty easily. NV complete towers essentially have everything needed already there. This isnt 2001 anymore.
TBBroadband
join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

TBBroadband

Member

Yes they could but much of that NV is still limited and half out there. A good share of the country has nothing for NV. Until they can finish NV this would be horrible for a customer stand point. Sprint "techs" won't know crap about GSM and that would be the first thing that goes, the CSRs at TMO and outsourced out of country.

swintec
Premium Member
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME

swintec

Premium Member

said by TBBroadband:

Yes they could but much of that NV is still limited and half out there. A good share of the country has nothing for NV.

You prove time and time again you dont know what you are talking about.

Just over 31,000 of sprints 40,000 towers have been touched for an upgrade in one form or another and the other upgrades are pending but need backhaul (can be a wait depending on the vendor), hardware, heck, even a tower crew which are already stretched thin as it is since all carriers are doing upgrades right now.

airshark
--... ...-- -.. . -. -.... .-.. -.--
Premium Member
join:2003-05-20
Hollister, CA

airshark to TBBroadband

Premium Member

to TBBroadband
said by TBBroadband:

Sprint "techs" won't know crap about GSM and that would be the first thing that goes

The funny thing about this statement that makes it not true is this: (almost)All new gen cell sites are simply fiber and data in the cabinets. What comes out of the antenna end is virtually inconsequential to a field tech. All that is needed to add a new service is another shelf, radios on the towers and antennas. Legacy technologies are going bye-bye. It used to be that when you opened up a cell site, you'd see nothing but coax, amps, radios, filters, etc....now it's a router and a few interconnected pieces of equipment linked via fiber.

And why the ill-will towards "techs" ? If you'd like to be angry at anyone, be angry at management.
Bob61571
join:2008-08-08
Washington, IL

Bob61571 to cb14

Member

to cb14

BTW if Forbes criticizes Sprint, that's really something, since they are as pro big corporate as one can get.

You may want to read Forbes more often then, cb14!!
It's full of criticism of differerent company's execs and their bad strategies...
If Forbes magazine was only full of praise, no one would read it!!
jagged
join:2003-07-01
Boynton Beach, FL

jagged to swintec

Member

to swintec
actually according to engineers it will not integrate easily. There are reports Sprint engineers are not liking the idea of having to integrate T-Mobile at all
TBBroadband
join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

TBBroadband to swintec

Member

to swintec
And yet you posted below that it isn't even done yet. Double standards or just a hater?

And if the upgrades are taking places, then where is all this promised LTE service at?

swintec
Premium Member
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME

swintec

Premium Member

said by TBBroadband:

And yet you posted below that it isn't even done yet. Double standards or just a hater?

And if the upgrades are taking places, then where is all this promised LTE service at?

It isnt done yet. I said about 31,000 cell sites have been upgraded in some form. There are 4 stages of upgrades for each tower that get signed off on. Each can have their own bottleneck reason like what I posted in my previous post (waiting on backhaul vendor, tower crew available, hardware, etc).
swintec

swintec to jagged

Premium Member

to jagged
said by jagged:

actually according to engineers it will not integrate easily. There are reports Sprint engineers are not liking the idea of having to integrate T-Mobile at all

Where are the reports?
DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV

DarnellP to cb14

Member

to cb14
said by cb14:

BTW if Forbes criticizes Sprint, that's really something, since they are as pro big corporate as one can get.

Forbes isn't criticizing Sprint. This hack, Joan Lappin, is. It's an opinion piece, not a news article. If you look at her history she and her Gramercy Capital Mgt. Corp. were invested in Clearwire (CLWR). She's been upset about CLWR being sold for only $5/share as she had hopes of CLWR being acquired at a far higher price.

Most rational investors would be happy that they made a profit and move on. That's apparently not Ms. Lappin's style though. Instead, she's taken to writing these hit pieces about Sprint and Dan Hesse. I guess there's some validity to the hell, fury, woman scorned thing.

I'm surprised that Karl would even cite this woman's drivel. Actually, I shouldn't be surprised though. Integrity is so last decade it seems.

jseymour
join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

jseymour

Member

said by DarnellP:

Forbes isn't criticizing Sprint. This hack, Joan Lappin, is. It's an opinion piece, not a news article.

Obviously. So? Is there something inaccurate in it?

Jim
DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV

DarnellP to swintec

Member

to swintec
said by swintec:

You prove time and time again you dont know what you are talking about.

Yep, he never misses an opportunity.
DarnellP

DarnellP to jseymour

Member

to jseymour
said by jseymour:

said by DarnellP:

Forbes isn't criticizing Sprint. This hack, Joan Lappin, is. It's an opinion piece, not a news article.

Obviously. So? Is there something inaccurate in it?

Jim

Yes.

jseymour
join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI

jseymour

Member

said by DarnellP:

said by jseymour:

said by DarnellP:

Forbes isn't criticizing Sprint. This hack, Joan Lappin, is. It's an opinion piece, not a news article.

Obviously. So? Is there something inaccurate in it?

Jim

Yes.

And that would be...?

I read it. Opinion it may be, but it appeared to be accurate?

With which part(s) do you take issue, and why?

Jim
DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV

1 edit

DarnellP

Member

said by jseymour:

And that would be...?

I read it. Opinion it may be, but it appeared to be accurate?

With which part(s) do you take issue, and why?

Jim

Appears to be accurate in what way? Let's look at #3. According to Lappin, there was a 'fib' about not leaving Kansas. As of the time of the writing and even today, Sprint's headquarters is in…wait for it...Overland Park, KS. So please tell me, what's accurate about that?

Let's look at #5. There may have been hints and indications that Sprint would participate in the H block auction, but when did they commit to participating in the auction? »Sprint Says No Thanks to H Block Auction [16] comments

Most had thought Sprint would bid on the spectrum, since it sites adjacent to the PCS G Block spectrum Sprint is currently using for LTE service.

So once again, please tell me what's accurate about her ranting, where's the 'fib' at?

As far as #1, #2 & #4, that's just business. Business is fluid, it's dynamic it isn't static. I believe that they had no intention of paying more than $2.97/share for Clearwire at the time that they made the offer. There were no other suitors, they had the blessings of the CLWR board which recommended to shareholders that they vote in favor of the buyout at that price. Then Dish came in with a counteroffer. That changed the dynamic, therefore their strategy had to change. That hardly qualifies as what this person is calling a 'fib' though.