SunnyD join:2009-03-20 Madison, AL |
SunnyD
Member
2014-Apr-7 2:46 pm
Wireless is a Cash Cow**For incumbents only. |
|
tshirt Premium Member join:2004-07-11 Snohomish, WA |
tshirt
Premium Member
2014-Apr-7 3:14 pm
said by SunnyD:*For incumbents only. Cincinnati Bell is about as incumbent to the telephone business as you can get and 16 years in wireless is several generations. This is more about the end of limited local players, needing the size and footprint to compete nationwide. You can be sure Cincinnati Bell got plenty of money for the spectrum and whatever customers who will stick through the transition. |
|
|
I live in Cincinnati and I am surprised it went to Verizon.
Cincy Bell has no LTE, is all GSM based and has had roaming contracts with both ATT and T-Mobile over the years. They have never released a CDMA phone either.
I am glad they are keeping their fixed line. They are doing awesome at it. I have 50/10 and I sometimes get bursts of almost 90 mbps download |
|
|
Mr Guy
Anon
2014-Apr-7 3:23 pm
said by Trogdor9000:I live in Cincinnati and I am surprised it went to Verizon.
Cincy Bell has no LTE, is all GSM based and has had roaming contracts with both ATT and T-Mobile over the years. They have never released a CDMA phone either. They are selling their spectrum to Verizon. And their spectrum fits in nicely with what Verizon already has in that area. Doesn't matter what it's being used for now. Verizon current 700 MHz spectrum used to be used for TV until 5 years ago. |
|
|
But I am saying the pain it is to switch customers over to CDMA. It might be a small enough pool of people that it wont be too bad |
|
|
Mr Guy to SunnyD
Anon
2014-Apr-7 3:41 pm
to SunnyD
said by SunnyD:*For incumbents only. so? |
|
SunnyD join:2009-03-20 Madison, AL |
SunnyD
Member
2014-Apr-7 4:54 pm
said by Mr Guy :said by SunnyD:*For incumbents only. so? So don't expect any competition to help control or bring down prices any time soon, if ever. |
|
tshirt Premium Member join:2004-07-11 Snohomish, WA |
to Trogdor9000
Within a year or so most phones will handle CDMA or GSM and all will use sims so they can build the LTE network and transition people later on |
|
|
to SunnyD
I think it could, just not in this case.
The problem for Cincinnati Bell is that they're a carrier with a very small footprint, which means that, if a customer left the metro area, they'd be roaming. At that point, the company has two choices: charge the customer for roaming or not charge them and absorb the cost. Since most people expect their plans to include nationwide roaming, that rules out the first option. So that means the company has to eat those roaming charges or hide them in the overall bill, resulting in higher prices overall. Not a good prospect for a small company. |
|
BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
to Mr Guy
Exactly. The phone swap-out cost is minimal compared to the value of the spectrum. People upgrade anyways, so in a year or two, they can switch that spectrum over to LTE. |
|
|
to ISurfTooMuch
Exactly, and this was crushing the profitability of the company as a whole. I stuck with them as long as possible and they continued to force users to swallow more and more costs to offset the roaming losses. It was really bad for families with kids off at college, because you had to maintain an 80/20 balance of in/out of network data usage, per line, or you were cut off. Personally I think T-mobile would've been a better suitor, competition wise, but I'm not sure if they could've pulled it off. |
|
|
to BiggA
a year or two? It may take longer than that. You still have to get those to upgrade, and this approved, etc. It will take a year to get everything in order to move those customers over to the VZW billing system. |
|
TBBroadband |
to fel0nious
Many carriers have that same 80/20 balance. TMO has it, Sprint has it, and I'm sure if you use VZW and roam more than 60% of the time you are in your "home" coverage they will do the same. |
|
|
fel0nious
Anon
2014-Apr-8 12:33 am
I don't doubt it, but with cbw it wasn't explicit roaming so much as implicit nationwide coverage through TMo and ATT. With the big nationwide carriers, it's not as common to be in a populated area and be roaming. But outside of the Cincy network, in a populated area, you were considered out of network (which was different than roaming), and all was well until you hit that split. I was just pointing out that it was untenable in a world where a growing number of customers do actually travel out of network. |
|
|
to TBBroadband
said by TBBroadband:Many carriers have that same 80/20 balance. TMO has it, Sprint has it, and I'm sure if you use VZW and roam more than 60% of the time you are in your "home" coverage they will do the same. Except since Verizon is pretty much everywhere you don't roam that much. |
|
Mr Guy |
to Trogdor9000
said by Trogdor9000:But I am saying the pain it is to switch customers over to CDMA. It might be a small enough pool of people that it wont be too bad Verizon is moving away from CDMA anyway. They will be selling phones without CDMA radios within a year and they will be starting their VoLTE service by the end of this year. Verizon plans to be CDMA free no later than the end of 2020 anyway. Probably sooner. |
|
|
to Mr Guy
True, but it hasn't always been that way. Just maybe 7-10 years ago, there were still a decent number of places where you could be roaming. Remember, before Cingular got the old AT&T Wireless, they had no native coverage in NYC, and T-Mobile had no native coverage in California. And, until VZW bought out Unicel and ALLTEL, their coverage in Alabama and Mississippi was limited. In Alabama, if you were outside of a major metro area, you roamed on ALLTEL, and, in Mississippi, if you were just about anywhere but Jackson, you roamed on Cellular South. |
|
BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
to TBBroadband
After it's approved. |
|