well.... according to tmobile's Q2 results, they seem to be doing fine on their own. The only complaints people seem to have is lack of 4G in their area which should be resolved with verizon's 700 mhz spectrum, the upcoming 600 mhz, and refarming 2g edge to lte
now sprint on the other hand....
| |IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
Re: Nextel again? That's what I've been saying all along.
Re: C-spire is a Sprint partner.. How is that a bad thing. Helps both small carriers and Sprint. Plus I believe Tmobile also bas a stake in some of these alliances where needed.
Re: Screw C-Spire
said by 78036364:The alliances help the small carriers with roaming outside their areas. Now if always outside the area a larger carrier better. But if say vacations and some trips local carrier with roaming may be better.
While I agree with them the reason why T-Mobile doesn't have any 700 MHz spectrum in our areas is because C-Spire owns it. Even though they do not provide service in our area and have no intentions of doing so. This is why only the major carriers should have spectrum. Who wants to go with a regional carrier where you're on roaming as soon as you drive 5 miles out of town? Morons perhaps.
I think the article is correct... I oppose the other two mergers and generally oppose mergers but neither sprint nor t-mobile is a competitor on their own. T-mobile, despite the good things it is doing for customers, is bleeding money and DT wants out from under it. There also isn't much evidence that t-mobile's behavior is having much impact upon the behavior of ATT or verizon or poses a significant threat to their market share. Nor is it clear that t-mobile can , or will, be able to maintain this behavior in future. Having t-mobile and sprint going back and forth grabbing customers from one another isn't accomplishing anything in the long term. Going from 2 to 3 big competitors would be a bigger benefit to the market than 2 struggling companies and 2 big players. The risks of allowing this seem worth it given the state of the market today.
Miami Beach, FL
Typical corporate propaganda. I am not going to speculate what's in for Meena to provide this support, one thing is sure, anyone who believes that a 4 to 3 reduction will improve competition lives in lala land. There is a ton of examples from other countries how this worked out.
And look at Sprint. They are not even thinking of lowering prices or becoming disruptive-as they say, they need the money to upgrade the network. Hm-mm, what about Mr. Son and Softbank chipping in some cash first, face some losses in the first few years and then reaping the profits later? off course not, what a crazy idea. Mr. Son will rather spend billions to bulldoze Sprint's most dangerous competitor. Because yes, there are reasons for customers to stay wit Verizon or Tea, but honestly, there are barely any reasons for them to stay with Sprint. This is why they are leaving with millions.
If this deal gets rejected and or of TMO US gets bought by the French as suggested, Mr. Son will have no other alternative than actually spend some of that merger money on Sprint and make it competitive. The other alternative would be Sprint's bankruptcy but son will not let that happen. So, we ,may get a real competition among 4 carriers if the deal gets rejected, or Tea-Verizon-Sprint type of wheeling dealing over the back of the consumers if it does not.
I dont buy it. The only people who benefit is the shareholders.
Softbank brought sprint, made a dash to essentially make a new marketing campaign to sell sprint's revamped plans and pitched to buy Tmobile, with small network improvements in between.
I dont see how Sprint buying Tmobile will benefit the end user. Yes, on paper the company is stronger to compete. Then what?
They just spent 30+ billion buying a company... surely the great tmobile deals will continue. REALISTICALLY, we all know its shareholders or consumer happiness, and sure enough, the shareholders will be put first.
We know Tmobile would be consumed for its user base, full stop; and sprints biggest competitor removed. Where is the incentive to compete? Without Tmobile, they could just follow the big two pricing model and lower their price by 5 dollars, not to mention kill the free data roaming because that doesn't benefit shareholders, especially after again a 30+ billion dollar buyout.
This whole thing looks good on paper. In reality, once tmobile is gone, what's the incentive to improve? 100 million-ish users, is quite a profit wave, after necessary cost cutting and layoffs.
I just believe the long-term investment here is the user base.
Id rather see Iliad purchase it and fail, then Son to hold it and ruin it. Im not getting a vibe from Son or Sprint he's champaign for the people.