 | |
VZtech
Anon
2012-Apr-9 9:03 am
Conflict of interestT-mobile was the logical partner for the cable co's. The Verizon wireless business conflicting with their own wireline services is absurd.
Selling Comcast, Brighthouse, Time Warner wireline services in Verizon stores is ridiculous. Verizon should have been endorsing their OWN wireline services in their VZW stores. Whether is be FiOS, or DSL . | |
|
 mix
join:2002-03-19
Romeo, MI |
mix
Member
2012-Apr-9 9:59 am
HeadlinePerhaps the headline should really read: "T-Mobile: We're 50% More Spectrum Deficient Than Verizon." | |
|
 | | |
Re: HeadlineI think the proper headline is "T-Mobile: We're 50% More Spectrum Efficient Than Verizion because we have 95% fewer users"
Yes I know that 95% is an extradition the point is with less users you can cram more into less and at at least where I am (Baltimore, MD) their network is crap, the speeds suck and everyone I know who tries them dumps them within a month for AT&T, Verizon or Sprint. | |
|
| | moonpuppy (banned)
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD |
Re: Headlinesaid by flashcore:I think the proper headline is "T-Mobile: We're 50% More Spectrum Efficient Than Verizion because we have 95% fewer users"
Yes I know that 95% is an extradition the point is with less users you can cram more into less and at at least where I am (Baltimore, MD) their network is crap, the speeds suck and everyone I know who tries them dumps them within a month for AT&T, Verizon or Sprint.
Really? I am in the same market and I have no issues. I can tell you my friends with iPhones hate ATT. | |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC |
axus
Member
2012-Apr-9 10:02 am
Is cable using their spectrum at all?I think Cox tried to do something, but gave up. Verizon will use this spectrum, I don't think T-mobile has a case here. There might be some collusion on the TV/Internet side, but that doesn't affect T-mobile, and nobody has proven that. | |
|
|  FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 11:37 am
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by axus: Verizon will use this spectrum, I don't think T-mobile has a case here. There might be some collusion on the TV/Internet side, but that doesn't affect T-mobile, and nobody has proven that.
Despite those who like conspiracy theories, I don't think that Verizon and the cable companies have some quid-pro-quo where Verizon won't put Fios in to their territories. I think it is what it appears to be on the surface - a marketing deal where the cable companies push Verizon for a quad play pkg instead of AT&T or other wireless provider. | |
|
| |  Robert
Premium Member
join:2001-08-25
Miami, FL |
Robert
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 12:13 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by FFH5:said by axus: Verizon will use this spectrum, I don't think T-mobile has a case here. There might be some collusion on the TV/Internet side, but that doesn't affect T-mobile, and nobody has proven that.
Despite those who like conspiracy theories, I don't think that Verizon and the cable companies have some quid-pro-quo where Verizon won't put Fios in to their territories. I think it is what it appears to be on the surface - a marketing deal where the cable companies push Verizon for a quad play pkg instead of AT&T or other wireless provider. Why not? It's not unheard of. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do believe they have some quid-pro-quo going on. You think AT&T lets the NSA tap into their network out of the goodness of their heart? | |
|
| | |  chlenEthically Challenged
Premium Member
join:2001-01-16
Saratoga, NY |
chlen
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 12:28 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by Robert:said by FFH5:said by axus: Verizon will use this spectrum, I don't think T-mobile has a case here. There might be some collusion on the TV/Internet side, but that doesn't affect T-mobile, and nobody has proven that.
Despite those who like conspiracy theories, I don't think that Verizon and the cable companies have some quid-pro-quo where Verizon won't put Fios in to their territories. I think it is what it appears to be on the surface - a marketing deal where the cable companies push Verizon for a quad play pkg instead of AT&T or other wireless provider. Why not? It's not unheard of. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do believe they have some quid-pro-quo going on. You think AT&T lets the NSA tap into their network out of the goodness of their heart? not at all in fact it is law CALEA » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co ··· ment_Act | |
|
| | | openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144 |
to Robert
Backroom deal or not, what does it honestly matter? Both Verizon and AT&T have stated they are done building out their next gen of wireline infrastructure for now. The deal between Verizon and the cable group is value-added for everyone involved...to include the consumer IMO. | |
|
| | | |
3 edits |
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?"done" , for now. For the rest of eternity, I guess you'd assume they'd continue to maintain their copper network; right? Nope, the actual plan RIGHT NOW is to make a deal with those cable companies and withdraw from their wireline business/responsibilities altogether. Thats good for consumers, right? One wireline choice? The competitive thing to do is to finish their FiOS deployment across their footprint, even allow clec access to FiOS, with limitations, in order to take down the aging copper.
Does anything they state "honestly matter"? We're talking about a billion dollar company that passed 400,000+ homes with FioS, then sold it to Frontier. Whatever they " state " can be changed the very next day.
Whether is be " next gen " or not, Verizon has engaged in a deal that will be anti-competive to their wireline network. End of story. | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 1:02 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by ITALIAN926:"done" , for now. For the rest of eternity, I guess you'd assume they'd continue to maintain their copper network; right? No. I repeat(my emphasis now included). said by openbox9:Both Verizon and AT&T have stated they are done building out their next gen of wireline infrastructure for now. said by ITALIAN926:Whether is be " next gen " or not, Verizon has engaged in a deal that will be anti-competive to their wireline network. So, will Verizon Wireless stores be hawking cable TV services in Verizon FiOS TV markets? | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?Maybe, maybe not. Why are you limiting your sample to TV services? What about areas that have FioS internet but no TV franchise agreements? What about areas that have only landlines/ DSL ? FiOS TV is not the only product at stake here. | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 1:33 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?Isn't that a fundamental question that needs to be answered before everyone flies off the handle? I assume the concern is over the alleged "conflict of interest" between cable TV and FiOS TV. In non-TV FiOS markets and DSL markets, I don't see an issue with Verizon reselling cable company pay TV services. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
1 edit |
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?The VZW stores will be selling the cable triple plays (internet AND phone) , not just TV service. You dont think this interferes with Verizons own DSL and landline business? Which part of this is complicated?. Wake up.
Edit: And your "fundamental question" is moot. This deal with thwart any potential plans to expand FiOS further. And once again, what they say today regarding FiOS expansion is 100% irrelevant. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 2:01 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by ITALIAN926:The VZW stores will be selling the cable triple plays (internet AND phone) , not just TV service. In Verizon LEC markets? said by ITALIAN926:Edit: And your "fundamental question" is moot. This deal with thwart any potential plans to expand FiOS further. And once again, what they say today regarding FiOS expansion is 100% irrelevant. It certainly is not a moot point. You don't even know where this reselling arrangement is being employed. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
1 recommendation |
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by openbox9:It certainly is not a moot point. You don't even know where this reselling arrangement is being employed.
A tiny bit of common sense (as opposed to your proclivity to feign ignorance of corporations' underlying motives) will lead a rational observer to see where this deal is ultimately leading. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2012-Apr-10 6:18 am
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?You're right. We should all jump to conclusions instead of asking simple questions. | |
|
| 25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
1 recommendation |
to axus
Nobody was using anything. Cox was building a CDMA network but later gave up in hopes to use Sprint's CDMA network as an MVNO. Something the MSOs do ALL the time and always give up on.
They don't want to be a cell phone company and they've already made that clear. If they did; the SpectrumCo partners could have easily built out a national carrier with no problems and roamed together on the network. | |
|
| | 34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
1 edit |
34764170 (banned)
Member
2012-Apr-9 4:43 pm
Re: Is cable using their spectrum at all?said by 25139889:Nobody was using anything. Cox was building a CDMA network but later gave up in hopes to use Sprint's CDMA network as an MVNO. Something the MSOs do ALL the time and always give up on.
They don't want to be a cell phone company and they've already made that clear. If they did; the SpectrumCo partners could have easily built out a national carrier with no problems and roamed together on the network.
They gave up because it was costing too much. | |
|
 mech1164I'll Be Back
join:2001-11-19
Lodi, NJ |
A PointTmo has a point in that this is giving one competitor and greatly enhanced position in regards to the rest of the industry. Just as if they had been taken over by ATT and the competition would have been lessen. This to would be adverse to the remainder. Never mind the anti competitive nature that was to be worked in with cable. There are too many things wrong with this to let it proceed. Just depends now on how much VZW is willing to lobby (coerces, bribe ect.) to get this done. That is the truly sad part. | |
|
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA |
Sammer
Member
2012-Apr-9 12:22 pm
Re: A PointIt's also true that if this wasn't anti-competitive there would be no need to tie the marketing agreement to the sale of the spectrum licenses. | |
|
| | | |
Re: A Pointsaid by Sammer:It's also true that if this wasn't anti-competitive there would be no need to tie the marketing agreement to the sale of the spectrum licenses.
Also no one seems to mention how AT&T and Verizon keep gobbling up all the available spectrum. Right after the T-Mobile deal fell through, AT&T bought Qualcomm's spectrum. This Verizon deal needs to fall through, and the sale of spectrum rejected. A smaller competitor, such as T-Mobile, Leap, MetroPCS, etc. needs to have that spectrum. | |
|
| | |
to mech1164
YES yes YES..... ANY move that leads to at&t being the only real players is a bad move. | |
|
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 1:49 pm
They each claim they are more efficientVerizon actually is, as they use most of their spectrum. T-Mobile has maybe 10% of their AWS spectrum deployed, probably less than that. | |
|
| | |
Re: They each claim they are more efficientsaid by BiggA:Verizon actually is, as they use most of their spectrum. T-Mobile has maybe 10% of their AWS spectrum deployed, probably less than that.
How much of its AWS 2100+1700 MHz and Lower 700 MHz spectrum is VZW actually using? (And, yes, that is a rhetorical question.) AJ | |
|
| | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2012-Apr-9 11:20 pm
Re: They each claim they are more efficientWhen they deploy, they deploy. Like the C-block, they will have over 100% of their network deployed on that spectrum by mid-2013. Much of even T-Mobile's puny network doesn't have AWS spectrum deployed. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: They each claim they are more efficientsaid by BiggA:When they deploy, they deploy.
Ah, so that caveat is okay for VZW but not for T-Mobile. Your logical inconsistency undermines your argument. AJ | |
|
| | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT  ·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68
|
BiggA
Premium Member
2012-Apr-10 4:59 pm
Re: They each claim they are more efficientWhen Verizon deploys spectrum, they deploy it on their entire network. T-Mobile doesn't. Yes, there are other factors, but overall, T-Mobile deploys much less of their spectrum, even if you look at it on a mhz*mi^2 or something basis with corrections for relative spectrum holdings for both, Verizon comes out way ahead.
T-Mobile probably does better in the 'hood, as they have more towers there than Verizon, but that's not worth much if that's the only place they are covering.
Offloading smartphone data has nothing to do with deploying spectrum. It can increase capacity on a given piece of spectrum, or avoid using it for some traffic all-together (Wifi calling), but it has nothing to do with whether it is deployed in the first place or not. | |
|
| | |
to BiggA
said by BiggA:Verizon actually is, as they use most of their spectrum. T-Mobile has maybe 10% of their AWS spectrum deployed, probably less than that.
No they're not. Verizon is very averse to using femtocells or offloading smartphone data consumption to Wi-Fi. | |
|
| |
xmark
Anon
2012-Apr-9 3:03 pm
helloEveryone claims tmobile coverage suck and getting some spectrum wouldn't hurt , well here we have some that's available today right now & the company that needs it the most won't be getting any in the near future. Sounds anticompetitive to me | |
|
| |
I'm still supporting VerizonI've said this many times on the cable industry deal, I fully support it. They purchased spectrum legally because they have the finances to do so. They are not planning on rolling out FiOS and haven't since 2010 or 2011. They've already sold off a majority of their landline business and realistically their DSL wasn't even competition to the cable companies.
T-Mobile should stop complaining and instead should join the companies buying the spectrum. They actually have no native coverage in my area and I'm not sure they do anywhere in Nebraska outside of Lincoln/Omaha. My area is included on Sprint's Network Vision for LTE and USCellular just purchased 700Mhz spectrum to presumably build out an LTE network in the future, but T-Mobile and AT&T both roam off Viaero. | |
|
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2012-Apr-9 5:41 pm
T-mobile is off baseOk first of all if this deal gets blocked that doesn't help anyone since these cable companies are just sitting on this spectrum anyways. Until the FCC forces them to use it how does cable squatting on spectrum help anyone?
Second the FCC is going to auction off TV spectrum. If Verizon can't get spectrum form this deal it'll juts outbid T-Mobile for that spectrum. Is T-Mobile going to whine about that too? $3.6 billion for this spectrum is $3.6 bil less they have to spend for TV spectrum.
If cable can't sell to Verizon and they don't squat on the spectrum them they'll just sell to
at&t - Of course T-Mobile will complain about that
Sprint - T-Mobile will complain about that
t-mobile - which T-Mobile will be happy about of course Verizon, at&t and Sprint should all complain about that since that makes T-Mobile complete hypocrites.
So really T-Mobile needs to STFU already. | |
|
|
|
·
