SoftBank's Son to champion wireless home broadband as a way to gain support for T-Mobile purchase
According to Wells Fargo analyst Jennifer Fritzsche, Son wants SoftBank to compete against those cable companies that use landlines to bring the internet inside your home. Those cable companies operate without much competition and Son is poised to argue that speedy wireless internet in the home can improve both education and mobile commerce while also giving the cable companies a reason to offer more competitive pricing.
Son is speaking tomorrow at a a luncheon that is being attended by invitation only. The invites stated that Son will be talking about "the state of America’s wireless communications industry and the competitive global landscape." Those attending will not hear the executive's reasoning about why U.S. regulators should allow Sprint to buy T-Mobile. In January, he told U.S. regulators that allowing the deal to proceed would be the only way for mobile companies to challenge the Verizon/AT&T duopoly. Last week, T-Mobile CFO Braxton Carter told an investor conference that consolidation is "inevitable given the predatory duopoly structure here in the U.S."
Neil Juggins, a Hong Kong based analyst with JI Asia Research, said that it "It’s going to be very hard to persuade the FCC and the American consumer," to allow Sprint to buy T-Mobile. But last week's news that Dish Network has won spectrum in a government auction could convince regulators that the satellite content provider could be a viable fifth major mobile carrier in the states, which could lead to the approval of a Sprint acquisition of T-Mobile.
1. bwhiting (Posts: 173; Member since: 15 Jun 2013)
I actually wouldn't mind seeing how this would work out for both the carriers. He might be able to do something since SoftBank is the one buying them and not Sprint. So many people been calling in about that like we are buying them but instead it is SoftBank that bought a portion of us that is buying T-Mobile.
Plus if SoftBank did something to make pricing more competitive in the states for Charter and some of the others then it would be great. I would love that concept to come to light and work as a tag team to end some of the duopoly.
2. Miracles (Posts: 560; Member since: 31 Aug 2013)
Never gonna happen Son. Landlines always gonna be faster. Also your probably gonna charge one hell of a price to rip everyone off. No thanks
3. Augustine (Posts: 800; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
As Google Fiber demonstrated, though wires can be fast, the cable and DSL operators have been dragging their feet in the US. While abroad, even in the third world, it's possible to get much faster speeds than in the US and for less, these monopolistic behemoths couldn't care less because they have no competition. Any competition, wired or not, would be welcome.
7. cncrim (Posts: 547; Member since: 15 Aug 2011)
Demonstration like that is only half the true. I want them to test the wireless singnal go through moutain/ multiple concrede wall...... Than I wil change my mind wireless reliability.
However competition is good, i welcome it anytime.
10. troutsy (Posts: 283; Member since: 17 Feb 2012)
You could probably just have a landline run to your bunker and then use wireless broadband in all the places that people actually go.
4. lsutigers (Posts: 772; Member since: 08 Mar 2009)
Sprint is already testing this in Texas with fixed mount antennas on buildings which can take advantage of Sprint's huge 2.5ghz spectrum assets. This spectrum will eventually provide ultra high speeds (100+ mbps) with LTE advanced carrier aggregation which will easily compete with cable and fiber operators. The issue will be congestion which will have to be managed and is exactly why they are testing it first.
More competition is good for everyone, considering fixed ISP monopolies and no true nationwide contender.
6. Augustine (Posts: 800; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
I did try Clear, but before it was acquired by Sprint. I lived in a border-line area between strong and weak signal according to its coverage map, but the speed was quite slow: 1Mbps, 3Mbps on a good day. I was excited about skirting TimeWarner and AT&T, but alas I had only them as viable ISPs.
8. lsutigers (Posts: 772; Member since: 08 Mar 2009)
Well Clear is completely different than this. Clear used WiMAX, Sprint is using TDD-LTE with huge Nokia radios to support a ton of bandwith along with LTE-Advanced features. The only similarity is they both ran on the 2.5ghz spectrum.
The other issue you mentioned was living in a Clear fringe area. Sprint Spark will eventually be available in at least the top 100 markets if not nationwide and they are also mounting fixed outdoor antennas to improve signal strength when needed. This is much faster.
5. PBXtech (Posts: 983; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
Meanwhile in Kansas City, Google destroyed the competition with their new fiber network. KC has become an internet hub for online business as a result due to the insane speeds Google is delivering. While wireless seems to be the next step in home connectivity, I'm not sure I prefer to go that route over something like what Google has done, yet. Give wireless a little more time and it will easily be the next step, provided there's enough content.
9. Kaiser2007 (Posts: 158; Member since: 16 Nov 2013)
Champion wireless home broadband? Are you kidding me?
I own Clearwire home based WiMax modem "Hub Express", and use their $35 unlimitted plan before. Speed is up to 3Mbps. Sprint bought Clearwire and they kill that plan. Now, they offer only with per GB plan, no more unlimitted. I now left with a modem I can't use. I'm hoping FreedomPop will come up with BYOD plan. FP offer the plan with their own device, but they sell the device for $99. It will be nice if I can use my "Hub Express" with their BYOD plan.
11. TheRequiem (Posts: 163; Member since: 23 Mar 2012)
Your out of the loop, as many others have already said above. TD LTE Advanced is much different then WiMAX. The in building coverage is no longer a problem due to the use of the giant new 8 channel radios (an industry first) and fixed outdoor antennas... This renders these issues inept. They just demonstrated 2.6gbps over a single sector using this technology. That's a big different then 1-3 Mbps. Do your homework.