Sprint confirms interest in buying T-Mobile
21. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
Oh Please God Yeeeeeees! I need a good laugh and this will make me sh¡† in my drawers.
51. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
I vote yes to its the only way to actually give the US consumer a better deal Verizon and ATT won’t cut their rates unless they are forced. T-mobile is basically broke and Softbank wants to be the market leader by undercutting the competition sounds like a winner for consumers to me
2. TechDork (Posts: 262; Member since: 10 May 2010)
How the hell would that even be possible? O_o That'll bring T-Mobile down BIG time. Smh..
23. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
That fall into the abyss won't be too far.
55. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
lol sprint is owned by softbank go read about who they are
3. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 3072; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)
I wouldn't mind seeing this happen. IF Sprint honored T-Mobile's customers rate plans pricing and such. Also, Sprint and T-Mobile really need more coverage. Where there is LTE in Sprint, T-Mobile is on 2G EDGE, where there is terrible 3G coverage with Sprint, there is blazing fast LTE with T-Mobile. Just in my area alone. My friend works with me and has T-Mobile, he gets great LTE speeds at my work, I'm stuck on a god awful, nearly unusable 3G with Sprint. However, where I live, I get really excellent Sprint LTE coverage and he gets 2G Edge where I live.
Or maybe I'm just being selfish and wishing T-Mobile had the coverage where I live so I could switch to them with no regrets. lol
50. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
I think sprints rates are better $45 unlimited talk text and web no contract $35 unlimited talk, text and 3gb of internet and $25 per month unlimited talk, text and 1gb with their framley plan
4. Sparhawk (Posts: 75; Member since: 10 Mar 2012)
SprinT-Mobile? NexT-Mobile? What will they call themselves?
When will Sprint learn that buying competitors with completely incompatible networks is not a good idea? They nearly choked to death on NexTel.
7. Augustine (Posts: 955; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Well, at least LTE is cross-compatible. Sprint's bands at 800 and 1900MHz are FD, like T-mobile's 700 and 1700MHz.
13. WillieFDiaz (Posts: 89; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
That means nothing really. Only a few devices are capable of using 800 ESMR LTE at all, let alone the 1900 PCS G-Block (Band 25) which is not "the same" as 1900 PCS that is in most phones now. Nexus 5 and Sprint devices include it, but AT&T and T-Mobile do not include specifically G-Band PCS meaning the network and device are incompatible and not cross carrier. As for the 700 spectrum its worthless right now, interference is a key issue, being fixed as we speak, then T-Mobile has to deploy it. It also already serves areas that have LTE in the AWS.
29. lsutigers (Posts: 813; Member since: 08 Mar 2009)
Dude stop making a big deal about this. The Nexus 5 proves that you can make a single device that supports AT&T, TMO and Sprint Spark, including tri-band LTE. This is not as big of a deal as it used to be.
The bigger deal is the overhead of running 2 separate networks for voice and data. Sprint's new Network Vision infrastructure is much more advanced and flexible than anything TMO has but they are running on CDMA instead of GSM. Either way voice is going to VoLTE within the next several years so they just need to figure out which network they are going to keep and integrate it all into Sprint's NV multi-mode base stations.
37. Augustine (Posts: 955; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
All LTE smartphones sold by T-mobile support at least the 1900MHz band. As for the 700MHz band... both AT&T and Verizon seem quite happy to serve their customers with it, with Verizon even topping everybody else in performance using that band.
39. a_merryman (Posts: 749; Member since: 14 Dec 2011)
VZW and AT&T use different bands from the one that T-Mobile bought in the 700MHz spectrum. The one T-Mobile bought supposedly has interference with over the air TV channel that is still near it. Though, T-Mobile says it has found a way to fix that and AT&T agreed to include T-Mobile's 700 MHz band class into future phones. I think they're supposed to include band class 12 and 17 into a new band that encompasses both...but for now, no luck. The 600 MHz auction is also supposed to clear the tv channel out of where it is so that there wont be interference anymore, I think.
43. Augustine (Posts: 955; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
The crowded 700MHz band suffers from interference from several sources, not only TV. Both AT&T and Verizon have had local problems with interference with their LTE signals. As this never stopped them, it should not stop T-mobile either.
44. a_merryman (Posts: 749; Member since: 14 Dec 2011)
I don't know anything about the interference that vzw and at&t suffer with their 700 MHz, only the channel 51 interference that T-Mobile and US cellular will have to find a way to work around until the 600 MHz auction. Are you talking about the reports of certain light bulbs interfering with VZW and AT&T spectrum? Because that's not really the same thing.....
45. Augustine (Posts: 955; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Indeed, where there are TV stations on channel 51 it might present a problem. However, the FCC does not allow LTE using block A of band #12 where there is a TV stations broadcasting on channel 51. The license that T-mobile bought from Verizon is for areas where such frequencies can be used for LTE. IOW, though it may be a problem, the license is for areas where it is not a problem.
And things get worse in the crowded 600MHz band...
47. a_merryman (Posts: 749; Member since: 14 Dec 2011)
Yeah, I'm assuming that's what they meant by it won't be a problem. They desperately need to deploy it to help with in-building coverage.
And yeah, the 600 MHz is looking like it will be a complete mess, but that doesn't change the fact that it is supposed to clear out channel 51 so that lower band can be used all over the country. The voluntary reverse auction seems like a stupid set-up to me. I really want Sprint and T-Mobile and Dish to pick up a healthy swath of it so that there can be a more fair ground between the carriers. AT&T and Verizon own way too much of the sub-GHz spectrum.
5. PapaSmurf (Posts: 9846; Member since: 14 May 2012)
I only want spectrum and greater coverage. Leave everything else alone.
10. Jommick (Posts: 221; Member since: 10 Sep 2013)
This *can* be good, seeing as the merger isn't Sprint buying T-Mobile, it's Japanese corporation Softbank looking to purchase them - they use frequencies (WCDMA, UMTS) that are more compatible with T-Mobile than Sprint, which can result in decent interoperability and possibly abolition of most of Sprint's old CDMA and EV-DO networks, replacing it with a more sim card friendly network. That could result in better competition, due to unlocked phones etc.; especially if they kept the more eclectic T-Mobile branding.
53. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
I think they would need to rebrand you may like T-Mobile but many people don't this is not a bash on them. The most important thing about a cell is that it works where you go and with T-Mobile it simply does not work in a whole lot of the USA. I can only speak of where I live and where I go but in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan (the Upper Peninsula) and Wisconsin other than the metro areas my sprint works way better than the t-mobile I tried from a few months
54. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
and rebrand the other way because just as many hate sprint
6. Whateverman (Posts: 3237; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo... Well, you guys have a point with the extra spectrum and all. I just don't want Sprint mucking up a great thing.
8. AtomicMe (Posts: 23; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
Sprint uses CDMA and TMobile uses GSM. How would that even work?
12. WillieFDiaz (Posts: 89; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
The same way it worked for Telus and Bell in Canada, Telstra and Optus in Australia and so on so forth with all CDMA carriers - they all abandoned and refarmed the CDMA spectrum to GSM/HSPA - just like T-Mobile is doing with MetroPCS. Except in the case of Sprint, they LOOOOOVE CDMA. In fact, the first Sprint network, in Washington DC, called Sprint Spectrum back then was GSM. They loved CDMA more so they abandoned it, sold it off to PowerTel or OmniPoint, which later became T-Mobile anyway, and completely went CDMA. Sprint is 100% dedicated to CDMA though at least 2017. At a minimum. Then they plan to have an LTE network to match, and will begin once again, a new phase of Network Vision, transitioning everyone from CDMA to LTE only.
In ALL scenarios, Sprint will keep CDMA and not implement or deploy or overlay any of the network with HSPA if they bought T-Mobile, they would immediately dismantle redundant areas of overlap (98% of it).
36. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
T-Mobile just bought CDMA metro PCS and that has had few hickups. A merger of dfferent tech isn't as cumbersome as it was in the 90's. Plus the Nextel merger was pre Dan Hesse and with Softbank running the show I have even more faith in the success and consumer benefit to this merger. This needs to happen. Plus bottom line is T-Mobile WILL be sold I would rather it be Sprint who is known for lower price points and unlimited data vs some unkwown entity that may reverse course.
52. tuminatr (Posts: 725; Member since: 23 Feb 2009)
Ok here is a bit of trivia, who launched the first GSM network in the USA?? aww you know that one sprint in the Washington DC area. Here is my novice understanding when Sprint upgraded to LTE and started offering sim card based phones there are not huge differences in the networks anymore and there is a protocol to make them compatible
9. WillieFDiaz (Posts: 89; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
"Son says that the deal would allow Sprint to push a faster network more aggressively and offer better prices to compete with the big two. " - Umm, no it won't. The fact is that Sprint has major spectrum balances and has the ability to push a faster network more aggressively, they just do not want to. They would rather be like AT&T and buy out the competition for the customers, extra spectrum they really do not need at all, and then they will raise prices just the same as the other two have done. There is killing one competitor that is large enough to make the other three crap their pants, even without the large network.
As for Sprint competing with price, Sprint CAN do this, they chose not to. The Framily plan is not much of a deal until you hit 7 members, and going over actually makes no added benefit. The Unlimited My Way plan is more THEIR way than it is yours, and still has a high price tag, roughly $30 more than T-Mobile. I would hate to see this forced onto T-Mobile customers as "..a great value..".
11. jskates420 (Posts: 40; Member since: 29 Jun 2013)
Bringing tmobile down? You guys are idiots sprints coverage is better than tmobile,sprint spark leaves tmobile in dust if anything itll help sprint get coverage in areas where they dont have non shoot even now they worked on they're 3g and its very usable dont speak if you dont own a spark enabled phone.
14. DigitalJedi_X2 (banned) (Posts: 346; Member since: 30 Jan 2012)
Then maybe you shouldn't speak if you don't own a T-Mobile LTE enabled device? T-Mobile LTE has routinely been proven faster than even At&t and Verizon in some instances. Sprint may have a longer reach, but their data speeds are crap. Especially compared to T-Mobile.
15. jskates420 (Posts: 40; Member since: 29 Jun 2013)
My brother has the note 3 from tmobile I have the gs4 mini on sprint he gets around 20mbps while I get 50mbps in los angeles, we all know that sprints spark lte is better than that of tmobile,tmobile has good lte just not as good as sprints.
17. DigitalJedi_X2 (banned) (Posts: 346; Member since: 30 Jan 2012)
Now... How many customers does Sprint have on its Spark network compared to T-Mobile? T-Mobile has LTE in 40 cities. Sprint Spark has what? Max 13 cities(could be less). And its limited in those cities, yes? So your comparison really isn't even fair. TMo has far more users on their LTE network. Once Spark is fully deployed, lets revisit this conversation.
20. DigitalJedi_X2 (banned) (Posts: 346; Member since: 30 Jan 2012)
Correction: Spark is in 16 cities.
38. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
No spark 28 mbps on my Note 2 on the highway in Orlando! And tried spark on my mom's G2 in Miami crazy! Sprint is coming and the footprint is far larger than T-Mobile's! Fastest is nice but I prefer coverage. I drove from Miami to Orlando and kept LTE the whole time. Network vision is very real and tangible results.
22. Doakie (Posts: 1660; Member since: 06 May 2009)
Sprints LTE was running at 2.0 Mbps here in Seattle, their EVDO network was running at 50-200 Kbps. Totally useless! In Honolulu and Disneyland Sprint had a totally unusable network I couldn't even run a speed test. It would just error out. My experience is totally different than yours. Good for you. Personally I'm never going to be stuck on a SIMless phone again. The fact that Sprint and Verizon have to provision phones is enough for me to stay away from them from now on. Currently I have AT&T and T-Mobile, I couldn't be happier.
25. Whateverman (Posts: 3237; Member since: 17 May 2009)
T Mobile is wagging the dog. Sprint is crap. It's better than what it was but it's still crap. Any carrier that would leave it 3G customers with Edge speeds for 3+ years while increasing their rate plans is crap, and I know because I was an ex customer, no very happy with T Mobile. I'm sure Spark is wonderful, but it can't make up for the horrible customer service and experience.
24. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
I'd like to know where Sprint has [that] coverage??
16. HildyJ (Posts: 234; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Sprint is the Blackberry of carriers. Give them a year and they'll be number four. Maybe Tmo should buy them.
48. TheRequiem (Posts: 228; Member since: 23 Mar 2012)
Actually in a year they'll have the fastest LTE in all major metropolitan areas and can't be compared to blackberry, they actually have a plan.
18. bugsbunny00 (Posts: 1628; Member since: 07 Jun 2013)
Should've been at&t and T-Mobile both are gsm,but this is crazy.
19. Doakie (Posts: 1660; Member since: 06 May 2009)
"But, Son says that the deal would allow Sprint to push a faster network more aggressively and offer better prices to compete with the big two."
Lies. More Sprint empty promises. Sprints network speeds suck and they aren't even competitive with T-Mobile let alone the big two. Softbank should have bought T-Mobile instead of Sprint the first time around.
26. jroc74 (Posts: 5534; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I dont know how I feel about this.....
GSM 3G is currently faster than CDMA 3G. If Sprint sticks to CDMA....what will be lost....if Sprint moves to GSM...what will be lost....
27. phoneguy (Posts: 190; Member since: 08 Jan 2009)
IF this were to happen, the combined entity should roll with T-Mobile as the lead carrier and brand the new company as such, and replace the current management team with John Legere. Spectrum and network compatibility are no big deal unless you sit on it, and with T-Mobiles current momentum, Softbank would be silly to not do this.
28. mas11 (Posts: 1034; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)
I would be okay with T-Mobile buying sprint, but Sprint's plans are way overpriced. A merger with John at the helm would make me happy
30. youlookfoolish (Posts: 156; Member since: 14 Dec 2012)
T-Mobile fan boys are once again proving to be nothing more than uneducated mouth breathers.
T-Mobile current entry level plan is $50 a month. Sprint's entry level plan is $55. What's the difference? For that extra $5 Sprint doubles T-Mobile with 1gb of data. Hardly a big difference in price.
Sprint also offers installment billing non contact options. Just like T-Mobile, right? Yet the majority of dim witted comments I read complain about price difference or company policies. Honestly, most are also barely English.
T-Mobile isn't a great carrier. I will keep reminding everyone of that. They routinely get embarrassed on the network subject from credible sources ranging from Consumer Reports, to JD Power, and even Root Metrics. It's great that it's speedy where it works but the bottom line is that those areas are few and far between.
T-Mobile is the last place US carrier. They have the smallest national coverage foot print. They lost $20 million in q4 even adding customers. And most importantly, their parent company still wants to get rid of them. It will be the third time in 20 years they will get sold, merged, or rebranded.
Any more questions??? LOL T-Mobile.
33. tokuzumi (Posts: 603; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)
Carrier performance and satisfaction is based on location. Where I live and work, T-Mobile offers the same coverage as Verizon, and has better speeds. I don't travel much, and when I have traveled, I have yet to have a coverage issue with T-Mobile. But I'm not naive enough to say that T-Mobile is the best carrier out there. For me, where I live and work, I'm happy with T-Mobile, and have no intentions to switch, unless this merger goes through. I had so many problems with them, that I wouldn't even consider going back to them.
As far as pricing goes, PhoneArena has a recent article about pricing with the major carriers, with a variety of plan options (number of smartphones, data allotment, etc). Sprint was the most expensive carrier by far on most of the options. They were even more expensive than Verizon, who is notorious for gouging its customers. When was the last time Sprint even posted a break-even quarter?
34. youlookfoolish (Posts: 156; Member since: 14 Dec 2012)
That article was widely derided for not using current information. So you rely on Phone Arena instead of fact checking or shopping yourself is what you're saying?
41. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
I'm a DM for a big box that carries all carriers. Sprint is far from the most expensive. Go to each carrier's website pull up pricing and see for yourself. Smh
35. djcody (Posts: 73; Member since: 17 Apr 2013)
For your knowalage tmobile give you 1gb data too for 50$ start 23 march :) for 60$ you will have 3gb and 80$ unlimited
40. Augustine (Posts: 955; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Since old and arcane CDMA is useless outside of N. America and global connectivity is important to me, there are only two choices for me: AT&T or T-mobile.
42. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
"uneducated mouth breathers" hilarious but true. When I worked for T-Mobile I couldn't believe the passion of there hardcore fans. I was there from Aerial to Voisestream to T-Mobile and it's crazy. I had a non T-Mobile phone the whole time I worked there, in addition to my T-mobile phone, due to coverage issues. But they have improved, just like sprint, and both still have a long way to go.
32. tokuzumi (Posts: 603; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)
Sprint has a history of making terrible decisions. That Nextel buyout gave them nothing but losses on their balance sheet (they did get some 800MHz spectrum, but they way overpaid). Then, there was the great idea to use Clearwire for their Faux-G network. I have a feeling Sprint just wants to grab any cash T-Mobile might have in their bank account, and then sell off T-Mobile assets at auction. After a few years, you wouldn't even know T-Mobile existed.
Also, this would most likely mean an end to the $30 walmart plan (100 minutes, unl text, 5GB 4G data) that I love so much. I'll go back to StraightTalk, using AT&T if this merger goes through.
46. atlvideoguy (Posts: 50; Member since: 24 Feb 2012)
I switched to T-Mobile to get away from throttled data that sprint denied they were throttling but was obvious they were. I also got tired of the network vision lies and 4glte speeds of 2mbps. I also like the option of having a gsm phone that will soon be unlocked since I paid off my phone. As someone else has previously stated what worked good for you may not work so well for me. T-Mobile works well where I live and all the areas I travel to for work. as soon as I have the other 3 device paid in full on my account my bill will be $100 cheaper than Sprint. I really hope the DOJ continues to make this difficult if not impossible. Dan Hesse himself indicated we needed four U.S. wireless carriers.
49. TheRequiem (Posts: 228; Member since: 23 Mar 2012)
Sprint doesn't throttle data, I use Anywhere from 6 -15 gigabytes a month and always have full speed LTE. They have publicly stated they don't throttle data unless your abusive.