x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Sprint explains why AT&T doesn't need T-Mobile's spectrum

0. phoneArena posted on 21 Jun 2011, 03:39

AT&T has stayed on-message about the T-Mobile acquisition, insisting that they need the spectrum; but Sprint has submitted a technical analysis, explaining how AT&T could improve their network without T-Mobile...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 04:26 2

1. Randall L. Stephenson (unregistered)

Apparently Sprint has no clue what it is talking about. Our various departments have looked at the diagram and think the colors clash and don't understand any of the gibberish. We all agree we should simply throw money at the problem and hope for the best. We need T-Mobile to gain much needed expertise because pretty much we have no clue what were doing in this market.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 06:20 10

3. The_Miz (Posts: 1496; Member since: 06 Apr 2011)

So tell me, how much is AT&T paying you to spout crap on this article? Why not use that money and invest in fixing their ****ty network of dropped calls and inconsistent data? Oh no, they rather screw their customers by slapping high data fees and taxes, for which they sued for and paid through a settlement, along with stripping out unlimited data.

Not only that, but AT&T absorbing T-Mobile would make them the most dominant carrier in the US with more subscribers than Verizon. They'd be the only GSM carrier in the US, essentially becoming a monopoly.

Wake up and see the reality, kid.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 08:43 6

6. AndroidTroll (Posts: 359; Member since: 05 Mar 2011)

you make valid points but it's hard for me to take you seriously with that gay profile pic of yours lolol

posted on 22 Jun 2011, 08:34 1

19. The_Miz (Posts: 1496; Member since: 06 Apr 2011)

So says the dumbass with "Troll" in his username.

posted on 22 Jun 2011, 18:46 1

20. Alex Riley (unregistered)

Not awesome...

posted on 26 Jun 2011, 12:46

22. lollipop (Posts: 43; Member since: 15 Feb 2011)

The real sad part people do not realize is that LTE is far more efficient with spectrum then GSM. An LTE tower can handle more calls and data users then a GSM tower.

Either way, in the end US customers are gonna get wrecked on pricing especially when calls go VoIP which will drop costs for carriers. The "exaflood" that the carriers are claiming is a fictional claim that any transparency would blow away. Data plans are looked at as free money and the only reason they are raising the price of data plans is that they know they can.

Look at it like this Verizon Wireless employees get 50% off their bill no matter what plan and Verizon is still making a PROFIT. This means the markup for service is rediculously high.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 04:55 3

2. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Now all AT&T-Mobile need to do is refute Sprint's analysis - but with transparent (aka objectively verifiable) data. Wanna bet that doesn't happen?

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 08:53 1

7. LETSUSELOGIC (unregistered)

based on how simplified this diagram it wont be hard to knock their analysis. In fact it begs the question if they made this elementary school plan for At&t why cant Sprints own network be better its major downfall against its competition. Its 4g network isnt that widespread and is slower. Its converage in general is poor by comparison, what an easy argument for them to dispute nice try but no cigar....

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 07:42 2

4. DOGIEFRESH (Posts: 309; Member since: 15 Jul 2009)

The purchase is gonna pass anyway, Sprint should focus and figure out how to explain the fcc the NEXTEL dismantle. stop crying like a dumped whore Sprintcrap....!!!!

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 13:50 1

13. downphoenix (Posts: 3165; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)

If AT&T gets to buyout and Sprint doesnt get to dismantle Nextel, then heads need to roll at the FCC. I say all or none.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 08:29

5. Gcombs (unregistered)

Its good that Sprint has been voicing their concerns. I think its going to pass anyways but this could be a win for Sprint as well. With the deal Sprint made with Lightsquared they will be rolling out LTE and all Sprint has to do is keep their prices where its at. People will start to switch to the cheaper carrier with the same technology.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 10:48

9. Phoneguy007 (Posts: 218; Member since: 02 Jun 2011)

but lightsquared still have not explained to the fcc why there network interfers with gps units.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 11:33

11. wumberpeb (Posts: 453; Member since: 14 Mar 2011)

actually they have

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 16:50

15. Phoneguy007 (Posts: 218; Member since: 02 Jun 2011)

yes just saw it

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 09:28 3

8. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)

"We can't say if Sprint's analysis is correct. But we do know that Sprint isn't really concerned for consumers' welfare."

Incorrect, Sprint is concerned with thier Customer's welfare. Sprint goes as thier Customers go...

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 10:50 1

10. Phoneguy007 (Posts: 218; Member since: 02 Jun 2011)

Sprint is just staling they dont really care, fact is att wont gain all tmo customers ver will get some and sprint will gain the customer that dont like att or ver. There is no monopoly.

posted on 22 Jun 2011, 08:22 1

17. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)

They are arguing against a duoply, not a monopoly

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 12:36

12. Sam's Song (unregistered)

When it all comes down to it no one really knows what will happen if AT&T buys T-mobile.

They could completely overcharge customers, have the customer sevrice get crappier than it already is, and start the 2nd Geat Depression.

Or they could expand coverage, provide more 4G towers, lower prices because of the new customers, start an innovative war, and have customer service rise because of the new employees.

But I do know for certain that the FCC won't have an ongoing monopoly. -_-

posted on 22 Jun 2011, 08:23 2

18. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)

History tells us that in a duopoly, the two big companies sit on tech and advancement and use thier tremendous leverage to just make money off the masses without offering true innovation.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 14:02

14. Superguy (unregistered)

Interesting, as cited over at BGR, AT&T is rebutting Sprint by saying they can't provide a good analysis as they don't even manage their own network. That's outsourced to Ericsson.

http://www.bgr.com/2011/06/21/sprint-to-att-youre- doing-it-wrong/

Don't know if the points are valid or not. I just know AT&T's network seems to suck more by the day and SOMETHING needs to be done.

posted on 21 Jun 2011, 20:29 1

16. DANDIRK (unregistered)

I heard on the radio that AT&T has more spectrum right now than any other carrier.

Why do they seem to have this problem, much more so then verizon, who has more customers?

posted on 22 Jun 2011, 18:53

21. Randy "Macho Man" Savich (unregistered)

Not that I disagree at all with them.

But, they should worry more about investing all this time and money into their own network, because it is piss-poor in ALOT of places, especially where I live.

posted on 28 Jun 2011, 16:32

23. phonesphoneseverywhere98765432 (unregistered)

Notice that only Sprint is fighting. Verizon would care if it wasn't about to buy up sprint. Even if verizon doesn't, Sprint has nothing to worry about. At my son's school, just about all the kids on on Sprint or Verizon. There's not that many on At&t or T-mobile. There are only two kids other than mine on t-mobile at my son's school...

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories