Personally, I think eliminating hardware subsidies was the right move for T-Mobile (and the industry as a whole). Whether or not they can convince the mass market that cheaper monthly plans > cheaper phones is another story entirely. The other points you made, however, are perfectly valid. I think T-Mobile is floundering a lot more than Sprint. Why the media portrays it the opposite way is beyond me.
Is Sprint really Floundering?
- Thread starter bearballz72
- Start date
Its already better here in Chicago haha
Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2
Attachments
I personally think it was stupid of T-Mobile to get rid of subsides especially for customers whos credit isn't all that good. I hope sprint never stops
Sent from my Sprint Galaxy Nexus rockin 4.2.1 using Tapatalk 2
I wouldn't really care if any carrier kept subsidies as long as we could get cheaper plans with unsubsidized phones like T-Mobile was doing before. The way it is now with Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon, you still pay exorbitantly high amounts whether you buy the phone outright or get it subsidized, and that's not fair to the consumer.
If we use our dollar votes (buying power) to support unlocked phones at low costs, such as the Nexus 4, and pre-paid or other non-contract accounts we get two results: 1. The market is forced to realize that consumers want this, and therefor either adapt by improving their services to make contracts once again worth it (we win) or to adopt by offering similar competitive plans (we win). 2. The carriers you support have more revenue to make improvements to infrastructure, offer even more completive plans, advertise more, etc, etc. Conversely, carriers you don't support have less revenue to do the same things and are forced to compete for your dollars.
It takes a massive change, word of mouth campaign and a lot of effort and they'll try to fight you every step of the way. We're in this situation because we rewarded the monopoly for so long. They're not going to change it on their own. There are also legislative actions that can be taken, but that takes a very focused effort.
We need to inform our friends and family, advertise for them and realize that ever moment we spend doing so is a moment invested in the betterment of the future for all of us. The most selfish reason of all; improving the world because you and those you love live in it.
It takes a massive change, word of mouth campaign and a lot of effort and they'll try to fight you every step of the way. We're in this situation because we rewarded the monopoly for so long. They're not going to change it on their own. There are also legislative actions that can be taken, but that takes a very focused effort.
We need to inform our friends and family, advertise for them and realize that ever moment we spend doing so is a moment invested in the betterment of the future for all of us. The most selfish reason of all; improving the world because you and those you love live in it.
Well I think the reason is T-Mobile is spending a ton of money on advertising. We've all seen the commercials of the sexy brunette riding around on her motorcyle or in a helicopter surveying her domain. Plus depending where you are, people get really good 3G speeds on T-mobile, addmittedly way better than Sprint as of now.
I like the business model that T-mobile is trying to implement, essentially turning their network into a dumb pipe where people pay a lower cost for service while doing away with subsidies for phones.
It's almost like what the european carriers are doing. Buy your phone at full price and then shop around for the best deal while not getting locked into a long term contract. I think people here in the U.S. are so used to getting these subsidies that it doesn't make sense to for them to pay $600.00+ for a smartphone up front. Even though you'll be saving more money in the long run, at least for GSM phones.
CDMA phones like what Sprint or Verizon have won't work because they're not compatible on each other's network.
Last edited:
Not true at all. Sprint and Verizon have had roaming agreements for years, along with USCC and even Cricket. People also flash Sprint phones to Verizon and vice versa, and others flash Sprint or Verizon phones to US Cellular or Cricket. If the phones weren't compatible with all the CDMA networks, that wouldn't be possible. As long as the phone supports the required frequencies, the phones are compatible with any CDMA network. LTE is complicating things a bit, but I think that problem will be solved with the next-gen SoCs.
But yeah, CDMA phones are definitely not tied to a single network (through hardware compatibility, anyway; they're obviously locked to their respective networks, but that has nothing to do with compatibility, just carrier greed).
cgardnervt
Well-known member
While I think Sprint IS on the right track they still have a ton of work to do. Even outside of their 4G LTE growth. 3G still needs to be fix. I know they are working on it but we hear very little about it. I mean lets be honest if you don't have LTE in your area then Sprint is just to slow. (Granted there are some good 3G markets for Sprint but not to many.) Even in Boston when I had Sprint was slow as hell. Big metro area with a lot of people. WiMax when I had it wouldn't even work in most buildings and so on. It's cheaper than the rest but its not always useable. That was my issue with Sprint.
Att on the other hand has NO LTE in my area and we only have HSPA+. I get up to 10 megs down and its useable just about any where that I go. I ran into some area's in the NY Lake George area where I only got edge but otherwise it was amazing! I know I pay some more but I can count on it working 90% of the time.
Sprint still has a soul and its still in working motion. I still wouldn't surprise to see Sprint doing much better in the coming years when they fix some of their issues. But it still remains...If you live in a Sprint LTE area then your good! Otherwise I feel bad for whom ever uses their data speeds.
As far as Tmo goes I think them dropping the contract WAS the right idea. I side with them. They have cheaper plans that way. Plus I don't know about you but for $30 and they give you unlimited Text/100 minutes and 5gigs of data? Sounds like a deal for me! Sad thing is the coverage isn't all that great. Plus Vermont only gets edge. So I will be sticking with att unless they moves some towers up my way!
Now I know many won't agree with me and my opinion and that's ok! Let me know why. I like good conversation even if we disagree. But I was with Sprint for 7-8 years. While I was there I saw the ups and downs, sadly more downs!
Att on the other hand has NO LTE in my area and we only have HSPA+. I get up to 10 megs down and its useable just about any where that I go. I ran into some area's in the NY Lake George area where I only got edge but otherwise it was amazing! I know I pay some more but I can count on it working 90% of the time.
Sprint still has a soul and its still in working motion. I still wouldn't surprise to see Sprint doing much better in the coming years when they fix some of their issues. But it still remains...If you live in a Sprint LTE area then your good! Otherwise I feel bad for whom ever uses their data speeds.
As far as Tmo goes I think them dropping the contract WAS the right idea. I side with them. They have cheaper plans that way. Plus I don't know about you but for $30 and they give you unlimited Text/100 minutes and 5gigs of data? Sounds like a deal for me! Sad thing is the coverage isn't all that great. Plus Vermont only gets edge. So I will be sticking with att unless they moves some towers up my way!
Now I know many won't agree with me and my opinion and that's ok! Let me know why. I like good conversation even if we disagree. But I was with Sprint for 7-8 years. While I was there I saw the ups and downs, sadly more downs!
1. People have to understand that Sprint is Overhauling its entire Network...This is not just adding LTE panels to a tower and their done...It's building a brand new Network from the Ground up that doesn't happen over night. AT&T and Verizon are the ones only adding LTE panels, they're not doing the massive overhaul that Sprint is doing, at least in Verizon's case not yet!
2. WiMax was not Sprint build out, it was 100% Clearwire's. Sprint was a victim of Clearwire's inability to properly build out a network and they're taking the blame for it, since Sprint was the front line company that disgruntled customers saw. Remember all Clearwire had to work with 2.5 mhz spectrum, not ideal for a primary Data pipe, 2.5 mhz is really only good for an Overlay to other lower frequencies, which is what Sprint will be re-purposing it for with LTE.
3. There has been plenty of info on the web to immerse yourself with the Network Vision rollout...S4GRU.com is nothing but a world of Network Vision talk, along with rollout maps, detailing down to ground level what towers have been upgraded along with one under construction. So let's not act like we don't have clue.
Sprint's going as fast as manpower allows them too, its not a cash situation, but more so manpower available. I'm but if you're in a location where Network Vision is more than 30-40% complete no carrier can beat what Sprint's offering. I myself am waiting for NV to complete here in the NYC - NJ - Philly region and I'm happily bringing my ass back to Sprint... Verizon is a wallet raper pure and simple.
Once Softbank's 20bn$ is solidly in the Bank (no pun), a whole lot of thing with Sprint's gonna change. Sprint will have more muscle to compete with the Duopoly.
Sprint's NOT GOING ANYWHERE!
2. WiMax was not Sprint build out, it was 100% Clearwire's. Sprint was a victim of Clearwire's inability to properly build out a network and they're taking the blame for it, since Sprint was the front line company that disgruntled customers saw. Remember all Clearwire had to work with 2.5 mhz spectrum, not ideal for a primary Data pipe, 2.5 mhz is really only good for an Overlay to other lower frequencies, which is what Sprint will be re-purposing it for with LTE.
3. There has been plenty of info on the web to immerse yourself with the Network Vision rollout...S4GRU.com is nothing but a world of Network Vision talk, along with rollout maps, detailing down to ground level what towers have been upgraded along with one under construction. So let's not act like we don't have clue.
Sprint's going as fast as manpower allows them too, its not a cash situation, but more so manpower available. I'm but if you're in a location where Network Vision is more than 30-40% complete no carrier can beat what Sprint's offering. I myself am waiting for NV to complete here in the NYC - NJ - Philly region and I'm happily bringing my ass back to Sprint... Verizon is a wallet raper pure and simple.
Once Softbank's 20bn$ is solidly in the Bank (no pun), a whole lot of thing with Sprint's gonna change. Sprint will have more muscle to compete with the Duopoly.
Sprint's NOT GOING ANYWHERE!
The problem with the US mobile market isn't a monopoly - it's an oligopoly which is much, much worse. An oligopoly is a market with three or more players all doing the the same thing. No player wants to rock the boat by trying something different so the consumer pays $19.99 for a CD no matter which company made it, gets their choice of crappy 22-minute sitcoms with the same recycled jokes used decades earlier (ABC, CBS, NBC) or the same low-quality, "good enough" car that will last for 100,000 miles if they're lucky (Ford, GM, Chrysler). It's the illusion of competition without the benefits of differentiation or lower costs for the consumer. Just as change forced the oligopolies cited above to adapt, so too will changes in the US mobile market break up the Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile oligopoly.
There's a long list of likely suspects who have the cash and a lot to gain by either starting a new network (Dish) or acquiring an existing player (T-Mobile) and forcing them to play ball. When customers jump ship from one carrier to the other about half choose an iPhone to use on their new network. If Apple were to buy their own network and make the iPhone exclusive to their network they wouldn't have to share revenue with any of the other carriers and they could charge a premium for their service. Their biggest problem would be acquiring enough islands and secure warehouses to store all the cash they would collect. They could also offer things like unlimited wireless data bundled with Apple TV, iPads, etc. either for a monthly fee or bundled with the product. I could definitely see Steve pitching this to the board, but I doubt Tim Cook has the gravitas to make it happen. If the fruit-factory starts turning out less successful devices I could see their board approaching Cook about making it happen to shake things up though.
With a whopping 2% market share it won't be long before US carriers stop taking Microsoft's money to carry their failed Windows Mobile 3.0 devices. This leaves MS with a choice - cut and run (Kin, Zune, Silverlight) or double down by scooping up Nokia and/or HTC and acquiring a network. Even MS knows that mobile devices are the future and without gaining some traction in this segment they have a much darker future. They seem to be trying to copy Apple (mall stores, telling manufacturers what hardware they're allowed to use with the OS, building hardware) so I could definitely see them trying this path if Apple did it first.
Google. They're already bringing high-speed internet to Kansas. By becoming their own carrier they could gather even more data about their customers to sell to marketers. A nationwide wireless network would work nicely with some of their other ventures (self-driving cars, Google glasses, etc.)
While T-Mobile's 3.5G HSPA+ network is nice, T-Mobile has other issues. They have very little coverage outside of urban areas and have very few roaming agreements with other carriers. The best carrier for you will depend on your needs and location but DT hasn't been willing to invest in TMO. True, they're finally starting an LTE network but they have the fewest towers of the major networks and the smallest coverage area overall. To compete and attract NEW customers that they will need to grow they will need to start building towers. DT hasn't even hinted at that. My guess is that they are just putting on a new coat of paint for when Apple, MS or Google come to kick the tires.
The move to separate the phone subsidy from the service essentially makes TMO a MVNO that lets customers pay at the end of the month instead of the beginning. I suspect the move is part of DT's thriftiness - it's a lot cheaper to run a network of you don't have to, "loan" your customer $600 worth of hardware and hope they pay it off over 2 years. I don't see the move catching on because US customers are used to the bundled system they have now, no one is going to want to fork over $699 for a new iPhone, getting used phones is going to get a lot harder since manufacturers are moving to non user-replaceable batteries and the savings aren't that great. TMO's unlimited plan goes from $89.99/mo to $69.99/mo - so you're only saving $20/mo.
There's a long list of likely suspects who have the cash and a lot to gain by either starting a new network (Dish) or acquiring an existing player (T-Mobile) and forcing them to play ball. When customers jump ship from one carrier to the other about half choose an iPhone to use on their new network. If Apple were to buy their own network and make the iPhone exclusive to their network they wouldn't have to share revenue with any of the other carriers and they could charge a premium for their service. Their biggest problem would be acquiring enough islands and secure warehouses to store all the cash they would collect. They could also offer things like unlimited wireless data bundled with Apple TV, iPads, etc. either for a monthly fee or bundled with the product. I could definitely see Steve pitching this to the board, but I doubt Tim Cook has the gravitas to make it happen. If the fruit-factory starts turning out less successful devices I could see their board approaching Cook about making it happen to shake things up though.
With a whopping 2% market share it won't be long before US carriers stop taking Microsoft's money to carry their failed Windows Mobile 3.0 devices. This leaves MS with a choice - cut and run (Kin, Zune, Silverlight) or double down by scooping up Nokia and/or HTC and acquiring a network. Even MS knows that mobile devices are the future and without gaining some traction in this segment they have a much darker future. They seem to be trying to copy Apple (mall stores, telling manufacturers what hardware they're allowed to use with the OS, building hardware) so I could definitely see them trying this path if Apple did it first.
Google. They're already bringing high-speed internet to Kansas. By becoming their own carrier they could gather even more data about their customers to sell to marketers. A nationwide wireless network would work nicely with some of their other ventures (self-driving cars, Google glasses, etc.)
While T-Mobile's 3.5G HSPA+ network is nice, T-Mobile has other issues. They have very little coverage outside of urban areas and have very few roaming agreements with other carriers. The best carrier for you will depend on your needs and location but DT hasn't been willing to invest in TMO. True, they're finally starting an LTE network but they have the fewest towers of the major networks and the smallest coverage area overall. To compete and attract NEW customers that they will need to grow they will need to start building towers. DT hasn't even hinted at that. My guess is that they are just putting on a new coat of paint for when Apple, MS or Google come to kick the tires.
The move to separate the phone subsidy from the service essentially makes TMO a MVNO that lets customers pay at the end of the month instead of the beginning. I suspect the move is part of DT's thriftiness - it's a lot cheaper to run a network of you don't have to, "loan" your customer $600 worth of hardware and hope they pay it off over 2 years. I don't see the move catching on because US customers are used to the bundled system they have now, no one is going to want to fork over $699 for a new iPhone, getting used phones is going to get a lot harder since manufacturers are moving to non user-replaceable batteries and the savings aren't that great. TMO's unlimited plan goes from $89.99/mo to $69.99/mo - so you're only saving $20/mo.
Was not aware of that you could flash a Sprint branded phone to Verizon. Guess you learn something new every day.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Android Central Forums
Was not aware of that you could flash a Sprint branded phone to Verizon. Guess you learn something new every day.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Android Central Forums
You can't legally. Sprint nor Verizon will not activate any phone that is not specifically sold under their brand and definitely not their competitors. You can flash it no problem to the Verizon prepaid or sprint prepaid with a bit of modding but to actually get a Sprint phone or VZ or vice versa will require quite a bit of stuff that is not legal.
Trending Posts
-
[Chatter] "Where everybody knows your name ..."
- Started by zero neck
- Replies: 53K
-
-
Question Help with using a custom layout for a physical keyboard on android
- Started by savery
- Replies: 0
-
News FCC votes to restore net neutrality and is set to begin regulating ISPs- Started by AC News
- Replies: 5
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram