T-mobile is claiming they are now 3rd

[Closingracer]

They are claiming they are third even though they are at 55 million and sprint IS at 55.9 but accusing them of having 1.7 inactive subscribers in that number . Of course it's t-mobile trying to make the public one thing but as of now they are still 4th until true numbers say otherwise

T-Mobile says it's now the #3 U.S. wireless carrier | TechnoBuffalo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[clevin]

It's easy to see the trend, real or not at this time, we all know it is happening for sure.

@T-Mobile GN3

 

[zorak950]

They're only going to get further ahead until Sprint rehabilitates its brand.

 

[Closingracer]

It's easy to see the trend, real or not at this time, we all know it is happening for sure.

@T-Mobile GN3

Yeah but at this point of thine they are lying


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Rukbat]

What matters is which one gives you better coverage where you need it. I don't care if they're first - if they don't cover my house, they're useless to me. (Sprint had a dead spot that covers my daughter's entire house, except for one pane of one upstairs window. TMobile covers the whole house. (Weak signal, but signal.)

 

[raino]

Yeah but at this point of thine they are lying

TMO is lying? How?

 

[Closingracer]

TMO is lying? How?

They aren't 3rd place yet ? 55 million < 55.9 million last time I remembered . And how would t-mobile know 1.7 million of their ( sprint ) subs are inactive ? They are sprint ? They are 4th place until they have more then 55.9 million


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[raino]

They aren't 3rd place yet ? 55 million < 55.9 million last time I remembered . And how would t-mobile know 1.7 million of their ( sprint ) subs are inactive ? They are sprint ? They are 4th place until they have more then 55.9 million


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well those numbers are in Sprint's report. At most, TMO may be fudging the number of inactives by assuming ALL of them are inactive. But there's no doubt there are a lot of inactives in those 1.7 million after six months of no refills, that too on MVNOs, mind you. The question is whether they add up to 900k or not.

Personally, the way I see it, even if TMO has more customers, Sprint has the better network (based on the recent RootMetrics report.) So it's a wash.

 

[Closingracer]

Well those numbers are in Sprint's report. At most, TMO may be fudging the number of inactives by assuming ALL of them are inactive. But there's no doubt there are a lot of inactives in those 1.7 million after six months of no refills. The question is whether they add up to 900k or not.

Personally, the way I see it, even if TMO has more customers, Sprint has the better network (based on the recent RootMetrics report.) So it's a wash.

Yeah they are fudging it and still 4th place for what's it's worth .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[npaladin-2000]

Yeah but at this point of thine they are lying


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Arguably it's Sprint that's lying, they're padding their numbers by keeping inactive accounts in that count for 6 months, when the standard is 2-3. If you apply the same standard to everyone (something all carriers try hard to avoid) then Sprint has fallen to #4. Nothing wrong with this, Sprint's CEO came out and said they would, and that they need to worry more about expanding and fixing their network than subscriber count. They're not in a place where they can reliably and sustainably grow their subscriber count, they'll churn too many of them.

 

[GreenghostUvln]

Arguably it's Sprint that's lying, they're padding their numbers by keeping inactive accounts in that count for 6 months, when the standard is 2-3. If you apply the same standard to everyone (something all carriers try hard to avoid) then Sprint has fallen to #4. Nothing wrong with this, Sprint's CEO came out and said they would, and that they need to worry more about expanding and fixing their network than subscriber count. They're not in a place where they can reliably and sustainably grow their subscriber count, they'll churn too many of them.

This.

Sent from my T-Mobile Nexus 4 LTE using Tapatalk

 

[clevin]

I just find sprint's ads dishonest, "cut your bill in half", then demands you pay a new phone for $20-30 a month.

I was with sprint for a few years before, that's until I found out that their 1 mbps 3g was cheating me money. The whole network stinks at the time.

Imho, Sprint has an image problem, and I don't see that changing based on their recent actions.

@T-Mobile GN3

 

[raino]

I just find sprint's ads dishonest, "cut your bill in half", then demands you pay a new phone for $20-30 a month.

Isn't that as bad as TMO saying "no contracts!" but putting you on EIP for 24 months? Or can you not pay Sprint phones off right away/but them at full price?

 

[npaladin-2000]

Isn't that as bad as TMO saying "no contracts!" but putting you on EIP for 24 months? Or can you not pay Sprint phones off right away/but them at full price?

Not at all. That's not a service contract, it's a financing plan for a phone. It's completely separate, and completely optional (you can provide your own device, pay full price up front, or source it somewhere else instead).

 

[raino]

Not at all. That's not a service contract, it's a financing plan for a phone. It's completely separate, and completely optional (you can provide your own device, pay full price up front, or source it somewhere else instead).

So is Sprint requiring financing a phone, versus BYOP/buying outright? Or are they requiring a service contract despite payments on the phone?

 

[zhris]

This is (in my opinion) an inevitability, but I think the announcement is a bit premature. Yes, Legere can say "We're No. 3!" with a huge asterisk behind it that say "as long as you look at the numbers in this specific way", but I think it would have been better to wait until it was an across the board, no denying, honest to goodness lead.

 

[raino]

That's not a contract. Sprint requires you to sign 2 year contract and EIP payment. I have my own s4 on tmobile, it has no EIP payment and I can go anytime I want.

Lol that's what they're doing--instituting phone payments AND contracts?? That doesn't sound right, but if they are, they're either dumber than I thought, or better at disguising this ridiculous structure--if they're actually picking up postpaid customers.

 

[recDNA]

2 flies fighting over a crumb while ensnared in big red's web.

 

[GreenghostUvln]

Big red sucks in my area lol.

Sent from my T-Mobile Nexus 4 LTE using Tapatalk

 

[Shilohcane]

They aren't 3rd place yet ? 55 million < 55.9 million last time I remembered . And how would t-mobile know 1.7 million of their ( sprint ) subs are inactive ? They are sprint ? They are 4th place until they have more then 55.9 million


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

T-Mobile knows about it since Sprint's financial filings with the Securities Exchange Commission that counts 1.7 million customers through resale partners that have been inactive "for at least six months." The other 3 do not use this type of measurement, so it's safe to say T-Mobile is number 3. Sprint, however, maintained that it has used this accounting method for years, following a policy to not remove a customer from its records until its resale partner officially notifies the company. Sprint declined to comment further on T-Mobile's comments.


CNET sure thinks that T-Mobile passed Sprint for Subscribers.

The answer is a little complicated, but T-Mobile will almost certainly officially eclipse Sprint in the current quarter.