Database Users

The Sky Is Falling, The Sky Is Falling!!!

At&t did not buy T-Mobile today. At&t announced its INTENTION to buy T-Mobile. This sort of thing is subject to regulatory approval and could take YEARS to approve, if ever. My guess is that its a move to inflate at&T's stock price because I don't think this aquisition would ever withstand anti-trust examination. Not to mention that everyone from Verizon to Sprint to Cricket will file injunctions to block this deal on exactly those grounds tomorrow. Relax.

LMAO at the thread title
Thanks Mr. Voiceofreason

austontatious said:
At&t did not buy T-Mobile today. At&t announced its INTENTION to buy T-Mobile. This sort of thing is subject to regulatory approval and could take YEARS to approve, if ever. My guess is that its a move to inflate at&T's stock price because I don't think this aquisition would ever withstand anti-trust examination. Not to mention that everyone from Verizon to Sprint to Cricket will file injunctions to block this deal on exactly those grounds tomorrow. Relax.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Usually the company buying the other company's stock goes down.
ATT has made wise decisions to establish their position. Their betting on the Iphone was a solid winner and now that the cash cow is being milked by others ATT looks to continue growing through this acquisition.
This deal will go through and then Verizon will buy Sprint. Sucks, but it makes sense for these mega companies. It will suck for the consumer.

Your theory does hold merit except you're overlooking one MASSIVE detail. The negotiation terms.
'In the event of the deal failing to receive regulatory approval, AT&T will be on the hook for $3 billion to T-Mobile -- a breakup fee, they call it -- along with transferring over some AWS spectrum it doesn't need for its LTE rollout, and granting T-Mo a roaming agreement at a value agreeable to both parties.'
I don't think AT&T wants to fork over $3 billion and part of it's spectrum for a ploy.

austontatious said:
At&t did not buy T-Mobile today. At&t announced its INTENTION to buy T-Mobile. This sort of thing is subject to regulatory approval and could take YEARS to approve, if ever. My guess is that its a move to inflate at&T's stock price because I don't think this aquisition would ever withstand anti-trust examination. Not to mention that everyone from Verizon to Sprint to Cricket will file injunctions to block this deal on exactly those grounds tomorrow. Relax.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think on closer examination, you're a bit off-base.
One of the overlooked elements in this story is that AT&T has agreed to pay TMo/DT US$3 billion along with giving TMo very favorable roaming agreements, if this deal doesn't go thru. Trust me, AT&T fully expects this deal to survive scrutiny. Yeah, they'll have to make some sort of concessions, maybe even sell or give up some spectrum, and maybe agree to keep prices at a certain level for a period of time, for example, but they fully expect to be the owner of a certified preowned cellular 'net with about 34 million subs, in about 12 months.

brook**** said:
Usually the company buying the other company's stock goes down.
ATT has made wise decisions to establish their position. Their betting on the Iphone was a solid winner and now that the cash cow is being milked by others ATT looks to continue growing through this acquisition.
This deal will go through and then Verizon will buy Sprint. Sucks, but it makes sense for these mega companies. It will suck for the consumer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree completly with bed red picking up sprint, especially if sprint goes lte, if sprint stays wimax then there is a chance for them to maintain their independance, but they need to start making money
The at&t mobil deal will go through, since verizion probably covers the same markets
Remember when big red bought altel, they had to sell the towers in areas, verizion already had towers, and there were no other towers, there was such a small number of markets affected I think like 10 or so
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Do some homework - bell was broken up in 1984 because they were too big. Do you think the SEC is going to just give a do-over? And that $3B is about AT&TS operating budget for a fiscal quarter. If their stock price goes up 1/10th of a percent they will make that back. The purchasing company only loses stock value if they don't meet financial forecasts AFTER the buy. The information that AT&T will double its spectrum is almost guaranteed to raise their stock. Watch the ticker tomorrow. If ATT doesn't skyrocket when the bell rings ill be shocked. And it isn't a permanent thing. This would basically allow AT&T to borrow the money to improve their network from the market - INTEREST FREE. And Verizon will never buy Sprint. The biggest mobile company in America can't buy one of the other biggest companies in America. Never happen.

Regardless, only time will tell. My point is that this isn't a done deal. It will have to survive legal challenges from any number of government and private entities. I don't think it will happen, YMMV. And there is no way it will go through in 12 months. You can't buy a baskin Robbins in 12 months. So just relax.

austontatious said:
Do some homework - bell was broken up in 1984 because they were too big. Do you think the SEC is going to just give a do-over? And that $3B is about AT&TS operating budget for a fiscal quarter. If their stock price goes up 1/10th of a percent they will make that back. The purchasing company only loses stock value if they don't meet financial forecasts AFTER the buy. The information that AT&T will double its spectrum is almost guaranteed to raise their stock. Watch the ticker tomorrow. If ATT doesn't skyrocket when the bell rings ill be shocked. And it isn't a permanent thing. This would basically allow AT&T to borrow the money to improve their network from the market - INTEREST FREE. And Verizon will never buy Sprint. The biggest mobile company in America can't buy one of the other biggest companies in America. Never happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was 1984. Completely different regulatory environment today.
When's the last time the SEC or DOJ blocked a big telecom merger? Didn't happen when SBC bought then-Ameritech; not when Bell Atlantic/Verizon bought Alltel. Didn't happen when SBC and the old AT&T merged. Didn't happen when Comcast snatched up NBC/U recently, and Comcast is hated coast-to-coast.
And you can bet real $$$ that the regulators aren't going to block this one, today. They'll eke out concessions, and then the only question remaining will be "what color will the new logo for the successor company, be?"

austontatious said:
Do some homework - bell was broken up in 1984 because they were too big. Do you think the SEC is going to just give a do-over? And that $3B is about AT&TS operating budget for a fiscal quarter. If their stock price goes up 1/10th of a percent they will make that back. The purchasing company only loses stock value if they don't meet financial forecasts AFTER the buy. The information that AT&T will double its spectrum is almost guaranteed to raise their stock. Watch the ticker tomorrow. If ATT doesn't skyrocket when the bell rings ill be shocked. And it isn't a permanent thing. This would basically allow AT&T to borrow the money to improve their network from the market - INTEREST FREE. And Verizon will never buy Sprint. The biggest mobile company in America can't buy one of the other biggest companies in America. Never happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Finally an intelligent comment. I'll scream corruption if this deal falls through.

TonyArmstrong said:
That was 1984. Completely different regulatory environment today.
When's the last time the SEC or DOJ blocked a big telecom merger? Didn't happen when SBC bought then-Ameritech; not when Bell Atlantic/Verizon bought Alltel. Didn't happen when SBC and the old AT&T merged. Didn't happen when Comcast snatched up NBC/U recently, and Comcast is hated coast-to-coast.
And you can bet real $$$ that the regulators aren't going to block this one, today. They'll eke out concessions, and then the only question remaining will be "what color will the new logo for the successor company, be?"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
VZW was forced to give AT&T some of Alltel subscribers. I believe that was the FTC's doing.

Correct me if I am wrong but in 84 ma bell owned most if not all phone lines, thus had total control over every phone. Vzw owns towers, and att owns towers, sprint owns towers, att would not be able to own all towers, and have complete control over wireless signal.
The funny thing is all the fiber back bone to the towers is probably owned by at&t
Sent from my Evo using the XDA app

gqstatus0685 said:
VZW was forced to give AT&T some of Alltel subscribers. I believe that was the FTC's doing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the deal still went through. That's my point. The FTC, Justice, SEC all might have some requirements -- and yes the combined company might have to shed some subscribers. But not anywhere near what makes a real difference.
At the end of the day, right now, I put the chances of this deal not going to closing at way less than 1 in 10.

I think it will go through because AT&T has deep pockets. If it doesn't fall through they'll have to cough up money among other things. They are fairly confident that it'll go through. I work for AT&T by the way and have read many communications about this today.

If this merger can't go through, then all the Ticketmaster monopoly acquisitions shouldn't have either. That didn't stop anyone from declaring it illegal. As long as the buyers have deep pockets (which AT&T does) and "buy" out the people who decide these things, anything could happen. Companies can get away with anything as long as they butter up the right people.

*coughs* called it.

zomg! did some one say the sky is falling?

Leaked document kills AT&T/T-Mobile case

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Leaked-ATT-Letter-Demolishes-Case-For-TMobile-Merger-115652
Yesterday a partially-redacted document briefly appeared on the FCC website --accidentally posted by a law firm working for AT&T on the $39 billion T-Mobile deal (somewhere there's a paralegal looking for work today). While AT&T engaged in damage control telling reporters that the document contained no new information -- our review of the doc shows that's simply not true. Data in the letter undermines AT&T's primary justification for the massive deal, while highlighting how AT&T is willing to pay a huge premium simply to reduce competition and keep T-Mobile out of Sprint's hands.
We've previously discussed how AT&T's claims of job gains and network investment gained by the deal aren't true, with overall network investment actually being reduced with the elimination of T-Mobile. While AT&T and the CWA are busy telling regulators the deal will increase network investment by $8 billion, out of the other side of their mouth AT&T has been telling investors the deal will reduce investment by $10 billion over 6 years. Based on historical averages T-Mobile would have invested $18 billion during that time frame, which means an overall reduction in investment.
Yet to get the deal approved, AT&T's key talking point to regulators and the press has been the claim that they need T-Mobile to increase LTE network coverage from 80% to 97% of the population. Except it has grown increasingly clear that AT&T doesn't need T-Mobile to accomplish much of anything, and likely would have arrived at 97% simply to keep pace with Verizon. AT&T, who has fewer customers and more spectrum than Verizon (or any other company for that matter), has all the resources and spectrum they need for uniform LTE coverage without this deal.
For the first time the letter pegs the cost of bringing AT&T's LTE coverage from 80% to 97% at $3.8 billion -- quite a cost difference from the $39 billion price tag on the T-Mobile deal. The push for 97% coverage apparently came from AT&T marketing, who was well aware that leaving LTE investment at 80% would leave them at a competitive disadvantage to Verizon. Marketing likely didn't want a repeat of the Luke Wilson map fiasco of a few years back, when Verizon made AT&T look foolish for poor 3G coverage.
The letter also notes that AT&T's supposed decision to "not" build out LTE to 97% was cemented during the first week of January, yet public documents (pdf) indicate that at the same time AT&T was already considering buying T-Mobile, having proposed the deal to Deutsche Telekom on January 15. In the letter, AT&T tries to make it seem like the decision to hold off on that 17% LTE expansion was based on costs. Yet the fact the company was willing to shell out $39 billion one week later, combined with AT&T's track record with these kinds of tactics, suggests AT&T executives knew that 80-97% expansion promise would be a useful carrot on a stick for politicians.
While the $39 billion price certainly delivers AT&T customers, equipment, employees, and spectrum, most of T-Mobile's network replicates AT&T's existing resources in major markets, and T-Mobile's network is significantly less robust in rural markets where AT&T would want to expand. While the deal provides AT&T with a shortcut to sluggish tower builds in a few select markets, by and large AT&T will be faced with terminating many redundant positions and decommissioning a lot of duplicative equipment. They'll also have to close a large number of retail operations and independent retailers.
Again, the reality appears to be that AT&T is giving Deutsche Telekom $39 billion primarily to reduce market competition. That price tag eliminates T-Mobile entirely -- and makes Sprint (and by proxy new LTE partner LightSquared and current partner Clearwire) more susceptible to failure in the face of 80% AT&T/Verizon market domination. How much do you think wireless broadband market dominance is worth to AT&T over the next decade? After all, AT&T will be first to tell you there's a wireless data "tsunami" coming, with AT&T and Verizon on the shore eagerly billing users up to $10 per gigabyte.
Regardless of the motivation behind rejecting 97% LTE deployment, the letter proves AT&T's claim they need T-Mobile to improve LTE coverage from 80-97% simply isn't true. That's a huge problem for AT&T, since nearly every politician and non-profit that has voiced support for the merger did so based largely on this buildout promise. It's also a problem when it comes to the DOJ review, since proof that AT&T could complete their LTE build for far less than the cost of this deal means the deal doesn't meet the DOJ's standard for merger-specific benefits.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App

Wow I hope you're right and that this does throw a monkey wrench in the merger review... AT&T has notoriously wretched customer service & this is purely a power grab to squeeze out competition. These commercials about the merger being necessary to expand coverage to underserved populations looks like & smells like PR-spin BS. But, it seems like a lot of big players are coming out in favor of it... It'd be a great time to be an AT&T lobbyist right now.

interesting - but I think most of us were already aware of their false info since the get-go

TexasEpic4G said:
interesting - but I think most of us were already aware of their false info since the get-go
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe we knew, but not most people. I hope it gets denied so Sprint can merge and catch up to the big red and at&t.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App

Damn that's a lot of typing on an onscreen keyboard..
Edit: I see you just copied the article into the thread. Good info!

shane6374 said:
Damn that's a lot of typing on an onscreen keyboard..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest, I copy/pasted. But I could do it with my favorite, Swiftkey X keyboard.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App

The merger has big tech industry and political support. If it does happen, we need to look at what assets ATT/TMobile will have to divest to meet approval, and which assets Sprint can buy up.

son of a ***** my ATT stock is going to take a dive on monday

murso74 said:
son of a ***** my ATT stock is going to take a dive on monday
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd take a look at Sprint's stock if this merger is declined. lol

Overstew said:
I'd take a look at Sprint's stock if this merger is declined. lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm planning on grabbing handfuls of it on Monday anyway.

The Root said:
I'm planning on grabbing handfuls of it on Monday anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Makes me wish I had the money to get into stock trading. But I'm sure it doesn't help that I don't know much about it, haha

Sprint's balance sheet is much too bloated with debt and an uncertain 4G future. I would invest in reliable companies like Exxon Mobil, Microsoft, Ford, and Walmart.

I'm glad you posted this not for the info that we already knew but for the fact that this merger should go down in flames now

Reading this made me so happy. I will starting as a retail associate for tmo within the next few weeks (been trying for 3 years!) And I'm def happy about this. **** at&t this merger is horrible and is a completely legit try at market dominance. Sprint needs to pick up tmo, no matter what the outcome of the different tech and spectrum being used is. It would put all 3 companies neck to neck. And since sprint's prices are the **** big red and apples main brown nosers will be force to compete, instead of raping your wallet.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App

last thing sprint needs to do is integrate another new tech.

RushAOZ said:
Reading this made me so happy. I will starting as a retail associate for tmo within the next few weeks (been trying for 3 years!) And I'm def happy about this. **** at&t this merger is horrible and is a completely legit try at market dominance. Sprint needs to pick up tmo, no matter what the outcome of the different tech and spectrum being used is. It would put all 3 companies neck to neck. And since sprint's prices are the **** big red and apples main brown nosers will be force to compete, instead of raping your wallet.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
murso74 said:
last thing sprint needs to do is integrate another new tech.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's interesting to see both views on the subject. I'm all for Sprint grabbing T-Mobile. If another wireless carrier gets T-Mobile, Sprint will most likely go bankrupt and/or be bought out by another company instead. Sprint's options are to either buy or be bought. (At least that's my view of it).
Sprint's a great company that cares about it's customers, I just wish they were larger because they're the ones that have fair pricing.

Yeap. If I was Google Id pick up sprint and tmo... wasn't there talks about Google acquiring sprint or something. If Google owned its own network apple would be screwed
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App

RushAOZ said:
Yeap. If I was Google Id pick up sprint and tmo... wasn't there talks about Google acquiring sprint or something. If Google owned its own network apple would be screwed
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.businessinsider.com/sprint-verizon-comcast-google-2011-3
Verizon stated they wouldn't buy Sprint, they're in too much debt (that link I cannot find), however, it was interesting that Comcast might buy Sprint. Then again, same thing. Sprint's too much in debt to be bought out right now. I'm very interested in seeing how this pans out.

Not to mention Google just announced purchasing Motorola Mobile. Verizon carries the most Motorola Products so far so who knows what will happen. What I like is that Motorola also develops and provides set top boxes and cable modems for most cable operators so I think this can help Google bring more into the home tv and internet service area.

that's it... google buys sprint, the att tomobile deal goes through... we have a 3 way race. google undercuts everyones prices, and everyone benifits!
and by everyone i mean me

[Q] Leaving Sprint

Hello,
For starters, my apologies if this has been asked before. I took a quick look at the "similar threads" but none seemed to hit this angle.
I signed a two-year contract with Sprint last June. I bought the EVO 4G (thus my post on this particular forum) and paid $299 for it (forgot to mail in the rebate - my fault.) I live in Tulsa, OK, and we weren't on the list of cities with 4G at the time, but Sprint was rapidly expanding its "the nation's first 4G network" and I wanted to be a part of that. Plus I'd come from AT&T and an iPhone 3G, and I'd had enough of Apple.
Anyway, searches on Sprint's site regarding WiMax coming to Tulsa always resulted in a "give us your e-mail address and we'll let you know!" page. So I gave them my e-mail address, lived with Sprint's just-ok 3G speeds combined with spotty reception, and I waited. Don't-bother-trying-to-stream-music-in-the-car-or-use-data-at-some-intersections spotty. Often couldn't send a text message from my one-level, ground floor office full of windows in the middle of town, spotty. It'd be worth it when they flipped on that WiMax switch.
Well, fast forward 15 months, and I've put in my e-mail address about a dozen times. Verizon's LTE network has been live here for months. AT&T's faux-G HSPA+ is available here. Hell, T-Mobile's is even live here according to their website, though I don't know anyone on T-Mobile. Still, I've waited.
Recently I read that Sprint's future direction is LTE-Advanced. That sounds lovely, but I've read that WiMax will "continue to be supported for several more years due to the contract with Clearwire." Sprint would be stupid to dump more money into the WiMax network, but where does that leave me? The customer who paid an ETF to jump on the "first 4G network" and buy the "iPhone killer running Android?" I don't have WiMax now and it's clear that I never will. My phone doesn't have an LTE radio so that does me no good. I bought a ticket to ride a train that never left the station.
/rant
For the record, I never voiced my reception complaints with Sprint. Always thought it'd get better. Lesson learned.
Anyway, the point of all this - in light of Sprint's announcement that they're moving forward with LTE-Advanced (and, one assumes, not dumping money into also building out WiMax) - do you think I'd have grounds to demand the ETF be waived? I almost feel like I've been subject to a bait-and-switch, except they just kept the bait and never gave me anything else.

Many people don't realize that the salespeople layered on a whole bunch of "4G will be here in a couple of months..." stories when peddling the EVO 4G around launch time....Especially with the $10 4G tax that came with it....(now a moot point since the 4G tax got relabeled a $10 "smartphone" tax).
I was told that Omaha was "next on the list", "eminent", "in the pre-roll out" phase, etc. etc. etc. It never happened.
I have been with Sprint for over 10 years....And in the space of the last year and a half, I have seen them go South BIG TIME....In more ways than I would like to elaborate here.
And "unlimited" is their last perk....Well guess what, unlimited 10-25kbps (downtown Omaha) is nothing to write home about folks.

sog1971 said:
Many people don't realize that the salespeople layered on a whole bunch of "4G will be here in a couple of months..." stories when peddling the EVO 4G around launch time....Especially with the $10 4G tax that came with it....(now a moot point since the 4G tax got relabeled a $10 "smartphone" tax).
I was told that Omaha was "next on the list", "eminent", "in the pre-roll out" phase, etc. etc. etc. It never happened.
I have been with Sprint for over 10 years....And in the space of the last year and a half, I have seen them go South BIG TIME....In more ways than I would like to elaborate here.
And "unlimited" is their last perk....Well guess what, unlimited 10-25kbps (downtown Omaha) is nothing to write home about folks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium

MLPosey27 said:
Hello,
Anyway, the point of all this - in light of Sprint's announcement that they're moving forward with LTE-Advanced (and, one assumes, not dumping money into also building out WiMax) - do you think I'd have grounds to demand the ETF be waived? I almost feel like I've been subject to a bait-and-switch, except they just kept the bait and never gave me anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In short you wont be able to pull this. 4G is considered a feature... as long as you have regular service Sprint is doing its part on the contract... now if the calls drop like crazy and you dont get any signal you might have a way out..
revol.epic said:
i like your theory. However Sprint will say in fact you do have access to 4g wimax if you go to any city that has wimax like denver, colorado. They may also point out that you knew when you bought the phone that you did not have 4g and that unless their was in writing in your contract that 4g wimax service would be available by a certain date then you may not have a leg to stand on. You can try to start a class action suit and see what happens....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CAS are completely and utterly useless. The only ones who benefit from these are the lawyers who get paid in the thousands or even millions while the ppl they represent not only get a rate hike (hey someone has to foot the bill for the amount the company paid to the lawyers or did you think the stockholders would be happy to know their money was used to pay off the suit?) but they get a measly coupon for like 10% off any accessory or a $2 credit and no noticeable change to the terms they were trying to fight against.
If you really want to make a difference all you need is to get out of Sprint either by paying the ETF or waiting patiently for another 'considerable' change to the contract's terms as they seem to pop every 6 months or so and spread the word...

I know. I, along with thousands, if not millions are in this sanger boat as you. Got mine Nov 2010. Was promised 4g by march, nothing. Then it was july, nothing. Then end of summer, nothing. I had about written it off then I heard about the lte network. So I won't have 4g for maybe another year. Eh, whatever. We can ***** all we want, its not going to make things happen any faster. Would be great if 3g was as fast as it used to be to make the wait easier. Its either wait it out or go pay out the ass for verizon or att, neither of which are worth the price IMO, especially att. Guess I'll just wait like everyone else.
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

You may want to try this. You can use it to get better signal if you are in an area with ishtty sprint coverage OR use it to get kicked outta your contract if that's what you're looking for

revol.epic said:
You can try to start a class action suit and see what happens....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, actually you can't. Read Sprint's terms and conditions. Specifically, the section regarding dispute resolution.
http://shop2.sprint.com/en/legal/legal_terms_privacy_popup.shtml
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

I thought I remembered reading an email from Sprint that basically let you out of your contract with ETF's since they changed the terms of the contract. Might just call and ask.

snowboarda42 said:
I thought I remembered reading an email from Sprint that basically let you out of your contract with ETF's since they changed the terms of the contract. Might just call and ask.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, if they change the terms of your contract you get the opportunity to get out with no ETF. I don't think they have changed any contract terms recently though.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

MLPosey27 said:
Hello,
For starters, my apologies if this has been asked before. I took a quick look at the "similar threads" but none seemed to hit this angle.
I signed a two-year contract with Sprint last June. I bought the EVO 4G (thus my post on this particular forum) and paid $299 for it (forgot to mail in the rebate - my fault.) I live in Tulsa, OK, and we weren't on the list of cities with 4G at the time, but Sprint was rapidly expanding its "the nation's first 4G network" and I wanted to be a part of that. Plus I'd come from AT&T and an iPhone 3G, and I'd had enough of Apple.
Anyway, searches on Sprint's site regarding WiMax coming to Tulsa always resulted in a "give us your e-mail address and we'll let you know!" page. So I gave them my e-mail address, lived with Sprint's just-ok 3G speeds combined with spotty reception, and I waited. Don't-bother-trying-to-stream-music-in-the-car-or-use-data-at-some-intersections spotty. Often couldn't send a text message from my one-level, ground floor office full of windows in the middle of town, spotty. It'd be worth it when they flipped on that WiMax switch.
Well, fast forward 15 months, and I've put in my e-mail address about a dozen times. Verizon's LTE network has been live here for months. AT&T's faux-G HSPA+ is available here. Hell, T-Mobile's is even live here according to their website, though I don't know anyone on T-Mobile. Still, I've waited.
Recently I read that Sprint's future direction is LTE-Advanced. That sounds lovely, but I've read that WiMax will "continue to be supported for several more years due to the contract with Clearwire." Sprint would be stupid to dump more money into the WiMax network, but where does that leave me? The customer who paid an ETF to jump on the "first 4G network" and buy the "iPhone killer running Android?" I don't have WiMax now and it's clear that I never will. My phone doesn't have an LTE radio so that does me no good. I bought a ticket to ride a train that never left the station.
/rant
For the record, I never voiced my reception complaints with Sprint. Always thought it'd get better. Lesson learned.
Anyway, the point of all this - in light of Sprint's announcement that they're moving forward with LTE-Advanced (and, one assumes, not dumping money into also building out WiMax) - do you think I'd have grounds to demand the ETF be waived? I almost feel like I've been subject to a bait-and-switch, except they just kept the bait and never gave me anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well if you want to opt out of the contract you should try the PRL mod it lets you roam on verizons towers and sprint wont like that and will cancel ur contract if you dont mind.
Or just wait for LightSquared LTE its gonna be the best of all .
Heres some videos to keep your hopes up. which should be up by mid 2012.
http://youtu.be/NbZVmsm09R4
http://youtu.be/gdbGpul7QAA

sog1971 said:
And "unlimited" is their last perk....Well guess what, unlimited 10-25kbps (downtown Omaha) is nothing to write home about folks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just talked to Sprint about lousy 3g speeds here in Kansas City Missouri. My contract is done in February, and so am I. Verizon here I come.
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

I am pretty disgusted with Sprint as well. I live in Omaha, NE. I have a 4G signal about 2 miles from my apartment but they won't flip the switch to allow the whole city to have it. Verizon has had 4G LTE in Lincoln and Omaha since September. This is beyond unacceptable, its retarded. It amazes me that they want to alienate their small customer base in the Midwest, especially since they are based out of Overland Park, KS. Since they decided to spend money on Apple and the iPhone instead of carry through with their promise of WiMax in 2011, I hope they are bought out by Verizon or that they go bankrupt. I have terrible data speeds and I am flat out sick of Sprint's lying.

You might have to pay more for att or Verizon but I rather pay for better service then deal with sprints lousy service I'm done. I would pay only $10.00 more with att so not breaking the bank.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Go to t-mobile I live in a small city and look at my speeds on there HSPA +
BTW im on there $30 plans go on their wesite and check it out
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk

Will it take 2 more years for Sprint to bring their new LTE to most of the country?

Just wanted to let you guys know I called sprint and got the $10 data charge waived for one month due to slow data speeds. I had them look at my data usage over the last couple months and told them the drop was due to slow speeds.
Sent form EVO using taptalk!!!

MLPosey27 said:
[...] they just kept the bait and never gave me anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ this
This has me so mad @ Sprint. When my contract is up this spring, I'm not sure if I'll be staying with Sprint.

MLPosey27 said:
Anyway, the point of all this - in light of Sprint's announcement that they're moving forward with LTE-Advanced (and, one assumes, not dumping money into also building out WiMax) - do you think I'd have grounds to demand the ETF be waived? I almost feel like I've been subject to a bait-and-switch, except they just kept the bait and never gave me anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I'm in your precise situation and it's why I'm doing everything I can to rape their network until I'm dropped. Check out that "hack the htc evo" thread. They did not represent themselves honestly.

I'm about 3 hours north of Sprint's 4G here in Ohio. I signed on because they said that in about 6 months (from the time I signed) my area should be up and running. I should have paid attention to the "should be" part.

SharkUW said:
Nope, I'm in your precise situation and it's why I'm doing everything I can to rape their network until I'm dropped. Check out that "hack the htc evo" thread. They did not represent themselves honestly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you aren't happy with Sprint's service, why don't you just switch carriers? All you are doing is driving up costs for the rest of us.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

Anyone else hearing this?

http://www.ktla.com/business/sns-rt-us-sprint-4gtre7ao1o9-20111125,0,4531202.story
Sent from my MZ505 using Tapatalk

Doesnt surprise me. It will come sooner or later, always knew that.

Currently Sprint's 4G is run off a third party network and the same can be said for the majority of the new 4G LTE rolling out. So Sprint's actual network will remain relatively unchanged aside from some faster 3G speeds after the upgrades.
People speculated the iPhone would cripple Sprint's network on data but when the majority of Sprint's iPhones users switched from Android the network usage stayed basically the same. Thats where AT&T screwed and lied to the customers saying the excessive use of the iPhone was the reason for the tiered plans.
Data use is data use regardless of iPhone or Android.

I don't think its gonna happen any time in the next 12 - 18 months, Dan is still putting out new commercials bragging about unlimited, its sprints only real advantage over the competition, and just because some "analyst" who doesn't even work for Sprint thinks its gonna happen doesn't mean spit. Especially using switching to LTE as his justification, they didn't drop it when they added wimax why would the drop it because of LTE? Makes no real sense, if they went tiered they'd be shooting their own foot off, how many people would stay if they lost the only reason most of us are on Sprint? I think the person who wrote that article must be mad he signed with Verizon last year for unlimited data and big red shoved it up his ass this summer *shrugs*
Sent from my -EViLizED-EVO-

-EViL-KoNCEPTz- said:
I think the person who wrote that article must be mad he signed with Verizon last year for unlimited data and big red shoved it up his ass this summer *shrugs*
Sent from my -EViLizED-EVO-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That made my night, i almost spit my drink onto my laptop from laughing.
I fully expect sprint to eventually end unlimited data, hopefully I can get
grandfathered in on a somewhat future-proof phone before that time. If not,
let the chips fall where they may, because we can't control their decisions,
except with our wallets..and large corporations rarely listen to the paying
customer 'till they get desperate. I'm still contemplating switching to a prepay,
if I can find one with a decent phone, or find one that lets me take my existing
devices with me. Besides, killing iDen, and using that spectrum, plus offloading
some of LTE onto Clearwire's bandwidth will help a little. I don't see Clearwire
complaining a whole lot over the deal, since that means Sprint has no choice
but to keep them afloat in a worst case scenario.

TBH big red really effed my mom a few months back, they set her up with a new plan claiming it would reduce her bill buy 75 a month, her bill was about 275 at that time. Since then her bill has been 400 a month every month and they refuse to fix it. They also sold her devices that were incompatible with her plan and refused to allow her to return them. She's actually contemplating suing them for fraudulent sales practices, its been a nightmare and she's been a customer with them since 1995 pretty ridiculous practices to screw the customer if u ask me
Sent from my Classic-EViLizED-ToMAToFiED-EVo4g-

it's all about marketing and money....
let's see what's happened over time.
1. smartphones come out advertising about how you can use your phone to watch videos and all kinds of other data intensive uses.
2. all the carriers offer unlimited data plans because of all these cool things you can do with them.. no one would have bought them in the first place if they knew they would be metered
3. their networks start to suffer from all the subscribers they've successfully marketed to buy these phones that do all this cool stuff
4. after everyone's bought a smartphone, suddenly the carriers drop the unlimited plans and start charging high prices for small amounts of data, but continue to market you watching videos, making video calls and streaming all this crap.
5. sprint comes out with a novel idea, it starts charging $10 extra just to own a smartphone.. it's reasoning... it can be used to watch videos and other things that suck up data. The very things that all the carriers have been advertising on why you should get a smartphone in the first place.
When you look back, it really sucks the big one. They come out with smartphones and tell everyone all the great things it can do, thus getting millions of people to buy a smartphone. Go crazy everyone, after all, the plans are unlimited, see how cool smartphones are?
Once everyone's bought a phone.. NOW it's time to start cutting everything back that they used to get you to buy the phone in the first place.
It just pisses me off. It's the ole bait and switch. Hey everyone.. check out these cool phones! Look at all these things you can do with them. They market the phones encourgaing you to do all the things that suck up lots of data. Now they've sold everyone a phone, now it's the ole... "I'm sorry, all these people are using their phones doing the things we marketed them to for, but because you're using them that way, we just don't have any bandwidth anymore, so we're going to start charging you by the gig now. And Sprint says.. "hey, we're going to charge you a extra $10 buck a month, just because your phone can do all these wonderful things. Which is why you bought it in the first place
Classic

ItsLasher said:
Currently Sprint's 4G is run off a third party network and the same can be said for the majority of the new 4G LTE rolling out. So Sprint's actual network will remain relatively unchanged aside from some faster 3G speeds after the upgrades.
People speculated the iPhone would cripple Sprint's network on data but when the majority of Sprint's iPhones users switched from Android the network usage stayed basically the same. Thats where AT&T screwed and lied to the customers saying the excessive use of the iPhone was the reason for the tiered plans.
Data use is data use regardless of iPhone or Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree 100% ItsLasher.. When ATT changed midway through my contract and tried to screw me with their new pricing/tiers I told them they could shove it over principle. Cancelled my landline (home phone) prior to that over high costs and fees for just local service.
Seems like there is always an excuse for higher prices and tiers.. some kind of .. Its for the children will be next excuse.. LOL
It didnt take a rocket scientist to see how badly ATT was getting ready to screw folks so I sold both iphone 3s, paid early termination to ATT and went to Sprint for 2 EVOs. Best move I have made.. knock on wood.

Read Carefully
The article was written from the standpoint of the analyst. The writer gives all the bad and dramatic news first, which is from the opinion of the analyst. Then proceeds to wedge in one or two comments from Sprint. I can't quote statistics, but I will bet their customer base grew each time both Verizon and ATT changed their pricing policies. Being the third largest already, and the only provider left to offer unlimited, Sprint MUST know they can't change that. Their network isn't expansive enough.

Another thought occurred to me. Content providers must take notice of these changes. They should be tracking network traffic to know who is using the most bandwidth. I read that Netflix accounts for over 70% of cell network traffic. Even if the real figure is less, which it probably is, att and Verizon customers are telling their kids to wait until there is a Wi-Fi access point while Sprint kids are cruising with Netflix on every grocery run. I'd be willing to bet donuts to demographics there are more families with kids at Sprint too because of their pricing policy. If they change it the will lose every market advantage they have.
1n1tia|c0nt4ct snap bang pow...watch me now.

interloper said:
Another thought occurred to me. Content providers must take notice of these changes. They should be tracking network traffic to know who is using the most bandwidth. I read that Netflix accounts for over 70% of cell network traffic. Even if the real figure is less, which it probably is, att and Verizon customers are telling their kids to wait until there is a Wi-Fi access point while Sprint kids are cruising with Netflix on every grocery run. I'd be willing to bet donuts to demographics there are more families with kids at Sprint too because of their pricing policy. If they change it the will lose every market advantage they have.
1n1tia|c0nt4ct snap bang pow...watch me now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly my point, why would they get rid of their one selling point? It's like having one good hand and one gimped up hand and amputating the good hand thinking its gonna make the gimped one work better. Eliminating unlimited would probably end sprint for.good so many customers would run so far so fast it would more than likely bankrupt them.
Sent from my Classic-EViLizED-ToMAToFiED-EVo4g-

I totally agree, Sprint would severely be crippled if they got rid of the unlimited data plans. I would rather pay an extra 5 or 10 dollars a month but keep my unlimited data then be capped, as for most people they wouldn't want to pay more money, which I can understand as well. It is a double edged sword. Only time will tell, although where I live I don't get 4g service, so honestly I think Sprint should concentrate on getting 4g in more areas as opposed to upgrading to 4gLTE. That would stimulate more customers switching to Sprint. In my area Sprint is the only carrier without 4g service so a lot of my friends and coworkers use the other carriers. Whereas if Sprint had 4g I'm sure most of my friends would switch, because even tho they pay more with ATT, Verizon, and T-Mobile. Sprint doesn't have 4g here so all the phones they want really don't serve much of a purpose to them without 4g. I really don't care about 4g just like the price, plus get I discount thru my employer for Sprint

Rural Verizon users getting the boot for data overuse

http://gizmodo.com/verizon-is-booting-8-500-rural-customers-over-data-use-1818476496/amp,
Out where we are, there is no wifi, so we rely on the unlimited plans and tether. We do use a lot of data but the closest house to us is a half mile away. Been with Verizon over 20 years. My state is included in the list, so just waiting for the boot.
What are your thought's?

leroybrute said:
http://gizmodo.com/verizon-is-booting-8-500-rural-customers-over-data-use-1818476496/amp,
Out where we are, there is no wifi, so we rely on the unlimited plans and tether. We do use a lot of data but the closest house to us is a half mile away. Been with Verizon over 20 years. My state is included in the list, so just waiting for the boot.
What are your thought's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's no fun, but they're no charity. If it's costing them money then so be it. I think people often mistake carriers for governments. Carriers are private companies who have no requirement to provide charity data. That''s my thoughts.

The_Tech_Princess said:
Well, it's no fun, but they're no charity. If it's costing them money then so be it. I think people often mistake carriers for governments. Carriers are private companies who have no requirement to provide charity data. That''s my thoughts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I pay Verizon over 400 a month for unlimited data which was guaranteed to me more than 12 years ago so I don't see where they are a charity.
Appreciate your thoughts though.

leroybrute said:
I pay Verizon over 400 a month for unlimited data which was guaranteed to me more than 12 years ago so I don't see where they are a charity.
Appreciate your thoughts though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're saying it was guaranteed to you might be a little erroneous. The reality is, that carriers don't guarantee anything to anyone. They have clauses in their contracts to allow things such as this to occur, when they see fit. As such, I think that's a dangerous position for people to take. About the only thing guaranteed in this world are taxes and death. While the Constitution affords theoretical protections against various things even that's up to interpretation. You're correct, I was saying that they're absolutely not a charity. I think you just solidified my point. They're a profitable Corporation, and have no obligation to be nice or fair to anybody. That's not true of just Verizon that's true of every carrier or any private sector company.

The_Tech_Princess said:
I think you're saying it was guaranteed to you might be a little erroneous. The reality is, that carriers don't guarantee anything to anyone. They have clauses in their contracts to allow things such as this to occur, when they see fit. As such, I think that's a dangerous position for people to take. About the only thing guaranteed in this world are taxes and death. While the Constitution affords theoretical protections against various things even that's up to interpretation. You're correct, I was saying that they're absolutely not a charity. I think you just solidified my point. They're a profitable Corporation, and have no obligation to be nice or fair to anybody. That's not true of just Verizon that's true of every carrier or any private sector company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell me this, our closest neighbor is a half mile away and she is 84 hrs old. She used just under 12gb of data on an unlimited plan to watch Netflix and she got a notice as well as we did saying she overused and her speeds would be cut to 700 khz.
I understand what you are saying but it still doesn't make it right...

leroybrute said:
Tell me this, our closest neighbor is a half mile away and she is 84 hrs old. She used just under 12gb of data on an unlimited plan to watch Netflix and she got a notice as well as we did saying she overused and her speeds would be cut to 700 khz.
I understand what you are saying but it still doesn't make it right...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't disagree. It does suck.

The_Tech_Princess said:
Well, it's no fun, but they're no charity. If it's costing them money then so be it. I think people often mistake carriers for governments. Carriers are private companies who have no requirement to provide charity data. That''s my thoughts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahahahahahahaha OMG really? PLEASE tell me your not that naiive
http://www.verizon.com/about/file/22819/download?token=7m9zCDca
(Find their financial report here if the above doesn't work
http://www.verizon.com/about/invest...2017-quarter-earnings-conference-call-webcast)
Verizon reported 4.3B in INCOME in q2 2017. Let's just be clear here. That means they made four point three BILLION dollars in three months earlier this year. That's. INCOME mind you, revenue minus expenses. As in take it to the bank money* in case you slept through finance class.
4.3B every 3 months in profit and they need to stick it to rual working class people?
Oh, and also VZW is a Telecom provider, and is actually classified as a company that does hold monopoly control of a utility in certain locations (your landline or broadband services in some places go through them or subsidiaries of them) so they actually ARE a little bit like a government as they are regulated and beholden to fair customer treatment in areas of their business.
Using the charity strawman in response to a global Telecom company. Wow. That's all I can say on a board like XDA about that.
......
Yea nope.
* Yes I know that things come out of revenue and it's not pure profit but given that the comment indicated that giving a few thousand dollars would qualify VZW as a charity I simplified

If I would be a person living in a rural area, I would use Ubiquiti Loco M5 LAN bridges. Because one bridge works up to 5 miles and provide 100Mbit connection between two houses. Now, let's say only one person has internet in rural area, but using this bridge you can build your own network thru which you can share this person's one internet connection to as many houses as you like, as long as distance between them is less than 5 miles in open field. It is kinda illegal, because usually internet providers have a clause in a contract about "no reselling services", but as long as you not making money on it, and nobody knows, it is OK. Just a hint

After reading the article looks like it is for roaming not using their data. These are people that are not in Verizon main service area most of the time they are outside the Verizon service area and roam onto other networks which does cost them money!

The_Tech_Princess said:
I think you're saying it was guaranteed to you might be a little erroneous. The reality is, that carriers don't guarantee anything to anyone. They have clauses in their contracts to allow things such as this to occur, when they see fit. As such, I think that's a dangerous position for people to take. About the only thing guaranteed in this world are taxes and death. While the Constitution affords theoretical protections against various things even that's up to interpretation. You're correct, I was saying that they're absolutely not a charity. I think you just solidified my point. They're a profitable Corporation, and have no obligation to be nice or fair to anybody. That's not true of just Verizon that's true of every carrier or any private sector company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will second the guarantee about taxes and death...:good::good::good:

leroybrute said:
http://gizmodo.com/verizon-is-booting-8-500-rural-customers-over-data-use-1818476496/amp,
Out where we are, there is no wifi, so we rely on the unlimited plans and tether. We do use a lot of data but the closest house to us is a half mile away. Been with Verizon over 20 years. My state is included in the list, so just waiting for the boot.
What are your thought's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For $400 a month, you could easily switch to satellite (Hughes net) and save money.
Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk

JSnively said:
After reading the article looks like it is for roaming not using their data. These are people that are not in Verizon main service area most of the time they are outside the Verizon service area and roam onto other networks which does cost them money!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good point! It is in their contract info that you have to use the majority of your data while on their network or something like this could happen.
Not saying it doesn't suck but maybe I'd figure out who is providing cell signal in the area, the actual provider and start talking to them.

I've been looking to upgrade my phone on gudp, I use an old lg G3 and last month I did about 500GB worth of data. Do any are you guys still have unlimited with your S8 and haven't been disconnected? They don't even offer the older sub upgrade prices for phones anymore and gudp went up, which fine I ported out other lines to total wireless and get the same network for way less. The irony is My VZW speeds are double to triple the speed on my wired connection which has a hidden data limit.