T-Mobile + Sprint/Nextel

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...xtel.html?.v=2

what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers ?

--
----------------------------------
"If everything seems to be going well,
you have obviously overlooked something." - Steven Wright

"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
following in news:1tPTj.14392$V14.9877@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:

> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...xtel.html?.v=2
>
> what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers ?
>

Simple- Sprint ignored the brand and waited to work on the network until it
was too late.

On Mon, 05 May 2008 22:05:02 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:

>"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
>following in news:1tPTj.14392$V14.9877@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...xtel.html?.v=2
>>
>> what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers ?
>>
>
>Simple- Sprint ignored the brand and waited to work on the network until it
>was too late.

Nevertheless, I don't see how the technology hurdles that would have
to be overcome make this deal workable. While it's true Sprint did
ignore the brand and/or manage the integration somewhat poorly, I
think a large part of that is because integrating two carriers using
completely different technologies and business models is quite tough
no matter who tries it.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Cyrus Afzali <pnsmnyv@lnubb.pbz> amazed us all with the following in
news:s6lv14dm45ij8liu8j2mu9tlm8bsclpc2c@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 05 May 2008 22:05:02 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>
>>"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
>>following in news:1tPTj.14392$V14.9877@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
>>
>>> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...nextel.html?.v
>>> =2
>>>
>>> what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers ?
>>>
>>
>>Simple- Sprint ignored the brand and waited to work on the network
>>until it was too late.
>
> Nevertheless, I don't see how the technology hurdles that would have
> to be overcome make this deal workable. While it's true Sprint did
> ignore the brand and/or manage the integration somewhat poorly, I
> think a large part of that is because integrating two carriers using
> completely different technologies and business models is quite tough
> no matter who tries it.
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>

Agree 100% and it makes me wonder what magic pill T-Mo has to cure
it.CDMA/GSM makes no more sense than CDMA/iDen.

The Bob wrote:
> Cyrus Afzali <pnsmnyv@lnubb.pbz> amazed us all with the following in
> news:s6lv14dm45ij8liu8j2mu9tlm8bsclpc2c@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 05 May 2008 22:05:02 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
>>> following in news:1tPTj.14392$V14.9877@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
>>>
>>>> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...nextel.html?.v
>>>> =2
>>>>
>>>> what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Simple- Sprint ignored the brand and waited to work on the network
>>> until it was too late.
>>
>> Nevertheless, I don't see how the technology hurdles that would have
>> to be overcome make this deal workable. While it's true Sprint did
>> ignore the brand and/or manage the integration somewhat poorly, I
>> think a large part of that is because integrating two carriers using
>> completely different technologies and business models is quite tough
>> no matter who tries it.
>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>>
>
> Agree 100% and it makes me wonder what magic pill T-Mo has to cure
> it.CDMA/GSM makes no more sense than CDMA/iDen.

I think the article pretty much said the same thing.
See how the market reacts, and then take a breath and decide.

What about the same type of different merging of networks
with ATT and Cingular - the old GSM vs TDMA battle ?

"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
following in news:o8RTj.14406$V14.7868@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:

> The Bob wrote:
>> Cyrus Afzali <pnsmnyv@lnubb.pbz> amazed us all with the following in
>> news:s6lv14dm45ij8liu8j2mu9tlm8bsclpc2c@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 05 May 2008 22:05:02 -0500, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> amazed us all with the
>>>> following in news:1tPTj.14392$V14.9877@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
>>>>
>>>>> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080505/deuts...nextel.html?.v
>>>>> =2
>>>>>
>>>>> what's the problem with Nextel, and why are they loosing customers
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simple- Sprint ignored the brand and waited to work on the network
>>>> until it was too late.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, I don't see how the technology hurdles that would have
>>> to be overcome make this deal workable. While it's true Sprint did
>>> ignore the brand and/or manage the integration somewhat poorly, I
>>> think a large part of that is because integrating two carriers using
>>> completely different technologies and business models is quite tough
>>> no matter who tries it.
>>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>>>
>>
>> Agree 100% and it makes me wonder what magic pill T-Mo has to cure
>> it.CDMA/GSM makes no more sense than CDMA/iDen.
>
> I think the article pretty much said the same thing.
> See how the market reacts, and then take a breath and decide.
>
> What about the same type of different merging of networks
> with ATT and Cingular - the old GSM vs TDMA battle ?
>
>
>

GSM was the next evolutionary step for TDMA in the US. IIRC, ATT has
started the GSM conversion prior to the merger.

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
On 2008-05-06, The Bob <nospam@bob.com> wrote:

> Agree 100% and it makes me wonder what magic pill T-Mo has to cure
> it.CDMA/GSM makes no more sense than CDMA/iDen.

Agree 100%, and am concerned that after leaving post-merger Sprint due
to budget cuts that adversely affected Customer Service, I'll have to
do the same thing with T-Mo. The only other option here is
AT&T/Cingular; there is no way in hell Verizon will be getting my
business back.

--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol

At 05 May 2008 23:25:34 -0500 The Bob wrote:

> Agree 100% and it makes me wonder what magic pill T-Mo has to cure
> it.CDMA/GSM makes no more sense than CDMA/iDen.


True, but this might simply be a spectrum grab. Sprint is bleeding
customers, so given the churn rate, the customer base itself isn't really
worth much- T-Mo would really just be buying licenses, infrastructure, and
headaches!

(The old) AT&T and Cingular certainly had some hurdles converting their
TDMA networks to GSM, but they managed to pull it off in the long run. T-
Mo might be thinking that adding Sprint's spectrum (if you'll pardon the
pun!) is worth the pain of migrating one technology to the other. Like
with the GAIT and GSM/TDMA handsets offered by Cingular and AT&T during the
transition, a few GSM/CDMA combo handsets (like the "world" Blackberries
and Global Q Sprint and Verizon offer now, but reworked to use American GSM
as well) could ease the transition to whatever technology (most likely GSM,
to leverage their international networks) T-Mo settles on, and give
customers instant access to both networks without waiting for any conversion.


It wouldn't be easy, or pretty, to pull off, but no one besides T-Mo (or
maybe Alltel) is really capable of acquiring Sprint- with the recent 700
MHz auctions, both AT&T and Verizon are close to, at, (or over) the 95 MHz
spectrum "soft cap" in many markets, and couldn't acquire Sprint without
some serious divestiture (most likely to T-Mo anyway!)

At 05 May 2008 23:42:15 -0500 The Bob wrote:

> > What about the same type of different merging of networks
> > with ATT and Cingular - the old GSM vs TDMA battle ?
>
>
> GSM was the next evolutionary step for TDMA in the US.

I'm not sure it was "evolutionary" as much as it was simply a cheaper
conversion to GSM than to CDMA, so they chose the path of least finacial
resistance!

> IIRC, ATT has
> started the GSM conversion prior to the merger.


Absolutely- both (old) AT&T and Cingular were converting from TDMA to GSM
prior to the merger. In fact, in the "history is repeating itself"
department, like Sprint and the Nextel merger, (old) AT&T had major
customer service and technical/billing issues with the transition, started
losing customers and offered fantastic deals to stem the hemorraging (like
Sprint with SERO?) and weakened to the point of becoming a takeover
candidate by Cingular.


Cingular had their share of issues with the conversion as well, but handled
it more smoothly by taking their time. ATTWS (old AT&T) seemed to rush the
transition- they forced new customers to choose GSM only before the GSM
network was fully built out, for example, and switched too much capacity
from TDMA to GSM before enough of the customer base had switched,
deteriorating the network the bulk of their customers used. Even worse,
they only offered a single TDMA/GSM phone, IIRC- an unattractive,
featureless Siemens.

By comparison, Cingular was very patient- allowing TDMA sales to continue
until the GSM network was at least a fair approximation of the TDMA
network, and offered two TDMA/GSM combo models, from major manufacturers:
Nokia and SE.

Todd Allcock wrote:
> I'm not sure it was "evolutionary" as much as it was simply a cheaper
> conversion to GSM

And fast. Each one of the three sectors was off the air for only
about an hour