7 ms·

I really hope this doesn't go through. T-Mobile has been great for me, and shed a lot of the anti-consumer policies of the other carriers. I'd hate to regress.

donflamenco 12y ago
From what I understand, if this goes through, T-mobile will be the surviving brand. The current CEO of T-Mobile will run the new company. I am a current T-mobile customer and anti-Sprint. I think this is a good move. This is more of a merger than a buyout.
- abrowne 12y ago
  As long as they stay pro-GSM and unlocked phones. And no matter what, it's way better than a purchase by Comcast!
  - aidenn0 12y ago
    I strongly suspect they will move to CDMA, as IIRC Sprint owns far more towers than t-mobile. On the other hand for LTE they should be compatible. [edit] As I said in another thread, my information for that is a few years old, so this may not be true anymore.
    - dsl 12y ago
      Sprint has more towers, but they effectively run three different networks on top of them, making it a terrible fragmented mess.
    - greg5green 12y ago
      More likely that they slowly decommission the CDMA network as both networks move towards being 100% LTE.
  - zanny 12y ago
    I miss Wimax.
- ulfw 12y ago
  With DT owning only 20% I doubt the brand would be T-Mobile. Most likely it would be Sprint branding and look n feel with largely T-Mo management. Will be interesting to see what happens to Bellevue as I suppose the combined co might be run from Overland Park.
  - jusben1369 12y ago
    Agreed. Sprint is by far the bigger brand in the US. Although if this was even 1 year later it might be more of a toss up as T-Mobile has done great things to enhance the markets perception of them.
    - ulfw 12y ago
      Well I'd argue that T-Mobile is clearly the 'preferred' brand in the market. Just kind of doubt it would make sense to brand it that way when T-Mo Intl only owns 15 or 20% of it. Who knows - maybe they come up with a new brand even (like EE for T-Mobile/Orange in the UK)
      - YokoZar 12y ago
        One of the nice assets you acquire when you merge is the option to use whichever brand will work best in front of consumers, no matter how small a player it actually is.
      - protomyth 12y ago
        "Well I'd argue that T-Mobile is clearly the 'preferred' brand in the market." Given the sponsorships and the lack of coverage in certain markets, Sprint is the higher profile brand.
      - jusben1369 12y ago
        I don't know why T-Mo Int % of ownership matters one way or the other. The BOD of the new combined company would say "Ok, which brand is better to go with?" The only way I can imagine T-Mo Intl having an impact is if they specifically wanted to forbid it being called that for their own brand reasons. That might include fear that the US will screw up and drag down their brand overall. Or they may want to try again here in 5 or 10 years and use T-Mobile then etc.
JoshTriplett 12y ago
If T-Mobile and Sprint can leverage this to create one more comprehensive LTE network (ignoring the CDMA bits from Sprint), that would greatly benefit T-Mobile customers. T-Mobile's biggest problem is coverage.
- pkulak 12y ago
  This. I loved T-Mobile but decided to bail since it didn't work between cities for me. T-Mobile's service with better coverage? Sign me up.
- myared 12y ago
  I hope this is true as a T-mobile subscriber. T-mobile is great in cities, but it's terrible when you leave. You can make a phone call, but there will no Internet. I just finished a cross country road trip, and if I were ever to do one again, I would get a Verizon phone for a month.
  - jonknee 12y ago
    I also just finished a cross country trip and Verizon would not be a bad way to go. I purposely got a Verizon flavored iPad so that I would have multiple networks (AT&T mobile phone) and between the two I usually had coverage. AT&T slipped back to 4G/3G/EDGE and even GPRS (!) much more than Verizon did. But having both was great.
  - mrinterweb 12y ago
    I was a Sprint customer for years. From my experience, their coverage was not a whole lot better than T-Mobile's. I'd also hate to see them switch their networks to be more CDMA centric. CDMA should go away IMO.
    - burnte 12y ago
      With LTE, CDMA is going away. Both Verizon and Sprint have committed to going with world-common standards rather than staying with CDMA, which is dead anyway.
wise_young_man 12y ago
As a Sprint customer, I hope it does go through. My internet speeds are pretty bad even after them upgrading the infrastructure here to LTE. I don't know how it will play out, but I think Sprint users could stand to benefit from T-Mobile. As a T-Mobile user though, I could see why you could be nervous if it went the opposite direction and both services went downhill. I think Sprint wants the band that T-Mobile has that they received in the AT&T fallout so my hopes are positive.
- maxsilver 12y ago
  This won't help your Sprint service get faster. Sprint is already sitting on tons of unused spectrum, and a larger subscriber base than T-Mobile. Nothing stops Sprint from fixing their own service. They just choose not to. And they choose to not fix their network, all across the nation in lots of areas. My fear is that Sprint's lack of care and lack of effort, will bleed into T-Mobile's network, and we'll be down to just two functional service providers in the US.
untog 12y ago
T-Mobile has been great for me too, but I'm not totally soured on this idea. Their coverage is bad, and this could help them in the future. They also never get good handset exclusives - if they were a larger company perhaps they might be able to compete better.
esbonsa 12y ago
I've had both carriers on different devices on a recent car trip across eastern USA and Sprint had much better coverage. Hopefully this would help T-Mobile.
jusben1369 12y ago
You really want it to happen. T-Mobile's CEO will lead the combined company. So more of what you love but now with the resources to fix the bad parts.
brownbat 12y ago
I feel like it could have benefits, but like you I lean pessimistic. I had a deeply discounted unlimited plan with Sprint (a couple family members worked there). I left when T-Mobile offered a lower price for unlimited web + text. The only people I know who use voice use OTT services for it anyway. On top of that, T-Mob offered BYOD, letting me run pure Android, without all of Sprint's then unremovable NFL, NASCAR, and Facebook apps. It beat Sprint's employee discount plan for me, and easily. My family members who work there were frustrated by the news. They mostly rationalized by bashing T-Mobile, claiming their prices were unsustainable, arguing it must be a risky, poorly run business. I think those prices are only unsustainable when you have a major carrier's assumptions. Assumptions about acceptable levels of overhead and expected levels of profit. I think Sprint did some really bold things in its history. It fought the good fight as MCI against an entrenched telecom monopoly, back when sentiment was against them, when legislators were literally talking up how wonderfully efficient the telecom monopoly was.* Today I feel like T-Mobile is more like the scrappy startup that benefits consumers primarily by running aggressively trim. Unlike others posting here, I've never had any network issues with T-Mobile, and had routine congestion based or coverage based issues with Sprint. But that doesn't really matter. A larger network could offer more redundancy, and faster speeds on both sides of the network. Historically though, conglomeration of telecom companies has reduced competition, and essentially led to monopoly rents for a service that is especially susceptible to price competition. (There's a reason they try to lock you in with contracts. Competition is the enemy.) Here, I worry that Sprint's management has noticed that T-Mobile is unlike other competitors, AT&T, and is competing on price, setting a dangerous precedent. I worry they're trying to squash this unruly behavior through the purchase. Potential benefits might be nice, I just worry the downside risk is very large. * Check out "The Master Switch" by Tim Wu, or at least this review: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.h...
- opendais 12y ago
  Ya, that what scares me too. I run stock android BYOD style with Tmobile. I don't want them to switch to the Sprint model of terrible apps and higher prices. :/
- 12y ago

donflamenco 12y ago

From what I understand, if this goes through, T-mobile will be the surviving brand. The current CEO of T-Mobile will run the new company. I am a current T-mobile customer and anti-Sprint. I think this is a good move. This is more of a merger than a buyout.

abrowne 12y ago
As long as they stay pro-GSM and unlocked phones. And no matter what, it's way better than a purchase by Comcast!
- aidenn0 12y ago
  I strongly suspect they will move to CDMA, as IIRC Sprint owns far more towers than t-mobile. On the other hand for LTE they should be compatible. [edit] As I said in another thread, my information for that is a few years old, so this may not be true anymore.
  - dsl 12y ago
    Sprint has more towers, but they effectively run three different networks on top of them, making it a terrible fragmented mess.
  - greg5green 12y ago
    More likely that they slowly decommission the CDMA network as both networks move towards being 100% LTE.
- zanny 12y ago
  I miss Wimax.
ulfw 12y ago
With DT owning only 20% I doubt the brand would be T-Mobile. Most likely it would be Sprint branding and look n feel with largely T-Mo management. Will be interesting to see what happens to Bellevue as I suppose the combined co might be run from Overland Park.
- jusben1369 12y ago
  Agreed. Sprint is by far the bigger brand in the US. Although if this was even 1 year later it might be more of a toss up as T-Mobile has done great things to enhance the markets perception of them.
  - ulfw 12y ago
    Well I'd argue that T-Mobile is clearly the 'preferred' brand in the market. Just kind of doubt it would make sense to brand it that way when T-Mo Intl only owns 15 or 20% of it. Who knows - maybe they come up with a new brand even (like EE for T-Mobile/Orange in the UK)
    - YokoZar 12y ago
      One of the nice assets you acquire when you merge is the option to use whichever brand will work best in front of consumers, no matter how small a player it actually is.
    - protomyth 12y ago
      "Well I'd argue that T-Mobile is clearly the 'preferred' brand in the market." Given the sponsorships and the lack of coverage in certain markets, Sprint is the higher profile brand.
    - jusben1369 12y ago
      I don't know why T-Mo Int % of ownership matters one way or the other. The BOD of the new combined company would say "Ok, which brand is better to go with?" The only way I can imagine T-Mo Intl having an impact is if they specifically wanted to forbid it being called that for their own brand reasons. That might include fear that the US will screw up and drag down their brand overall. Or they may want to try again here in 5 or 10 years and use T-Mobile then etc.

JoshTriplett 12y ago

If T-Mobile and Sprint can leverage this to create one more comprehensive LTE network (ignoring the CDMA bits from Sprint), that would greatly benefit T-Mobile customers. T-Mobile's biggest problem is coverage.

pkulak 12y ago
This. I loved T-Mobile but decided to bail since it didn't work between cities for me. T-Mobile's service with better coverage? Sign me up.
myared 12y ago
I hope this is true as a T-mobile subscriber. T-mobile is great in cities, but it's terrible when you leave. You can make a phone call, but there will no Internet. I just finished a cross country road trip, and if I were ever to do one again, I would get a Verizon phone for a month.
- jonknee 12y ago
  I also just finished a cross country trip and Verizon would not be a bad way to go. I purposely got a Verizon flavored iPad so that I would have multiple networks (AT&T mobile phone) and between the two I usually had coverage. AT&T slipped back to 4G/3G/EDGE and even GPRS (!) much more than Verizon did. But having both was great.
- mrinterweb 12y ago
  I was a Sprint customer for years. From my experience, their coverage was not a whole lot better than T-Mobile's. I'd also hate to see them switch their networks to be more CDMA centric. CDMA should go away IMO.
  - burnte 12y ago
    With LTE, CDMA is going away. Both Verizon and Sprint have committed to going with world-common standards rather than staying with CDMA, which is dead anyway.

wise_young_man 12y ago

As a Sprint customer, I hope it does go through. My internet speeds are pretty bad even after them upgrading the infrastructure here to LTE. I don't know how it will play out, but I think Sprint users could stand to benefit from T-Mobile. As a T-Mobile user though, I could see why you could be nervous if it went the opposite direction and both services went downhill. I think Sprint wants the band that T-Mobile has that they received in the AT&T fallout so my hopes are positive.

maxsilver 12y ago
This won't help your Sprint service get faster. Sprint is already sitting on tons of unused spectrum, and a larger subscriber base than T-Mobile. Nothing stops Sprint from fixing their own service. They just choose not to. And they choose to not fix their network, all across the nation in lots of areas. My fear is that Sprint's lack of care and lack of effort, will bleed into T-Mobile's network, and we'll be down to just two functional service providers in the US.

untog 12y ago

T-Mobile has been great for me too, but I'm not totally soured on this idea. Their coverage is bad, and this could help them in the future. They also never get good handset exclusives - if they were a larger company perhaps they might be able to compete better.

esbonsa 12y ago

I've had both carriers on different devices on a recent car trip across eastern USA and Sprint had much better coverage. Hopefully this would help T-Mobile.

jusben1369 12y ago

You really want it to happen. T-Mobile's CEO will lead the combined company. So more of what you love but now with the resources to fix the bad parts.

brownbat 12y ago

I feel like it could have benefits, but like you I lean pessimistic. I had a deeply discounted unlimited plan with Sprint (a couple family members worked there). I left when T-Mobile offered a lower price for unlimited web + text. The only people I know who use voice use OTT services for it anyway. On top of that, T-Mob offered BYOD, letting me run pure Android, without all of Sprint's then unremovable NFL, NASCAR, and Facebook apps. It beat Sprint's employee discount plan for me, and easily. My family members who work there were frustrated by the news. They mostly rationalized by bashing T-Mobile, claiming their prices were unsustainable, arguing it must be a risky, poorly run business. I think those prices are only unsustainable when you have a major carrier's assumptions. Assumptions about acceptable levels of overhead and expected levels of profit. I think Sprint did some really bold things in its history. It fought the good fight as MCI against an entrenched telecom monopoly, back when sentiment was against them, when legislators were literally talking up how wonderfully efficient the telecom monopoly was.* Today I feel like T-Mobile is more like the scrappy startup that benefits consumers primarily by running aggressively trim. Unlike others posting here, I've never had any network issues with T-Mobile, and had routine congestion based or coverage based issues with Sprint. But that doesn't really matter. A larger network could offer more redundancy, and faster speeds on both sides of the network. Historically though, conglomeration of telecom companies has reduced competition, and essentially led to monopoly rents for a service that is especially susceptible to price competition. (There's a reason they try to lock you in with contracts. Competition is the enemy.) Here, I worry that Sprint's management has noticed that T-Mobile is unlike other competitors, AT&T, and is competing on price, setting a dangerous precedent. I worry they're trying to squash this unruly behavior through the purchase. Potential benefits might be nice, I just worry the downside risk is very large. * Check out "The Master Switch" by Tim Wu, or at least this review: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.h...

opendais 12y ago
Ya, that what scares me too. I run stock android BYOD style with Tmobile. I don't want them to switch to the Sprint model of terrible apps and higher prices. :/
12y ago