Why even Project Dark can't save T-Mobile

[pukemon]

they gained my market share. i didn't even know about this. att wouldn't concede some bonus on a new secondary line i just activated so i cancelled both lines. only thing i will miss is the faster 3g speed. i just need to find a good 3g phone that will work on tmob's 3g. the pickings are real slim, and i don't like straying from nokia phones because of symbian and maemo.

[Lompoc]

i didn't even know about this.

I guess that speaks volumes about the effectiveness of the ad campaign...at least in your area/demographic.

Welcome to TMO!

[pukemon]

I guess that speaks volumes about the effectiveness of the ad campaign...at least in your area/demographic.

Welcome to TMO!

i hardly watch tv and wasn't planning on switching. a few weeks ago i did happen across tmob's website but they still had the other plans.

[terryjohnson16]

they gained my market share. i didn't even know about this. att wouldn't concede some bonus on a new secondary line i just activated so i cancelled both lines. only thing i will miss is the faster 3g speed. i just need to find a good 3g phone that will work on tmob's 3g. the pickings are real slim, and i don't like straying from nokia phones because of symbian and maemo.

Check out the Nokia N900. It has maemo, and T-Mobile's 3G.

[pukemon]

oh for sure. i'm on disability right now so n900 is out of the question. it's either that or an e72, even though e72 isn't tmob 3g compatible. but hopefully tmob's edge will be good enough for now on my e71.

[DRNewcomb]

When my wife's phone envy finally got bad enough that we had to replace her ratty old Nokia, we decided to check out two carriers: T-Mobile & Cellular South. Cellular South is a regional carrier that covers MS, S. Ala & NW Fla. We've had service with them since 1992. Their reputation was always as a good "home town" carrier with friendly service, if perhaps a bit backward. I've had my service with T-Mobile ever since they bought out Powertel about 2000 and with P'tel and DigiPH before. The reason I went with a GSM carrier was that I traveled internationally and needed the roaming. I also used GSM CSD before they even had GPRS. I've been a fan of GSM since the '90s. Having service with two different technologies actually works well when we travel together as wherever she does not get a signal, I do and vice versa (except in places were there is no signal at all)

We looked at the phones and plans of both carriers. Cellular South has absolutely rock solid coverage throughout out the region and roams on Verizon and every other CDMA carrier outside their region. They have 3G coverage throughout their service area. T-Mobile's coverage in our region looks like someone squashed a spider on the map. Only within 5 miles of major highways. There is no 3G coverage within 50 miles.

Cellular South: $50/mo, 500 nationwide minutes, unlimited text and data, no nights and weekends, 2 year contract on an account we've already had for 17 years, HTC Hero $120.
T-Mobile: $60/mo, 500 nationwide minutes, nights & weekends, unlimited data, no contract but we pay off the G1 at $20/mo over about 20 months.

We never use any where near 500 minutes per month total. I actually prefer T-Mobile's new way of selling phones over the 2-year contract but I just couldn't get over the lower total price, and better 2G and 3G coverage of Cellular South.

We now have a nifty new Cellular South HTC Hero. First application I loaded was FRING and we were chatting via VOIP over 3G in no time at all. I never thought the day would come when Cellular South equaled T-Mobile on technology but they have and beat T-Mobile on price.

Note: The reasons we checked only T-Mobile and Cellular South were:
1. We already had service with those carriers and were satisfied with each in their own ways.
2. AT&T and Verizon have reputations for being "spendy".
3. Sprint has a reputation for hostile customer service.

[Kies]

Regional carriers usually always have excellent coverage.

[pukemon]

When my wife's phone envy finally got bad enough that we had to replace her ratty old Nokia, we decided to check out two carriers: T-Mobile & Cellular South. Cellular South is a regional carrier that covers MS, S. Ala & NW Fla. We've had service with them since 1992. Their reputation was always as a good "home town" carrier with friendly service, if perhaps a bit backward. I've had my service with T-Mobile ever since they bought out Powertel about 2000 and with P'tel and DigiPH before. The reason I went with a GSM carrier was that I traveled internationally and needed the roaming. I also used GSM CSD before they even had GPRS. I've been a fan of GSM since the '90s. Having service with two different technologies actually works well when we travel together as wherever she does not get a signal, I do and vice versa (except in places were there is no signal at all)

We looked at the phones and plans of both carriers. Cellular South has absolutely rock solid coverage throughout out the region and roams on Verizon and every other CDMA carrier outside their region. They have 3G coverage throughout their service area. T-Mobile's coverage in our region looks like someone squashed a spider on the map. Only within 5 miles of major highways. There is no 3G coverage within 50 miles.

Cellular South: $50/mo, 500 nationwide minutes, unlimited text and data, no nights and weekends, 2 year contract on an account we've already had for 17 years, HTC Hero $120.
T-Mobile: $60/mo, 500 nationwide minutes, nights & weekends, unlimited data, no contract but we pay off the G1 at $20/mo over about 20 months.

We never use any where near 500 minutes per month total. I actually prefer T-Mobile's new way of selling phones over the 2-year contract but I just couldn't get over the lower total price, and better 2G and 3G coverage of Cellular South.

We now have a nifty new Cellular South HTC Hero. First application I loaded was FRING and we were chatting via VOIP over 3G in no time at all. I never thought the day would come when Cellular South equaled T-Mobile on technology but they have and beat T-Mobile on price.

Note: The reasons we checked only T-Mobile and Cellular South were:
1. We already had service with those carriers and were satisfied with each in their own ways.
2. AT&T and Verizon have reputations for being "spendy".
3. Sprint has a reputation for hostile customer service.

it's usually to better to go with who has best local coverage because you can always get whatever prepaid works best for when you leave your local area. prepaid is very reasonable these days and there's no reason to get a high end phone/unlocked phone for prepaid. (unless the unlocked covers the technology of both companies.)

[GSMinCT]

So we are a good six weeks or so into "Project Black"....does anyone know if it is working? Is TMO gaining market share?

Maybe from Sprint haha. Seriously, though, it will take at least a quarter, if not a year to see how they are doing relative to the other carriers. Also, less data for T-Mobile is available, since they are owned by a foreign company, and thus they don't have to release information to American investors.

[Eric77lv]

Ok, this is a little off topic, but here's my view on this.

T-Mobile Europe is a monster, with about 100 million customers in Europe, considering that their population is nearly 700 million, that would mean 1/7th of people in Europe would have T-Mobile.

Considering the fact when T-Mobile USA first started up with the acquisition of a regional called VoiceStream. So, T-Mobile of course used what used to be Voice Stream's network. With a few expansions into major cities it makes up T-Mobile's current network.

What makes me think, is T-Mobile just a regional with a larger network? Look at it this way, do you really see more urban people with VZW/AT&T or TMO/Sprint? T-Mobile really seems like they are going at a market like Topeka, Little Rock, or Las Vegas. Cities with about 250,000 to 1 million. While Verizon and AT&T rule the Urban Jungles like Los Angeles, New York, and Houston. What I'm really saying is TMO is going after towns, while AT&T and VZW are going after cities.

And, at first it seemed like Deutsche Telekom wanted to do what they did with Europe to North America. Have you seen the advertisments? "With new lower plans cheaper than Verizon and AT&T." It seems like the little dog is going after the big dogs.

So in my point of view, Deutsche Telekom needs to rethink what they did. While your at it, maye just even skip HSDPA+ and start looking at LTE while they can, because T-Mobile is late, and they don't want to do that again.

[Kies]

T-Mobile is moving it's PCS to LTE, so the 3G AWS network would have to be complete in order for that to happen.. which makes sense because LTE is slated for 2012.

[GSMinCT]

Ok, this is a little off topic, but here's my view on this.

T-Mobile Europe is a monster, with about 100 million customers in Europe, considering that their population is nearly 700 million, that would mean 1/7th of people in Europe would have T-Mobile.

Considering the fact when T-Mobile USA first started up with the acquisition of a regional called VoiceStream. So, T-Mobile of course used what used to be Voice Stream's network. With a few expansions into major cities it makes up T-Mobile's current network.

What makes me think, is T-Mobile just a regional with a larger network? Look at it this way, do you really see more urban people with VZW/AT&T or TMO/Sprint? T-Mobile really seems like they are going at a market like Topeka, Little Rock, or Las Vegas. Cities with about 250,000 to 1 million. While Verizon and AT&T rule the Urban Jungles like Los Angeles, New York, and Houston. What I'm really saying is TMO is going after towns, while AT&T and VZW are going after cities.

And, at first it seemed like Deutsche Telekom wanted to do what they did with Europe to North America. Have you seen the advertisments? "With new lower plans cheaper than Verizon and AT&T." It seems like the little dog is going after the big dogs.

So in my point of view, Deutsche Telekom needs to rethink what they did. While your at it, maye just even skip HSDPA+ and start looking at LTE while they can, because T-Mobile is late, and they don't want to do that again.

No, T-Mobile is really going after the big cities and other areas that have mid to high-density urban development (not necessarily urban jungles), since that's the only place they can compete. Once you get away from the dense urban development, T-Mobile's PCS network can't keep up with cellular networks, since there aren't more places to put towers up.

Verizon is just going for everywhere, there's a map for that.

T-Mobile is moving it's PCS to LTE, so the 3G AWS network would have to be complete in order for that to happen.. which makes sense because LTE is slated for 2012.

Huh? LTE will probably go on AWS, they don't have enough PCS to do GSM and LTE.

[Kies]

LTE will be run on PCS

[DreamCatcher68]

Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (J2ME/MIDP; Opera Mini/4.2.14912/1280; U; en) Presto/2.2.0)

I don't think T-Mobile is trying to be on the same level as Verizon/ATT. You're right, they don't have the coverage. But that's fine. They don't need to be number 1 to be successful and have a lot of influence.

[GSMinCT]

Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (J2ME/MIDP; Opera Mini/4.2.14912/1280; U; en) Presto/2.2.0)

I don't think T-Mobile is trying to be on the same level as Verizon/ATT. You're right, they don't have the coverage. But that's fine. They don't need to be number 1 to be successful and have a lot of influence.

I wish they were successful in making change, because their effective abandonment of contracts is absolutely the right pricing model, but they can't because their network sucks. AT&T's is borderline acceptable nationwide, really Verizon is the only company that has a solid network nationwide.