Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 91

Thread: T-Mobile to cover 200M with 5G NR by end of year 2019

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    373
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Yes I can because Verizon does not list Visible in it's quarterly reports. I go by FACTS available. And if you look long before Visible was a thing Verizon was losing prepaid subs. And Visible is not gaining that many customers from Verizon and what they are gaining is certainly less profitable. Sure Verizon make money form Comcast and Charter mobile's services but it's less than they would be making if those same customers stayed with Verizon prepaid
    Right, they were losing prepaid subs, so they decided to start their own prepaid subsidiary to compete with tmobiles metro and at&t's cricket wireless. Also, what are you basing the "Verizon doesn't report visible" numbers on? Tmobile reports metro numbers under branded prepaid users and at&t reports cricket under branded prepaid users. Do you have any evidence to suggest Verizon is not doing the same thing with visible? They have to be reporting the revenue from visible somewhere.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,833
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    Right, they were losing prepaid subs, so they decided to start their own prepaid subsidiary to compete with tmobiles metro and at&t's cricket wireless. Also, what are you basing the "Verizon doesn't report visible" numbers on? Tmobile reports metro numbers under branded prepaid users and at&t reports cricket under branded prepaid users. Do you have any evidence to suggest Verizon is not doing the same thing with visible? They have to be reporting the revenue from visible somewhere.
    Firstly it doesn't matter what/how T-Mobile and at&t reports.

    Second, Visible is not technically Verizon it it's own thing. Why is Visible's headquarters different from Verizon's?

    Third if Verizon was counting Visible they would say it the quarterly report. Find me where it states they are including Visible.

    Fourth, let's say you're right and Verizon's prepaid numbers include Visible then that make those numbers even worse since the numbers are still trending downwards badly. That means even with running a double data promo for an entire year and offering a super cheap off shoot prepaid plan they are still losing subs massively each month. You can try to dismiss it all you want but Verizon's prepaid is doing terribly no matter how much you want to sugarcoat it.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    373
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Firstly it doesn't matter what/how T-Mobile and at&t reports.

    Second, Visible is not technically Verizon it it's own thing. Why is Visible's headquarters different from Verizon's?

    Third if Verizon was counting Visible they would say it the quarterly report. Find me where it states they are including Visible.

    Fourth, let's say you're right and Verizon's prepaid numbers include Visible then that make those numbers even worse since the numbers are still trending downwards badly. That means even with running a double data promo for an entire year and offering a super cheap off shoot prepaid plan they are still losing subs massively each month. You can try to dismiss it all you want but Verizon's prepaid is doing terribly no matter how much you want to sugarcoat it.
    This makes no sense. Visible's headquarters are in a different location, for the same reasons as metros headquarters are in Texas, and crickets are in Atlanta. They are subsidiaries of their parent company. They are still a branded service though.

    I will take this as you have nothing to base the claim of Verizon not reporting visible and just kind of pulled it out of thin air? Doubling down on something only works if you are sure what you are saying is correct. As a publicly traded company, Verizon must report all revenue, this includes visible. When you are claiming that they don't report it, you are accusing them of committing a pretty serious offense.

    As far as trending downward, not really, for the 9 month period ending on 9/30/18 they lost 667,000 prepaid users. The next 9 month period they only lost 470,000. So if you assume most of that bleeding is coming from the Verizon prepaid brand, visible is doing fine with the limited exposure it has right now. Now, this only applies if they are counting visible in their prepaid customer numbers, I've seen no evidence though that they aren't, and recent trends in their numbers suggest they are. I can assure you though, they are reporting the revenue, and cost of visible somewhere.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Do you lease cars too? I would NEVER lease anything. I guarantee you leasing loses you money.
    For vehicles with terrible resale value and very low lease rates, leasing sometimes makes sense than buying, if you really want such a vehicle.

    You wouldn't want to lease a vehicle with high resale value like a Toyota or Honda. You might lease a GM, Ford, VW, Nissan, Fiat, Kia, Lincoln, BMW, or Mercedes.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    On their prepaid side, Verizon seems to be putting a lot into their prepaid brand visible. Visible still seems to have activation and c.s. issues galore, but has some pretty innovative ideas such as their party pay. So it will be interesting to see what they do with it going forward. I know people like to pretend the marriage of metro and tmobile was all roses, but in reality when tmobile bought metro, they had no clue just how bad a lot of the metro franchise locations really were. As long as numbers stayed decent though, they didn't overly care. Come forward to last year, they decide to formally bring the metro and tmobile brands together, (you would be shocked at how many people think tmobile bought metro just last year) they then realize with metro now holding the tmobile name they need to do some clean up. At this time also, numbers started to decline heavily as At&t made a big push into the prepaid market with both their cricket brand, and in house at&t prepaid offerings, and at&t actually was adding more prepaid users a quarter than tmobile/metro. This resulted in a higher up at metro...um resigning (cough, cough) and them putting Jon Freier, who also heads T-Mobiles retail division, in charge of metros retail division. So the prepaid competition should be quite fierce going forward. If the merger is approved you have a revamped metro, with the right guy heading the ship now, at&t is not backing off with their offerings on both their in house brands, and Verizon with their visible brand, if they can straighten out their c.s. and activation issues.
    I looked at Cricket but their family plans have gotten poorer since when I first considered them. Four lines would be $40+$30+$20+$20=$110. They used to have five lines for $100. Cricket throttles heavily. But the coverage is good and you can get Mexico and Canada coverage on some plans. But unlike Visible you can use just about any AT&T locked, or any unlocked phone. Total Wireless was a better deal at $95 plus tax for four lines, and no throttling.

    In any case, I'm not wedded to any carrier. I look for a carrier with good coverage, sufficient data, and that isn't throttled. For now, Total Wireless meets my needs. My coverage problems have gone away and it's a pretty good price.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    373
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    I looked at Cricket but their family plans have gotten poorer since when I first considered them. Four lines would be $40+$30+$20+$20=$110. They used to have five lines for $100. Cricket throttles heavily. But the coverage is good and you can get Mexico and Canada coverage on some plans. But unlike Visible you can use just about any AT&T locked, or any unlocked phone. Total Wireless was a better deal at $95 plus tax for four lines, and no throttling.

    In any case, I'm not wedded to any carrier. I look for a carrier with good coverage, sufficient data, and that isn't throttled. For now, Total Wireless meets my needs. My coverage problems have gone away and it's a pretty good price.
    Yea, to me the prepaid market right now is much more exciting and innovative than the postpaid market currently is. With the big 3 now owning their own prepaid subsidiaries, along with all the mvnos out there, they are getting pretty creative in what they are doing to attract users.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14,802
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Oh a $900 **** phone that will be obsolete in a few months?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Do you lease cars too? I would NEVER lease anything. I guarantee you leasing loses you money.

    First you criticize him for buying a $900 phone then when he said he didn't buy it, you criticize him for not buying it and accuse him of losing money.

    We get it. You're the perfect one. Everyone should use the same phone as you. Everyone should have Verizon just like you. In fact, everyone should be just like you. Because if they're not, you'll go on the attack.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    Yea, to me the prepaid market right now is much more exciting and innovative than the postpaid market currently is. With the big 3 now owning their own prepaid subsidiaries, along with all the mvnos out there, they are getting pretty creative in what they are doing to attract users.
    Well you lose some things with prepaid MVNOs. No domestic roaming. Little or no foreign roaming (except on Google Fi or Altice), no Wi-Fi calling.

    I followed the advice of others and when I went to Total Wireless I ported my T-Mobile number to Google Voice instead of to Total Wireless. It's very convenient to be able to view and search my text messages in e-mail.

    I haven't traveled out of the country yet since I've switched over, and since I lost the T-Mobile international free low-speed data and 25˘/minute calls I'll have to use a foreign prepaid SIM when leaving the U.S. since Total Wireless doesn't have any international roaming. The trade-off of far better domestic coverage is worth that hassle a couple of times a year or less.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Verizon was first with nationwide VoLTE but Ok whatever.

    Nationwide means 200 million out of 330 million.

    First doesn't mean diddly. Didn't T-Mobile chide Verizon last year when they were the 1st with a 5G home internet service? This is just for the court case because they think this will help. If the merger was already finalized T-Mobile wouldn't even be making this launch now.
    Still waiting for John Legere to announce when T-Mobile will offer nationwide 3G and 4G service.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,833
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    First you criticize him for buying a $900 phone then when he said he didn't buy it, you criticize him for not buying it and accuse him of losing money.

    We get it. You're the perfect one. Everyone should use the same phone as you. Everyone should have Verizon just like you. In fact, everyone should be just like you. Because if they're not, you'll go on the attack.
    I never said or implied that. Who is attacking? YOU. Why so defensive? Projection much? When did I ever say use Verizon? D you actually READ my posts. I'm 100% pro-merger. #1 reasoned they will have the customer base and bandwidth to be on equal footing with Verizon an at&t that will force them to change up their mediocre overpriced plans. And the only way that happens if people actually LEAVE those services for T-Mobile. So it's ironic you accuse me of being pro-Verizon when I'm actively rooting for millions of customers to leave.

    As far as the $900 phone. $900 is too much for ANY phone in my opinion. Especially one that is going to obsolete soon. It would be different if it was going to be a year or more before there will be phones that can handle low/mid/high/mmwave 5G bands but those are literally a few months away. It their money if they want to waste it so be it. Why not wait few months and get a phone that has ALL the bands? I'm not quite sure what is wrong with my suggestion

    You used to spot on the Verizon board a lot and I remember you used to get crapped on my the majority pretty bad. I used o feel sorry for you since you actually made the most sense most of the time. Seeing how you are being here though I'm starting to get why they got on your case. You know people here are allowed to have opinions that are not necessarily aligned with YOURS. maybe try remembering that.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    373
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    Well you lose some things with prepaid MVNOs. No domestic roaming. Little or no foreign roaming (except on Google Fi or Altice), no Wi-Fi calling.

    I followed the advice of others and when I went to Total Wireless I ported my T-Mobile number to Google Voice instead of to Total Wireless. It's very convenient to be able to view and search my text messages in e-mail.

    I haven't traveled out of the country yet since I've switched over, and since I lost the T-Mobile international free low-speed data and 25˘/minute calls I'll have to use a foreign prepaid SIM when leaving the U.S. since Total Wireless doesn't have any international roaming. The trade-off of far better domestic coverage is worth that hassle a couple of times a year or less.
    You do lose some things on prepaid, but I'm just speaking on the market in general. The postpaid market has settled into their add a line, get a free device paid off in bill credits approach, and each carrier has pretty much made that their go to move. With prepaid they really can't do that and have gotten pretty innovative with how they are attracting users. You have metro and cricket with their port in specials, and metro offering Amazon prime and Google one, and now offering access to their 5g network, you have visible with their party pay, and device swap program, and visible is now even offering 0% device financing with affirm, you have at&t prepaid now offering highly a discounted 12 month plan, TMobile prepaid now has a $15 plan, you have mvnos such as mint offering bulk options, you have total with their 4 for less than 100 deals, Google fi with their international options. Right now, the prepaid market just seems a little more innovative to me, and is more interesting to watch. The postpaid market is settled in, and is about the same every quarter, TMobile will add 1 million users, Verizon will add 200-300,000, and at&t will add 100-200,000 new phone adds. Prepaid though, who knows, it's whoever came up with the best idea to grab users that quarter.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    I never said or implied that. Who is attacking? YOU. Why so defensive? Projection much? When did I ever say use Verizon? D you actually READ my posts. I'm 100% pro-merger. #1 reasoned they will have the customer base and bandwidth to be on equal footing with Verizon an at&t that will force them to change up their mediocre overpriced plans. And the only way that happens if people actually LEAVE those services for T-Mobile. So it's ironic you accuse me of being pro-Verizon when I'm actively rooting for millions of customers to leave.

    As far as the $900 phone. $900 is too much for ANY phone in my opinion. Especially one that is going to obsolete soon. It would be different if it was going to be a year or more before there will be phones that can handle low/mid/high/mmwave 5G bands but those are literally a few months away. It their money if they want to waste it so be it. Why not wait few months and get a phone that has ALL the bands? I'm not quite sure what is wrong with my suggestion

    You used to spot on the Verizon board a lot and I remember you used to get crapped on my the majority pretty bad. I used o feel sorry for you since you actually made the most sense most of the time. Seeing how you are being here though I'm starting to get why they got on your case. You know people here are allowed to have opinions that are not necessarily aligned with YOURS. maybe try remembering that.
    Non-mmWave 5G phones are not really going to be obsolete but they will plunge in price as soon as the mmWave 5G phones are widely available. I would not buy a new flagship phone right now unless I had to. Better to stick it out for another 6 months. Most of the phone manufacturers are experiencing sales slumps because so many users are waiting for the next generation of flagship phones prior to upgrading.

    Post merger T-Mobile will have the opportunity to decide whether or not they want to compete as a third top-tier carrier or continue to be the "uncarrier" and not worry about expanding their coverage to the level necessary to be considered a top-tier carrier. They can remain a lower-cost option for those users that are not terribly concerned about coverage outside of urbanized areas or they can spend the money to expand their own native coverage. But I would doubt that if they choose the latter it would result in AT&T and Verizon will get into some sort of price war with T-Mobile. Instead, T-Mobile will feel justified in raising their prices to the level of AT&T and Verizon.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    373
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    Non-mmWave 5G phones are not really going to be obsolete but they will plunge in price as soon as the mmWave 5G phones are widely available. I would not buy a new flagship phone right now unless I had to. Better to stick it out for another 6 months. Most of the phone manufacturers are experiencing sales slumps because so many users are waiting for the next generation of flagship phones prior to upgrading.

    Post merger T-Mobile will have the opportunity to decide whether or not they want to compete as a third top-tier carrier or continue to be the "uncarrier" and not worry about expanding their coverage to the level necessary to be considered a top-tier carrier. They can remain a lower-cost option for those users that are not terribly concerned about coverage outside of urbanized areas or they can spend the money to expand their own native coverage. But I would doubt that if they choose the latter it would result in AT&T and Verizon will get into some sort of price war with T-Mobile. Instead, T-Mobile will feel justified in raising their prices to the level of AT&T and Verizon.
    Well they are gonna compete as a 3rd top tier company. That part is easy. A lot of people forget that the main goal of any publicly traded company is to maximize shareholder value by generating as much profit possible. This applies to Verizon, At&t and TMobile now pre merger and post merger. This gets a taboo type label, because honestly a lot of customers just don't like hearing it, but it is the primary goal of these companies.

    I think people don't realize really what the "uncarrier" movement was, or where it came from. It was a marketing strategy devised by Tmobiles PR team and top leadership to attract people to a company that was frankly dying a slow death. After the failed at&t merger, they were thrown a lifeline and put new leadership in place that convinced their shareholders that they had a plan back to relevance. This though would include a time period where growth would be heavily favored over profits. It was basically a growth at any cost strategy. Not going to deep into it, but it instantly worked. Those early uncarrier numbers you saw TMobile post, the growth was outstanding, and it was all they promoted. "2 million adds!!" Join the network people are flocking to, become part of the movement. You know, buzz words that young people relate to. What was hidden in those early press releases were earnings. Because they weren't there. Hidden deep down in the release it would say for quarter so and so EPS of -.21.

    This didn't matter to leadership, as they were in a growth at all costs mindset and earnings would come. Just wait. Also, it didn't matter to the stock price, as all investors saw was this company adding customers like crazy so the price went up..up...up...well let's fast forward a few years, TMobile is no longer in a growth over profits stage in their lifespan. I believe even Braxton made a comment about this to the press not to long ago? But now TMobile is looking at maximizing profits for their shareholders, which is what they, as a publicly traded company, are supposed to do. This will anger some, claiming "I thought you were supposed to be "uncarrier" and different!!" and I guess to a degree they have a point, but, TMobile was never really different at all, they were just 1. Desperate to get relevant and 2. In a different stage of their cycle than the other 3 carriers. Every move they make, every promotion they run, every press release they put is designed for 1 thing, and 1 thing only, to get a customer to spend money with them, over their competition. This is the same with Verizon and AT&T.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    257
    Device(s)
    Samsung S9+
    Carrier(s)
    Total Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hofonewb9 View Post
    Well they are gonna compete as a 3rd top tier company. That part is easy. A lot of people forget that the main goal of any publicly traded company is to maximize shareholder value by generating as much profit possible. This applies to Verizon, At&t and TMobile now pre merger and post merger. This gets a taboo type label, because honestly a lot of customers just don't like hearing it, but it is the primary goal of these companies.
    They will have to decide if the enormous capital expenditures that will be necessary to compete as a top tier carrier would generate sufficient additional revenue to be able to recover those costs. It means taking a financial hit for a significant number of years, which will affect shareholder value.

    AT&T and Verizon built out their networks over several decades both by making acquisitions of smaller carriers and by adding coverage in areas where the number of subscribers living in those areas would not justify the expense but doing it anyway. There are no small rural carriers left for T-Mobile to try to acquire in order to grow coverage without the long, difficult, and expensive process of finding sites for new towers and going through the approval, design, construction, and deployment process. 5G small cells will help, but they are not a panacea. You still need the large cells, with generators, to provide coverage. Adding 5G small cells also requires running the backbone fiber to all those poles though this is less costly than building standalone installations.

    A marketing machine that caters to only young people that don't know any better, and to those that look only at price when making a purchase leaves out a lot of potential customers, but skimming off the customers that don't care about having the best coverage can work well if you keep expenses low. If T-Mobile decides to try to become a top-tier carrier then they'll need to go after corporate and government accounts and will need to appeal to higher-income users that demand more ubiquitous coverage and for whom price is not a major factor when selecting a carrier.

    Prior to leaving T-Mobile, we were on vacation in California, visiting areas outside of cities, including three National Parks. We then understood what people were talking about when it comes to T-Mobile coverage! We stopped and bought one Tracfone/Verizon SIM kit at a rural Walmart so we'd have at least one phone that worked in case of emergency. When we got back I moved all our lines over to Tracfone's Total Wireless service which uses Verizon. It was also about $40 less per month than I'd been paying, though to be fair I have to factor in the cost of losing the Netflix subsidy. We also lost VoLTE, included low-speed foreign data, and included foreign SMS. So there were trade-offs in exchange for better coverage.

    Finally, I am rather shocked to see attacks on posters that post factual information about a carrier. Yes, HF is an "enthusiasts" site, but stating indisputable facts doesn't warrant personal attacks.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles/Canada
    Posts
    11,426
    Device(s)
    LG G7 (T-Mobile), iPhone 8 (AT&T)
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianAngela View Post
    Prior to leaving T-Mobile, we were on vacation in California, visiting areas outside of cities, including three National Parks. We then understood what people were talking about when it comes to T-Mobile coverage! We stopped and bought one Tracfone/Verizon SIM kit at a rural Walmart so we'd have at least one phone that worked in case of emergency. When we got back I moved all our lines over to Tracfone's Total Wireless service which uses Verizon. It was also about $40 less per month than I'd been paying, though to be fair I have to factor in the cost of losing the Netflix subsidy. We also lost VoLTE, included low-speed foreign data, and included foreign SMS. So there were trade-offs in exchange for better coverage.

    Finally, I am rather shocked to see attacks on posters that post factual information about a carrier. Yes, HF is an "enthusiasts" site, but stating indisputable facts doesn't warrant personal attacks.
    Yup. T-Mobile's rural is weak. National parks in CA in general are or have been typically Verizon here due to their old 850MHz build. Building in federal park land is very difficult and expensive. I have had this issue with AT&T in San Bernardino as well. There are some large gaps where Verizon covers.. that nobody else did because they built back when it was easier to build on federal land. In general, I stick with T-Mobile, as it is cheaper for me than Tracfone. I've been able to compare AT&T vs. T-Mobile in California, and they're pretty similar, with the nod to AT&T in 'some' areas and T-Mobile in others. In the end, it came down to price for me, as I'm paying $120 for 4 lines of T-Mobile One after tax/fees (included).
    AT&T... your world, throttled.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 02:32 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2012, 07:03 AM
  3. Air Voice Express, Verizon Paygo mvno to switch carriers by end of year
    By Big Blue 023 in forum General Prepaid discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-17-2010, 03:44 AM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-02-2009, 02:05 AM
  5. Unannounced: 9 new phones by end of year!!!
    By FoneAhead in forum AT&T
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-08-2002, 05:57 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks