Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: T-Mobile take over AT&T spot as second-largest wireless carrier

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    100
    Feedback Score
    0

    T-Mobile take over AT&T spot as second-largest wireless carrier

    According to T-Mobile, the company became the country's second-largest wireless provider in second-quarter 2020 based on a total of 98.3 million customers. The total include customers gained from the merger with Sprint (31 million) that closed on April 1 of this year.

    Verizon Communications reported 119.9 million subscribers in the second quarter and AT&T reported 92.9 million.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ier/112875918/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,872
    Feedback Score
    0
    Wow. I hope AT&T Mobility can keep up!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,796
    Feedback Score
    0
    I hope T-Mobile's coverage finally starts to improve because I would love to have another carrier option. My Metro PCS and Mint experiments didn't go so well. Oddly enough, Sprint has always had better coverage then T-Mobile but I'm assuming it was because they roamed on Verizon towers.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,366
    Device(s)
    Pixel XL, OnePlus 7 Pro
    Carrier(s)
    Project Fi
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishx65 View Post
    I hope T-Mobile's coverage finally starts to improve because I would love to have another carrier option. My Metro PCS and Mint experiments didn't go so well. Oddly enough, Sprint has always had better coverage then T-Mobile but I'm assuming it was because they roamed on Verizon towers.
    I had the same issues years ago. Sprint just had a better network where I lived. Once they started sharing towers, T-Mobile finally had coverage that worked properly where I'm at. Sprint's old network should fill in some major gaps in coverage in some areas and make T-Mobile a much better network.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,666
    Feedback Score
    0
    Compare where T-Mobile was ten years ago, and it's quite amazing to see how far this company has come. Going from Number 4 all the way to Number 2 in a saturated market is absolutely amazing. John Legere will go down in history as one of the best CEO's in American history and will likely be studied in business courses for years to come.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    901
    Feedback Score
    0
    Unfortunately the Uncarrier days are over. T-mobile is a different company today. T-mobile needs to step up their game on network expansion and 5G modernization.
    Quote Originally Posted by VisionsDivine View Post
    Compare where T-Mobile was ten years ago, and it's quite amazing to see how far this company has come. Going from Number 4 all the way to Number 2 in a saturated market is absolutely amazing. John Legere will go down in history as one of the best CEO's in American history and will likely be studied in business courses for years to come.
    Sent from my SM-T720 using HoFo mobile app

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,796
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Mandelstamm1 View Post
    Unfortunately the Uncarrier days are over. T-mobile is a different company today. T-mobile needs to step up their game on network expansion and 5G modernization.

    Sent from my SM-T720 using HoFo mobile app
    Yes, a lot of Sprint users will jump over to Verizon and At&t if T-Mobile doesn't expand their rural footprint or at least keep Sprint's roaming agreements with Verizon in place.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,729
    Feedback Score
    0
    Strange AT&T isn't in the top spot with excellent coverage nation wide and is now 3rd to Verizon and T-Mobile. When I say excellent it's because rural coverage has really been improved over the last few years, more so than any other carrier. Verizon always had excellent coverage too but the lack of spectrum in this low band coverage has left speeds sorely lacking.

    I agree with Mandelstamm1, the coverage with T-Mobile leaves a lot to be desired, especially in rural areas. When you do get a T-Mobile signal though, the speed is fast, consistent and typically trouble free. I also like their policies better than AT&T when it comes to unlocked handsets. VoLTE phones is a requirement now, yet for years they blocked unlocked phones from even using it... WiFi calling although supported on many Samsung handsets is still a no go without whitelisting the IMEI. Royal pain.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    2,022
    Device(s)
    Moto X4, Moto E5+, Any and all Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by @Class View Post
    Strange AT&T isn't in the top spot with excellent coverage nation wide and is now 3rd to Verizon and T-Mobile. When I say excellent it's because rural coverage has really been improved over the last few years, more so than any other carrier. Verizon always had excellent coverage too but the lack of spectrum in this low band coverage has left speeds sorely lacking.
    Depends how you define the criteria used to claim "#1, #2", etc. It's like if Burger King claimed they're the #1 hamburger chain, then discovering the criteria is if you list them alphabetically instead of by sales.

    T-Mo is #2 using a self-selected critera- number of branded postpaid and prepaid lines, *not* counting wholesale/MVNOs, and not counting IoT devices (of which AT&T claims to have over 70 million, including my dog's GPS!)

    I'm not suggesting T-Mo's criteria is invalid, just that it's only one way of looking at the data. Like if one baseball team claims they've got the best batters based on batting average, while another can claim they've got the best based on # of home runs, a third by RBIs, a fourth by on-base percentage, etc. They could all be #1 based on some metric *they* claim is most important.







    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    --
    Todd Allcock, Microsoft MVP: Mobile Devices 2007-2011

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    5,008
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by @Class View Post
    Strange AT&T isn't in the top spot with excellent coverage nation wide and is now 3rd to Verizon and T-Mobile. When I say excellent it's because rural coverage has really been improved over the last few years, more so than any other carrier. Verizon always had excellent coverage too but the lack of spectrum in this low band coverage has left speeds sorely lacking....
    T-Mo has grown admirably over the years, but what got them more subscribers than AT&T was buying Sprint and the subscribers that came with that. T-Mo's subscriber count is a cherry-picked metric that does not include all of AT&T's subscriber lines so it is semi-bogus marketing fluff.

    T-Mo is still dead last in nationwide coverage. When I choose a carrier I am not in the least concerned with how many subscribers they have. I want the one that has signal where I need to use it.

    If one never leaves metro areas, T-Mo can be good enough.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    2,022
    Device(s)
    Moto X4, Moto E5+, Any and all Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdevnul View Post
    If one never leaves metro areas, T-Mo can be good enough.
    Even if one leaves metro areas, T-Mo can be "good enough" depending on your expectations.

    Maybe because I'm old enough to have lived before the rise of the cellular phone, and also lived through the early days when we didn't expect coverage everywhere, I have a different perspective. T-Mo works for me 97+% of the time, and for a reasonable rate compared to other carriers. I'm not willing to spend 30-40% more to get a carrier that works 98 or 99% of the time.

    "But what about if there's an emergency" I invariably hear at this point, usually from Verizon users. Well, even Verizon has dead spots and areas without coverage. Why don't those emergency-fearing users have a satellite phone to have 100% coverage instead of Verizon's or, say, 99? "But that's too expensive", I'm typically told, "besides, Verizon coverage is 'good enough'."

    Well, that's how I feel, one level removed; Verizon is too expensive, and T-Mo is good enough.

    [Note: the coverage percentages in my example above aren't meant to imply T-Mo covers 97%+ of the country's population or land area- it's my estimate of the percentage of time *I* have coverage in my life and travels, vs the percentage of time I estimate I'd have coverage with AT&T or Verizon.]

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    5,008
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by elecconnec View Post
    Even if one leaves metro areas, T-Mo can be "good enough" depending on your expectations.

    Maybe because I'm old enough to have lived before the rise of the cellular phone, and also lived through the early days when we didn't expect coverage everywhere, I have a different perspective. T-Mo works for me 97+% of the time, and for a reasonable rate compared to other carriers. I'm not willing to spend 30-40% more to get a carrier that works 98 or 99% of the time.

    "But what about if there's an emergency" I invariably hear at this point, usually from Verizon users. Well, even Verizon has dead spots and areas without coverage. Why don't those emergency-fearing users have a satellite phone to have 100% coverage instead of Verizon's or, say, 99? "But that's too expensive", I'm typically told, "besides, Verizon coverage is 'good enough'."

    Well, that's how I feel, one level removed; Verizon is too expensive, and T-Mo is good enough.

    [Note: the coverage percentages in my example above aren't meant to imply T-Mo covers 97%+ of the country's population or land area- it's my estimate of the percentage of time *I* have coverage in my life and travels, vs the percentage of time I estimate I'd have coverage with AT&T or Verizon.]

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    I am old enough to remember my grandparents rural party line. We had a private line at home, but had to talk to an operator to tell them what number to call - no dial. I have no illusion that the world owes me ubiquitous phone service everywhere.

    My cell service needs are very low so I use MVNOs. On prepaid MVNOs I pay the same for Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mo so I go with the best coverage where I live, work, travel, and the areas in between. Verizon is the only one with good service inside my house. It is also the best almost everywhere else around here. T-Mo has no price advantage in my situation. Uncarrierness does not inspire me to accept inferior coverage.

    The last time I checked single-line post and prepaid service on all three was about the same. If I had to use postpaid, I might consider T-Mo if the price was $20 or so less. T-Mo is the only other one with service inside the house. That is only since last December when they turned on band 71. It is slow, but solid. Where I live will not be covered by band 41 or mm-wave anytime soon. I am too far from the towers. Before band 71 T-Mo coverage around here, even in town, was abysmal garbage.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    2,022
    Device(s)
    Moto X4, Moto E5+, Any and all Windows Phones!
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdevnul View Post
    T-Mo has no price advantage in my situation. Uncarrierness does not inspire me to accept inferior coverage.

    The last time I checked single-line post and prepaid service on all three was about the same. If I had to use postpaid, I might consider T-Mo if the price was $20 or so less.
    Fair enough. If I was coming to T-Mo for the first time today, I'd probably agree with your assessment. I've been on a variety of grandfathered T-Mo plans over the last decade, so my plan is significantly cheaper than any current equivalent AT&T or Verizon plan.

    All else being equal, I'd probably go with AT&T prepaid or an AT&T MVNO if I were buying cell service for the first time today.

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,796
    Feedback Score
    0
    So is T-Mobile now gonna cover all the areas that Sprint did???? Only Sprint and At&t get a signal at my cabin.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    100
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishx65 View Post
    So is T-Mobile now gonna cover all the areas that Sprint did???? Only Sprint and At&t get a signal at my cabin.
    Answer to that question seem to be unclear right now. On their web site, T-Mobile is saying as of now everything stay the same regarding Sprint. Except now Sprint customers receive extended roaming capabilities on T-Mobile.

    https://www.t-mobile.com/support/acc...0Z20261#sprint

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ISO: someone to take over AT&T contract (philly area)
    By oppie1 in forum GSM phone Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-29-2004, 03:12 PM
  2. Cingular to take over AT&T
    By f20c in forum Rogers/Fido/Chat-r
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-26-2004, 07:04 PM
  3. Free v60t for taking over AT&T TDMA contract
    By ping2x in forum Non GSM phone Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2003, 02:03 AM
  4. T-Mobile takes over...
    By dna48363 in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-25-2002, 06:17 PM
  5. CiNGULAR taking over AT&T
    By pinoy in forum AT&T
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-24-2002, 12:18 PM

Bookmarks