Possible T-Mobile-Sprint merger could rival AT&T in subscribers

[AppleInsider]

Deutsche Telekom, the owners of T-Mobile in the U.S., are reportedly looking into acquiring competitor Sprint. Together, the two companies would have a customer base that rivals AT&T.

According to The Daily Telegraph, Detsche Telekom is prepping a multi-billion dollar offer for Sprint Nextel, which is the third-largest wireless carrier in America. Together, the two companies would have a combined customer base near AT&T's nearly 80 million subscribers.

Currently, AT&T is the second-largest wireless carrier in the U.S., behind only Verizon Wireless, which had an estimated 87.7 million subscribers as of July. While AT&T has lagged behind Verizon, the No. 2 company has been gaining ground, thanks, in part, to its exclusive deal for Apple's iPhone.

Sprint is estimated to have a market value of $10 billion. The formal bid from Deutsche Telekom is expected to be received within weeks.

The news comes as the international corporation also hopes to merge T-Mobile U.K. with Orange. Combined, those two British carriers would have 37 percent of the market with 28.4 million subscribers. That deal is reportedly centered on the possibility of gaining access to popular handsets, like the iPhone, by having a larger customer base for negotiation leverage.

The Telegraph notes that T-Mobile U.S. has struggled recently, with revenue falling and subscribers leaving for larger carriers that offer better coverage, like AT&T and Verizon, or smaller, regional carriers that cost less. But combined with Sprint, it would have a subscriber base of 78.2 million, just behind AT&T.

Such a merger would be difficult, as the two carriers operate on different style networks. AT&T and T-Mobile share a GSM network, while Sprint, like Verizon, operates primarily as a CDMA network. Deutsche Telekom has reportedly been eyeing Sprint for over a year, though "preparations" for the deal began within the last few months.

While still a long ways off, if at all possible, a T-Mobile-Sprint merger would change the landscape of U.S. wireless providers significantly. The iPhone's exclusive contract with AT&T is set to expire next year, which has led some to speculate that Apple's device could become available on a rival network. By and large, assumptions have suggested Apple would choose Verizon, the largest wireless provider in the U.S. But a combination of T-Mobile and Sprint would be nearly as large as AT&T, and perhaps a viable option for Apple to consider.

[melgross]

I'll post what I posted in Macworld, which had this story earlier:

"Well, this seems to be an idea fraught with problems!

How ARE they going to deal with the network problem?

Having both would be counterproductive, but switching Sprint over to GSM would cost tens of billions. It would cost less to move T-Mobile to CDMA, but why would they want to move away from the global standard?

I could understand this if Sprint was moving to the 4G standard that both AT&T and Verizon are moving to, but they aren't.

So what benefits will they derive?"

[alexh4]

I'll post what I posted in Macworld, which had this story earlier:

"Well, this seems to be an idea fraught with problems!

How ARE they going to deal with the network problem?

Having both would be counterproductive, but switching Sprint over to GSM would cost tens of billions. It would cost less to move T-Mobile to CDMA, but why would they want to move away from the global standard?

I could understand this if Sprint was moving to the 4G standard that both AT&T and Verizon are moving to, but they aren't.

So what benefits will they derive?"

They wouldn't have any benefits other than the amount of customers. I went from sprint to t-mobile to At&t hopefully Verizon when the Iphone goes to their network. I hated Sprint they always and i mean always screwed my bill up, thus i went to t-mobile so for me personally sprint Sucks, t-mobile will SUck if the buy Sprint. and it will not have effect on AT&t with the iphone or Verizon because of the network. it would be a stupid merger and like you said it will cost sprint millions or billions of dollars to switch to GSM and im sure t-mobile will not switch to CDMA.

[mstone]

I'll post what I posted in Macworld, which had this story earlier:

"Well, this seems to be an idea fraught with problems!

How ARE they going to deal with the network problem?

Having both would be counterproductive, but switching Sprint over to GSM would cost tens of billions. It would cost less to move T-Mobile to CDMA, but why would they want to move away from the global standard?

I could understand this if Sprint was moving to the 4G standard that both AT&T and Verizon are moving to, but they aren't.

So what benefits will they derive?"

Legacy support. The two networks remain separate for some time. As they both move to 4G the entire CDMA system needs to be replaced anyway. The economies of scale would benefit the new larger company in advertising, accounting and customer support where they could eliminate the redundancies. As new customers come online they would likely be on the GSM side of the equation.

[fulldecent]

Legacy support. The two networks remain separate for some time. As they both move to 4G the entire CDMA system needs to be replaced anyway. The economies of scale would benefit the new larger company in advertising, accounting and customer support where they could eliminate the redundancies. As new customers come online they would likely be on the GSM side of the equation.

The economies of scale come from price gouging.

[eh270]

I'm sorry, no matter what people think, I just can't see Apple and Verizon working together. Verizon's obsession with crippling devices goes totally against what makes the iPhone great...

[SpamSandwich]

The merger will look better for the bottom line. We're currently in a period of undervalued companies and those teetering near bankruptcy simply because of the economy.

Keep in mind also that T-mobile would instantly have a large chunk of the Clearwire deal, opening T-mobile to WiMax. This would all make T-mo and Clearwire a more attractive company for Apple to deal with.

[SpamSandwich]

I'm sorry, no matter what people think, I just can't see Apple and Verizon working together. Verizon's obsession with crippling devices goes totally against what makes the iPhone great...

And Apple already has standing deals with T-mo in Germany.... this sounds better every time I hear about it.

[Roc Ingersol]

How ARE they going to deal with the network problem?Whereas Sprint might downplay the importance of 4G, the new joint venture would be moving there, quickly.

[Quake97]

This is easily one of the dumbest things I've seen recently. Doesn't T-Mobile know about the fiasco that was the Sprint and Nextel merger? What, 3 years later, and their still having problems with that. Instead of spending money buying something, T-Mobile should just throw that money into the network and expand 3G like crazy. I remember already seeing an article that they plan on dumping a ton of money into T-Mobile USA for just that anyway.

Joe

[ghstmars]

This is a recipe for disaster. Remember what happened when Sprint bought Nextel.The incompatibility of CDMA and the IDEN networks made this deal a total disaster. Dan Hasse, Sprint CEO, said it clearly on The Charlie Rose show the other day, how they paid too much for it and the trouble of integrating both networks. Imagine another go at it this time Wimax with LTE ? Tmobile has a clear upgrade path to 4g with LTE . Sprint already on Wimax. It will cost billions and years for it to work and by that time its functioning, if TMobile ever gets it to work, it would have lost more money.

[Blastdoor]

I'm sorry, no matter what people think, I just can't see Apple and Verizon working together. Verizon's obsession with crippling devices goes totally against what makes the iPhone great...

Agreed!

I can understand people's frustration with AT&T, but I think we have to give them credit for making this deal with Apple. We're all a lot better off than if Verizon had their way. This is easy for me to say because I don't live in NY or SF, and I've had nothing but good experiences with my AT&T coverage. But I'm not going to be looking to change carriers if/when the iPhone becomes available elsewhere.

[Enigmafan420]

Sprint never really recovered from purchasing Nextel and the two systems are still operated separately. They have never been integrated.

To me, this idea sounds like a continuation of a disastrous merger of incompatible technologies. Think Sprint would have learned the first time.

[noexpectations]

Q: What do you get when you combine two medium sized wireless carriers who continue to loose customers each month due to inadequate service, coverage, and lousy support?

A: A large sized wireless carrier that will continue to loose customers each month due to inadequate service, coverage, and lousy support. Case in point: Sprint + Nextel = A bigger mess.

[SpamSandwich]

This is a recipe for disaster. Remember what happened when Sprint bought Nextel.The incompatibility of CDMA and the IDEN networks made this deal a total disaster. Dan Hasse, Sprint CEO, said it clearly on The Charlie Rose show the other day, how they paid too much for it and the trouble of integrating both networks. Imagine another go at it this time Wimax with LTE ? Tmobile has a clear upgrade path to 4g with LTE . Sprint already on Wimax. It will cost billions and years for it to work and by that time its functioning, if TMobile ever gets it to work, it would have lost more money.

Aquisitions/mergers are the only way to grow these companies right now. They certainly aren't able to add more customers in any great numbers using traditional methods. This makes sense, especially because T-mo can buy undervalued Sprint now and spin it off later when the economy has recovered enough (if that's what makes sense at that time).

[Rot'nApple]

While still a long ways off, if at all possible, a T-Mobile-Sprint merger would change the landscape of U.S. wireless providers significantly. The iPhone's exclusive contract with AT&T is set to expire next year, which has led some to speculate that Apple's device could become available on a rival network. By and large, assumptions have suggested Apple would choose Verizon, the largest wireless provider in the U.S. But a combination of T-Mobile and Sprint would be nearly as large as AT&T, and perhaps a viable option for Apple to consider.

As a T-Mobile subscriber for 6 years, and to quote the most recent tv commercial for Pizza Hut, "JACKPOT"! :D

I do wonder what technological route they a merger would provide... T-Mobile's GSM, Sprint's current method or this 4G everyone is talking about?

[Gazoobee]

I'm sorry, no matter what people think, I just can't see Apple and Verizon working together. Verizon's obsession with crippling devices goes totally against what makes the iPhone great...No one except a few tech pundits and some disgruntled customers think Apple will go with Verizon. They had the chance to twice already and they didn't.

It makes no sense for Apple to make a CDMA phone and the only way *any* American telcos will get a contract from Apple is to move to a more modern standard. It would make sense for Apple to do multiple carriers if multiple carriers are available on GSM or LTE. Those that don't move quick enough will fail and be bought out just as we see happening here.

The poster above that said they will merge and move both companies forward to LTE has it right on the button. If AT&T doesn't move to LTE fast enough they could end up being left behind as well. Things could and probably should move fast on all of this since almost every "western" country except for the USA is already far ahead.

CDMA is dead in the water and Sprint is just the first casualty. In Canada, there are three telcos in the oligopoly and the other two are more than halfway through a conversion to GSM that started the moment they saw the iPhone wasn't ever going to work on their networks. By late next year, my part of Canada will be almost completely GSM and moving towards LTE at lightning speed.

Most of Europe is there already.

[mdriftmeyer]

and kills Consumer Options.

There should be a required minimum 20 Telco carriers one can choose from, in any market, at any time, with a unified back-end to traffic across.

[ronn]

T-Mobile has $70B in debt, Sprint has more than $20B in debt. A merger will ensure further debt. There's no way this could go through. And I haven't even mentioned the incompatible systems. Never!!

[melgross]

Legacy support. The two networks remain separate for some time. As they both move to 4G the entire CDMA system needs to be replaced anyway. The economies of scale would benefit the new larger company in advertising, accounting and customer support where they could eliminate the redundancies. As new customers come online they would likely be on the GSM side of the equation.

I don't really agree. Both companies are quickly losing customers.

The normal situation where two losing companies merge is for one new losing company to be formed. Often, losses increase after such a merger.

Sprint is moving to WiMax for 4G. T-Mobile? Who knows?

WiMx isn't compatible with the other 4G services that AT&T and Verizon are moving to as I said already. So they will still be stuck with a non compatible system.

There are no economies of scale here. They use two networks, and they will be doing that for years to come.

That means that they get no synergy from the merger. Two technical departments, two equipment technology lines from their suppliers. Two support staffs, etc.

What an incredible waste of money!

It costs large amounts of money to integrate two large companies even when their technologies are the same. Just figuring out who should stay, and who should go, what management lines are going to take over from which company, how the culture clash will be managed, something that's rarely done well.

But now they will have opposing technology lines to manage. People trained in one won't understand the other. How will they integrate their networks? How will they explain to their customers which phones they can purchase, and which ones they can't?

So, if I were a Sprint CDMA customer, and now its one company, what do I subscribe to? Is is T-Mobiles odd GSM implementation, which uses the 1700 band which no other GSM company does, or am I still a Sprint CDMA customer?

DoI need to buy a GSM phone, or a CDMA phone? What happens when I move? Or if I'm traveling around?

Can I choose to go from one to the other? Is my two year plan still valid if I want to go to GSM from CDMA, or the other way around?

Am I on the very limited 3G service from T-Mobile, or the much more widespread one from Sprint?

How is this going to work? Sprint had almost as much of a problem when they bought Nextel, and now there's a lawsuit over that mess:

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/03/13/sprint-s-sees-lawsuit-over-2005-nextel-merger-disaster/

This will be a far bigger mess than that ever was, and Sprint has STILL not completely integrated IDEN into their network properly.

[melgross]

The merger will look better for the bottom line. We're currently in a period of undervalued companies and those teetering near bankruptcy simply because of the economy.

Keep in mind also that T-mobile would instantly have a large chunk of the Clearwire deal, opening T-mobile to WiMax. This would all make T-mo and Clearwire a more attractive company for Apple to deal with.

Yuk!!

[melgross]

Whereas Sprint might downplay the importance of 4G, the new joint venture would be moving there, quickly.

Sprint isn't downplaying 4G. They are just moving to the WiMax version.

It's highly doubtful that these combined companies would move any faster. It's likely that everything will stop cold until they figure out what they are, and where they're going.

It won't be pretty.

[iansilv]

Man I hope this goes through... Screw Verizon. Allthat would need to happen is that both companys' customers continue to use their current network, and they make a choose of Whig network to bring the iPhone out on- which standard and then start to flesh out that one more.

Thinkabout it- network congestion would not really matter as you would have two different networks to use while the new iPhone customers are on the onebeing improved. I was on sprit until Att for the iPhone- I might go back...

[melgross]

Aquisitions/mergers are the only way to grow these companies right now. They certainly aren't able to add more customers in any great numbers using traditional methods. This makes sense, especially because T-mo can buy undervalued Sprint now and spin it off later when the economy has recovered enough (if that's what makes sense at that time).

If this goes through, T-Mobile won't be spinning it off. If it came to that, it would be because the merger (or more likely, purchase, though companies don't like to use that term) was a failure.

That would cost more billions.

No. If they do this they must complete it.

[melgross]

As a T-Mobile subscriber for 6 years, and to quote the most recent tv commercial for Pizza Hut, "JACKPOT"! :D

I do wonder what technological route they a merger would provide... T-Mobile's GSM, Sprint's current method or this 4G everyone is talking about?

When you said "jackpot", I'm assuming by the face, that you are joking.

I think that Apple would avoid this as best as possible.

I would.

[Gazoobee]

I don't really agree. Both companies are quickly losing customers.

The normal situation where two losing companies merge is for one new losing company to be formed. Often, losses increase after such a merger.

Sprint is moving to WiMax for 4G. T-Mobile? Who knows? WiMx isn't compatible with the other 4G services that AT&T and Verizon are moving to as I said already. So they will still be stuck with a non compatible system.

There are no economies of scale here. They use two networks, and they will be doing that for years to come. That means that they get no synergy from the merger. Two technical departments, two equipment technology lines from their suppliers. Two support staffs, etc.

What an incredible waste of money!

It costs large amounts of money to integrate two large companies even when their technologies are the same. Just figuring out who should stay, and who should go, what management lines are going to take over from which company, how the culture clash will be managed, something that's rarely done well.

But now they will have opposing technology lines to manage. People trained in one won't understand the other. How will they integrate their networks? How will they explain to their customers which phones they can purchase, and which ones they can't?

So, if I were a Sprint CDMA customer, and now its one company, what do I subscribe to? Is is T-Mobiles odd GSM implementation, which uses the 1700 band which no other GSM company does, or am I still a Sprint CDMA customer?

DoI need to buy a GSM phone, or a CDMA phone? What happens when I move? Or if I'm traveling around? Can I choose to go from one to the other? Is my two year plan still valid if I want to go to GSM from CDMA, or the other way around? Am I on the very limited 3G service from T-Mobile, or the much more widespread one from Sprint?

How is this going to work? Sprint had almost as much of a problem when they bought Nextel, and now there's a lawsuit over that mess. This will be a far bigger mess than that ever was, and Sprint has STILL not completely integrated IDEN into their network properly.I think you're taking the "merger" word a little too seriously here. Often when companies "merge like this, what they really mean is "one swallows the other whole."

If you consider that CDMA is a dead-end technology (and I would argue it is), then most of your issues go away. They keep a skeleton staff in order to keep the CDMA stuff working while they transition, but otherwise anyone involved in the CDMA side of things is basically fired.

There's no "moving back to CDMA" or anything like that, the CDMA networks get a few basic handset choices and sort of "wait to die." A similar thing happens on the GSM side (for both companies), while the entire business is moved to LTE. This puts them at number two in the USA with (at the end of the process) a better network than AT&T has now. Seems like an excellent move to me.

[melgross]

No one except a few tech pundits and some disgruntled customers think Apple will go with Verizon. They had the chance to twice already and they didn't.

It makes no sense for Apple to make a CDMA phone and the only way *any* American telcos will get a contract from Apple is to move to a more modern standard. It would make sense for Apple to do multiple carriers if multiple carriers are available on GSM or LTE. Those that don't move quick enough will fail and be bought out just as we see happening here.

The poster above that said they will merge and move both companies forward to LTE has it right on the button. If AT&T doesn't move to LTE fast enough they could end up being left behind as well. Things could and probably should move fast on all of this since almost every "western" country except for the USA is already far ahead.

CDMA is dead in the water and Sprint is just the first casualty. In Canada, there are three telcos in the oligopoly and the other two are more than halfway through a conversion to GSM that started the moment they saw the iPhone wasn't ever going to work on their networks. By late next year, my part of Canada will be almost completely GSM and moving towards LTE at lightning speed.

Most of Europe is there already.

You really think that Sprint will abandon the almost $10 billion it's spending on WiMax, and go with LTE? They had the chance, and they didn't.

T-Mobile can barely manage to get 3G working in a few cities, it will be late with 4G services, you can be sure.

The only other company Apple could deal with in the US is Verizon. Verizon is rushing LTE. They'll have it in a few cities by the end of the year. AT&T will take longer, but by 2011, both will have fairly extensive LTE networks.

Once that happens, and the iPhone is worked to run with it, then Verizon becomes a viable option.

As Apple is now moving to multiple carriers in the same country in many places, it could happen here.

We can look to China. A three year non exclusive deal with China Unicom, and China Mobile just stated that they are working with Apple to bring the iPhone to them.

Believe me, if Apple can work with Chinese companies, with the government imposed limitations, and the companies tough demands, they can work with Verizon.

[Hudson1]

A little bit off-topic but does anyone else raise their eyebrows when they hear GSM is some kind of "global standard"?

Among the largest four USA mobile providers, most people think T-Mobile and AT&T are the poorest from a technical standpoint. Both are GSM based. Heck, I have two family members on T-Mobile right now and it's deplorable both in coverage and quality. So I get a little peeved when people talk about Europe's mobile telephone system being years ahead of the USA's. If so, then why is Deutche Telecom's mobile service (T-Mobile) the worst in the USA?

I have no idea why Deutch Telecom would want to do this merger. About all I can come up with is that it's the only way they can stay in business on this side of the Atlantic. How they will do that, post merger, is anyone's guess.

[JeffDM]

Whereas Sprint might downplay the importance of 4G, the new joint venture would be moving there, quickly.

Sprint already has 4G right now.

This is a recipe for disaster. Remember what happened when Sprint bought Nextel.The incompatibility of CDMA and the IDEN networks made this deal a total disaster. Dan Hasse, Sprint CEO, said it clearly on The Charlie Rose show the other day, how they paid too much for it and the trouble of integrating both networks. Imagine another go at it this time Wimax with LTE ? Tmobile has a clear upgrade path to 4g with LTE . Sprint already on Wimax. It will cost billions and years for it to work and by that time its functioning, if TMobile ever gets it to work, it would have lost more money.

I don't know how the two networks could be integrated, at all. I don't know about other areas, but I know for sure that the Nextel system is still up and running here, my parents are still using their old phones. They really need to send all their Nextel subscribers a new phone and drop Nextel's old network. It doesn't need to be done all at once, city by city, state by state, whatever. But it looks to me that it must be done.

I just don't see Sprint-Nextel merging with yet another network, one that's also a bit of a hodgepodge. You don't get an eagle by strapping together three turkeys.

In Canada, there are three telcos in the oligopoly and the other two are more than halfway through a conversion to GSM that started the moment they saw the iPhone wasn't ever going to work on their networks.

I am highly skeptical that a transition to GSM is happening because of the iPhone. It has to be wayyy too expensive to do for that reason alone.

[melgross]

I think you're taking the "merger" word a little too seriously here. Often when companies "merge like this, what they really mean is "one swallows the other whole."

If you consider that CDMA is a dead-end technology (and I would argue it is), then most of your issues go away. They keep a skeleton staff in order to keep the CDMA stuff working while they transition, but otherwise anyone involved in the CDMA side of things is basically fired.

There's no "moving back to CDMA" or anything like that, the CDMA networks get a few basic handset choices and sort of "wait to die." A similar thing happens on the GSM side (for both companies), while the entire business is moved to LTE. This puts them at number two in the USA with (at the end of the process) a better network than AT&T has now. Seems like an excellent move to me.

You can play with words if you like. I don't care. I already said that companies use the word merger when it often means "purchased". Sometimes, merger is a political term. It's intended to not embarrass the company being bought, particularly when it's the larger one.

This happened with Chrysler and Mercedes. Mercedes bought Chrysler, but it was called a merger.

I've seen it happen more than a few times. It doesn't really matter what you want to call it. The point is that it will be intended to make one large company out of two smaller ones. That's all that matters.

They can't do what you say they could do. That's absurd.

CDMA customers will be two thirds of their customer base, as will the employees.

What, you think they can snap their fingers and the whole annoying CDMA thing will just disappear?

CDMA will be the main system for years to come there, like it or not.

It would be a lot easier and cheaper to do away with the non standard version of GSM that T-Mobile inexplicably uses.

You better get out into the real world. Things don't work the way you think they do. Read the link I provided.

[beingnickb]

Q: What do you get when you combine two medium sized wireless carriers who continue to loose customers each month due to inadequate service, coverage, and lousy support?

A: A large sized wireless carrier that will continue to loose customers each month due to inadequate service, coverage, and lousy support. Case in point: Sprint + Nextel = A bigger mess.

I don't really agree. Both companies are quickly losing customers.

The normal situation where two losing companies merge is for one new losing company to be formed. Often, losses increase after such a merger.

I would love to see where you two get your numbers.

T-Mobile USA Q2 results (http://cache.t-mobile.com/Cms/Files/Published/0000BDF20016F5DD010312E2BDE4AE9B/0000BDF20016F5DE0122F10FE4B0BF18/file/TMUS%20Q2%20Press%20Release%20Final%20CLEAN-Updated.pdf)

T-Mobile was even nice enough to put an executive summary in bullet point format so you guys do not have to strain yourselves.

[melgross]

You don't get an eagle by strapping together three turkeys.

I like that.


I am highly skeptical that a transition to GSM is happening because of the iPhone.

So am I.

[JeffDM]

A little bit off-topic but does anyone else raise their eyebrows when they hear GSM is some kind of "global standard"?

Among the largest four USA mobile providers, most people think T-Mobile and AT&T are the poorest from a technical standpoint. Both are GSM based. Heck, I have two family members on T-Mobile right now and it's deplorable both in coverage and quality. So I get a little peeved when people talk about Europe's mobile telephone system being years ahead of the USA's. If so, then why is Deutche Telecom's mobile service (T-Mobile) the worst in the USA?

I have no idea why Deutch Telecom would want to do this merger. About all I can come up with is that it's the only way they can stay in business on this side of the Atlantic. How they will do that, post merger, is anyone's guess.

I can't address the US issues, but GSM really is a global standard, like it or not. I personally don't like it because GSM phones seem a lot more prone to interfering with audio equipment, consumer or pro, but I don't think anyone can really argue that the GSM group of standards isn't going to be the long term winner, they already more than outnumber all the other standards combined in user base.

[melgross]

I would love to see where you two get your numbers.

T-Mobile USA Q2 results (http://cache.t-mobile.com/Cms/Files/Published/0000BDF20016F5DD010312E2BDE4AE9B/0000BDF20016F5DE0122F10FE4B0BF18/file/TMUS%20Q2%20Press%20Release%20Final%20CLEAN-Updated.pdf)

T-Mobile was even nice enough to put an executive summary in bullet point format so you guys do not have to strain yourselves.

Well, I didn't explain myself too well. As you can see from T-Mobile's own information, that you so kindly provided, their new customer additions are sliding severely. From 668,000, to 415,000, to 325,000 customer additions. That's what I meant, but didn't explain it properly.

Sprint is actually losing customers. Their Ads where they say that there are 49 million customers on their network will shortly have to be revised to 48 million.

[BenRoethig]

If done right (aka moving to GSM.), this could be a very good thing for the future. However, it would be expensive as hell to do.

[iansilv]

I also don't understand why everyone is freaking out about merging networks. You have two companies right now, that for better or for worse, each have their customer bases. Their profitability on each might be changing, but they are companies- functional, working companies.

Buy Sprint- move over brand identity. Keep servicing their customers. Consolidate costs with combined advertising, marketing and branding. Make a decision as to which network continues and work with Apple while you do that. Then bring out the iphone on that network, and the equivalent of all of T-Mobile's and Sprint's customers can buy it. Sure, either T-Mobile or Sprints' prior customers are now using a different network, but nobody cares. The network that does not get the iphone is the network whose towers are converted over gradually to the new network. And all future phones are brought out on the new network.

Old network- likely CDMA dies.

And seriously- who really gives a shit about LTE or WI-Max or whatever nuclear powered next gen network is coming out? I can bring up a web page relatively quickly on the 3g network on ATT. Most of the time I am in a wifi zone. With 3g I can receive a call without breaking my data connection. It seems like these faster and faster networks are going to run in to the problem of dvd v blurry- Blu-ray's increased picture quality is not appreciated by a lot of customers. More network speed isn't necessarily welcomed by customers if the basics are taken care of- like calling and email. I suppose video chatting would be a killer feature- but that will work on 3g now...

Fact is, the iPhone 2g proved Jobs' analysis- it was fast enough and people cared more about the user experience. That's why the iphone sold the way it did- it was just the first device to really give people what they wanted in a handheld device.

[beingnickb]

Well, I didn't explain myself too well. As you can see from T-Mobile's own information, that you so kindly provided, their new customer additions are sliding severely. From 668,000, to 415,000, to 325,000 customer additions. That's what I meant, but didn't explain it properly.

Sprint is actually losing customers. Their Ads where they say that there are 49 million customers on their network will shortly have to be revised to 48 million.

Right. A decrease in growth does not equal loss.

I do agree that the merger is pointless.

[bartfat]

A little bit off-topic but does anyone else raise their eyebrows when they hear GSM is some kind of "global standard"?

Among the largest four USA mobile providers, most people think T-Mobile and AT&T are the poorest from a technical standpoint. Both are GSM based. Heck, I have two family members on T-Mobile right now and it's deplorable both in coverage and quality. So I get a little peeved when people talk about Europe's mobile telephone system being years ahead of the USA's. If so, then why is Deutche Telecom's mobile service (T-Mobile) the worst in the USA?

I have no idea why Deutch Telecom would want to do this merger. About all I can come up with is that it's the only way they can stay in business on this side of the Atlantic. How they will do that, post merger, is anyone's guess.

GSM is a global standard, being used in over 212 countries around the world... the US is the exception, rather than the rule. The reason T-Mobile's coverage sucks indoors is because they use a higher frequency in the US than the do in Europe, since AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon already got licensed most of the favorable wireless frequencies that work well indoors from the FCC. In Europe, it's the opposite... AT&T coverage is terrible there (probably here too now b/c of iPhone users) b/c they didn't get favorable frequencies, while T-Mobile did, since they were there first to acquire and license the use of those frequencies.

However, I'd guess that those three listed above aren't really doing much to improve coverage (maybe Verizon, I keep hearing from family that they don't go anywhere without having at least 4 bars.. even in swampy Louisana). T-Mobile is so far great coverage here in southern california, but they don't have a viable data phone to compete with the iPhone so they're losing customers to AT&T. And those that want Verizon-like coverage and are willing to pay, well, they go to Verizon. What's left for T-Mobile? Competing with AT&T and Sprint (with a higher wireless frequency that doesn't penetrate walls as well in the US) and having to offer more minutes/data for less. Is that really such a bad thing for consumers? Probably not, but they'd like not to be in that situation ;)

My opinion on the merger? Clearwire is clearly losing billions each year, and the only sponsor really is Intel... Sprint doesn't have nearly enough capital to waste on a project like that. So that means if T-Mobile ever gets 4G, it'll probably be LTE. Besides, they can use their knowledge from building their 4G network in Europe to help build it in the US. Come to think of it, why AREN'T they using their experience in Europe's 3G networks to build it out in the US? But then again, to put these up all over the place requires more towers than AT&T (b/c of the frequency problem; these higher frequencies also don't travel as far.. sometimes, they're not much further than a few football field lengths of signal from the tower) and T-Mobile definitely doesn't have that kind of capital to build it out nationwide at that quantity, having only the 4th largest amount of subscribers.

[melgross]

I also don't understand why everyone is freaking out about merging networks. You have two companies right now, that for better or for worse, each have their customer bases. Their profitability on each might be changing, but they are companies- functional, working companies.

Buy Sprint- move over brand identity. Keep servicing their customers. Consolidate costs with combined advertising, marketing and branding. Make a decision as to which network continues and work with Apple while you do that. Then bring out the iphone on that network, and the equivalent of all of T-Mobile's and Sprint's customers can buy it. Sure, either T-Mobile or Sprints' prior customers are now using a different network, but nobody cares. The network that does not get the iphone is the network whose towers are converted over gradually to the new network. And all future phones are brought out on the new network.

Old network- likely CDMA dies.

And seriously- who really gives a shit about LTE or WI-Max or whatever nuclear powered next gen network is coming out? I can bring up a web page relatively quickly on the 3g network on ATT. Most of the time I am in a wifi zone. With 3g I can receive a call without breaking my data connection. It seems like these faster and faster networks are going to run in to the problem of dvd v blurry- Blu-ray's increased picture quality is not appreciated by a lot of customers. More network speed isn't necessarily welcomed by customers if the basics are taken care of- like calling and email. I suppose video chatting would be a killer feature- but that will work on 3g now...

Fact is, the iPhone 2g proved Jobs' analysis- it was fast enough and people cared more about the user experience. That's why the iphone sold the way it did- it was just the first device to really give people what they wanted in a handheld device.

You're making the iPhone out to be something it isn't. It has nothing to do with what happens at these companies.

[quinney]

You really think that Sprint will abandon the almost $10 billion it's spending on WiMax, and go with LTE? They had the chance, and they didn't.

If the rumored acquisition occurs, it will be Deutsche Telekom making the decision, rather than Sprint. Who knows what the decision will be, but I think the future
worldwide for LTE looks a lot more promising than that for WiMax. Certainly we will see LTE-capable iPhones before we see WiMax iPhones, don't you think?

[iansilv]

You're making the iPhone out to be something it isn't. It has nothing to do with what happens at these companies.

No, no sorry- i think you are wrong here. The iphone is the most revolutionary device since the blackberry, and it is converting people to ATT, despite all the problems with people complaining about coverage. I would be very very surprised if T-Mobile is considering buying Sprint if they do not have something going on to bring out the iphone after they do.

I mean, what- they buy sprint, and the iphone goes to Verizon- WTF would anyone go to T-Sprint after that?

The iphone is a strong enough device to convert people to the apple ecosystem. All the carriers know that. The choice is no longer about what network you want- its about whether you want and can afford the iphone.

Right now the original 3g is at 99$- that's a pretty lower barrier to entry. It's not a far jump to say $49 or even free with contract at that point...

And consider any complaints that go with the iphone have to do with ATT.

No, I think you re wrong to say that the iphone is not changing what is done at these companies. i think these companies are very much waking up to the idea that the device can be more persuasive than the network.

[melgross]

Right. A decrease in growth does not equal loss.

It will. What is happening is that T-Mobile is losing out to both AT&T and Verizon.

While Sprint is actually losing customers, T-Mobile is being hurt significantly as well. When your additions are down by a large amount each quarter, there comes a time when you are losing customers as well. Look at the numbers:

From 2nd quarter 2008 to the first quarter of 2009, down 38%. From first quarter 2009 to 2nd quarter 2009, down 22%. That may sound like the decreases are themselves decreasing, but really, they are accelerating. The first numbers T-Mobile gave here skipped two quarters, while the last one was just one quarter later.

The additions this last quarter are less than half of what they were a years ago, same quarter. That could easily mean that next year, 2nd quarter, T-Mobile could lose customers.

Remember that Sprint was also gaining customers in decreasing numbers before they actually started to lose them. History is repeating itself with T-Mobile, and apparently, DT is seeing this.

But still, two weak companies together merely means one larger weak company. They will have to prove to their customers, and potential customers that they can turn it around. That's very difficult to do. I don't see how this is going to do it. A couple of people have offered overly simplistic ideas about that, the reality is that it will be almost impossible.


I do agree that the merger is pointless.

Yes.

[melgross]

No, no sorry- i think you are wrong here. The iphone is the most revolutionary device since the blackberry, and it is converting people to ATT, despite all the problems with people complaining about coverage. I would be very very surprised if T-Mobile is considering buying Sprint if they do not have something going on to bring out the iphone after they do.

I mean, what- they buy sprint, and the iphone goes to Verizon- WTF would anyone go to T-Sprint after that?

The iphone is a strong enough device to convert people to the apple ecosystem. All the carriers know that. The choice is no longer about what network you want- its about whether you want and can afford the iphone.

Right now the original 3g is at 99$- that's a pretty lower barrier to entry. It's not a far jump to say $49 or even free with contract at that point...

And consider any complaints that go with the iphone have to do with ATT.

No, I think you re wrong to say that the iphone is not changing what is done at these companies. i think these companies are very much waking up to the idea that the device can be more persuasive than the network.

We have the phone, and it's great. but it won't mean a damn to whether this deal works or not. There are so many problems for these two companies that iPhone or not, they won't survive without making tens of billions in changes.

And, do you think that with the iPhone already selling at AT&T there will be that many new customers for the new company? I don't see it.

In fact, I don't see Apple wanting to deal with them at all.

They will still be the third largest company, and will still be losing customers, possibly at an even faster rate. They will have two incompatible systems, so only some of their customers MIGHT be able to use the phone.

T-Mobile can't control whether they get the iPhone. They would have to convince Apple that it is good for APPLE, not them. I cant see this losing company being good for anyone, much less Apple.

Verizon is the only other viable company in the US that the phone could go to for the number of increasing subscribers it has, and the use of LTE, along with AT&T.

Forget this company. That would be like going from the pan into the fire.

[melgross]

If the rumored acquisition occurs, it will be Deutsche Telekom making the decision, rather than Sprint. Who knows what the decision will be, but I think the future
worldwide for LTE looks a lot more promising than that for WiMax. Certainly we will see LTE-capable iPhones before we see WiMax iPhones, don't you think?

That's why I mentioned them. DT is doing that in the UK. I was reading about it when I was over there a week ago.

They aren't happy about being the smallest, here or there.

But Sprint can fight this if they don't want it. There's no guarantee it will go through.

While I had high hopes for WiMax two years ago, the adoption of LTE by BOTH AT&T and Verizon has changed my mind.

[iansilv]

We have the phone, and it's great. but it won't mean a damn to whether this deal works or not. There are so many problems for these two companies that iPhone or not, they won't survive without making tens of billions in changes.

And, do you think that with the iPhone already selling at AT&T there will be that many new customers for the new company? I don't see it.

In fact, I don't see Apple wanting to deal with them at all.

They will still be the third largest company, and will still be losing customers, possibly at an even faster rate. They will have two incompatible systems, so only some of their customers MIGHT be able to use the phone.

T-Mobile can't control whether they get the iPhone. They would have to convince Apple that it is good for APPLE, not them. I cant see this losing company being good for anyone, much less Apple.

Verizon is the only other viable company in the US that the phone could go to for the number of increasing subscribers it has, and the use of LTE, along with AT&T.

Forget this company. That would be like going from the pan into the fire.

1. It will make a huge difference to the deal. What- I mean WHAT could a combination of the two smaller US companies bring to the table as a strength above them remaining individual companies? Everyone knows ATT's growth is fueled by the iPhone. My evidence= ATT gaining customers even though they suck. Despite what 'Seth the blogger douche' says.

2. You mention two incompatible systems, and that only some of their customers will be able to use the phone- I don't understand your logic here. If the companies merge, we have S(print) customers with CDMA phones and T(-Mobile) customers with GSM phones. Imagine that T-Sprint gets the iphone, and it is GSM. That's ok for T customers- they have been using gsm phones. But S customers- its fine for them too. Even if their last phone was a CDMA phone, their new phone is a GSM phone. The transition would be seamless for them. The customer would not care- there would be two networks and they would just move from one to the other within the same newly merged company.

3. You said that T-Mobile wold have to convince Apple the deal is good for them- ok. Easy- "Hey apple- sure Verizon is bigger- but do you want to help to make them even more powerful? Work with us- we will bend over for you, and you can make the same deal with us as you made with ATT." For this I cite Verizon's continued comments about Steve Jobs not owning innovation or whatever other crap they spew. Verizon represents the very worst of the cell phone industry in Steve's eyes- a carrier trying to nickel and dime over providing content. I think Apple would want to work with a weaker carrier first, forcing Verizon in to a better negotiating position for them later.

[JeffDM]

No, I think you re wrong to say that the iphone is not changing what is done at these companies.

It really depends. I don't think anyone can discount the iPhone's impact, but it's an overreach to say that companies are switching to GSM just because of the iPhone. There is no proof of that, it's all handwaving arguments. I do believe it may be a factor, but the core reason? Come on, be realistic here. Changing network types on a nationwide scale is not cheap, it's way too much of a gamble if it's only done for a *chance* at getting the iPhone, and even if they do get it, I don't think it would pay off for that reason alone. Too strong of a downside for too little of an upside.

[iansilv]

It really depends. I don't think anyone can discount the iPhone's impact, but it's an overreach to say that companies are switching to GSM just because of the iPhone. There is no proof of that, it's all handwaving arguments. I do believe it may be a factor, but the core reason? Come on, be realistic here. Changing network types on a nationwide scale is not cheap, it's way too much of a gamble if it's only done for a *chance* at getting the iPhone, and even if they do get it, I don't think it would pay off for that reason alone. Too strong of a downside for too little of an upside.

Everyone needs to separate company from network here. Right now we have two companies, each with their own network. The merger would mean one company, two networks.

Again, nobody has to change any networks. T-SPRINT (the new company) would simply say, "yeah yeah we have two networks, they are incompatible, they both suck, blah blah blah... but now we have the iphone. It runs on our GSM network." and that's it. They do not have to shut down/switch over one of the networks- each company represents a functioning nationwide network. Sure neither are arguably the best- and they would not be able to merge them to make one stronger network- but that's not the point. The point is that with one company, T-SPRINT could pull from a pool of customers the size of ATT and sell the iphone to them, even if they did not pick off customers fed up with ATT or unwilling to go to ATT from Verizon.

But imagine if they introduced a $75 a month everything plan for the iphone- unlimited EVERYTHING and made a statement by allowing slingbox to stream over their 3g equivalent network... I would switch...

[melgross]

1. It will make a huge difference to the deal. What- I mean WHAT could a combination of the two smaller US companies bring to the table as a strength above them remaining individual companies? Everyone knows ATT's growth is fueled by the iPhone. My evidence= ATT gaining customers even though they suck. Despite what 'Seth the blogger douche' says.

AT&T only seems to suck BECAUSE it has the iPhone. What do you think will happen if the media eating iPhone users are on this new company? It will suck. Likely, it will suck more. T-Mobile has just a few major cities on 3G, and it's incompatible with Sprints much larger coverage which is CDMA, which the iPhone can't deal with.

Do you thing that suddenly, T-Mobile will cover the entire country? It won't. It will still have a small coverage, and that's for its regular service as well. It's much more limited than AT&T's, and people complain about that. Sprints is out of the picture entirely. Apple isn't making a CDMA phone for Verizon, and they sure ain't gonna make one for Sprint.


2. You mention two incompatible systems, and that only some of their customers will be able to use the phone- I don't understand your logic here. If the companies merge, we have S(print) customers with CDMA phones and T(-Mobile) customers with GSM phones. Imagine that T-Sprint gets the iphone, and it is GSM. That's ok for T customers- they have been using gsm phones. But S customers- its fine for them too. Even if their last phone was a CDMA phone, their new phone is a GSM phone. The transition would be seamless for them. The customer would not care- there would be two networks and they would just move from one to the other within the same newly merged company.

You have an overactive imagination. Sprint isn't getting an iPhone, and neither is T-Mobile.

You don't seem to understand the coverage problems I've been talking about. T-Mobile's coverage will still be puny, and Apple still won't make a CDMA iPhone.

If a lot of customers began using iPhones on T-Mobile's network, it would overload it more than it does the much larger AT&T network. There's no doubt about that. How many customers would be satisfied that in most of T-Mobiles coverage area there is no 3G, and won't be for months or years?

And what do you tell your new CDMA customers? "No iPhone for you!" That's 2/3rds of your customers. Oh, and what about Sprints IDEN customers? They won't be able to use it either.


3. You said that T-Mobile wold have to convince Apple the deal is good for them- ok. Easy- "Hey apple- sure Verizon is bigger- but do you want to help to make them even more powerful? Work with us- we will bend over for you, and you can make the same deal with us as you made with ATT." For this I cite Verizon's continued comments about Steve Jobs not owning innovation or whatever other crap they spew. Verizon represents the very worst of the cell phone industry in Steve's eyes- a carrier trying to nickel and dime over providing content. I think Apple would want to work with a weaker carrier first, forcing Verizon in to a better negotiating position for them later.

What are you talking about? Do you think Apple cares if Verizon has a few million more customers than AT&T? They don't. They went to them first, remember? They want the biggest carrier in each country. Sometimes they can't get that, so they settle for a smaller one.

Again, look to China. Apple was in negotiations with China Mobile, the largest carrier in the world. Bigger than all the carriers in the US put together. Larger than all the carriers in the extended EU put together. They couldn't make a deal, so they went with China Unicom. But the three year deal is non exclusive. They're still negotiating with China mobile.

So don't say that Apple doesn't want Verizon to get a bit bigger. They don't care, or maybe they do, and would want that.

But Sprint/T-Mobile will really be a messed up company for years to come. Why would Apple want to deal with that?

Now, if they abandoned WiMax and went for LTE, in a few years it might be different, but that's billions down the hole for Sprint, and a major change in direction.

[JeffDM]

Everyone needs to separate company from network here. Right now we have two companies, each with their own network. The merger would mean one company, two networks.

That's not quite right. If it goes through, which I'm skeptical, that would mean one company that owns three networks. Each network has a heavy infrastructure cost for as long as they keep it going. Some of the back end might be merged, but you still have the cost of maintaining three different sets of radio hardware on each tower, so consolidation can only go so far without a very heavy investment to switch over their tower radios, maybe antennas and who knows what else. That makes it hard to compete against companies that aren't dragging that anchor. So far, Sprint hasn't managed to get rid of their iDEN network. This December, the Sprint-Nextel merger will be four years old.

[melgross]

Everyone needs to separate company from network here. Right now we have two companies, each with their own network. The merger would mean one company, two networks.

Yeah, that's what we've been saying. Or as Jeff has again pointed out, three networks.


Again, nobody has to change any networks. T-SPRINT (the new company) would simply say, "yeah yeah we have two networks, they are incompatible, they both suck, blah blah blah... but now we have the iphone. It runs on our GSM network." and that's it. They do not have to shut down/switch over one of the networks- each company represents a functioning nationwide network. Sure neither are arguably the best- and they would not be able to merge them to make one stronger network- but that's not the point. The point is that with one company, T-SPRINT could pull from a pool of customers the size of ATT and sell the iphone to them, even if they did not pick off customers fed up with ATT or unwilling to go to ATT from Verizon.

But imagine if they introduced a $75 a month everything plan for the iphone- unlimited EVERYTHING and made a statement by allowing slingbox to stream over their 3g equivalent network... I would switch...

That is really poor logic.

[iansilv]

You have an overactive imagination. Sprint isn't getting an iPhone, and neither is T-Mobile.


I'm just going to respond to this, as everything else you wrote seems to hinge on it:

OK- fine- I have an overactive imagination. You're right. I have no information that says that Deutsch Telecom is in negotiations with Apple to get the iPhone if it can increase its market base in the United States to that nearly of ATT.

But I am replying in this thread as though the rumor printed on the front of Apple Insider is not complete crap, and that the editor and management of this site think it's credible enough to post on its front page.

Answer this- why would Deutsch Telecom consider purchasing Sprint in the United States? Everything everyone has said on this thread is focusing on the problems between the two companies merging.

Assuming these problems are true, and Deutsch Telecom is not run by a bunch of idiots, why would they consider buying Sprint?

What- Are they going to shut it down so it can't compete with T-Mobile in the US? Are they going to use it to get employee discounts on iDen plans? These two questions are obviously sarcastic- but I want you to seriously answer the question- why would Deutsch Telecom be preparing to buy Sprint?

[iansilv]

Yeah, that's what we've been saying. Or as Jeff has again pointed out, three networks.



That is really poor logic.

It's actually not if you think about the idea that most towers are concentrated in the same place for all carriers, and if they let one network die and made all new phones only work on the other network, they could gradually transition their old customers over to the new network and switch their old towers over. Granted, they may have to force some customers to buy new phones after a time, but they could gradually move people off of the old network.

[JeffDM]

It's actually not if you think about the idea that most towers are concentrated in the same place for all carriers, and if they let one network die and made all new phones only work on the other network, they could gradually transition their old customers over to the new network and switch their old towers over. Granted, they may have to force some customers to buy new phones after a time, but they could gradually move people off of the old network.

I do think they should be doing this, but Sprint already had four years to get rid of iDEN and they have nothing to show for it. They've already admitted that the merger was a bad idea, now whoever buys Sprint-Nextel would have to work on decommissioning two networks and transitioning their customers to the third. It just sounds like a doubly bad idea.

[charlituna]

By and large, assumptions have suggested Apple would choose Verizon, the largest wireless provider in the U.S.



by and large, assumptions are that

Apple would sign up with anyone else rather than unlock the phone altogether, thus eliminating all the grey market for unlocking (i get daily spams to unlock my phone for anywhere from $100 to $500)

and/or

Apple will invest the time and money to make a device that either supports CDMA or both CDMA/GSM despite rejecting CDMA for the iphone when it was first released.


Having both would be counterproductive, but switching Sprint over to GSM would cost tens of billions. It would cost less to move T-Mobile to CDMA, but why would they want to move away from the global standard?

yes but the talk is that both technologies are on the way out. making the way for LTE or whatever. so it would be counterproductive to do any switching, only to do it again in a year or so. given this, they probably would have both going at the same time.

assuming that the legals shake out and allow the merger.

[SpamSandwich]

and kills Consumer Options.

There should be a required minimum 20 Telco carriers one can choose from, in any market, at any time, with a unified back-end to traffic across.

I completely disagree. Consolidation means efficiencies of scale which leads to large, stagnant companies which will in turn become targets for faster, nimbler competitors. Companies have a life cycle that mimics human characteristics because they are organizations made of people making decisions, both good and bad.

[charlituna]

We can look to China. A three year non exclusive deal with China Unicom, and China Mobile just stated that they are working with Apple to bring the iPhone to them.


yes but if what I read is correct, both of these companies support both GSM and CDMA.

unlike Verizon and Sprint which are both CDMA while the iphone is GSM



3. You said that T-Mobile wold have to convince Apple the deal is good for them- ok. Easy- "Hey apple- sure Verizon is bigger- but do you want to help to make them even more powerful? Work with us- we will bend over for you, and you can make the same deal with us as you made with ATT."

something else to consider. all the backlash that Apple is likely getting because of ATT's handling of the phone. there's no guarantee that T-mobile wouldn't get uppity and be just as bad, thus more backlash over the things Apple can't control but get blamed for cause they make the phone

also, how to handle the transition. newly sold phones is easy. they would be sim locked to T-Mobile. but what about current phones. do they just have to let current phones ride out on ATT until the person feels like upgrading again. or do they force ATT to essentially sell them the contract (ie T-Mobile pays the ETF) and immediately shut off all service to the phone, forcing the customers to download some new software that switches the sim lock to T-Mobile and then they have to go reactivate with T-Mobile. can't see that being pretty

[vinea]

Sprint already on Wimax.

Sprint effectively dumped WiMax. Xholm is no more.

[Rot'nApple]

When you said "jackpot", I'm assuming by the face, that you are joking.

I think that Apple would avoid this as best as possible.

I would.

No, when I said "jackpot", actually I was hungry for some pizza, but really, I was thinking to the fact that I wouldn't have to PAY to port my number that I have been giving out for the past 6 years, just in order to keep it while using the iPhone and I don't want a jail broke phone or whatever. I'm not to techno savvy to go through the chutes and ladders process every time Apple releases a new iPhone OS.

Regarding Apple avoiding this, I guess would be determined by the technologies of the future that are supposedly coming regarding LTE or 4G.

I don't think Apple would look at it from the standpoint as best possibilities, because were we not told by Steve Jobs that going with AT&T was the best carrier and then a year later Apple is hosting a spring time event and talking about MMS available worldwide now, available in the US at the end of Sept! And this was said in a jokingly manner with Apple management rolling their eyes!

Also, was it not just recently reported on that where in France Apple had one exclusive partnership and sales were dismal and then the French courts ruled exclusivity was illegal and Apple had two partnerships and their market share percentage went up, or something to that effect.

So based on the fact that Apple really isn't concerned about the carrier's ability and the fact that the market share increases when the iPhone is available to multiple carriers in one nation, then why not a large T-Mobile merged with Sprint. Maybe T-Mobile will dump the PRE?!

And why should T-Mobile's debt be a problem, the bozos in Washington think debt and deficits is no big deal, just you don't try and "protest" against them...

Finally, RIP Patrick Swayze. No more pain and discomfort from your Pancreatic cancer. You left an indelible mark with your talent and will be looked upon fondly. Thanks for your movies Dirty Dancing, Ghost, and your tv movie miniseries, North and South... may God Bless you into His Kingdom of Peace and Love!

[skittlebrau79]

The only other company Apple could deal with in the US is Verizon. Verizon is rushing LTE. They'll have it in a few cities by the end of the year. AT&T will take longer, but by 2011, both will have fairly extensive LTE networks.

Once that happens, and the iPhone is worked to run with it, then Verizon becomes a viable option.

Except there are two problems with this: Verizon will continue to use CDMA for voice for years after 4G is rolled out, and the 4G rollout will take until 2012, according to Verizon itself.

First, Verizon has publicly stated that although they are beginning trials of 4G, they are "very happy" with CDMA's voice capabilities, and they plan to continue to keep CDMA around well into 2018. The reason is simple: they have to keep CDMA around for all their existing customers, so they will use their significant CMDA investment a while longer to reduce cost and risk during the rollout. Meaning they can roll out LTE as time and money permit, using the CDMA fallback as necessary. The LTE phones that Verizon carries will include a CDMA fallback radio so that they function when LTE is not available, but the iPhone won't have any such capability. The iPhone 3G could be sold nationwide because it would just fall back to 2.5G. Verizon stores on the other hand would be overrun with angry people who can't use their phone in the vast parts of the midwest that were still running on a 2G network up until early 2009.

Second, Verizon publicly said they will begin their 4G rollout in late 2010 with 20-30 cities. By 2011, they will have expanded it to the top 50 markets and it will continue into 2012. By 2012 they hope to have coverage in 175-200 markets--but note they said coverage IN 200 markets, not coverage OF 200 markets. To cover a market, they can put up a tower in a crowded area like a downtown center, and leave the rest of the city on CDMA until they have more capital to spend.

We can look to China. A three year non exclusive deal with China Unicom, and China Mobile just stated that they are working with Apple to bring the iPhone to them.

Believe me, if Apple can work with Chinese companies, with the government imposed limitations, and the companies tough demands, they can work with Verizon.
They had no choice. They either worked with China Unicom, or no company at all, because CU is the only company in China that uses the same GSM band as the iPhone. Apple has plenty of choices in the USA, and I see no reason they'd want to give in to any of Verizon's demands (like crippling the phone via software just so Verizon can charge for Bluetooth).

[melgross]

I'm just going to respond to this, as everything else you wrote seems to hinge on it:

OK- fine- I have an overactive imagination. You're right. I have no information that says that Deutsch Telecom is in negotiations with Apple to get the iPhone if it can increase its market base in the United States to that nearly of ATT.

But I am replying in this thread as though the rumor printed on the front of Apple Insider is not complete crap, and that the editor and management of this site think it's credible enough to post on its front page.

Answer this- why would Deutsch Telecom consider purchasing Sprint in the United States? Everything everyone has said on this thread is focusing on the problems between the two companies merging.

Assuming these problems are true, and Deutsch Telecom is not run by a bunch of idiots, why would they consider buying Sprint?

What- Are they going to shut it down so it can't compete with T-Mobile in the US? Are they going to use it to get employee discounts on iDen plans? These two questions are obviously sarcastic- but I want you to seriously answer the question- why would Deutsch Telecom be preparing to buy Sprint?

DT is having problems with a number of its carrier properties around the world in that they are market trailers. They seem to have little, or no growth potential. By "merging" with others, they can get some mass. In the UK that makes a lot of sense, as they are on the same GSM systems, but the question is what they think they are going to accomplish here.

T-Mobile's new customer acquisition is in trouble, as the smallest of the major carriers, they are being pushed out. Both AT&T and Verizon are gaining new customers at a good clip. Sprint is losing them at a good clip. T-Mobile is losing the ability to attract new customers, and we can see that in the shrinking new customer numbers.

Where can T-Mobile get more customers? Well, the only other company that DT can afford is Sprint. So they are looking at that. It's not just an AI story, you know.

We're not the only ones questioning this deal. I'm reading questions in the WSJ, the NYTimes among other places.

Companies get together for several reasons. One is because they have synergy. Each company had half of what would be a fantastic property. Together they are more than the whole. But is that the case here? I don't see it.

Then other times they need the mass, as I've said, but do they get that here? With two major systems, and a third minor one, that will be very hard to accomplish. They can't let one system just die on the vine, all those customers would think of leaving, and many would.

Next is cost savings. Because they couldn't easily combine operations, the savings wouldn't be that great, and would be vastly overshadowed by the cost of integration as they must choose one final system to run with for the long term.

As to the iPhone. Why would Apple be interested? The GSM system is small, there's hardly any 3G operating. The road to 4G is questionable. The success of the company would be also questionable.

As with most big companies, management of DT isn't dumb, but they can make mistakes. We only have to look at the financial industry to see how that can happen.

[melgross]

It's actually not if you think about the idea that most towers are concentrated in the same place for all carriers, and if they let one network die and made all new phones only work on the other network, they could gradually transition their old customers over to the new network and switch their old towers over. Granted, they may have to force some customers to buy new phones after a time, but they could gradually move people off of the old network.

Towers are just that. It's the transceivers on the towers that matter. T-Mobile has fewer towers, and they have fewer transceivers. T-Mobile is not even in large parts of the country. So Sprint has tens of thousands of CDMA transceivers on many more towers than does T-Mobile. T-Mobile can take advantage of more towers, but then has to spend literally tens of billions changing all the transceivers to GSM models, or at least adding them to the CDMA towers until they can finally, years later, cut out CDMA entirely. They also need to change the equipment in their buildings, and the software. It's a real mess.

[melgross]

yes but the talk is that both technologies are on the way out. making the way for LTE or whatever. so it would be counterproductive to do any switching, only to do it again in a year or so. given this, they probably would have both going at the same time.

assuming that the legals shake out and allow the merger.

LTE won't be viable until late 2011. Then it will cover most of the US from both at7t and Verizon.

It will take longer for T-Mobile (what should we use for a shorthand name for this that doesn't sound too cute?) because Verizon has already started, and AT&T has made up its plans and is considering how todo the rollout.

Knowing how far behind T-Mobile is with 3G, we can see that LTE won't come quick.

What happens in the meantime? What if frustrated customers start to leave in larger numbers because of the problems caused by this "merger"?

[melgross]

yes but if what I read is correct, both of these companies support both GSM and CDMA.

unlike Verizon and Sprint which are both CDMA while the iphone is GSM


Well, that's one point. All Apple had to do was to kill WiFi.

But with LTE here in the States, it won't matter about CDMA.

[justflybob]

And Apple already has standing deals with T-mo in Germany.... this sounds better every time I hear about it.

Thanks for your comments. I just couldn't get my head around why they would do this. Now I get it. ;)

[melgross]

No, when I said "jackpot", actually I was hungry for some pizza, but really, I was thinking to the fact that I wouldn't have to PAY to port my number that I have been giving out for the past 6 years, just in order to keep it while using the iPhone and I don't want a jail broke phone or whatever. I'm not to techno savvy to go through the chutes and ladders process every time Apple releases a new iPhone OS.

Regarding Apple avoiding this, I guess would be determined by the technologies of the future that are supposedly coming regarding LTE or 4G.

I don't think Apple would look at it from the standpoint as best possibilities, because were we not told by Steve Jobs that going with AT&T was the best carrier and then a year later Apple is hosting a spring time event and talking about MMS available worldwide now, available in the US at the end of Sept! And this was said in a jokingly manner with Apple management rolling their eyes!

Also, was it not just recently reported on that where in France Apple had one exclusive partnership and sales were dismal and then the French courts ruled exclusivity was illegal and Apple had two partnerships and their market share percentage went up, or something to that effect.

So based on the fact that Apple really isn't concerned about the carrier's ability and the fact that the market share increases when the iPhone is available to multiple carriers in one nation, then why not a large T-Mobile merged with Sprint. Maybe T-Mobile will dump the PRE?!

And why should T-Mobile's debt be a problem, the bozos in Washington think debt and deficits is no big deal, just you don't try and "protest" against them...

Finally, RIP Patrick Swayze. No more pain and discomfort from your Pancreatic cancer. You left an indelible mark with your talent and will be looked upon fondly. Thanks for your movies Dirty Dancing, Ghost, and your tv movie miniseries, North and South... may God Bless you into His Kingdom of Peace and Love!

It looks as though Apple doesn't want to build devices with technology they think is irrelevant to most users if it adds to the cost, even by a little.

With LTE being the next jump in technology, Apple will want to go with that. With both AT&T and Verizon working on that, it gives them the potential of a subscriber base of 164 million. That's with two growing companies. One technology.

What will this company offer that could match that?

I'm looking at incremental sales. If Apple adds Verizon, they could add another 25% to their sales. I don't see much more.

Why? Because AT&T is already getting substantial sales coming in from all three other companies. Some people are coming in from Verizon now. If Verizon has the phone, the people who were moving, would just get the phone from Verizon, no increase from them. Some people now on AT&T getting an iPhone would move to Verizon to get it, so no new sales there either. So maybe about a 25% rise.

As they are already getting people to come over from both Sprint and T-Mobile, many of them would also be no new customers. In fact, I surmise that many Sprint customers moving to AT&T for the iPhone might have left anyway, so no gain there either. Almost the same thing for T-Mobile.

So this new company, if everything worked out just right might add another 10% to Apple's sales. Not enough to make another phone, and possibly not enough to want to even bother with the new problem fraught company.

And what would that 10% be when considering worldwide sales? Maybe 5%. After China comes on board with China Unicom, maybe 3%. If then China Mobile is added, perhaps 1%?

Why bother?

[TRRosen]

Sprint has talked about dumping Nextel. What if T-mobile bought Nextel to get their towers and spectrum for LTE? nextels push to talk is a completely separate radio system, they must have a good bit of spectrum.

[melgross]

Except there are two problems with this: Verizon will continue to use CDMA for voice for years after 4G is rolled out, and the 4G rollout will take until 2012, according to Verizon itself.

First, Verizon has publicly stated that although they are beginning trials of 4G, they are "very happy" with CDMA's voice capabilities, and they plan to continue to keep CDMA around well into 2018. The reason is simple: they have to keep CDMA around for all their existing customers, so they will use their significant CMDA investment a while longer to reduce cost and risk during the rollout. Meaning they can roll out LTE as time and money permit, using the CDMA fallback as necessary. The LTE phones that Verizon carries will include a CDMA fallback radio so that they function when LTE is not available, but the iPhone won't have any such capability. The iPhone 3G could be sold nationwide because it would just fall back to 2.5G. Verizon stores on the other hand would be overrun with angry people who can't use their phone in the vast parts of the midwest that were still running on a 2G network up until early 2009.

Second, Verizon publicly said they will begin their 4G rollout in late 2010 with 20-30 cities. By 2011, they will have expanded it to the top 50 markets and it will continue into 2012. By 2012 they hope to have coverage in 175-200 markets--but note they said coverage IN 200 markets, not coverage OF 200 markets. To cover a market, they can put up a tower in a crowded area like a downtown center, and leave the rest of the city on CDMA until they have more capital to spend.

But as you say, CDMA is for fallback only on LTE phones. That doesn't mean that new phones would even need it. I did say by the end of 2011, which is the same as saying by 2012.

It would be mostly for their cheap and "free" phones that wouldn't have LTE capabilities, until that became cheap enough to add to even those.

We don't have, nor do we need exact dates. Apple could move in June 2012, when they announce the new phones. That would likely be the best time.


They had no choice. They either worked with China Unicom, or no company at all, because CU is the only company in China that uses the same GSM band as the iPhone. Apple has plenty of choices in the USA, and I see no reason they'd want to give in to any of Verizon's demands (like crippling the phone via software just so Verizon can charge for Bluetooth).

Not true. Apple was first negotiating with China mobile, and is STILL negotiating with them. It's likely we'll see in on both carriers late this year, or the next.

We don't know what the industry will look like in 2012. Verizon is now beginning to break with its old policy. It must if it expects to get the Pre, and possibly the Pixi, and all those Android phones. No one would buy them from Verizon if there were restrictions there that weren't anywhere else.

[mdriftmeyer]

AT&T only seems to suck BECAUSE it has the iPhone. What do you think will happen if the media eating iPhone users are on this new company? It will suck. Likely, it will suck more. T-Mobile has just a few major cities on 3G, and it's incompatible with Sprints much larger coverage which is CDMA, which the iPhone can't deal with.

Do you thing that suddenly, T-Mobile will cover the entire country? It won't. It will still have a small coverage, and that's for its regular service as well. It's much more limited than AT&T's, and people complain about that. Sprints is out of the picture entirely. Apple isn't making a CDMA phone for Verizon, and they sure ain't gonna make one for Sprint.



You have an overactive imagination. Sprint isn't getting an iPhone, and neither is T-Mobile.

You don't seem to understand the coverage problems I've been talking about. T-Mobile's coverage will still be puny, and Apple still won't make a CDMA iPhone.

If a lot of customers began using iPhones on T-Mobile's network, it would overload it more than it does the much larger AT&T network. There's no doubt about that. How many customers would be satisfied that in most of T-Mobiles coverage area there is no 3G, and won't be for months or years?

And what do you tell your new CDMA customers? "No iPhone for you!" That's 2/3rds of your customers. Oh, and what about Sprints IDEN customers? They won't be able to use it either.



What are you talking about? Do you think Apple cares if Verizon has a few million more customers than AT&T? They don't. They went to them first, remember? They want the biggest carrier in each country. Sometimes they can't get that, so they settle for a smaller one.

Again, look to China. Apple was in negotiations with China Mobile, the largest carrier in the world. Bigger than all the carriers in the US put together. Larger than all the carriers in the extended EU put together. They couldn't make a deal, so they went with China Unicom. But the three year deal is non exclusive. They're still negotiating with China mobile.

So don't say that Apple doesn't want Verizon to get a bit bigger. They don't care, or maybe they do, and would want that.

But Sprint/T-Mobile will really be a messed up company for years to come. Why would Apple want to deal with that?

Now, if they abandoned WiMax and went for LTE, in a few years it might be different, but that's billions down the hole for Sprint, and a major change in direction.

Doesn't it feel that talking to these profiles [specifically about this subject] is right up there with talking to first graders?

[melgross]

Doesn't it feel that talking to these profiles [specifically about this subject] is right up there with talking to first graders?

I try to think these things through. The topics are complex. I think that some people just think, wow! This is cool, Apple could make a great deal with them because the iPhone is so great, and this company just would want to have it, so you know, like they would do anything to get it, and well, Apple would be just so happy with that, being that they just, you know, hate Verizon because they turned them down the first tine, and um, who needs that restrictive software stuff that Verizon does.

So this deal would be just so cool, and Apple is so cool.

Uh, that's enough, right?

[ivan.rnn01]

Yep, the universal end of exclusive iPhone deals is nearing us, everyone knows. Apple may start gaining royalties like Qualcomm, I guess. :)

[Abster2core]

Doesn't it feel that talking to these profiles [specifically about this subject] is right up there with talking to first graders?

And most don't have a good understanding of the basic technologies to appreciate the complexities involved.

Perhaps the following excerpt will help. It may ned some further vetting and updating, but it is one of the best descriptions on wireless protocols we have seen.

"GSM and CDMA are different wireless protocols, or "air interfaces".

GSM is a worldwide nonproprietary standard. It is a variation of TDMA - time division multiple access. It allows many phones to use the same radio channel via a technique of "time slicing": each phone on the channel transmits only during its allotted time slot.

CDMA is a proprietary standard and while there are CDMA systems in over 50 countries, it is not the "world standard" - if you want a "world phone" you want a GSM quad-band phone. South Korea is one of CDMA's chief users besides the US. CDMA stands for "code division multiple access." It uses a spread-spectrum technique; different phones share the same channel by using different spread-spectrum keys.

On top of these differences you have to consider frequencies. GSM in North America uses two bands, 850 MHz and 1900 MHz. GSM in almost all of the rest of the world (ROW) uses two other bands, 900 and 1800 MHz.

These days most any GSM phone you get will be at least a dual-band phone: it will work on both bands used in your area. If you plan on traveling internationally and you want to use your phone, you can get tri-band GSM phones that work on both US bands and one of the ROW bands. Or if you live elsewhere you can get tri-band GSM phones that cover both of the ROW bands and one of the US bands. And of course there are quad-band GSM phones that cover all four. These will work on *almost* any GSM system in the world, assuming you have either a local SIM card or that international roaming is turned on for your account. There are a few oddball systems out there on different frequencies entirely.

CDMA has similar issues with frequencies. The first big build of CDMA in the US was by Sprint; they used 1900 MHz exclusively and called it "PCS". Verizon's CDMA towers use the same CDMA protocol, but on the 800 MHz band.

Most CDMA phones sold in the US will work on both bands so that you can roam on the other carrier's towers. In fact a lot of Verizon's older phones were "dual-band/tri mode", meaning they would work on both of the CDMA bands and also on the old AMPS analog towers (also 800 MHz). The need for those has gone away since many of the old analog cellular systems have been shut down. Sprint's PCS phones were orginally 1900 only, but most of their phones now are dual-band CDMA.

CDMA in South Korea uses different frequencies entirely; no US CDMA phone will work there, nor vice versa, even though we both use CDMA. (n.b.: If you travel to South Korea, there are phone rental booths in the airport... or at least there were the last time I was there. You can even keep your same number on the rental phone.)

There are CDMA systems in other countries here and there but in almost everyplace other than North America and South Korea, GSM is dominant.

So, so far we have GSM phones that might be dual-band (either North America or ROW only, not both), tri-band, or quad-band; and we have US CDMA phones that work on the two US CDMA bands; and we have South Korea's CDMA phones that work in South Korea. Of course GSM phones won't work on any CDMA tower, nor vice versa.

None of these provide 3G capabilities.

3G is not a specific air interface protocol. It is more of a name for a set of features and capabilities - if your system meets a specified set of capabilities (like data speed, simultaneous voice and data from the same phone at the same time, many others), you can call it a "3G" system. Just like both CDMA and GSM are commonly recognized as 2G or 2.5G (depending on features like EDGE), there are several different air interfaces that are all called "3G" and provide 3G capabilities. Yes, one of the key 3G capabilities is data transfer speed for a data connection - but there's a lot more to it than just higher data speed. The WIkipedia article on 3G has the details.

There are two 3G systems in common use today. One is called EV-DO. This is an extension of CDMA and accordingly is commonly found as the 3G upgrade to existing CDMA systems. So the 3G offered by Verizon and Sprint in the US is using EV-DO.

The other 3G system in common use is called UMTS. It is designed as the 3G upgrade for existing GSM providers.

There are frequency issues here too, just as there are for CDMA and GSM.

Both AT&T and T-mobile are providing UMTS.. but on different bands. My HTC TyTN II does quad-band GSM but it will not work on T-mobile's UMTS (1700/2100 MHz). It does work on AT&T's UMTS (850/1900 MHz), and also on UMTS in Europe (2100 MHz, but different from T-mo's 1700/2100).

UMTS includes an optional upgrade called HSPA. One piece of that is called HSPDA, which provides what is being called 3.5G data speed.

Note that 3G is not just for data access. 3G systems provide both voice and data services. My HTC phone will not work on any 2G system in Japan. However, it does work on Japan's UMTS systems (2100 MHz). Thus my phone works for both voice and high speed data in Japan, relying solely on its 3G capabilities.

Now... that covers the differences between the systems, sort of. There's a lot more detail and I've simplified a lot, but those are the basics.

Can you have a phone that has GSM, CDMA, and 3G? Yes - the Blackberry Storm is one example. It does CDMA in the US; it does quad-band GSM for near-worldwide GSM service. It does both EVDO (3G in the US) and UMTS (3G 2100) in many other countries.

Yes, it is standard GSM. I was surprised that they did quad-band GSM; I thought it would be ROW GSM only, but it is indeed quad-band. However it will usually not work on GSM in the US because there will usually be a Verizon or even Sprint CDMA tower handy; Sprint and Verizon have roaming agreements with each other such that using each others' towers is transparent and doesn't usually incur "roaming" charges even if the phone says you are roaming. About the only "non-USA" thing about it is that it won't do UMTS on any US carrier, but this doesn't make it not true GSM.

Also note that even if there were no CDMA/GPS/3G phones on the market, this would not prove that it isn't possible. It would only mean that no one has done it... this is usually for economic reasons. Carriers love to lock you into their systems and keep you there, and making your phone work on as few other systems as possible is one way they do that. The only reason Verizon and Blackberry decided to make the Storm is that Verizon was tired of losing world-traveling customers (who wanted a single phone they could use worldwide) to AT&T and T-mobile. It used to be if you wanted a "world phone" (or as close as is possible given the hodgepodge of "standards" around the world) you had to go to one of those carruers and get a quad-band GSM phone; no more." Sullivan. http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081222042019AAt9J2P

[Abster2core]

GSM is a global standard, being used in over 212 countries around the world... the US is the exception, rather than the rule. The reason T-Mobile's coverage sucks indoors is because they use a higher frequency in the US than the do in Europe, since AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon already got licensed most of the favorable wireless frequencies that work well indoors from the FCC. In Europe, it's the opposite... AT&T coverage is terrible there (probably here too now b/c of iPhone users) b/c they didn't get favorable frequencies, while T-Mobile did, since they were there first to acquire and license the use of those frequencies.

However, I'd guess that those three listed above aren't really doing much to improve coverage (maybe Verizon, I keep hearing from family that they don't go anywhere without having at least 4 bars.. even in swampy Louisana). T-Mobile is so far great coverage here in southern california, but they don't have a viable data phone to compete with the iPhone so they're losing customers to AT&T. And those that want Verizon-like coverage and are willing to pay, well, they go to Verizon. What's left for T-Mobile? Competing with AT&T and Sprint (with a higher wireless frequency that doesn't penetrate walls as well in the US) and having to offer more minutes/data for less. Is that really such a bad thing for consumers? Probably not, but they'd like not to be in that situation ;)

My opinion on the merger? Clearwire is clearly losing billions each year, and the only sponsor really is Intel... Sprint doesn't have nearly enough capital to waste on a project like that. So that means if T-Mobile ever gets 4G, it'll probably be LTE. Besides, they can use their knowledge from building their 4G network in Europe to help build it in the US. Come to think of it, why AREN'T they using their experience in Europe's 3G networks to build it out in the US? But then again, to put these up all over the place requires more towers than AT&T (b/c of the frequency problem; these higher frequencies also don't travel as far.. sometimes, they're not much further than a few football field lengths of signal from the tower) and T-Mobile definitely doesn't have that kind of capital to build it out nationwide at that quantity, having only the 4th largest amount of subscribers.

A further explanation well worth rereading.

[BenRoethig]

It's actually not if you think about the idea that most towers are concentrated in the same place for all carriers, and if they let one network die and made all new phones only work on the other network, they could gradually transition their old customers over to the new network and switch their old towers over. Granted, they may have to force some customers to buy new phones after a time, but they could gradually move people off of the old network.

The problem here is that it isn't free. They'll have to install new equipment at every single tower and then with a third set of radios, they'll have to pay higher electric bills at every tower site. The infrastructure costs might cost more than the merger itself. It would have major problems for the ability of the new T-Mobile USA to make money and probably put parent Deutsche Telekom in pretty large hole as well. The costs and number of subscribers would be very similar to the combined European holdings.

[al_bundy]

A further explanation well worth rereading.

high school physics

low frequency high wavelength will give you penetration and range. high frequency and low wavelength will give you data speed but shorter range and horrible penetration of buildings

i think i read somewhere that the 850MHz band is a nice compromise

[Abster2core]

high school physics

low frequency high wavelength will give you penetration and range. high frequency and low wavelength will give you data speed but shorter range and horrible penetration of buildings

i think i read somewhere that the 850MHz band is a nice compromise

Unfortunately, many here obviously skipped class.

It would be nice if you could reference "the compromise."

[melgross]

On top of these differences you have to consider frequencies. GSM in North America uses two bands, 850 MHz and 1900 MHz. GSM in almost all of the rest of the world (ROW) uses two other bands, 900 and 1800 MHz.


And for some arcane reason, T-Mobile in the US also uses 1700 MHz for its GSM. Another bolloxed up situation.

Here's their mess, quoted from Phonescoop.com:

T-Mobile was the first company to offer a nationwide GSM network. Since purchasing SunCom in early 2008, T-Mobile offers GSM service in both the 850 and 1900 MHz frequency bands. T-Mobile offers EDGE data service over most of their network, plus WCDMA 3G voice and data in select metro areas, using the 1700 MHz band. Germany's Deutsche Telekom AG bought VoiceStream in June 2001 and re-branded it T-Mobile USA in the 2nd half of 2002. T-Mobile is Deutsche Telekom's global wireless brand.

[Mac Voyer]

Here's how I see it going down:

1. T-Mobile and Sprint merge.
2. Apple breaks exclusive agreement and deals with both AT&T and Verizon.
3. T-Moble/Sprint closes their doors and boards up the windows.

[SpamSandwich]

Here's how I see it going down:

1. T-Mobile and Sprint merge.
2. Apple breaks exclusive agreement and deals with both AT&T and Verizon.
3. T-Moble/Sprint closes their doors and boards up the windows.

Lawl...

I don't think so. :lol:

[Quake97]

And for some arcane reason, T-Mobile in the US also uses 1700 MHz for its GSM. Another bolloxed up situation.

Here's their mess, quoted from Phonescoop.com:

T-Mobile didn't have much of a choice. They didn't have enough spectrum to deploy 3G on their current 1900 setup. They had to get more by buying the AWS spectrum (2100/1700). Sure, it makes it harder to get a device that handles all of the global bands, but T-Mobile had to do what they had to do.

Joe

[al_bundy]

Here's how I see it going down:

1. T-Mobile and Sprint merge.
2. Apple breaks exclusive agreement and deals with both AT&T and Verizon.
3. T-Moble/Sprint closes their doors and boards up the windows.

keep on praying for a verizon iphone

[iansilv]

Doesn't it feel that talking to these profiles [specifically about this subject] is right up there with talking to first graders?

No. But reading your post makes me feel like I am listening to a first grader.

Who the hell are you buddy? So far I hear people, myself included, discussing a topic of interest to them. What I do not hear is any executives from any company involved or anybody with any real expertise in the field giving their thougths or opinions.

But hey man- nice try on looking smart on a forum. Go over to macrumors if you want to be a tool with nothing to contribute but condescension from the protection of anonymity.

Don't be a douchebag.

[JeffDM]

No. But reading your post makes me feel like I am listening to a first grader.

Who the hell are you buddy? So far I hear people, myself included, discussing a topic of interest to them. What I do not hear is any executives from any company involved or anybody with any real expertise in the field giving their thougths or opinions.

But hey man- nice try on looking smart on a forum. Go over to macrumors if you want to be a tool with nothing to contribute but condescension from the protection of anonymity.

Don't be a douchebag.

Nothing like throwing five muckballs while complaining that someone else threw one. Good going.

[iansilv]

Nothing like throwing five muckballs while complaining that someone else threw one. Good going.

You're a moderator?

[JeffDM]

You're a moderator?

I don't know why you think I am showing favoritism here. You chose to escalate it into an argument rather than be civil and ask that it be cleaned up.

[iansilv]

I don't know why you think I am showing favoritism here. You chose to escalate it into an argument rather than be civil and ask that it be cleaned up.

read your pm

[melgross]

read your pm

I'll tell you something right now. We are VERY lax about trying to shut people up on AI. There are other well known big sites who would have had you off for just questioning a mod.

Just take a hint, and everyone will be happy.

[JeffDM]

read your pm

Complaints about moderator performance should be directed to Lundy.

[iansilv]

I'll tell you something right now. We are VERY lax about trying to shut people up on AI. There are other well known big sites who would have had you off for just questioning a mod.

Just take a hint, and everyone will be happy.

What you should have done was deleted the original First grader post, deleted my response, and sent us both pm'd warnings about it.

What you instead did was replied to it, validated it, and gave it credibility. That is not cool for a moderator to do. But whatever- I am over it.

[melgross]

What you should have done was deleted the original First grader post, deleted my response, and sent us both pm'd warnings about it.

What you instead did was replied to it, validated it, and gave it credibility. That is not cool for a moderator to do. But whatever- I am over it.

Since he was posting to ME, not you, there wasn't a problem. He used no names. If he had said that "iansilv, you are a first grader", it might have been different.

[iansilv]

Since he was posting to ME, not you, there wasn't a problem. He used no names. If he had said that "iansilv, you are a first grader", it might have been different.

I was posting to HIM, not to you- so what was the problem?

[iansilv]

I was posting to HIM, not to you- so what was the problem?

Look, I have a problem with snarky, immature bull sh@t. I would like this forum to be a place where people- myself included- can discuss topics until they are blue in the face. And for this forum to succeed as a truly world-class place where readers can discuss topics, page views can be generated, and the site owners can truly profit from advertising sales, the kind of juvenile crap where someone insults everyone on the thread who disagrees with him and the moderator approves cannot happen.

i enjoy someone posting things contrary to my posts. I enjoyed reading the posts about the technical specifications of the networks T-Mobile and Sprint operate. But when you get insulting crap thrown in the mix- regardless if it is directed at me- it should be deleted, not responded to. And if my view causes you to exercise your power as a mod, fine. I mod over at MyMovies, and I spend plenty of time on forums. Just think about what you do when you validate someone's snarky immature off-topic post.

[melgross]

I was posting to HIM, not to you- so what was the problem?

Because you were talking to him in the manner that you shouldn't be, several times. And don't be a wiseguy. As a mod, Jeff can nudge you if he feels it's required, and you know that.

He could have removed your post too. Is that what you want?

[iansilv]

Because you were talking to him in the manner that you shouldn't be, several times. And don't be a wiseguy. As a mod, Jeff can nudge you if he feels it's required, and you know that.

He could have removed your post too. Is that what you want?

He should have removed both of them, and sent us PMs. But first, you should have removed the first post instead of replying to it. How am I being a wise guy?

[melgross]

Look, I have a problem with snarky, immature bull sh@t. I would like this forum to be a place where people- myself included- can discuss topics until they are blue in the face. And for this forum to succeed as a truly world-class place where readers can discuss topics, page views can be generated, and the site owners can truly profit from advertising sales, the kind of juvenile crap where someone insults everyone on the thread who disagrees with him and the moderator approves cannot happen.

i enjoy someone posting things contrary to my posts. I enjoyed reading the posts about the technical specifications of the networks T-Mobile and Sprint operate. But when you get insulting crap thrown in the mix- regardless if it is directed at me- it should be deleted, not responded to. And if my view causes you to exercise your power as a mod, fine. I mod over at MyMovies, and I spend plenty of time on forums. Just think about what you do when you validate someone's snarky immature off-topic post.

So you feel that's it's ok to respond to what you think is a snarky post with an even snarkier post of your own?

That makes no sense.

We're not going to sanitize the site. As I said, if he had posted something specifically to, or about you, and it went overboard, then you would have been right to complain, to US. But responding doesn't help your argument at all.

I get people insulting me directly more often that I would like, but i'm all grown up. It doesn't bother me unless they use profane language, or refuse to stop after being asked to.

People need to let some steam off sometimes. Don't get too upset about ti.

[iansilv]

So you feel that's it's ok to respond to what you think is a snarky post with an even snarkier post of your own?

That makes no sense.

We're not going to sanitize the site. As I said, if he had posted something specifically to, or about you, and it went overboard, then you would have been right to complain, to US. But responding doesn't help your argument at all.

I get people insulting me directly more often that I would like, but i'm all grown up. It doesn't bother me unless they use profane language, or refuse to stop after being asked to.

People need to let some steam off sometimes. Don't get too upset about ti.

I'm not upset about T.I. Granted, he should not have bought illegal weapons, but who am I to judge... wait, what?

OK fine, but I still maintain that T-Mobiel and Sprint combining would be like the deathstar of cell phone companies. Those F'ers would buyout Apple!

[melgross]

He should have removed both of them, and sent us PMs. But first, you should have removed the first post instead of replying to it. How am I being a wise guy?

I didn't respond to him. He responded to me. I didn't find it objectionable. As I said it wasn't directed towards you.

If every time someone on a thread somewhere complains about people in general, then 25% of all posts will be deleted in many threads, if you remove those posts. No one does that. If you do, then your threads are going to be very dry.

Go to the threads in ARsTechnica, or Anandtech, for example, and read the posts. You'll see that we can be tame in comparison.

[melgross]

I'm not upset about T.I. Granted, he should not have bought illegal weapons, but who am I to judge... wait, what?

OK fine, but I still maintain that T-Mobiel and Sprint combining would be like the deathstar of cell phone companies. Those F'ers would buyout Apple!

I think they'll be the dumpster of cell companies.

[iansilv]

I think they'll be the dumpster of cell companies.

No- you're missing the big picture- like with every publicity move, a sex tape will be released. Think about tmobile's spokeswoman...

[melgross]

Think about tmobile's spokeswoman...

Ah, I often do. Don't you?

[iansilv]

Ah, I often do. Don't you?

That whole Get More thing...

[melgross]

That whole Get More thing...

My wife would object.