Home - , , - NET10 Adds More Data to Most Plans

NET10 Adds More Data to Most Plans

TracFone's NET10 Wireless has increased the amount of high speed data included with most of its unlimited monthly plans.

Like TracFone stablemate Straight Talk, NET10 is now giving BYOP ("Bring Your Own Phone") customers 5 GB instead of 3 GB of "high speed" data on selected plans. On NET10 high speed means unthrottled, except for phones on the Verizon network where high speed data is throttled to 5 Mbps. On all networks data speeds are throttled to 64 Kbps after the first 5 GB.

The increase to 5 GB applies to the $50 Unlimited Plan, $65 Unlimited International Plan, $60, $70 and $80 Unlimited Phone Upgrade Plans and the $90 2 line, $130 3 line and $170 4 line Unlimited Family Plans. To get 5 GB you must use your own non-NET10 phone. Customers with NET10's own phones only get 3 GB of high speed data, not 5 GB. I think NET10 limiting the added data to BYOP to reduce the number of customers they have to give 5 GB to. Most AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint and unlocked GSM phones work with NET10 BYOP. To check if your phone is eligible and buy a SIM or CDMA activation kit visit net10byop.com.

NET10 also increased the amount of data on several of its lower priced plans

  • The formerly data-less $35 plan now includes unlimited data with the first 500 MB at high speeds and 64 Kbps throttled data afterwards.
  • The $40 plan goes from 500 MB to 1.5 GB of high speed data.
  • The $75 2 line Family Plan now gets 1.5 GB of high speed data per line per line instead of 500 MB
The data increases on the $35 and $40 plans and the $75 2 line plan apply to all users regardless of whether they use their own phones or a NET10 handset.

NET10 is a multicarrier MVNO that offers phones and BYOP SIMs for all four national networks. To see which NET10 phones use each network see How to Tell Which Network (AT&T, T-Mobile or Verizon) a TracFone, NET10 or Straight Talk Phone Uses.

For details about NET10's plans and services see Prepaid Operator Profile: NET10.

Source: NET10.com, Image: Facebook

Tags: , ,

79 comments:

Comment Page :
  1. Does anyone have the weblink/URL to net10 site that directly displays the CDMA LTE sim cards?
    I wish to bypass the CDMA check page.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anyone know if the $99.99 reconditioned SIII is for Sprint or Verizon? The description shows 3G/WiFi connectivity, so one could assume it is the Verizon 3G only version, but there is no P/N associated with the device in question?
    Also, has anyone been able to activate a N10 refurbed device on Selectel or BYO? Anyone activated a New out of the box N10 SIII on Selectel or BYO?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The one I see on the NET10 site at the moment is for Verizon. 2 ways to tell:

      1) It says "Text SAS968C to 611611 for mobile tutorials" SAS968C is the Verizon version, SAS960L (sometimes labeled SAS960C) is on Sprint

      2) Examine the page URL for a string of characters beginning with &market= followed by 2-6 characters followed by another &. For example:
      &market=GSM5AT&
      Replace the characters between = and & with CO and press enter. The page will reload showing only Verizon network phones.

      See: How to Tell Which Network (AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint or Verizon) a TracFone, NET10 or Straight Talk Phone Uses | Prepaid Phone News for more tips.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Dennis, I completely missed that at the bottom "Text SAS968C to 611611 for mobile tutorials"
      Still wondering if a Refurb will activate outside N10? Anyone familiar with N 10 returns?

      Delete
    3. What operator do you want to activate it on?

      Delete
    4. Most likely BYO

      Delete
    5. Based on this Straight Talk Samsung Galaxy S3 Verizon - 3G Only? - Page 11 unless something has changed recently it should only work for talk & text but no data on MVNOs.

      Delete
    6. Did not realize it was locked down in this manner. The thread did say 3G working on Selectel, but no explanation as to how much work it took to get there?

      Delete
  3. Great distillation of the new Net 10 programs, answering what really matters - thanks!

    Boy... here comes the squeeze. The independent MVNOs are getting hard pressed to try and match the Big 4 MVNOs, as shown by the latest TracFone offerings -- just not really competitive with AT&T's Cricket or the T-Mobile MVNOs. The word is getting out amongst the postpaid folks, and they are thinking about an extra $50-$100 in their pockets every month. It seems likely that Verizon, as much as they disdain the "low-margin" Prepaid market, will be forced to get on the bandwagon at some point, too.

    I bet Carlos Slim misses the heady days when Mexico began privatizing its national industries in 1990, and he was able to pick up the landline monopoly Telmex for a song. Now he controls 90% of the landlines in Mexico, a monopoly that enables him to charge "among the highest usage fees in the world" (according to the OECD). Up here he has to contend with that pesky FTC preventing his dishonest advertising, and the DOJ blocking monopoly formation. It'll be interesting to see when a smart investor like Carlos throws in the towel and heads for the exit. As Dennis has surmised, "very few" of the independent MVNOs will survive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're forgetting nobody knows about T-Mobile mvnos. Tracfone has a huge retail channel, who's heard of Ting except us nerds?

      Delete
    2. Well, 1.5M customers and lots of classic TV watchers know about Consumer Cellular. Ptel is one of the oldest MVNOs in the country and still kicking. Family Mobile is on the shelves at Walmart. Then there is the Solavei MLM business with its viral marketing. Simple grew large enough to attract Carlos Slim. Ultra pulls in a lot of foreigners living here. So "nobody" is NOT the right word, by any stretch.

      Delete
    3. the old folks watching classic tv channels are the ones who consumer cellular wants as customers. but if any of those old folks are cheap like my parents, then the chances are they may instead go with cheap tracfone no-nonsense flip phones.

      Delete
  4. So that's what the DOJ does.......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In March, 2011 when AT&T announced it was buying T-Mobile, the Anti Trust Division of the US Dept of Justice blocked the takeover because it would have created a Duopoly and limited competition. At the time, AT&T was claiming that the merger would result in "better coverage" (maybe), and "lower prices and better service" (yeah, right). T-Mobile, in distant third place and losing customers, had no choice but to be the "disruptor", lowering prices and expanding out their network. It worked, too. I think this whole round of price cutting and simplified, consumer friendly plans are a largely a result of that DOJ antitrust ruling.

      Compare that to Carlos Slim being able to waltz in and purchase a controlling interest in the former State run landline monopoly, Telmex. Then, controlling 90% of the landlines in this third world country, he soaks his captive audience to become the richest man in the world. He must hate the "Slim" pickings up here where, say what you will, the rule of law trumps the corruption and mordida of Mexico.

      Delete
    2. The DOJ probably got it wrong in the long term. Right now, Tmobile and Sprint do not have the scale to catch up to the duopoly, the twin Bells, any time soon. The current price competition seems nice, but it is hurting the carriers financially, slowing investment and innovation. Ironically, the breakup of the ATT-Tmo deal helped coverage very quickly. Tmo got a 7-year, $3 Billion roaming agreement from ATT, and said on Oct, 2011 that this roaming deal would mean a 20% increase in coverage for Tmo customers, at no extra cost. Long term, though, the DOJ decision just means duplicative capex, lower buying power for Tmo and Sprint, slower network improvements, more expensive phones, less compatibility and one fewer Strong choice outside the twin Bells (the duopoly). Hardly a good outcome, IMO.

      Delete
    3. "Tmo got a 7-year, $3 Billion roaming agreement from ATT, and said on Oct, 2011 that this roaming deal would mean a 20% increase in coverage for Tmo customers, at no extra cost."

      In today's terms. T-Mobile roaming onto AT&T at least doubles coverage for T-Mobile customers. Why was it only 20% back then? Was AT&T so much smaller or something?

      Delete
    4. Something. T-Mobile always had some roaming on AT&T (since VoiceStream). The $3B agreement expanded the roaming coverage further.

      Delete
  5. Got the text message from Net10 today. "We couldn't wait to tell you, as a Special offer for our BYOP customers, you will now get 5GB of Data starting on your next Plan. We hope you enjoy."
    I am pumped up, getting unlimited calls and text with 5GB of data on the Verizon network for $45 a month!!!! All with a really nice phone!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dennis: Why dont they offer nice GSM phones (just in any non-US countries)?. Phones offered are really horrible...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You aren't limited to NET10's phones. Just about any phone is available if you BYOP.

      Delete
    2. What makes the Net10 phones "horrible"? My wife and I both have the Whirl-2, and they work fine for us. The only thing that might make them less than satisfactory for some users is the camera. But I already have a camera so I don't need a phone for that.

      Delete
    3. I've never heard of this phone, Neil. But it gets decent reviews on Amazon:

      http://www.amazon.com/ZTE-Whirl-Android-Cell-Phone/dp/B00IOTJ9AQ

      Delete
    4. The Whirl and the Whirl-2 are not the same. The Whirl-2 was originally supposed to be named the Flame. Now it is usually identified as the Z667G.

      http://www.bestbuy.com/site/zte-zte-whirl-2-no-contract-cell-phone-black/8728026.p?id=1219362861847&skuId=8728026

      Delete
  7. To Anonymous: While it is impossible to disprove that things would have gone EVEN BETTER if DOJ had allowed the merger, I think most readers of this forum are pleased with the direction that things HAVE gone, as prices drop, coverage improves, and connections get faster. I included the situation in Mexico as an example of a monopoly where very few positive changes, from the consumer's viewpoint, have occurred since the America Movil takeover in 1990.

    I also fail to see how allowing the merger of 2 of the 4 major carriers would somehow have created more "strong choices" outside of the AT&T/Verizon duopoly. Wouldn't the remaining company, Sprint, be in an even weaker position to catch up to two larger companies? Seems to me that great Republican progressive, Teddy Roosevelt, had it right when he went on his Trustbusting crusade, IMHO :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Huge difference between monopoly in Mexican wireless; Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel in the US when Teddy won; and oligopoly in USA today for wireless services: Competition. AT&T+T-mobile would have eliminated duplicative operating expenses and have more combined buying power for phones, network equipment, spectrum, and advertising. The T-mo CEO would have injected some new thinking and innovation at AT&T, increasing competition with Verizon, more than they are feeling today. Sure, this would have put pressure on Sprint. A cable company like Comcast or TW or Dish would likely have bought them or formed a joint-venture with Son. That might still happen with T-Mobile or Sprint; let's hope. A third, strong player will have a chance to catch the still-slower-to-innovate twin Bells quicker, and provide more effective competition over the long run. BTW, it's the short-term mentality that trips up administrations time and again. "Gotta achieve results on my watch, so that somebody else can't get the credit," and "It takes two 4-year terms to accomplish any big change," and "Let's let somebody else fix Social Security; why should we take the blame, it's not exactly broke yet." Why should we trust a bunch of lawyers at DoJ who have never run a business to know how many companies it takes to create the most effective competition in wireless, one of the most capital-intensive businesses in the US? T-Mobile alone will spend $4.4-4.7 Billion to improve its network this year. Short-term mentality does not work over the long term. For one example everyone can relate to, that's why highways are crumbling all over the US, especially in the Rust Belt. Driven there lately? Low bid wins the job. In Germany, the company who provides the longest warranty gets the work. If you have ever driven there, you noticed the difference. Yes, most of use are greedy and will always take what we want now, instead of waiting. Most people claim Social Security early, too. They could get 70% more by waiting until age 70 (vs. 62), with that big increase indexed to inflation over their lifetime(s). Massive difference, especially if they have a wife who will likely outlive them. But even those who can afford to wait take it early. I get it.

      Delete
    2. Logically I would think that Tmo and Sprint would want to merge. The different technologies could be an asset rather than a liability, if they create and sell dual-mode phones that could automatically switch between GSM and CDMA as needed.

      Delete
    3. I agree - and the T-Mobile CEO said several times they would be open to this, or to a union with Dish. It all depends on the price and financing, and Son already borrowed a huge amount to buy Sprint. The technology is merging any way - to VoLTE. LTE is a lot more efficient in its use of spectrum. The SIM-free iPhone 6 models operate on Sprint Spark, CDMA and virtually all the GSM carrier LTE, HSPA and GSM frequencies today, and it should not be too hard to make it switch modes, like the Nexus 6 on Google Fi will do.

      Delete
    4. Sprint and T-Mobile did try to merge in 2012, but the lawyers at DoJ and the politicians receiving lobbyist visits and contributions from Verizon and AT&T said: "No way. We want 4." And that was that. We have to wait to see whether the cable company lobbyists, like the huge herd from Comcast who are VERY friendly with the administration, can do any better.

      Delete
    5. "For one example everyone can relate to, that's why highways are crumbling all over the US, especially in the Rust Belt. Driven there lately? Low bid wins the job"

      Actually, high bid wins the job when you factor in "prevailing wage", which guarantees low-performance substandard poorly-performing union "workers", 10% or more paid for projects than needs to be, and millions directly funneled from the government to partisan lobbying operations.

      Delete
  8. Really am liking the fact that the $35 plan now includes unltd data. Perfect for my minimal data use plus AT&T coverage coupled with BYOP.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Along with the increased full-speed data allowance on some plans, NET10 has changed the description of the unlimited throttled data. Instead of "64kbps", it now says "2G speed". I don't know whether that is now faster, slower, or unchanged.

    ReplyDelete
  10. In other news from NET10, it now has a subsidiary called Clearway which aims at "business users", whatever that may mean. Click the link at the upper right from NET10's website, or go directly to www.clearway.com.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It would make more sense to purchase a refurbished Net10 Galaxy S3 and put it on Cricket or purchase one from GSM Nation if you wanted the 5GB Data on AT&T and you'd get unthrottled 5GB of data on Net10. Now this would be worth it. On the other hand if you were to use a Verizon refurbished phone you may be able to put that on Net10 but the throttled speed would sort of take the sweetness from it. It would be another Page Plus phone. Our Page plus dealer is already starting to sell some pretty nice phones where all you need to do is slap in the PagePlus SIM and your ready for service. Just don't know if I'd be willing to settle for lower data speeds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makes no sense to me. We have 2 lines to share 750 min, unlimited texts and 3GB/month un-throttled LTE on AT&T, with free, off-network roaming for $60/month. Calls between the two lines are free. And we can use any AT&T or unlocked phones we want. An extra 1GB or line costs $10 more/month.

      Delete
  12. I don't see how any of these updated plans would be better than ones offered by mvnos like Cricket.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cricket's part of AT&T so not an MVNO. AT&T seems to be trying to kill MVNOs like NET10. Easy to do when you set wholesale prices.

      Delete
    2. Our extended family uses AT&T MVNOs Consumer Cellular (great for couples), AirVoice and PureTalk. I think they will all survive, but AT&T pricing really affects the latter two. AirVoice minimizes losses from people who blow by their data limits near the end of the month before AT&T bills the usage (data split). They also throttle PayGo and the $10 plan to about 1 Mbps. PureTalk only sells a block of data at a relatively high price/mb on their Simple and Flex plans. Neither offer LTE, which must be expensive from AT&T. Both manage to offer excellent, US-based customer service, which we are all willing to pay extra to have (I will never use H2O). Each of these 3 MVNO has found niches that AT&T does not serve well. That's the name of the MVNO game.

      Delete
    3. I think goodtogo will be the next MVNO to drop AT&T. They are not competitive. And what about Real Mobile, powered by goodtogo Mobile? The margin list on the home page here says they sell AT&T and Sprint service, but I cannot find GSM service on their website.

      Delete
    4. Good2Go still offers GSM service it's mention multiple places on the site.The plans tab has a "Have a GSM phone" link that takes you to the SIM order page.

      Delete
    5. Dennis, I was asking about Real Mobile, not good2go. You list Real Mobile as a Sprint and AT&T MVNO on the carrier list, your home page, but I cannot find GSM "powered by good2go" on the Real Mobile website.

      Delete
    6. Dennis - I'm a little confused about what to call Cricket, then... Are they NOT an MVNO because, being wholly owned by network operator AT&T, they are a Mobile ACTUAL Network Operator? What do we call them to distinguish them AT&T?

      Delete
    7. I call them "psuedo-MVNO's. Or sometimes "division". For the vast majority of consumers, they appear to be just like any other MVNO. Those discerning enough to read "prepaidphonenews.com" know the difference.

      Boost and Virgin are the same sort of "animal" also.

      Delete
    8. I usually just call Cricket, Boost, Metro, etc. "carrier prepaid brands".

      Delete
    9. ... which is sensible, as that is what they are.

      Except, superficially, there APPEARS to be a difference between the obvious ones, like Sprint Prepaid, Verizon Prepaid, and GoPhone, and the ones hidden by a marketing layer... Virgin, Boost, Cricket.

      Delete
    10. It's interesting to compare the in-house carrier prepaid brands, like AT&T GoPhone, with their separate store prepaid brands, like Cricket. The last I nosed around an AT&T store, I noticed that the GoPhone display was stuck in an out of the way corner. Customers were steered towards the usual AT&T postpaid brand. I asked the sales person if they had any prepaid option, like those prepaid brands I'd "been hearing about." She directed me to the GoPhone display and abandoned me.

      And, of course, the Cricket stores are separate altogether, and you will NEVER see the letters "AT&T" anywhere in a Cricket store. Ask about Cricket's towers, and you'll be told they "use one of America's largest networks". In fact, here in Alaska (with NO Sprint, NO T-Mobile, and Verizon only in the two biggest cities), there are NO Cricket stores at all, although you can get (usually very poor) Cricket storefront service in Gamestop stores, and online. With higher infrastructure costs in Alaska and minimal competition, I think AT&T does not want to have Cricket franchises around to publicize, in any way, an alternative to their postpaid cash-cow. Seems to be working because most people just aren't interested in the details, want to go in and come out an hour later with that nice $200 Samsung or iPhone.

      Delete
    11. " (usually very poor) Cricket storefront service in Gamestop stores,"

      Tell me about it. When I've done, or tried to do Cricket stuff at Gamestop, it takes more than an hour of intense work by the clerk because they've never done it before. And they are bungling.

      I got a free Cricket SIM out of the deal. I went to get the SIM at the store, and set up. They spent a couple of hours on it, and I have stuff to do, and so did they (like sell games), so I suggested that we halt for the day and resume tomorrow. I managed to finish the setup myself, at home, online with Cricket CS.

      I came back to the Gamestop the next day with the phone with the new SIM they had put in yesterday, to resume and pay. Because, during the laborious process, they had never charged me for it. I figured I'd pay at the end of it.

      It turned out overnight they had thrown out the Cricket SIM paperwork, and had no record if it or anything, so they insisted I get the SIM for free, with no setup charge also.

      At least they tried. Very hard.

      Delete
  13. Some MVNO's kill themselves. Witness all the horrid CS. Or situations like "Selectel" refusing to offer 4G/LTE by their own choice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you are just speculating and wrong about Selectel. They are negotiating with Verizon. Verizon has delayed Puppy Wireless LTE at least 3 times, according to Kitty. Selectel knows they need to offer LTE service to survive in the long run. Now that Verizon is one company, they might be trying to take away the free roaming on the extended network as a condition of getting LTE. I am sure that Selectel would not want to do that to their customers.

      Delete
  14. Not having 4G LTE is setting your smartphone way back before 2014 when prepaid carriers like Verizon and US Cellular finally allowing 4G on their prepaid service. Be careful with Straight Talk, Net10, and some places are still trying to sell the 3G Samsung Galaxy S3 and if you don't pay close attention you'll get stung. Yes the S3 is SUPPOSED to be 4G but before any MVNO was allowed 4G on verizon the 4G radio was disabled on the S3 (don't know if there is a way to re enable it maybe with flashing). It was the one thing that kept me going from contract to contract even though at the time we were at a low income. Now I can actually afford a nice phone and have a choice as to what carrier I want. If my phone goes bad I'm not stuck with the same carrier if someone else offers the same technology at a better price. Why one MVNO would decide not to offer/allow 4G is beyond my conception of reason. Unless they are going to try and go for 70 and 80 yr old folks who care less about it. But if you're like most folks you're gonna want to stream music, video, do facebook and other things that would require a decent amount of data speed. Unless you see the Red 4G logo on verizon's web site your getting a 3G phone just like there are two versions of the Motorola G. It has to say Moto G LTE or its a toy not a real smartphone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you for Verizon service, but not for AT&T or T-Mobile plans. Their HSPA+ 'backup 4G' networks are faster than the throttled "LTE" service you get from Verizon MVNOs, at least in my area. We get 6-8 Mbps on AT&T or T-Mobile HSPA+. Paying a Verizon MVNO for LTE service may get somebody the icon, but it does not get them the best value for data unless they absolutely need Verizon coverage. The vast majority of people do not.

      Delete
  15. It does make a big difference, though. Verizon blankets the nation, except for some big holes in the West. T-Mobile has lousy coverage, even in most of the Eastern states. The TMO phone might work great in your home address, but if you drive 10 miles away on some errands, chances are you won't have any coverage in TMO while the nearby Verizon and AT&T towers loom over you and laugh. In other words: "T-Mobile: Don't Be Mobile"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your eyes must be failing. Verizon prepaid coverage also has holes all over the country, including some very big ones on the East coast. You are also delusional about Tmobile coverage. They have coverage where 96% of Americans live, work and play. 10% fewer people have coverage on Tmobile than Verizon. And most prepaid customers are not paying for Verizon coverage they don't need. Tmobile (#1) has more than twice as many prepaid customers as Verizon (distant #4), and Tmobile is growing faster. Most prepaid customers don't want the lower value that Verizon and their MVNOs offer. Slow 3G backup to LTE data is one of the reasons why.

      Delete
    2. " They have coverage where 96% of Americans live, work and play"... all deceptive, false/wrong, and meaningless marketing-speak to cover up the fact that T-Mobile has significantly worse coverage than Verizon does. Half the coverage, really. Americans live/work/and play in America, which T-Mobile doesn't cover nearly as well as the big ones. No "deluisions" at all: T-Mobile covers just a small part of the US, while Verizon covers most of it. No deceptive "covers most of Americans", which requires that no one ever leave their mailing address house, needed. If you cover most of America, there is no worry.

      Verizon has occasional nothing in the middle of vast coverage. T-Mobile has occasional coverage in the middle of vast nothing.

      "And most prepaid customers are not paying for Verizon coverage they don't need"

      It takes a real shill from a company with bad coverage to claim that customers "need" good coverage. Yes, the company that provides an objectively worse product will be the first to say that the deficiency doesn't matter.

      "T-mobile [meaningless sales figures inserted here]."

      Which still does not undo the fact that Verizon coverage is way much better than T-Mobile. Verizon's relatively high cost has kept it from making prepaid advances, but that is changing This reminds me of the "churn troll" who kept quoting distorted "facts" about quarterly churn when cold hard facts about the services were presented.

      Being an uncarrier instead of a real carrier only works if you make up for it somehow, by having a lot more data or much lower prices.

      Delete
    3. You can't seem to tell the difference between geography and population. If places where people lived, worked and played were evenly distributed across the US, you would have a point. Of course, the carrier maps would look much different if that were the case. Sales data is meaningless? To say that, it must really burn you up that T-Mobile and their MVNOs sell 2.5X Verizon and theirs. You really believe that if only those ignorant Tmo customers would read your posts, they would buy right? Type away, but you can't change facts: T-Mobile is the leader in prepaid, and Verizon is a distant fourth, losing ground.

      Delete
    4. "You can't seem to tell the difference between geography and population."

      There's no cut-and-dried line. There was in the landline world, But we are talking about MOBILE phones here. People take them away from their mailing addresses. A lot. Even if T-Mobile does not like it: I remember that company screaming bloody murder over bad reviews of their service because the reviewer dared to be mobile and take the T-Mobile-covered phone on the road.

      "If places where people lived, worked and played were evenly distributed across the US, you would have a point. Of course, the carrier maps would look much different if that were the case."

      Would they? Except for some big holes in the West and Maine, AT&T and Verizon have strong coverage across the nation. Fairly evenly distributed. They can muster it. T-Mobile and Sprint just have a scattering.

      "Sales data is meaningless?"

      It only does when presented in a misleading fashion, as you have, in order to cover up inconvenient facts.

      "To say that, it must really burn you up that T-Mobile and their MVNOs sell 2.5X Verizon and theirs."

      No, I am not a paid shill. As such you won't find me getting all worked up over sales and church figures.

      "You really believe that if only those ignorant Tmo customers would read your posts, they would buy right?"

      Sorry, I am not in the business of lying about a product in order to sell more of it. You apparently are.

      "Type away, but you can't change facts: T-Mobile is the leader in prepaid, and Verizon is a distant fourth, losing ground."

      Never disputed that. Nor should anyone dispute the fact that Verizon covers most of America, and T-Mobile doesn't.

      Delete
    5. To the guy obsessed with sales figures and thinks the idea that people would choose the inferior product a lot of the time rather than pay more for something a lot better is "irrational"...

      Do you drive a Kia? If so, is this because you think it is as good as a Lexus?

      Anyway, lets look at T-Mobile's plans to something about a big problem they have: This link shows T-Mobile expansion plans by the end of the year, 2015.

      While I am critical of T-Mobile, it is because I am a realist, and I have no illusions about them covering what is a small part of the country. Nor do I have a need to try to mislead and make it look better or worse than it really is. T-Mobile has inferior coverage, but honestly, I would be happier if it were better.

      If T-Mobile follows through with these plans. they will double their 4G coverage. T-Mobile will get a lot closer to AT&T and Verizon in this important area they are rather deficient in now.

      This is a good thing. And if Verizon stands still, T-Mobile will surge ahead in customers and all. That does not "burn" me, since I don't care about profits and subscriber shifts. I do care about better service. Verizon should very well be burned if they stand still.

      Delete
  16. Let's look at some thing objectively, shall we? Ohio. First state I chose. A very average state in the East. T-Mobile has 3G or better in about one-third of the state. The rest is a "Hello, 1998!" T-Mobile 2G, or Amish-friendly no-data wasteland.

    Verizon? Ohio blankets almost all of the state with 3G or better data. Way better coverage.

    It might be reasonable to say that T-Mobile provides better data values and CS than Verizon. It takes a real shill to provide misleading and false marketing info ("where 96% of Americans live work and play") in an attempt to imply that T-Mobile has better coverage than Verizon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pick any state you want; bury your head in the coverage maps. Real prepaid customers pick service where they need it. MetroPCS alone has as many prepaid customers as Verizon prepaid and all their MVNOs. The only coverage that matters is the coverage a customer needs. And prepaid customers are choosing T-Mobile prepaid and their MVNOs in much greater numbers than Verizon and theirs. It will continue, because customers see greater value.

      Delete
    2. "Real prepaid customers pick service where they need it"

      Actually, they put up with terrible coverage because they don't want to pay a premium for good coverage.

      Delete
    3. "And prepaid customers are choosing T-Mobile prepaid and their MVNOs in much greater numbers than Verizon and theirs. It will continue, because customers see greater value"

      It won't continue, if Verizon simply drops its prices and/or increases its data. At the beginning of the most recent quarter, the AT&T prepaid (Cricket) did both. It is not surprising that as a result, they grew more than T-Mobile prepaid.

      ....... as reported by Dennis B.

      Low-price, large-volume data from the big carriers is poison to the back-of-the-pack "uncarriers' unless they catch up and do something very different. We've had someone in this forum insist passionately that T-Mobile will double its coverage by the end of the year. This would do the trick as "something very different". I'd welcome this... an actual third choice. But I have my doubts T-Mobile can do this.

      I think of the anecdotal situation of a friend of mine, in the very populated Tampa Bay area. He had T-Mobile. He dropped it for Cricket, and got faster speed, better coverage, and more data. And he pays a lot less. The 2015 Q2 results are likely to expand on the new trend from 2015 Q1. It will get pretty wild if Verizon decides to really get in the high value prepaid game too.

      Delete
    4. I see. Those 22 Million additional customers over the past 2 years picked T-Mobile despite its "terrible coverage." That is not rational. It's just your rationalization.

      Delete
    5. Actually, what happened was they DID choose T-Mobile over Verizon, despite its relatively terrible coverage. It's rational, as Verizon charges a lot more for its better coverage. The customers weigh the worse coverage with the price, and make the decision. It is not my rationalization: it is what customers do.

      Delete
    6. "At the beginning of the most recent quarter, the AT&T prepaid (Cricket) did both. It is not surprising that as a result, they grew more than T-Mobile prepaid."
      You conveniently left out some very important facts that show the real picture:
      1. T-Mobile moved 195,000 of its prepaid customers up to Simple Choice postpaid, where they pay more; and
      2. T-Mobile added 479,000 MVNO and 141,000 M2M subscribers, for total subscriber gains of 1.8 Million. AT&T LOST 266,000 reseller customers, and had a total gain of 1.25 M customers.
      T-Mobile grew about 50% more subscribers than AT&T in Q1 2015.

      Delete
    7. 22 Million new T-Mobile customers did not chose coverage that they thought was "terrible." You are projecting that, and it's not rational.

      Delete
    8. "You conveniently left out some very important facts that show the real picture"

      I didn't. I stuck to the facts relative to prepaid subscriber growth figures, which is what you hung your hat on in the first place. I understand your need to shift the goal posts now, to move away from your prepaid argument, and include postpaid..

      "22 Million new T-Mobile customers did not chose coverage that they thought was "terrible." You are projecting that, and it's not rational."

      Whether they knew it or not. they choose a significantly worse product that cost a lot less.

      Delete
    9. T-Mobile won prepaid in Q1, 2015.
      They GAINED 698,00 branded prepaid, MVNO and M2M subscribers.
      AT&T LOST 168,000 branded prepaid and reseller subscribers (M2M not broken out).
      T-Mobile increased their lead over AT&T by 866,000 subscribers, which is in third place and still fading.
      You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but facts are stubborn things.

      Delete
    10. Under T-Mobile network expansion for this year, they still plan to add a total of 1M square miles of LTE coverage (166% increase over the 600,000 square miles they covered with LTE in Jan). This will let Tmo service an extra 25M people in the US (from 275 up to 300M) and provide much better in-building signal in 700 MHz markets. Tmo has already deployed 700 MHz in 55 markets, and plan to reach 190 markets. They have already deployed LTE on a substantial amount of their 1900 MHz 2G spectrum, primarily in rural areas. Tmo has upgraded to wideband LTE for much faster speeds and much more capacity in 157 markets. They met their 2014 network deployment goal in October '14, and the CEO says they are on track to achieve the 2015 plan. By the end of 2015, the Tmo network will make a lot more people happy with their network.

      Delete
    11. The above Anon seems rather well informed on this. Question.... Does "This will let Tmo service an extra 25M people" mean they will get NEW territory, or just upgrade existing 2G towers?

      Delete
    12. It's both. Tmo bought 700 MHz spectrum from Verizon that covers 150M POPs. They bought more in VA, and still more at auction. They just bought more AWS3 at auction. The 700 MHz covers a lot more territory, extending coverage in suburbs and rural areas. Tmo is also going to field more LTE on their mostly rural towers with 1900 MHz spectrum, and deploy more AWS3 spectrum. They are spending $4.4-$4.7B in network improvement this year, up from $4.3B last year and $4.2B in 2013.

      Delete
    13. That's good. Concrete info. that matters. A lot more than stuff about M2M subscriber trends and all.

      Delete
  17. I don't know about you. but if money were no object, and I were limited to prepaid, I'd go with Verizon. It's so much better than T-Mobile. I can get saying it costs more, but I can't get saying stuff like Verizon is a worse network than T-Mobile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You only get one vote. 16 Million customers chose T-Mobile and their MVNO. Only 6 M chose Verizon and theirs. Money and coverage matter to prepaid customers.

      Delete
  18. It's prepaid. We can get as many votes as we want. Money and coverage play off against each other. Prepaids with poor coverage succeed by having a lower cost, more data. Prepaids with great coverage can be more stingy with that. It's a trade-off, always

    If Verizon provided Verizon coverage at the prices (and data level) of the best T-Mobile-based MNVO deals, you'd probably have about 800 customers left on the T-Mobile MVNO when all was said and done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can make all the strawman arguments you want. Verizon is dead last in prepaid, and shows virtually no signs of wanting to change that. "We're a market leader. We don't follow the other carriers' moves." They and their MVNOs offer the worst overall value the vast majority of prepaid customers.

      Delete
    2. I know I could make all the "strawman" arguments I want. However, I have not chosen to make any so far, and I choose not to. After your false accusation, I agree with "Verizon is dead last in prepaid....." and the rest in general.

      Delete
    3. "If Verizon provided Verizon coverage at the prices (and data level) of the best T-Mobile-based MNVO deals, you'd probably have about 800 customers left on the T-Mobile MVNO.."
      It's a strawman because Verizon would NEVER do this, and even if they did, T-Mobile would respond and 15 million or so people would have to buy new phones, so the whole scenario you paint is just .... meaningless.

      Delete
    4. Not a strawman. It just shows how precarious things would be for T-Mobile if Verizon were to offer its much better service at T-Mobile's lower prices and data allowances. It's a useful speculation.

      Delete
  19. NET10- Bring Your Own Phone Universal Activaton Kit - .99 cents with any monthly plan purchase. This kit includes CDMA 4G LTE SIMS. This kit is $9.99 @ Walmart - Model # NTRTPKBYOPCNA

    ReplyDelete
  20. Apparently, Net10 has started selling mobile hotspots and plans:

    http://hotspot.net10wireless.com/

    ReplyDelete
Comment Page :