Home - , , , , - Mint Mobile CEO Explains Why We Need the Sprint/T-Mobile Merger Approved

Mint Mobile CEO Explains Why We Need the Sprint/T-Mobile Merger Approved

mint-mobile-David-Glickman-on-sprint-tmobile-merger
A couple of weeks ago, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced that they would be opening their doors to comments and formal petitions from opponents of the $26 billion merger between Sprint and T-Mobile. At the same time, the government agency was also open to hearing from those who were in favor of the merger between these two companies. Not one to pass up an opportunity, David Glickman, CEO of Mint Mobile and Ultra Mobile, penned a letter explaining why he supports this merger.

According to Glickman, people have been asking the wrong question with regard to the proposed merger. The CEO recommends looking at things from a different perspective, one that shows how groundbreaking the merger between these two wireless carriers could be. Instead of focusing on the “right number” of wireless carriers available for the U.S. consumer, the CEO believes we should be asking “whether the merger will finally create three strong, healthy network providers investing tens of billions of dollars each into 5G for all of America to enjoy.”

The Mint Mobile CEO explained that the merger between T-Mobile and Sprint will result in many market innovations. This will benefit independent resellers, as they will be better able to compete on price. As it stands right now, Mint Mobile’s affordably priced plans, starting at $15 per month, utilize spare wireless capacity to provide high-quality wireless broadband service to its customers.

Glickman also believes that the merger will be equally advantageous to regulators. On their own, T-Mobile and Sprint are unable to compete in the market. And if they were unable to merge, their separate 5G networks would not be as broad or deep as otherwise possible. Individually, these two companies could spend up to $10 billion each in order to build a moderately better network over the next five years.

Together, however, these companies will be able to create a nearly ubiquitous network that’s sure to fill in the gaps that existing 4G networks have. In return, the average American consumer will be able to enjoy speeds that are, at minimum, twice as fast as today, yet still at a fair price. The projected investment is nearly $40 billion over the next three years. This merger is also expected to create thousands of jobs in the U.S. alone.

Now is the best time for Sprint and T-Mobile to join forces to make 5G technology available to the average consumer. With the merger, the new company can create one powerful network that would force Verizon and AT&T to follow suit. This will also give big cable companies tougher competition, forcing all involved to invest heavily on making the average landline and cable internet experience a lot better than it is today.

Currently, almost half of all American homes only have one or fewer providers capable of delivering 25 Mbps broadband speed. But the new T-Mobile will be able to provide high-speed wireless broadband in excess of 100 Mbps to almost two-thirds of the population by 2021. By 2024, this could be available to almost 90 percent of the U.S. population.

But where does this leave independent prepaid resellers? With so much wireless capacity available, companies like Mint Mobile and Ultra Mobile will be able to offer competitive rates to their customers. This could also toughen up the market for cable providers, which have long been in need of improvement.



Source: Mint Mobile

38 comments:

Comment Page :
  1. The only way this merger makes sense is if US Cellular is willing to become a nationwide carrier by divesting Sprint's 1900 and 800 MHz to them, as well as some of T-Mobiles 700 MHz where necessary to fill in the holes.

    T-Mobile would then be allowed to keep ALL of Sprint's 2500 MHz as long as they agree to FULL deployment within five years. Playing games deploying only 20 MHz to create artificial scarcity will not be allowed. T-Mobile will be responsible for arranging for backhaul to support this deployment EVEN in rural areas.

    If these conditions are not be met, the merger will just end up in higher prices for everyone, and 5G will be going nowhere fast.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Of course this guy wants the merger to go through. When the Big Three raise their prices, MVNOs will follow.

    ReplyDelete
  3. He needs to disclose the price point per month customers would be required to pay for Mint service under the merger. As TMO subsidiary of course he will be pro merger to gain market share with a reduced Boost out of the way. Again to reiterate, customer service and lower prices. More gigs, in fact if this merger doesn't lower from current costs to customer with better service it should not go through. Currently Mint is a great value, as is Ultra, Boost, and occasionally Metro. Not to mention Simple. The merger seeks to eliminate market disruptive offers from Sprint carriers and permit TMO companies to gouge the customer Sprint relinquished.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm not so happy about the cable companies getting into this market. They keep bumping up speeds to justify making internet an ever rising percentage of your monthly bill, not coincidentally taking most of the financial advantage (if any) one might get from "cord cutting". Then, because they don't want to invest anything in improving their physical plant, they pay for the improved speeds by squeezing the bandwidth to nothing for their video so it's nominally high definition but in many cases looks worse than standard definition

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly; they keep selling speeds no one really needs. Spectrum's lowest internet speed in my area is now 200mbps. I recently switched to 11mbps DSL. When I called Spectrum to cancel, they claimed 11mbps is "too slow" to do anything. It has been 2 weeks and I don't notice the difference, except when downloading big files.

      Delete
    2. Xfinity Mobile saves my wife and me $35/month, and we get a stronger signal with faster data speeds. Their plan gives them a $20/month advantage over FIOS when our Comcast bargain contract ends. Brilliant - I'm sure the FIOS salespeople aren't happy.
      PS: We will love Xfinity even more when our $300 prepaid VISA arrives (2 BYOP).

      Delete
  5. Mint has to be cheap because it has many equally inexpensive competitors. Mint would like nothing more than for half of their competition to go away, so they get more business and can raise prices without losing customers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bad for consumers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's actually very likely to be good or consumers, if you look at the history of such mobile company mergers, all of which have been followed by the usual trend toward lower prices and huge increases in service.

      Delete
    2. @Anon754, care to share examples?

      Delete
    3. MetroPCS and T-Mobile. AT&T and Cricket.

      Delete
    4. And how do you figure the Metro/T-Mo and AT&T/Cricket mergers lowered prices and increased service hugely?

      Delete
    5. Since T-Mobile acquired MetroPCS, they have twice as many customers, three times as many employees, cover five times as many markets and MetroPCS customers have gotten greater than tenfold the amount of data. And those customers enjoyed in their various plans between 17% and 25% lower-priced plans, and they use more data than the rest of the T-Mobile customer base.

      So when you talk about Tmo coming together with Sprint and the significant expansion in available capacity that they're going to have, that's where you can clearly see competition will definitely go up, service offerings will expand and customers will be the beneficiary of lower prices, while at the same time T-Mobile will be able to drive profitability because of the significant decrease in cost structure ($6B savings in the first few years).

      Delete
    6. At the time of the merger with AT&T, Cricket’s network covered approximately 97 million people in 35 U.S. states, and Cricket had 4.57 million customers as of February 28, 2014. AT&T gave those customers new, simple, low-cost rate plans with more mobile data; an excellent lineup of smartphones; and a much better network experience. The new Cricket had access to AT&T’s nationwide 4G LTE network covering nearly 280 million people at no extra charge (roaming cost extra on some old Cricket plans). AT&T gained access to Cricket’s distribution channels and expanded Cricket’s presence to additional U.S. cities and states. AT&T used Cricket’s spectrum to expand coverage for all AT&T customers.

      Delete
    7. That's actually untrue. During all this time, Cricket has covered all 330 million Americans. What has changed is the amount of territory where these Americans can use the service.

      Any statistic about covering "people" is worthless for a mobile service. Because: mobile.

      Delete
  7. Everyone's whining about ulterior motives, while ignoring that his opinion is just common sense.

    As someone on Big Red because of coverage holes (even on AT&T), I'd love for there to be another competitive super network to drive down the cost.

    And with T-Mobile, Sprint and their MVNOs finally being competitive, there'll be a lot more downward pressure on current prices when competing on coverage is no longer an option.

    The resellers get it, but the Boost dealers are scared shitless because they see the writing on the wall.

    That's probably where half the antagonism comes from, with the other half coming from shills for the underinvesting Bell Twins, as well as the cable companies who just partnered up with them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Home broadband is not available in my rural area. Fortunately, both T-Mobile and Sprint have LTE service here.

      Because there is no broadband available, many people must use their cell phone hotspot for access. Verizon and AT&T have not upgraded their networks enough to meet this demand. As a result, both of their networks are very slow during peak demand hours.

      T-Mobile and Sprint are the only alternatives that work during times of heavy use at this location. So yes both T-Mobile and Sprint and their MVNOs are not only competitive right now but are the best option as a result of peak demand congestion on their competitors.

      I do not want to lose one of my two best options for home internet consequent to this merger. I also expect the drop in competition as a result of the merger to raise prices, especially on hotspot capable plans.

      Delete
    2. New T-Mobile will provide rural USA fast, super-low latency 5G with 100X capacity at lower prices. You will be very happy. And their roaming agreement is expanding coverage now as T-Mobile tweaks its towers. Half of Sprint customers own a compatible phone already.

      Delete
    3. I am all for a fast low latency connection, but how will they accomplish this on a non fiber connected rural tower? I need details before I believe their promises. I think the FCC should require T-Mobile to submit short and long term upgrade plans for front and back haul for each of both carriers macro sites. The plans for a local macro site should be made for available for homeowners within its range.

      Delete
    4. Tmo will primarily use some of their Band 71 spectrum for backhaul in rural areas. They will also use Sprint Band 41, unused edu band 41 and new 5G mid- and high-band spectrum for backhaul in rural areas where this spectrum is available. Their massive MIMO radios with 24 antennas and precise beam forming provide more distance from towers with 5G New Radio than with LTE, and 100X the capacity compared to LTE.
      Even using only Band 71 on Tmo's min. 31 MHz of nationwide spectrum, 5G will be at least 15-50% faster and latency will be 1ms or less. You will like it.
      For people who are not too lazy to read, the FCC proposal provides a lot of details about the nation-wide deployment. The differences with and without the merger are striking. Go look.

      Delete
    5. More on T-Mobile spectrum (not including Sprint's).
      T-Mobile has an average of 110 MHz of spectrum nationwide. The spectrum includes an average of 31 MHz in the 600 MHz band, 10 MHz in the 700 MHz band, 29 MHz in the 1900 MHz PCS band and 40 MHz in the AWS band. They will use ALL their spectrum to deploy 5G.
      T-Mobile also owns millimeter wave spectrum comprises an average of 186 MHz covering nearly 100 million POPs in the 28 GHz band and 106 MHz covering over 40 million POPs in the 37 GHz band.
      T-Mobile owns a nationwide average of 31 MHz of 600 MHz low-band spectrum covering 328 million POPs. T-Mobile owns approximately 41 MHz in the low-band (600 MHz and 700 MHz).
      T-Mobile started deployments of 600 MHz spectrum. It is live in 990 cities and towns in 45 states, covering about 500K square miles. It has deployed low band spectrum to nearly 300 million POPs, including 600 and 700 MHz spectrum.

      T-Mobile has started deploying massive MIMO (FDMIMO) in selected locations this year. T-Mobile has rolled out 256 QAM in nearly 1,000 markets. 256 QAM increases the number of bits delivered per transmission to enable faster speeds.
      T-Mobile is the first carrier to have rolled out the combination of carrier aggregation, 4×4 MIMO and 256 QAM in about 500 markets. They just signed a contract with Nokia for $3.5B worth of 5G New Radios, with up to 64x64 massive MIMO capability. They are also buying some 5G radios from Ericsson.
      T-Mobile has also started rolling out License Assisted Access technology that utilizes unused 5 GHz spectrum to augment bandwidth. The first LAA small cell went live in New York City in Q4 2017 - LAA small cell technology reached nearly 100 small cells. Customers have experienced 500 Mbps LTE speed in LAA areas. T-Mobile plans to deploy an additional 25,000 small cells to light up LAA and increase LTE and 5G speeds and coverage around the USA.

      Delete
    6. I read the FCC proposal, unfortunately it does not discuss backhaul and is full of generalizations. I would like to see upgrade plans for each macro site, especially as it pertains to backhaul.

      Delete
    7. "And their roaming agreement is expanding coverage now as T-Mobile tweaks its towers"

      The opposite is true. T-Mobile is eliminating roaming from coast to coast. This is a deliberate policy. I left T-Mobile several weeks ago and went to Verizon because T-Mobile without roaming on to AT & T was pretty much unusable.

      I talked to several people at T-Mobile and verify that this policy is real. Not just rumors on Reddit.

      Delete
    8. The FCC proposal is very specific about the technology to be fielded, and the spectrum deployment plans (Table 9 and Figure 9).
      5G is much more spectrum-efficient; and the Massive MIMO (up to 64x64) and QUAM 256 New Radios provide much more capacity, speed and coverage from each tower for both 5G and LTE. Current backhaul can easily be augmented with T-Mobile Band 71 and Sprint Band 41 spectrum as shown on the graphics, and LAA will be deployed via 25,000 small cells to fill in gaps and augment speed and capacity. Of course they will augment backhaul; why wouldn't they? In rural areas they can easily use some Band 66 spectrum, or 41 where available. Even if they did not, they can consolidate current Tmo and Sprint wireless backhaul in many if not most retained tower locations. Even if you still use your LTE phone it will work better with Massive MIMO and QUAM 256; they will broadcast both LTE and 5G simultaneously.
      Rural service will get a huge boost, especially with the thousands of new towers the New T-Mobile will deploy (read the FCC proposal for numbers).

      Delete
  8. The Feds now think 3 nation-wide 5G networks are necessary for robust competition. Looks like they agree with Mr. Glickman.
    https://nypost.com/2018/08/06/feds-provide-boost-to-sprint-t-mobile-merger-chances/

    ReplyDelete
  9. The big issue is are they going to Nationalize 5G? (the Federal government ends up running it or controlling it). https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/29/16946582/trump-5g-proposal-wireless-ajit-pai-fcc-china

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can stop worrying. This idea died months ago. Not an issue anymore.

      Delete
  10. T-Mobile--before the merger has been approved--announced an "Essential" postpaid plan that they say is cheaper than the "One" plans. The difference is $10, but "Essential" pricing does not include bundled Netflix, LTE hotspot, or taxes. Nationwide tax average is 17%, which on a $60 plan is $10.20. Oh, and "Essential" will be deprioritized more heavily than "One" and video will always be throttled.

    So much for savings, consumer-friendliness and "Un-Carrier"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two lines of Essentials cost $90 plus tax, vs. $120 for Tmo One. Three lines cost $95+ vs. $140. Four lines cost $110+ vs. $160. Extra lines $15/mo+.
      Essentials is a good, lower-cost alternative, especially for couples and families in low-tax states.

      Delete
    2. There is NO free Netflix on Tmo One unless you have two lines or more. It's obvious that Essentials plan is designed to save people money on two or more lines.

      Delete
    3. Video is throttled on the T-Mobile ONE plan as well. You have to pay extra for PLUS to get HD video streaming.

      Delete
    4. During the heyday of "uncarrier", T-Mobile had headline-grabbing PR ... But it also was distinguished from the"carriers" in that it hardly worked anywhere.

      Now T-Mobile is rapidly improving its network, moving to where one day it is a good choice for most Americans. Along the way, it sheds its "uncarrier" image.

      As an American who wants their phone to "just work", I welcome this!!! A "carrier" that lets you use your phone anywhere is FAR better than an "uncarrier" where you have to drive hundreds of miles to get coverage ... But hey, they give away pink umbrellas on Tuesdays!!

      T-mobile is growing AND growing up.

      Delete
    5. @anon737, 937: if T-Mobile intended to be a pal and make Essentials a good deal through and through, why are they offering a single line option (that too with taxes not included but everything that >1 lines has taken away?)

      @Anon946, you are correct. However, Essentials doesn't offer a Plus-type add-on.

      Delete
    6. To answer [email protected], Tmo offers single-line Essentials to take away a sales point from Sprint's $60 unlimited plan. Of course there is no Plus option for Essentials, which only offers the >essentials< at a lower price point!

      BTW, Essentials 4 unlimited lines for $120 is the lowest advertised price for a major carrier brand's plans, $20 less than Sprint Unlimited Freedom. T-Mobile One costs $160 including taxes and fees.

      Delete
  11. You have to pay extra for T-Mobile One Plus to get LTE hotspot, so 3G hotspot is the same as Tmo One with the Essentials plan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Except Essentials doesn't have an One Plus-type add-on.

      Delete
    2. Except that [email protected] typed: "but "Essential" pricing does not include ... LTE hotspot, ... when comparing it to T-Mobile ONE. Neither of them include LTE hotspot.

      Delete
  12. THE REAL ANSUER ;
    Merger T-Mobile and Sprint will not be Good For USA , All the revenues will be go to the Foreign companies that own T-Mobile and Sprint they will abuse of the power and take the consumers for a ride no only it Competition will Benefit the end consumer , Have Tri-Monopoly will no provide state of art services
    We need to Oppose the Merger or Make conditions that they can take out the Profits out USA

    ReplyDelete
Comment Page :


All comments must be approved before they will appear. The following types of comments will not be approved: off topic comments, insults or personal attacks directed at other commenters, bigotry, hate, sexism and profanity.