As a T-Mobile customer I was pretty excited about the merger, as the combined resources of Sprint and T-Mobile should really improve resources from coverage and network upgrades.
So far the merger has been fairly neutral from my perspective - I've not noticed any improved coverage at home,
So far I've not seen any downsides, so we'll see what happens..
But I think they will. Less competition is not a good thing
T-Mobile and Sprint were not individually large enough to offer real competition to AT&T and Verizon.
Only now do we truly have three carriers competing, I think we'll see overall benefit.
Especially as more phones move to 5G, that network support would have taken forever under T-Mobile and Sprint separately, now it should happen much faster. Maybe even faster than AT&T. So already we'll have some immediate benefit.
At least we can confirm what cellular tribe SuperKendall belongs too. Regrettably, it includes the worst cellular company ever to exist in Sprint.
Of course, the merger might result in 5G taking longer, it's easy to speculate when there are no consequences or commitment to truth, kind of like when you said that people had partial immunity to Covid. Remember that, SuperKendall?
At least we can confirm what cellular tribe SuperKendall belongs too.
Yes, there you are spot on.
But there's a good reason for that, I've been with ever other carrier and T-Mobile has worked way better for me.
I will freely admit that for what I've been doing, part of why T-Mobile has been so much better is free international data use. If you were staying in the U.S. it could well be that Verizon or AT&T simply had better coverage in some area you really needed it. Verizon for me I found hideously expen
The price of hard disk storage dropped precipitously from 1980 until now. Yet at the same time the number of hard drive manufacturers declined. Players falling out of the market didn't stop the benefits of competition.
Market competition doesn't require a certain number of players to create downward pressure on prices.
It's easy to fall back on that, but the issue is: what would have happened had the merger not taken place? The people who are against the merger tend to think the status quo would have prevailed, we'd have still had four carriers - two small, two large.
But Sprint was going bankrupt. So we'd have ended up with three anyway, just T-Mobile would have remained tiny rather than being big enough to compete against the big two.
It's hard to feel things are better when you have to compare, not with the past, bu
Professional wrestling: ballet for the common man.
So far so good (Score:2)
As a T-Mobile customer I was pretty excited about the merger, as the combined resources of Sprint and T-Mobile should really improve resources from coverage and network upgrades.
So far the merger has been fairly neutral from my perspective - I've not noticed any improved coverage at home,
So far I've not seen any downsides, so we'll see what happens..
Re:So far so good (Score:5, Interesting)
As a T-Mobile customer, I'm not at all thrilled with the merger. I mean, my service hasn't changed, it's still good. Prices haven't gone up yet.
But I think they will. Less competition is not a good thing unless competition is eliminated because something was socialized.
Now we actually have competition... (Score:1)
But I think they will. Less competition is not a good thing
T-Mobile and Sprint were not individually large enough to offer real competition to AT&T and Verizon.
Only now do we truly have three carriers competing, I think we'll see overall benefit.
Especially as more phones move to 5G, that network support would have taken forever under T-Mobile and Sprint separately, now it should happen much faster. Maybe even faster than AT&T. So already we'll have some immediate benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
At least we can confirm what cellular tribe SuperKendall belongs too. Regrettably, it includes the worst cellular company ever to exist in Sprint.
Of course, the merger might result in 5G taking longer, it's easy to speculate when there are no consequences or commitment to truth, kind of like when you said that people had partial immunity to Covid. Remember that, SuperKendall?
Well yes when I find a non-abusive carrier... (Score:1)
At least we can confirm what cellular tribe SuperKendall belongs too.
Yes, there you are spot on.
But there's a good reason for that, I've been with ever other carrier and T-Mobile has worked way better for me.
I will freely admit that for what I've been doing, part of why T-Mobile has been so much better is free international data use. If you were staying in the U.S. it could well be that Verizon or AT&T simply had better coverage in some area you really needed it. Verizon for me I found hideously expen
It takes two.... (Score:2)
The price of hard disk storage dropped precipitously from 1980 until now. Yet at the same time the number of hard drive manufacturers declined. Players falling out of the market didn't stop the benefits of competition.
Market competition doesn't require a certain number of players to create downward pressure on prices.
Re: (Score:1)
We had our internal company earnings call today I think you might be surprised over the next 6 months.
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to fall back on that, but the issue is: what would have happened had the merger not taken place? The people who are against the merger tend to think the status quo would have prevailed, we'd have still had four carriers - two small, two large.
But Sprint was going bankrupt. So we'd have ended up with three anyway, just T-Mobile would have remained tiny rather than being big enough to compete against the big two.
It's hard to feel things are better when you have to compare, not with the past, bu