expansion or improved reliability?

[THE W]

i'd much rather see metro improve the reliability and strength of the coverage they already have than try to expand to different markets.

what do you think?

 

[nycnyc]

I would have to agree. If you improve on the network's reliability you improve the customer's opinion of the network. They stick with Metro and you add more subs. Then you make more money and then you expand. At least that's what would happen ideally hehe.

 

[THE W]

Yeah you hear people complain about how metro doesn't have a lot of coverage area. That's the trade off for lower service cost and besides that they have spectrum in all the major metropolitan areas of the country.

If they can be the best service to get in those areas they can even more competitive than they already are as the fifth best carrier in the country.

 

[pcgamer]

What's weird to me... I get worse coverage with a 3g only phone My parents get great coverage, almost everywhere we go.(4g). Note: i am comparing data coverage...

 

[mike28]

i'd much rather see metro improve the reliability and strength of the coverage they already have than try to expand to different markets.

what do you think?

True good post I rather see stability over expansi

 

[pcgamer]

What about both at the same time? It'll be like... New cheap phones, some good phones, some high end phones. With upgraded coverage to attract tons of people. And then maybe be able to use the "everybody's moving to metro" ad again

 

[mike28]

What about both at the same time? It'll be like... New cheap phones, some good phones, some high end phones. With upgraded coverage to attract tons of people. And then maybe be able to use the "everybody's moving to metro" ad again

Makes even more sense :thumbup:

 

[THE W]

What about both at the same time? It'll be like... New cheap phones, some good phones, some high end phones. With upgraded coverage to attract tons of people. And then maybe be able to use the "everybody's moving to metro" ad again

That means even more towers, more money, higher consumer cost. We already went up $10. You wanna be like the big 4 you'll be paying big 4 prices.

 

[THE W]

What's weird to me... I get worse coverage with a 3g only phone My parents get great coverage, almost everywhere we go.(4g). Note: i am comparing data coverage...

Nothing weird about that as metro more or less skipped over 3G development for LTE.

 

[pcgamer]

That means even more towers, more money, higher consumer cost. We already went up $10. You wanna be like the big 4 you'll be paying big 4 prices.

But then more people will come and price will be similar to what it is now

 

[THE W]

The big 4 already have expansive networks. People on those carriers are paying double and triple what we pay. Expansion costs money and that cost is passed on to you.

I won't say that they should never expand but there are tons of reliability issues with the network. They should focus on that long before network expansion.

 

[trigger1074]

They are focusing on opening up LTE for the home areas they have now by end of August and then anywhere else they expand after that will be LTE

 

[n4zty]

this is a good question to see how people think and its alot like a car do we want the ability to go faster or do we need stability as well? do we need more mpg or do we need more performance? the answer for me is both as technology grows so does the perfecting part of it. who says we need to sacrifice performance for quality why not both? cuz there no need to have performance if there isnt reliability.