I think that is a lot less true now than it was. Prepaid outside of VM is getting better, and VM is just getting more expensive (in terms of monthly cost, as well as the cost of buying every OS upgrade/functionality fix via a new phone).
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Virgin & Boost to get LTE "relatively soon"
- Thread starter metsfan99
- Start date
hiwatt
Android Enthusiast
I'm with you on 99% of your post. But the fact is in the real world, I'd guess 9 outta 10 people don't care about any of those issues. Almost all my friends have a smartphone and yet most of them do not even use it to anywhere near it's actual potential. My sister is a prime example: She pays over $100 a month for T Mobile and her My Touch 4g. As long as she can log into facebook, take pictures, text and get unlimited talk minutes,she doesn't care about any of the other features. She has never used gps navigation, still guesses how late stores are open etc. It never occurs to her to check these things on her phone. It doesn't occur to most of my friends either.
The problem for VM, the whole prepaid market has changed -- they have to release the better phones or lose customers. Both Straight Talk and T-Mobile allow customers to bring any phone -- including top of the line phones like the Galaxy S3, or the Nexus 4. Cricket has the iPhone.
In most case, though, you can find out the issues before you buy the phone. The Triumph, for those that bought the phone on release day, had no history but that seems to be more of an exception. If you wanted to know the problems of the Evo V, you just had to look at the threads on the Evo 3D forum. If you want to see the problems with the Galaxy S2, check out that forum. The problems people have complained about on VM are the same problems, overall, that Sprint users had.
Also, having more phones means that VM tech support has more options. For example, if you have a lemon of an Evo V (and have been through a few phones), VM will be able to switch you with an equivalent phone -- say the S2. This is something the postpaid mobile providers have been able to do if a phone isn't working for a customer; with more phones available it is getting to a point where VM will be able to do it as well.
People have these complaints about every mobile provider. Cell phones are in their infancy still, in most ways. Verizon has the best coverage, yet even they still have complaints in some areas about data speeds or how users can't get a signal at home or work.
AT&T has had well documented problems in several major cities about slow data, largely because they were the sole iPhone provider for a couple of years and their network was overcrowded. Lots of people still complain about them in cities like New York and San Francisco, just for two examples.
Sprint is, in some ways similar to AT&T, going through growing pains. Their slow data is from having too many subscribers combined with unlimited data. Worse, with LTE still being rolled out, they have the problem of people with top of the line LTE phones that are stuck on 3G.
And both T-Mobile and Sprint have issues as both have smaller networks, not having the coverage that Verizon and AT&T do, particularly in rural areas.
Also, neither has much in terms of LTE, yet. I'll be interesting to see where both are a year from now. Sprint has an aggressive expansion plan -- I believe they have LTE in 30 cities now (though possibly not complete coverage) and will have LTE rollout mostly complete by this time next year. T-Mobile has zero LTE -- and is just releasing their first LTE phone -- but also has aggressive plans and, if the deal to merge with MetroPCS goes through, will inherit an LTE network in many cities.
But, again, this is true of the entire cell phone market. In some ways it is worst with people on contract -- they get "free" (or, for top of the line, heavily discounted) phones. So they get frustrated when they have the Evo 3D but aren't eligible for an upgrade for 6 months -- especially if LTE has gone live it their city and their friends are getting 20+ Mbps (since there are few using LTE yet).
Now, admittedly, it is somewhat worse for VM currently, as they had such a poor selection before and are now starting to actually have some solid phone choices. People who bought the Evo V because it was by far the best phone, at the time, that had ever been on VM -- and now they are faced six month later with what many will think is an even better phone. And in another six months will likely be faced with even better choices, particularly as the phones will likely have LTE.
As we, as prepaid customers, adapt, we will get used to new (and better) phones coming out every six months and start to plan ahead. And, again, it isn't just VM going through this pain. In fact, for MetroPCS customers, they are not only picking up LTE, they are also changing their phone technology from CDMA to GSM in the next few years.
It is little different than any new technology. I imagine iPad owners feel a similar pain -- especially those that bought the new "latest and greatest" in June that is now inferior to the newest iPad. We saw this with computers a few years ago, when because of hard drive sizes and processor speeds, computers seemed to become obsolete within a few months. Ultimately, though, we'll enjoy have the choices even if it means we can't always afford the latest and greatest. Though, at least with prepaid, we know we can always switch and won't feel like we have to wait until we have an upgrade available on our contract.
I think the Nexus 4 is big trouble for VM for multiple reasons. High end phone which can move to any GSM provider at prices that VM is unable to compete with. Sprint seems to be unwilling to release a high end phone for fear of cannibalizing its post-paid market and they're trying to dump excess WiMax inventory on VM customers because they think we don't have options at a reasonable price point.
If the rumors are true, VM will soon be releasing the G2 at higher prices than the Nexus 4. Unless you don't have T-Mobile in your area, not clear to me why anyone would pick a phone which is that old in the tooth over the N4. Rumors also point to G3 in 1Q next year. If the G2 is higher than the N4, the G3 has to be significantly higher.
I've been a VM subscriber for 9+ years now and when the Nexus 4 comes out, I'm gone. I'm tired of pitiful network performance and waiting for high end phones to come out.
Now maybe, when the G3 comes out, LTE might give it a leg up on the N4, but again, not at the same price point and you are still prisoner to VM.
I'm not a prisoner to VM, I switched to a Galaxy Nexus this summer and am on T-Mobile and have been happy. Though T-Mobile also isn't the only option as you can move to Straight Talk using a GSM phone. You have a choice between using T-Mobile's or AT&T's network, depending on which SIM card your order, but it does cost $50 for a plan that is about the same as VM's $55 plan (while Straight Talk claims "unlimited" data it tends to be throttled around 2GB, like VM).
Though that merely points out another advantage -- if you don't like your GSM carrier you can easily switch to a different one. And there are several choices for GSM: T-Mobile Monthly, AT&T Go, Straight Talk, Simple Talk, Solavei, Red Pocket, etc.
At the same time, I'm not anti-VM and am glad they are in the market. I agree that Sprint has an issue with not giving the best phones to Virgin Mobile. OTOH, they do seem to be improving the phones they offer, even if the phones are a year old. Though, in Sprint's defense, part of that is pricing; they want to wait until phones cost in the $300 range rather than the initial $600 price tag high end phones typically have. I'll also agree they need to improve their phone pricing. For example, $370 is too much for the Galaxy S2; especially when you consider you can buy the Galaxy S2 for T-Mobile prepaid for $330, that includes a $30 T-Mobile prepaid card.
mogelijk et. al.
The topic of this thread is:
Virgin & Boost to get LTE "relatively soon"
While the comments of the last several posts are interesting and of value, they are off topic in this thread. Please continue that discussion in a more appropriate existing thread or start a new thread if necessary.
The topic of this thread is:
Virgin & Boost to get LTE "relatively soon"
While the comments of the last several posts are interesting and of value, they are off topic in this thread. Please continue that discussion in a more appropriate existing thread or start a new thread if necessary.
I think it would be strange to offer LTE to pre-paid customers before the network is completely built out, but with Sprint, anything is possible.
Sprint pre-paid for access to Clearwire's WiMax network for the first two years of the agreement and I think that pre-payment only covers until the end of this year. (Yes? No? Anyone?) Once Sprint has to start cutting checks to Clearwire for WiMax access, there'd be incentive to get pre-paid customers onto Sprint's LTE network.
Sprint pre-paid for access to Clearwire's WiMax network for the first two years of the agreement and I think that pre-payment only covers until the end of this year. (Yes? No? Anyone?) Once Sprint has to start cutting checks to Clearwire for WiMax access, there'd be incentive to get pre-paid customers onto Sprint's LTE network.
Sprint is reported to have an agreement with Clearwire that runs through 2015 to provide WiMax coverage for Sprint (including VM and Boost) phones. Beyond that, Sprint just re-purchased a majority share of Clearwire, so I don't think cutting a check to Clearwire will bother them that much.
It's not a report - that wholesale master services agreement is well known and has been confirmed by Sprint Nextel. The agreement is not specific to Boost and Virgin Mobile.
Its bothers them. Sprint and Clearwire are separate publicly traded companies and have to keep separate books. When Sprint starts sending checks to Clearwire, that's money that will just make Sprint's cumulative losses worse. Sprint has lost $50 billion cumulatively since the Nextel merger and has $22 billion in debt - they don't want to make those numbers any worse if they don't have to.
Once Sprint can provide services over LTE nationwide, they won't need Clearwire's 4G capabilities and can finally stop shoveling money into that sinkhole. The sooner Sprint gets all its customers from all its brands off Clearwire's network, the sooner Sprint can stop worrying about what happens when Clearwire goes under.
Sorry, that was a rhetorical you. You actually were one of the ones that opened my eyes to the viability of T-Mobile
, just needed a high end affordable phone and the Nexus turned out to be (hopefully) my jumping off point.If you want HPSA+ 42, T-Mobile (or a T-Mobile MVNO) are your only options AFAIK.
Competition is always good, but until they stop giving pre-paid customers hand-me down phones, they're going to have issues with the increasing # of pre-paid providers that don't have these limitations.
Edit: just saw the request not to pollute the thread and get back to VM LTE topic. Sorry, you're right.
So to stay on topic, I suppose if VM releases the G3 in early 2013 when LTE is rumored to be more widely available in Sprint and it has a decent price point, then it could be interesting.
I do think it bothered Sprint when they were looking to divest themselves of Clearwire. With Softbank buying Sprint, if the deal goes through, I don't think it bothers Sprint as much -- especially since Softbank's strategy apparently includes Clearwire.
Why does Sprint even keep VM and Boost running to begin with? It seems odd that they would allow their own subsidiary to undercut them so much. If VM gets LTE and the G3, why would anyone pay $109 a month on Sprint for unlimited everything when they can get the same phones and service without an contract for $55 on VM?
septembersrain
句_句 Smurfing Awesome
For one, We won't get it until it's already been with Sprint for about a year.
For two, We still have no roaming so certain Sprint customers wouldn't benefit from our service.
For three, We've also lost Nextel. Only postpaid customers can download an app that'll allow push to talk in the same way through an app.
I also think there isn't as much throttling either on postpaid.
Just my thoughts.
Good points. Also no three way calling, no call forwarding and only so-so ability to work with Google Voice.
Also, many people just don't want to be tied down by a contract and don't mind paying more for an unsubsidized phone.
I'm looking forward to LTE on pre-paid, whenever it happens.
What plan do you have that gives you that??You can always get a Google Voice account and pay a few dollars for GrooveIP (at the Play store). Using both of those in conjunction with the other will give you free phone calls. I do this, and I think Mog does too. My billing cycle begins on the 4th of each month, and I've only used 1 of my 100 minutes.
The 30 dollar a month plan with 100 minutes gives you 5GB of data every month.
Kahroo
Android Expert
T-Mobile 4G Prepaid.
OverByter
Resident Slide Rule Guru
Actually a little over two years ago all Virgin had as far as Android was concerned was the Intercept, I remember rushing out to Best Buy to snatch it up for about $250,but it was the first and only prepaid Android on the market, that's the only reason that they were able to sell the damn things, sadly that's still the only Android that they sold that received an OS update. As for churn most prepaid carriers couldn't care less, unlike postpaid they make a lot of their money from handset sales as opposed to monthly plans, if they have constant churn that's just more profit on new customer phones. It's difficult to say with any certainty though because Sprint refuses to break out the numbers for their subsidiaries separately. Some of Virgin's business practices like the ease with which they send you replacement phones almost makes it seem like Sprint keeps them around for a write off. Most carriers make you jump through hoops to get a warranty replacement, try getting more than one replacement in a year from Verizon if you don't have insurance yet Virgin gladly sent me six class a replacement Triumphs in a little over two months. Even more remarkable is that your warranty starts anew from the date that you activate the phone. Everyone else gives you the remaining of the year or thirty days, whichever is greater. I have no idea if or how they can possibly turn a profit.
OverByter
Resident Slide Rule Guru
We won't see LTE anytime soon, even with Network Vision rolling out, remarkably as much as people complain about the limited coverage of WiMax it currently has a larger footprint than Sprints LTE coverage. And if the S3 ever came to Virgin it'd cost at least $ 600 for a phone that for most would limit you to dialup speed 3G in most markets.
OverByter
Resident Slide Rule Guru
Sprint is Clears largest shareholder and that's the main reason that Softbank is even interested, WiMax might be done but Clear's spectrum portfolio in numerous markets is the main reason for Sprint being attractive at all to Softbank.
Clearwire is a publicly traded company; Softbank didn't need to buy Sprint to get control of Clearwire. Prior to the merger announcement, Sprint did not own a majority of Clearwire. You are grossly overestimating both the value and importance of Clearwire's spectrum.
OverByter
Resident Slide Rule Guru
Actually even though Sprints sold off quite a bit of their holding in Clear after deciding to rethink WiMax they are still the largest shareholder with a majority holding of 50.8% while also accounting for about 90% of Clear's individual users through wholesale contracts , and Softbank on their own can't do much with Clears spectrum holdings while Sprint certainly can. Clear's imminent rollout of its 4G LTE network will certainly mesh well with Sprints own Network Vision rollout. So yes Sprint is Clears majority shareholder, yes Softbank has to go through Sprint to get control of Clear and without these holdings it's highly doubtful that Softbank would have been interested in getting involved.
Clearwire fully building out their LTE network is only possible in a delusional dreamworld. Clearwire doesn't have the billions needed to roll out their LTE network and bring it to a useful scale.
Clearwire is rolling out a different standard of LTE than Sprint, AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile because they apparently think that choosing a technology nobody else in the U.S. wants is a good thing - look how well that worked out with WiMax. Sure, anything can be kluged together and made to work, but saying that Clearwire's LTE will "mesh well" with Sprint's LTE network is silly.
Sprint made an early bet on Clearwire and WiMax that didn't pan out, then was stuck throwing more and more money at Clearwire primarily so Clearwire wouldn't fail, taking Sprint's investment and access to the WiMax network with it. Clearwire is a mess and Sprint is now the majority owner of a money loser with no hope in sight of turning that around any time soon, if at all.
The sooner Sprint can get its LTE network up and running in more cities, the better because it will give Sprint the chance to walk away from Cleawire and write off their equity or force Clearwire into bankruptcy and grab whatever is useful on the cheap or sell off their stake to someone dumb enough to buy it.
Verizon has the largest LTE network, by far. AT&T is second, with LTE in 102 markets. Sprint is just starting to implement LTE and has only rolled it out in about 20 markets, so far; they should be up to 100 by the end of 2013. T-Mobile has no LTE, yet, they begin a $4 billion LTE rollout next year. They also should be acquiring MetroPCS (pending government approval), which will give them LTE in markets where Metro currently has LTE.
T-Mobile makes up for their lack of LTE by having HSPA+ 42 -- in some markets their HSPA+ is as fast as Verizon and AT&T's LTE. AT&T has HSPA+ 21, which makes their 3G much faster than the 3G offered by Sprint and Verizon. While HSPA+ isn't available across AT&T's and T-Mobile's networks, they tend to be available in more areas than Verizon has LTE. Sprint and Verizon's 3G speeds are limited to around 1 Mbps, far slower than the 3G HSPA+ speeds.