Inside the Plan to Pull Sprint Out of Its Death Spiral | Hacker News Reader

Inside the Plan to Pull Sprint Out of Its Death Spiral

bloomberg.com

32 pointsprostoalex22 comments

Step 0) fire all corporate teams not directly related to core product: data. Get rid of ridiculous app development teams, teams that run things like the MAG, proxies, etc. None of these things are necessary. If you have a team that's writing your own VPN client, you're doing business wrong.

Step 1) fire all of middle and upper management in corporate

Step 2) fire all of middle and upper management on the retail side

Step 3) bring in a team of silicon valley tech managers for remaining tech teams for now flat organization

Step 4) bring in a select few retail managers that won't have the us vs them attitude about corporate

Step 5) sell the damn campus in OP. Target should be about 1000 corp employees max and there's plenty of commercial real estate in KC that'd fit the bill.

Step 6) sell data centers, anything that can't be cohosted somewhere else

Step 7) have engineers creating a backhaul network that is focused on simplicity, distribution, and redundancy. Piping all traffic back to overland park is stupid (as was the case in their WiMax 4g)

Step 8) Fire vendors. All of them. Sprint is a slut spending money with third party products. Switch to open source everything.

As you point out, it should be possible. The other MNOs think they are in a business other than moving bits. They are doing what are at best superfluous acquisitions like AOL. They think they can "add value." At best they can subtract value and charge you not to.

Seeing through this delusion should be an obvious competitive advantage. But you have to behave like you mean it. More bits, more predictable performance, fewer gotchas, for less money is what MNOs should be selling.

There's another way to zig where others are zagging: Create product offerings lined up with key ecosystems. There is the beginning of this in Sprint's participation in Project Fi.

I've been on Sprint since 2006. Granted, the one thing that has kept me around is the plan I have ($50 / month for unlimited text, data, etc, etc). The service, generally, has gotten much better over the last few years and I cannot justify doubling my bill to move to a provider that is only incrementally better.

I've been on Sprint since 2004 and agree on the plan keeping me around: You just can't beat unlimited everything for the prices they offer.

However, I did recently switch my wife's low-usage phone over to ting. Identical service, as it runs on Sprint's network, but only cost $14 last month. I will probably switch my phone over as well, which should drop my bill to around $30/month.

I had been on Sprint since 1999/2000 (At least the moment it entered into California)

I just switched to ProjectFI and have been much happier.

Are there any accurate tools out there for comparing networks?

I used to have Sprint, but switched to Verizon in 2013 because they had poor coverage in the Twin Cities, and no coverage in outstate Minnesota. Now I want to switch back because of cost, but I'd like to get an accurate idea of the coverage.

I'm not sure how accurate the data are, but take a look at opensignal.com.

Sensorly and CellMapper are also useful (and CellMapper makes an effort to pinpoint towers).

Of course, since they use crowdsourced data, they depend on people actually running their respective apps, so the lack of indicated coverage doesn't necessarily mean there's no coverage at a given location.

Their coverage maps offer a good indication as to what to expect in a general area, but they lack the precision necessary to perform due diligence before making a switch.

I work in Manhattan, where I've twice had the misfortune of occupying a cubicle in the exact center of a building. Both T-Mobile and AT&T report full coverage for the entire area, but the many micro dead spots in homes and offices can be a real problem. T-Mobile in particular licenses spectrum that can't penetrate walls as well as some other parts of the spectrum.

I'm sure there's a startup for providing user sourced coverage data at a very granular level, though it would be difficult to deal with the constant changes the carriers are making to their networks.

Do you have a phone that'll use WiFi for cellular? Most office buildings are effectively faraday cages. On T-Mobile, my phone will route SMS and calls from my iPhone over whatever WiFi network I'm on, so network quality in dense areas becomes less of a concern for me (except when I'm mobile; but then, I'm out in the open, so signal quality is better).

T-Mobile has LTE band 12, so if you have a iPhone 6S it may work better now. The 700Mhz frequency is a good addition for T-Mobile, as their biggest problem in my opinion is a lack of coverage when traveling. It also penetrates walls very well.

This problem - anxiety about switching to a mobile carrier with unknown coverage - is an opportunity waiting to be exploited. Imagine Sprint or T-Mobile sending someone to your home and walking around with you so that you could see exactly what kind of coverage you'll get with them. The ads practically write themselves: "Here at Sprint we're so confident our network is better that we'll send someone to your house and show you! Call today!"

This seems like a good Uber-style model for Sprint to play with. Hiring up thousands of full timers for this purpose might be simply too expensive for a company that hemorrhages money regularly.

But what if Sprint had an app where its customers could apply to become Network Advocates and after passing some requirements, could get forwarded requests to demonstrate network and modern device.

In return, they'd receive like $10 or a credit on their bill. It could be a way for a savvy young consumer to basically get free Sprint service in exchange for the powerful new advertising.

http://opensignal.com/

And a potential public relations nightmare. They'd have to thoroughly vet anyone that is going to be walking through someone's front door in their name.

Honestly, probably easier to just send a SIM card to people with $5 credit on it.

The one real option is to ask people that work with you, to see how it all works out for them. For instance, I used to work at a place where all carriers claimed to have good coverage, while in practice, everyone at the office had AT&T: The reason? The building was built in such a way that nobody really had good coverage. What AT&T did was install repeaters INSIDE THE BUILDING, to get a decent connection, and with that, they got easily 2000 subscribers.

Similar things can happen with cable too: A lot of people in my hometown rave about Charter's speeds, but in my subdivision, nobody uses them: There is packet loss, outages... so the entire neighborhood ends up with UVerse, which, while far slower and more expensive, it actually works.

Is Sprint still on iDEN or did they sell that off to USGOV some time last decade? I'm in Northern Lower Michigan and was on Sprint a long time ago. The cell coverage was terrible but the direct connect feature was rock-solid. I sort-of miss it.

Sprint Nextel provided iDEN service across the United States until its iDEN network was decommissioned on 30 June 2013. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEN#Operators)

I'm officially still a nerd. I thought this was going to be about Agile Sprints. Need more coffee.

I can only speak from the customer's perspective but I think of Sprint the way I used to think of TMobile: a more affordable alternative to the children of the Baby Bells (ATT and Verizon) that can offer a better deal since they're competing against bigger players.

For probably 10 years I used Sprint because they consistently offered the best price and perks despite not having bought up as much coverage in some areas as VZW and ATT. When I used a flip phone in the early 2000's I could get service for dirt cheap. A few hundred minutes plus a few hundred texts (back when those were itemized money makers for carriers) for $30/mo. When I got my first smart phone, a Treo 650, unlimited data was another $10 or $15/mo addon which brought my total to around $40-45/mo.

I never worried about minutes because Sprint didn't count any calls made on weekends, any calls made after 7pm, or even any calls to/from any cell phone of any carrier against your balance. Early on, the data speeds only allowed me to check email, sync calendars, and stream 128k/s Shoutcast streams in the car but I already felt like it was "futuristic" while friends were paying monthly fees for XM Radio or pricey Blackberry plans.

With my second smartphone (an HTC PocketPC running Windows Mobile) I got GPS navigation, unlimited 3G service at around 600-800k/sec, and all the cool stuff that came along with it like the ability to stream live TV from my PC with a tuner card at home. Data was still unlimited and my monthly bills were under $50. As a longer-term customer, I got a new phone subsidy every year instead of every two years at a time when there was no real benefit to going without a contract to save money.

Coverage in rural areas wasn't anywhere near as good as the bigger carriers but I lived in the city and Sprint roamed for free on Verizon towers so I could always make and receive calls. As the non-early-adopters started buying smartphones, I was always amazed that friends were paying upwards of $90/mo for iPhones on ATT with limited data and 2G speeds.

When WiMax debuted, our city was on the list of the initial rollout cities and I was using my phone as a WiFi hotspot to get (at the time) amazing 5-8mbps speeds anywhere I went. Video calls and live streaming video were now a thing and even though the monthly cost jumped from $45 to $60 it was still cheaper than alternatives.

But then they got rid of yearly subsidies. And the prices went up as they reorganized their tiers so that the cheapest plan I could get included more minutes that I could ever use with no way to buy less. $80/mo was creeping dangerously close to ATT/VZW prices. I still had unlimited data but over time, those 5-8mbps speeds weren't showing up on my actual phone. I was in a full coverage area with excellent signal but lucky to break 1mbps during the day.

It was a tough time to be a Sprint loyalist as service was becoming more expensive and less reliable. The tipping point for me was the Nexus 5 and TMobile's semi-hidden prepaid options. In the past Tmo had seemed like it was roughly the same in terms of cost but they had less coverage. But now I could buy a good phone off contract for $350 and pay only $30/mo for a 5GB data allotment with 100 minutes (which is still more than I use normally but much better than paying for hundreds).

When my Sprint contract expired I made the switch over to TMo and cut my bill in half. I've got WiFi coverage at home and at work so I never go over 5GB these days. If I run out of minutes for some weird reason, it's a quick couple of taps and $10 to add another 100 minutes. If Tmo ever pisses me off I can just buy a SIM from someone else and be ready to go. And the only downside is that I get no service in more remote areas.

But since I am in the city for 98% of the year, I figured it was a worthwhile tradeoff. Data speeds are excellent and I'm not stuck in a contract paying 2-3x as much for unwanted services. I don't know what it will take for Sprint to bounce back short of a TMo-like reinvention. The problem is that the things that attract me as a customer (cheap, fast, contract-free dumb pipes) are not the things that make loads of money for carriers. If they are able to leverage the amount of fiber and spectrum they own at good terms for customers, I'd gladly consider them again. But for the time being, I haven't felt like I was getting this good a deal since my early days with Sprint.

I have $50/month Unlimited data iPhone plan, and 0% financing on the iPhone itself over 2 years. Coverage is much improved recently, too.

Their marketing is terrible, and in-store customer service, while pleasant and eager to help, is painfully slow and inept. Fix that, and the pricing will drive customers to them.

Also keep in mind that T-Mobile's rural coverage has been rapidly improving, especially in the last six months or so. Northern Michigan (north of a line roughly from Muskegon to Bay City) used to be exclusively AT&T roaming coverage, and further south there were some large coverage holes with no service (e.g. around Hastings). Now, almost the entire Lower Peninsula is covered, and the few remaining gaps are being filled in.

A big reason for this, in Michigan at least, is that they have a chunk of 700 MHz spectrum; this is what they term their "extended range" LTE coverage.

In Illinois, they don't have any 700 to speak of, but they're still building out new coverage in places where there was only roaming (such as the Macomb area). Their joint venture in Iowa (iWireless) is also lighting up LTE on their network. I've also run into brand-new coverage in western Indiana. They clearly want to cut AT&T roaming to the barest minimum.

In areas where T-Mobile has 700 MHz coverage, you'll need an up-to-date handset to receive it - something you should consider if you were planning on switching an unlocked phone to them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com