Sprint-Nextel merger?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:28:11 GMT, "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Yes, the customers @ Nextel will have to replace their handsets when this is
>done within a year or two, but what's new about that? We ALL replace our
>handsets within two to three years anyway, as handsets tend to wear out and
>become obsolete with current and future technology.

NO we ALL do NOT replace our headsets every two years, or every time some "cool"
phone/radio/headset comes out.

I've had exactly THREE (3)! handheld mobile phones in almost 20 YEARS with
Verizon since it was BellAtlantic Mobile in the mid 80's when they first built a
system.

1) Motorola 8000UH from day 1 to about ~ 95 or 96
2) Nokia 280 (or something like that, its in a junk box somewhere) from 95/6 or
so till 10/2000 when I moved to a PCS 1900 VZW area
3) Audiovox 9000 since 10/2000

The ONLY REASON I upgraded from the 8000 to the Nokia was I wanted digital, had
the 8000 CDMA version been offered and more widely distributed I would have went
to it, but BAM didn't offer it.

I have recently had to invest in Nextel iDEN technology via Boost for work
related issues since I don't get paid for my cell phone usage for work. I am not
a big fan of nexhell for alot of reasons, BUT this merger will KILL NEXTEL if
they SCREW WITH THE PTT USERS.

Nextel SYSTEMATICALLY KILLED the local & regional SMR systems in the US that
were providing local 2 way radio services to businesses. Nextel system is
designed to provide this, and thats what alot of businesses AND PUBLIC SAFETY
users want and use Nextel for. The fact that it CAN DOUBLE as a "mobile phone"
too is just an extra benefit. Alot of the iDEN radios have the cell phone
feature locked out as they don't want their people using it.

Killing the iDEN network to a CDMA network that is not as rich in PTT as iDEN
will KILL ALOT OF NEXTEL's customers. In areas where competition to Nextel
exists, mostly in the southern US, (GA, AL, TN, MS) SouthernLinc will BENEFIT
TREMENDOUSLY from this merger. With the possibility that SL may go national and
create a new iDEN network for all the displaced Nextel PTT/Dispatch users.
Probably could get an iDEN network cheap when the Sprintel decides to sell the
network after the merger. No need in keeping something you don't need. Why it
probably would be better business wise to dismantle it and sell as scrap to kill
competition, its worth more in place and operating.

QChat, which nextel has EXCLUSIVE rights to in the US, is NOT a replacement for
iDEN PTT/Dispatch, not even close.

Personally I don't see this merger/aquisition being of benefit to Nextel or
Sprint business wise, and most certainly not for Nextel PTT/Dispatch users, but
users are never really a concern any way.

Sprint & Verizon, or Sprint & Alltel, SURE. Actually, Alltel/Sprint would make a
LOT more sense.

Sprint has landline ILEC
Alltel has landline ILEC
Sprint has wireless
Alltel has wireless
Sprint CDMA
Alltel CDMA

That looks like the PERFECT MARRIAGE to me! You can replace Verizon for Alltel,
and it works too, but the FCC & DOJ & Commerce may have something to say about
that one.

Nextel NO landline ILEC
Nextel PRIMARILY PTT/Dispatch
Nextel iDEN TDMA
Sprint has landline ILEC
Sprint PRIMARILY VOICE/DATA CELLULAR
Sprint CDMA

Not any real common ground here. Hopefully the IRS kills it with not allowing
them to make a tax free sale of Sprints ILEC business.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

first off nextel is only moving their iden network to a high frequency
because the FCC is forcing them. DO you believe they want to spend
billions of dollars if they did not have to. and southernlinc cannot
but this frequency band because it is going to the public saftey/police
& fire. it will not be for sale. secondly nextel will not make the
move until they are satisfied with it working properly and I believe
they will work it out.


--
1badss
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cellphoneforums.net
View this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t159884.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Not sure exactly where you mean, but verizon cuts it even less than
Sprint PCS in northern WI. I don't think there are any places in WI
where you can sign up for verizon service but not for Sprint PCS. There
are places where you can sign up for Sprint PCS service but not verizon.
At my home town, you can not sign up for either, they both roam.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Sprint has a small coverage area around Wausau and a very small sliver going
up hwy 51 to Rhinelander. Either side of the highway by 3 miles and it is
gone, very typical for Sprint and (Nextel) in rural areas. So they would be
roaming also and who they roam on I do not know. Verizon has no system
outside of the Fox Valley and roams on either USCC, Cellcom or Alltel ( in
that order per their PRL). Verizon roams on Cellcom digital as extended
network and it works fine with the exception of voice mail tags, internet
browsing, sms, picture sending. However Sprint's features wouldn't work
while roaming also per their advertisement. I live in Appleton and Verizon
has no conditions as to how much roaming you use as I checked before jumping
on board. I have been on all three over the last 2-3 years and USCC has the
best coverage but the highest costs. Sprints network works fantastic where
they have coverage and their cost is good, however they raped you on roaming
when I was on, and now I think that has changed. Verizon has good roaming
agreements and the cost per minute is good and they do not regulate how much
you roam.


"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LLWud.8649$yr1.3575@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Not sure exactly where you mean, but verizon cuts it even less than Sprint
> PCS in northern WI. I don't think there are any places in WI where you
> can sign up for verizon service but not for Sprint PCS. There are places
> where you can sign up for Sprint PCS service but not verizon. At my home
> town, you can not sign up for either, they both roam.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:


>>Then I guess to you, mass defections due to migration issues and
>>frustrations are acceptable. Good luck then.
>
>
> Migration happens whether there is a merger or not- spectrum swap. If
> you've been reading at all, there is going to be no push for an immediate
> single platform. Don't try to create issues where they don't exist.

Then I don't know what you've been reading, to be honest with you.
Nextel has long known that it needs to find something new to migrate to.
Sprint is going to be a convenient next thing. Eventually, and
probably sooner than later, a transition will have to happen.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
>>fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
>>that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
>>companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
>>companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
>>customers.
>
>
> Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
> move.

And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
entities and carry on? That's not how mergers work in the US. There
has to be a synergy, a cutting of costs, a maximizing of efficiency.
You do that in wireless by taking two networks and making them one.

That in mind, I agree with you: this whole thing is a stupid, stupid move.

It seems more definite though. I guess I'll stay a customer and watch
in amusement, until my service degrades. Then, time to move on.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
>>the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
>>words, to do more with less.
>
>
> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
> product to fig flavored hard candy?

No, that's a merger involving two different markets. Don't compare
apples with oranges.

If, however, Peter Pan Peanut Butter and JIF merged, guess what? You
MIGHT have two brands, but it's likely the two peanut butters are going
to made from the same plant, using the same machinery.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> You have a company with less than ideal
> customer service but great marketing combining with one that always rates
> high in customer service and has the lowest churn and bad debt numbers in
> the industry. Hmmmm- I wonder what parts they'll keep.


Generally, the ones that provide the quickest short term profits and
maximize cost savings. So let's see... which CS department earns less
and has fewer cs goals to meet, hmm?

--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:%I7vd.25845$GY5.15630@fe35.usenetserver.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > You have a company with less than ideal
> > customer service but great marketing combining with one that always
rates
> > high in customer service and has the lowest churn and bad debt numbers
in
> > the industry. Hmmmm- I wonder what parts they'll keep.
>
>
> Generally, the ones that provide the quickest short term profits and
> maximize cost savings. So let's see... which CS department earns less
> and has fewer cs goals to meet, hmm?
>

Wrong question- you're not even close. Try these (you'll find that they are
much more appropriate):

-Which business model has produced higher profit margins?
-Which business model has resulted in the highest ARPU in the industry?
-Which business model has resulted in the lowest churn in the industry?
-Which business model has resulted in much higher customer satisfaction
scores?
-Nextel has shown a profit how many consecutive quarters?

I believe the answer to any one of these would satisfy the great corporate
conspiracy you have uncovered. But the real question to you is, "What is
the benefit to Sprint in ignoring any of these results?" The single fact
that opposing technologies are in play here demonstrates that Sprint is in
no position to do a quick customer grab- they can't simply force customers
to switch to the Sprint network. And if you believe their intent is to
change the Nextel business model, then explain the benefit of buying an
incompatible network with the sole objective of having customers mass defect
to another carrier.

Cynicism is a great thing, but try to bring the facts into play every once
in a while.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 03:42:54 GMT, "mjohns2" <ghck@kvj.com> said in
alt.cellular.nextel:

>"Al Klein" <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote in message
>news:gfenr09odb4f7umfjqpkqn7gvmld2oho48@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:54:58 -0500, Isaiah Beard
>> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>> product to fig flavored hard candy? The strengths are combined, not
>> necessarily the products.

>Thank you for a voice of sanity. I don't know why people think that Sprint
>and Nextel will pickout their own faults then say let's implement this with
>this new company

I'm not saying that they won't do it - companies have been known to
self-destruct before. But there's nothing saying that they have to
combine the worst of both companies and disappear in a puff of
worldcom.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

> I'm not saying that they won't do it - companies have been known to
> self-destruct before. But there's nothing saying that they have to
> combine the worst of both companies and disappear in a puff of
> worldcom.

*grin*

That was funny. Thank you. "Puff of Worldcom."

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Sprint PCS also covers, highway 10 I think, through Waupaca and west to
51/39. My personal wish is for them to cover 21 and then maybe 49.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

I do agree that the majority of people replace their handsets about
every 18 months across all carriers. Nextel is typically on the lower
end of the spectrum on this because the majority of their clientel are
businesses that are not going to replace hundreds of handsets every
year or so just because something new came out. they are going to keep
them until the don't work anymore. That being said, if nextel forces
people to turn in their old handsets for new ones I am sure they will
offer some sort of deal to the large businesses so that it is not such
a burdon. as it stands now they offer a buyback on almost every phone
they have ever sold towards the purchase of a new one.


--
1badss
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cellphoneforums.net
View this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t159884.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

They have expanded up hwy 47 from 41 to 29 in the last couple of months
also. They are working at it which I will give them credit for.


"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6Zavd.9779$0r.2108@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Sprint PCS also covers, highway 10 I think, through Waupaca and west to
> 51/39. My personal wish is for them to cover 21 and then maybe 49.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"JDaT" <jda1951@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:B1%ud.69223$fY.46412@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

> No Bob, he is not the exception, I have friends and associates who are
> in the construction industry.
> Most still have the i700 or older Nextel units. All they want is a
> phone that works and working Direct
> connect. Most could care less about some of the newer features. I over
> heard one of my friend telling
> his wife to get off the phone he was working!
>
> This is not the exception. But it is industry Dependant! When a older
> Nextel digital phone breaks,
> most all of my friends are happy just to get it fixed. You see the cell
> phone is not a major part
> of there lifes. Course its a bad day when there phones break and they
> can not order Beer and
> Pizza!

We all have friends & associates we know who use Nextel phones, and I can
quote as many of these folks around here, who have replaced their Nextel
handsets between 1 to 3 years ago. The same goes for Cingular, ATTW, Alltel,
& Verizon users.

Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:01:45 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
>>>fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
>>>that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
>>>companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
>>>companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
>>>customers.

>> Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>> move.

>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>entities and carry on?

Buy a company that makes a profit. Some of the most successful
mergers are those in which corporate keeps its hands off the purchase.

>That's not how mergers work in the US. There
>has to be a synergy, a cutting of costs, a maximizing of efficiency.
>You do that in wireless by taking two networks and making them one.

See Telus/Mike. (The border doesn't make much difference.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:05:32 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
>>>the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
>>>words, to do more with less.

>> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>> product to fig flavored hard candy?

>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

So is Sprint/Nextel.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:

> -Which business model has produced higher profit margins?
> -Which business model has resulted in the highest ARPU in the industry?
> -Which business model has resulted in the lowest churn in the industry?
> -Which business model has resulted in much higher customer satisfaction
> scores?
> -Nextel has shown a profit how many consecutive quarters?

Then why does Nextel feel it needs to merge with a company that, by your
standards, doesn't perform as well? Nextel could very easily have said
it was not for sale. Instead, all reports have pointed to Nextel having
started the talks and pursuing them off and on for quite some time.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>>Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>>>move.
>
>
>>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>>entities and carry on?
>
> Buy a company that makes a profit.

.... and then toss it down the tubes by creating duplications and
inefficiencies? Real smart.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?
>
>
>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

> So is Sprint/Nextel.

Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy?



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:1HHvd.15508$RE2.5905@fe62.usenetserver.com...

> Then why does Nextel feel it needs to merge with a company that, by your
> standards, doesn't perform as well? Nextel could very easily have said
> it was not for sale. Instead, all reports have pointed to Nextel having
> started the talks and pursuing them off and on for quite some time.
>
>
> --

For starters, because of three very large expenses on the horizon, two of
which Sprint can provide relief for at no cost to Nextel:

Spectrum Swap
Development and deployment of a high speed data network
Eventual migration from iDen to CDMA

Why spend billions of dollars doing it yourself when somebody will do it for
you and pay you billions of dollars to use it? The networks are in place
(or being put in place) and the spectrum swap is a lot easier to swallow
when paid for with the revenue of 40 million subscribers.

It all points back to the questions that you ignored- like them or not,
Nextel has developed a business model that is the envy of EVERY wireless
carrier in the country. There is absolutely no indication that Sprint is
interested in changing that, and is probably hoping to bring the important
parts of that model to their side of the shop. If Sprint can drive anything
close to the margins that Nextel reports every quarter, this merger could
drive the two companies to the top of the pile.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:05:44 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>>Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>>>>move.

>>>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>>>entities and carry on?

>> Buy a company that makes a profit.

>... and then toss it down the tubes by creating duplications and
>inefficiencies? Real smart.

If Nextel makes a profit using its own tech staff, CS, etc., it'll
still make a profit using that same staff. It'll make more profit
using less staff. But it won't necessarily make more profit by
combining the two networks into one. People who want grapefruit and
people who want apples won't necessarily settle for apple/citrus
salad.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:07:36 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

> >>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?

>>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

>> So is Sprint/Nextel.

>Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy?

Nextel is basically a business walkie-talkie company - the cheap man's
radio system. Sprint Wireless is solely a cell phone company. Almost
totally different markets.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Al Klein" <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote in message
news:j0avr01l8i2v536hgb015fi5ieuha87d2b@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:07:36 -0500, Isaiah Beard
> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:
>
> >Al Klein wrote:
>
> > >>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change
the
> >>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?
>
> >>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.
>
> >> So is Sprint/Nextel.
>
> >Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy?
>
> Nextel is basically a business walkie-talkie company - the cheap man's
> radio system. Sprint Wireless is solely a cell phone company. Almost
> totally different markets.

Yes, and with the merger, should make a stronger cellular company, with a
number of cost savings to update Nextel's system to CDMA.

Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

The way I original read the news was this was just between
upper management at both companys.

But, don't the stockholders of both companys have a say as to
the out come of this proposed merger?

Are the stockholders of Nextel saying yes to the deal?
What about the Sprint stockholder?
What gives?

??