Re: Sprint-Nextel merger?

"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.

"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

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

"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

So what will this mean to the user? will we have to Pay for a new phone to
work on the IDEN/CDMA System?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

--
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments to it contain confidential
information and are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or
entities to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or
an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that you are prohibited from reviewing,
retransmitting, converting to hard copy, copying, disseminating, or
otherwise using in any manner this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to
this message and delete it from your computer.
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cuYvd.220$yK.135@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink .net...
>
> "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
>
>

"jwood" <jeffwood@adelphia.net> wrote in message
newsI8wd.4850$FE.4216@fe37.usenetserver.com...
> So what will this mean to the user? will we have to Pay for a new phone to
> work on the IDEN/CDMA System?
> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Eventually Yes ... For the short term, i.e.: 12 to 18 months, probably not.
Nothing has been said as to what the time frame would be to convert Nextel's
system over to SPCS.

I'm guessing that once the conversion takes place, SPCS will be offering
phones at a very subsidized cost.

Bob

Bob Smith wrote:

> Eventually Yes ... For the short term, i.e.: 12 to 18 months, probably not.
> Nothing has been said as to what the time frame would be to convert Nextel's
> system over to SPCS.

http://sprintnextel.mergerannounceme...estor_Pres.pdf

Towards the end of this document is a timeline. It looks like major
technical migrations aren't going to happen until at least 2006, and it
appears they even intend to maintain iDEN beyond that.


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