PRL 10023 is being 'pushed' out

Andrew,
Qwest is using SID 5461 for most of Colorado, Wyoming, North & South Dakota,
Montana and possibly more. I am guessing there is some dual SID's being
broadcast because Qwest phones have used the Sprint network along a strecth
of I-70 in the mountains where Sprint uses 4121, but a Qwest phone will not
readily roam on 4121 in other areas, AT&T and Verizon (for example) being
higher in priority. I have not seen a Qwest PRL, but it is similar to, but
no where near as complete as, Sprint's.

frank,
Qwest has shown their coverage as Sprint's since last October, but at that
time it was only for the new, "National" plans. I know they're still
serving many users from their old sites, and those users' phones can only
access the Qwest sites.

Andrew brings up a good point. in order for Sprint to fulfill their license
requirements, they would need to convert any acquired Qwest sites to
Sprint's channels. And yes, I would imagine there will be Qwest users who
will never upgrade their phone to a new PRL, and if/when the phone stops
working, they would call and ask for help, and with no signal, they would
not be able to get a new PRL OTA, therefore would need a new
phone...probably at Qwest's expense. It was probably worked into the
network conversion plan expenses.

John S,
What is your reference for "Sprint owns the Qwest cellular system now. Qwest
retained the right to re-sell
some of it's markets. " In Qwest's story in the Denver newspapers, Qwest
said they may sell some sites to Sprint (rumors are there will be 55 sites
sold), but the rest of the network will be used for another Qwest service.
I'm guessing that Qwest will be using these frequencies for their new,
recently announced "wireless DSL" service. Sprint would have no use for
Qwest's sites in Sprint's already-served markets.

-Bill Radio

"Andrew Shepherd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> BTW, Bill, what is the Qwest broadcast SID for its Rocky Mountain
> region footprint? It should be in the 5xxx range. I know that I have
> all the Qwest SID listings on a hardcopy somewhere but not readily
> available at the moment.

---

› See More: PRL 10023 is being 'pushed' out

[email protected]pamfree (John S.) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >If that date of 3/1/04 is correct does that mean Sprint will now
> >officially offer service in Montana & Wyoming where only Qwest has
> >towers?
>
> Sprint owns the Qwest cellular system now. Qwest retained the right to re-sell
> some of it's markets.

Entirely impossible. Qwest Wireless might possibly have transferred
ownership of all network infrastructure to Sprint PCS, but the PCS
licenses still remain firmly in Qwest's hands. In fact, Qwest has not
filed any pending transfer of control applications w/ the FCC. Check
the FCC ULS. There is not even a hint yet that Qwest's PCS licenses
will be transferred to SPCS. So, even if Qwest were to assign all of
its spectrum to SPCS, such would still be months from potential
approval & consumation.

Andrew
--
Andrew Shepherd
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.ku.edu/home/cinema/

[email protected] (Andrew Shepherd) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected]pamfree (John S.) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > >If that date of 3/1/04 is correct does that mean Sprint will now
> > >officially offer service in Montana & Wyoming where only Qwest has
> > >towers?
> >
> > Sprint owns the Qwest cellular system now. Qwest retained the right to re-sell
> > some of it's markets.
>
> Entirely impossible. Qwest Wireless might possibly have transferred
> ownership of all network infrastructure to Sprint PCS, but the PCS
> licenses still remain firmly in Qwest's hands. In fact, Qwest has not
> filed any pending transfer of control applications w/ the FCC. Check
> the FCC ULS. There is not even a hint yet that Qwest's PCS licenses
> will be transferred to SPCS. So, even if Qwest were to assign all of
> its spectrum to SPCS, such would still be months from potential
> approval & consumation.
>
> Andrew



I'd like to hear if anyone has been able to pick up a Sprint native
signal yet with PRL 10023 in Montana or Wyoming where Qwest has/had
coverage but Sprint didn't.

[email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> I'd like to hear if anyone has been able to pick up a Sprint native
> signal yet with PRL 10023 in Montana or Wyoming where Qwest has/had
> coverage but Sprint didn't.

At the very least, we know from the widely disseminated PRL 10014 that
it contained Qwest SID 5461 marked as a negative SID. I can also
personally vouch for the fact that SID 5461 was still negative in PRL
10015. During the several days that I spent in Colorado during the
summer of 2001, making several trips back & forth between Estes Park &
Boulder or Denver, I would intermittently lose Sprint PCS channel PCS
0200 signal along US-36 and would subsequently detect Qwest's CDMA PCS
E license signal on channel PCS 0825 bleeding upward into the
foothills from the piedmont floor. However, immediately upon
detection of the Qwest PCS 0825 signal & acquisition of the sync
channel, the PRL would commence search again, as the Qwest SID 5461
was no doubt still a negative entry.

Qwest being a fellow CDMA 1900 carrier, one would have thought that
SPCS would have favorably included Qwest's SID(s) into its PRLs.
However, as Bill has indicated, Qwest SID 5461 covers a very large
area, much of which overlaps w/ SPCS footprint along the I-25 corridor
in Colorado. Just as VZW removed or negated several geographically
expansive SPCS SIDs from its PRLs, in order to prevent excessive
in-market roaming, SPCS ostensibly did likewise w/ Qwest to curtail
potentially user-confusing roaming where the Qwest fringe signal
trumps the SPCS fringe signal along the I-25 corridor. Unfortunately,
akin to the VZW PRL contraction, such has also had the effect of
precluding CDMA 1900 roaming on Qwest in locales such as Rapid City or
Billings where SPCS has no overlapping coverage.

Bill, as you are located in Colorado, my question for you would be:
are you certain that none of the SPCS PRLs issued between PRL 10015 &
PRL 10023, if even the latter as has been hypothesized, have allowed
SPCS subs to CDMA 1900 roam on Qwest SID 5461?

Andrew
--
Andrew Shepherd
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.ku.edu/home/cinema/

Andrew,
My source for Qwest/Sprint roaming info comes from Qwest 'insiders' who may
or may not be employees. I have not seen an actual Sprint PRL since 10014.
So when I am told that Qwest towers are doing this or that, I am piecing
together reports and not PRL's. The 'inside' word is that very specific
Qwest sites will someday, if not already, be available to Sprint users, and
that means most likely it will not be done just by adding Qwest's SID to
Sprint's list, especially knowing that each of Qwest's 4 or 5 SID's covers
several states and overlaps with Sprint in areas where Qwest says they will
continue to use their sites for other purposes.

Qwest announced officially today their new "nationwide" wireless network,
and current customers will now have until the end of the year to 'update
their phone'. see:
http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_...&date=20040301

And here's the kicker, from the release:

"Beginning this month, current Qwest customers will be contacted regarding
their service transition to the new plans. Most will have the option of
transferring to a comparable plan with new national coverage. If customers
wish to sign up for a national plan prior to their transition date, they may
contact a Qwest customer service center. Current wireless customers in
Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming will remain on existing
Qwest wireless plans until later this year."

That tells me either Qwest's sites still need to somehow be changed to
become Sprint sites, or Sprint needs to build sites there to accomodate new
Qwest customers. It looks like Sprint coverage should be in these areas
"later this year." In the meantime, we will take each 'report' at face
value.

-Bill


"Andrew Shepherd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Bill, as you are located in Colorado, my question for you would be:
> are you certain that none of the SPCS PRLs issued between PRL 10015 &
> PRL 10023, if even the latter as has been hypothesized, have allowed
> SPCS subs to CDMA 1900 roam on Qwest SID 5461?

"Bill Radio" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Andrew,
> My source for Qwest/Sprint roaming info comes from Qwest 'insiders' who may
> or may not be employees. I have not seen an actual Sprint PRL since 10014.
> So when I am told that Qwest towers are doing this or that, I am piecing
> together reports and not PRL's. The 'inside' word is that very specific
> Qwest sites will someday, if not already, be available to Sprint users, and
> that means most likely it will not be done just by adding Qwest's SID to
> Sprint's list, especially knowing that each of Qwest's 4 or 5 SID's covers
> several states and overlaps with Sprint in areas where Qwest says they will
> continue to use their sites for other purposes.
>
> Qwest announced officially today their new "nationwide" wireless network,
> and current customers will now have until the end of the year to 'update
> their phone'. see:
> http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_...&date=20040301
>
> And here's the kicker, from the release:
>
> "Beginning this month, current Qwest customers will be contacted regarding
> their service transition to the new plans. Most will have the option of
> transferring to a comparable plan with new national coverage. If customers
> wish to sign up for a national plan prior to their transition date, they may
> contact a Qwest customer service center. Current wireless customers in
> Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming will remain on existing
> Qwest wireless plans until later this year."
>
> That tells me either Qwest's sites still need to somehow be changed to
> become Sprint sites, or Sprint needs to build sites there to accomodate new
> Qwest customers. It looks like Sprint coverage should be in these areas
> "later this year." In the meantime, we will take each 'report' at face
> value.
>
> -Bill


Thanks Bill. That's finally the evidence I was looking for. It appears
to me that Sprint customers still don't have native Sprint coverage in
those states in question such as Montana & Wyoming. That's
disappointing to hear. Hopefully we won't have to wait until the end
of the year for it.