Spring PCS to buy all of Qwest Wireless' subscribers

Unfortuately it is going to cost a lot of money to pay for the leases,
T1's, power, city taxes, employee expenses without having many
customers on your network to offset these expenses.
They can't move all of Qwest's subs over at once so they'll
probably keep some of the employees until the network is
gutted out. Cingular might buy the spectrum and Qwest might
sell the equipment to Sprint or overseas. Most of the equipment
is the older stuff. Not the newer mod cells.



Larry Thomas wrote:

> What I don't understand is what's going to happen to all of Qwest's cell
> sites and switches if they're going to use Sprint's network?
>
> --
> -Larry
> Sprint user since 1997
>
> bnj <[email protected]> wrote in article <[email protected]>:
> > Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> > wanted Sprint they buy it.
> >
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html
> >
>
> [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

---

› See More: Spring PCS to buy all of Qwest Wireless' subscribers

bnj <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> wanted Sprint they buy it.
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html

So, after the dust has finally settled, the truth about the rumored
Qwest Wireless transaction seems to be somewhere in the middle of two
extremes, in between Qwest only reselling a national CDMA network to
Qwest actually divesting its wireless unit to Sprint PCS or VZW or
Cingular, et al.

In the end, it does appear that Qwest Wireless will resell the Sprint
PCS national network as native footprint, a la Virgin Mobile, and that
Sprint PCS coverage will usurp Qwest Wireless coverage in overlapping
markets, such that Qwest subs will be transitioned entirely &
completely to the Sprint PCS network.

Additionally, once the subcriber transition has been consummated, it
sounds as if the Qwest Wireless PCS licenses & infrastructure will
indeed be sold, perhaps in pieces to Sprint PCS, VZW, &/or Cingular,
as previously postulated.

It would seem likely that Sprint PCS, perhaps as part of the reselling
transaction w/ Qwest, will seek to assume control of the Qwest
Wireless footprint, certainly the infrastructure, possibly the PCS D
&/or PCS E licenses as well, in markets w/o coincident Sprint PCS
coverage, such as Montana, Wyoming, Rapid City, SD; Bismarck, ND, et
al.

Below are links to the Google Groups threads from several weeks ago
hypothesizing on potential variations for the Qwest transaction:

http://tinyurl.com/i7rw
http://tinyurl.com/i7s1
http://tinyurl.com/i7rt
http://tinyurl.com/i7s7

Andrew
--
Andrew Shepherd
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/main.html

[email protected] (Andrew Shepherd) wrote in article
<[email protected]>:
> bnj <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> > wanted Sprint they buy it.
> >
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html
>
> So, after the dust has finally settled, the truth about the rumored
> Qwest Wireless transaction seems to be somewhere in the middle of two
> extremes, in between Qwest only reselling a national CDMA network to
> Qwest actually divesting its wireless unit to Sprint PCS or VZW or
> Cingular, et al.
>
> In the end, it does appear that Qwest Wireless will resell the Sprint
> PCS national network as native footprint, a la Virgin Mobile, and that
> Sprint PCS coverage will usurp Qwest Wireless coverage in overlapping
> markets, such that Qwest subs will be transitioned entirely &
> completely to the Sprint PCS network.
>
> Additionally, once the subcriber transition has been consummated, it
> sounds as if the Qwest Wireless PCS licenses & infrastructure will
> indeed be sold, perhaps in pieces to Sprint PCS, VZW, &/or Cingular,
> as previously postulated.
>
> It would seem likely that Sprint PCS, perhaps as part of the reselling
> transaction w/ Qwest, will seek to assume control of the Qwest
> Wireless footprint, certainly the infrastructure, possibly the PCS D
> &/or PCS E licenses as well, in markets w/o coincident Sprint PCS
> coverage, such as Montana, Wyoming, Rapid City, SD; Bismarck, ND, et
> al.
>
> Below are links to the Google Groups threads from several weeks ago
> hypothesizing on potential variations for the Qwest transaction:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/i7rw
> http://tinyurl.com/i7s1
> http://tinyurl.com/i7rt
> http://tinyurl.com/i7s7
>
> Andrew
> --
> Andrew Shepherd
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/main.html

Hopefully Sprint will get some added coverage out of this deal in the
markets that you mentioned. Sell the rest off to Cingular or whoever but
I hope Sprint can come out of this will a much larger footprint in at
least Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas.

[posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

fgj <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now you seem to understand.
> A large part of a customers' wireless experience
> is how well it works where they use their
> cell phones. And when you're moved onto
> another network you've been slammed.

Except that isn't the definition of slamming.




--
JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Svcs. [The Fusion of Content & Connectivity]
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

bnj wrote:

> Shut the **** up!

Well, now we know where this is heading.

Andrew Shepherd wrote:

> bnj <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
>>wanted Sprint they buy it.
>>
>>http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html

> In the end, it does appear that Qwest Wireless will resell the Sprint
> PCS national network as native footprint, a la Virgin Mobile, and that
> Sprint PCS coverage will usurp Qwest Wireless coverage in overlapping
> markets, such that Qwest subs will be transitioned entirely &
> completely to the Sprint PCS network.


I'm sorry, but I really don't see where that can be gleamed from the
news report we've seen. The current iteration of the agreement seems to
be that Qwest wants to continue selling service under its own brand.
Presumable, that means it will want to keep its current customer base.
If Sprint wanted those customers and ended up aqcuiring them, then it
would make little sense for them to use the Qwest brand.

If Qwest really does want to shore up their brand, then it would make
little sense for them to allow their wireless customer base to simply
slip over to Sprint. The big buzzterm at present is service bundling,
and with no wireless offering Qwest would be at a disadvantage.

fgj wrote:

> Now you seem to understand.

I think you fail to comprehend the idea of sarcasm.

> A large part of a customers' wireless experience
> is how well it works where they use their
> cell phones. And when you're moved onto
> another network you've been slammed.

I also think you've overbroadly applied the term "slamming." But, if
you want to continue to apply the term to corporate acquistions, then
chew on this:

- The Yahoo report cited seemed to suggest that Qwest will continue
providing services to their customers under their brand. From their
perspective Qwest users will still have Qwest service, they'll just be
be able to roam for "free" on Sprint's network, and vice versa.

Under that definition, this wouldn't really constitute slamming. Qwest
isn't brekaing any laws by simply changing how wireless calls are
handled, so long as the customers are still dealing with Qwest.


- Even if you reject the above, the FCC doesn't include wireless service
in its definition of slamming. Slamming applies to the illegal practice
of changing a consumer's local, interLATA, intraLATA, or international
long distance service. Wireless isn't even mentioned.

"bnj" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Shut the **** up! I know what the word Slamming means
> dumb ass. My employer does it all of the time.
>
> Well.... did the people who bought Qwest wireless service expect
> to be on a Sprint network? Maybe people got rid of Sprint because
> they didn't like Sprint's QOS. Or for any number of other
> reasons chose Qwest wireless. Well now they are going to be
> Sprint customers and I don't care who the **** bills them.
> It IS a form of slamming.
>

My 2 cents is that Sprint PCS will be used in areas where QWest Wireless
does not offer native coverage. The reason for this is simply to be able to
offer wireless services in a greater area than they do now, to improve
product marketing of bundled products. Native QWest service will remain
native unless they sell the spectrum licenses and somebody else starts
providing service.

So, in other words, if you are getting native QWest signal now and you don't
like SprintPCS for politics of your own, you will not be forced to use
Sprint unless you *roam* into a non-QWest area that happens to be Sprint.
Mostly, this deal appears to affect new subscribers that are not in QWest
native wireless are currently.

Tom Veldhouse

The only reason i got Qwest was to get away from sprint (which I refer to as
"Jog" because of how slow vision is).





"bnj" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> wanted Sprint they buy it.
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html
>

The speed of Vision depends greatly on the type of phone you use as well
as the software version. The Sanyo 4900 for example has a much slower
browser than my A500 does. Vision has been working lightning fast for
me.

--
-Larry
Sprint user since 1997



"Menards 3170" <[email protected]> wrote in
article <[email protected]>:
> The only reason i got Qwest was to get away from sprint (which I refer to as
> "Jog" because of how slow vision is).
>
>
>
>
>
> "bnj" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> > wanted Sprint they buy it.
> >
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html
> >
>
>

[posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]

In many of the smaller rural markets (Montana, Wyoming, etc. SLC, too)
Qwest uses
Ericsson equipment. Not the Lucent stuff. Wonder how much of a nuisance
Sprint will see this as. Qwest doesn't seem to be bothered by the mixture
of hardware.
We recently bought the remaining interest in TouchAmerica in these markets
after
their bankruptcy. Sprint may take it all. I think we'll hear the news this
Thursday.
I wonder how many subs Sprint will be able to transition at one time? Of
course there are those subs with old phones that can't be switched and I
wonder
how many of us they'll keep before they send them new phones. I know
they'll
get rid on several of us immediately because of the new lack of subs on
Qwest's
network not generating revenue to offset the employee expenses. They
always look
at things in such a cold accounting sort of way. Oh well... as one door
closes... another
one will open. I think I've seen better doors here locally and I've
already started
knocking.
Cingular started a buildout and then suddenly stopped in several markets
in the
West. (Actually co-lo with us in several places) So I know they're
interested in
covering our exact area. No doubt about it. Hope they do something that I
could be a part of.





Andrew Shepherd wrote:

> bnj <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > Sounds like slamming to me. If a Qwest wireless customer
> > wanted Sprint they buy it.
> >
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030725/1247000587_1.html
>
> So, after the dust has finally settled, the truth about the rumored
> Qwest Wireless transaction seems to be somewhere in the middle of two
> extremes, in between Qwest only reselling a national CDMA network to
> Qwest actually divesting its wireless unit to Sprint PCS or VZW or
> Cingular, et al.
>
> In the end, it does appear that Qwest Wireless will resell the Sprint
> PCS national network as native footprint, a la Virgin Mobile, and that
> Sprint PCS coverage will usurp Qwest Wireless coverage in overlapping
> markets, such that Qwest subs will be transitioned entirely &
> completely to the Sprint PCS network.
>
> Additionally, once the subcriber transition has been consummated, it
> sounds as if the Qwest Wireless PCS licenses & infrastructure will
> indeed be sold, perhaps in pieces to Sprint PCS, VZW, &/or Cingular,
> as previously postulated.
>
> It would seem likely that Sprint PCS, perhaps as part of the reselling
> transaction w/ Qwest, will seek to assume control of the Qwest
> Wireless footprint, certainly the infrastructure, possibly the PCS D
> &/or PCS E licenses as well, in markets w/o coincident Sprint PCS
> coverage, such as Montana, Wyoming, Rapid City, SD; Bismarck, ND, et
> al.
>
> Below are links to the Google Groups threads from several weeks ago
> hypothesizing on potential variations for the Qwest transaction:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/i7rw
> http://tinyurl.com/i7s1
> http://tinyurl.com/i7rt
> http://tinyurl.com/i7s7
>
> Andrew
> --
> Andrew Shepherd
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/main.html

Yea... into unemployment. Ever been there?



Isaiah Beard wrote:

> bnj wrote:
>
> > Shut the **** up!
>
> Well, now we know where this is heading.

In the large markets their would be a large duplication of
coverage. As expense conscious as Qwest is these days
(20 some billion in debt) I don't see them running ANY
unnecessary expenses. Hell.... we can't even expense
kleenex around here.



"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:

> "bnj" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Shut the **** up! I know what the word Slamming means
> > dumb ass. My employer does it all of the time.
> >
> > Well.... did the people who bought Qwest wireless service expect
> > to be on a Sprint network? Maybe people got rid of Sprint because
> > they didn't like Sprint's QOS. Or for any number of other
> > reasons chose Qwest wireless. Well now they are going to be
> > Sprint customers and I don't care who the **** bills them.
> > It IS a form of slamming.
> >
>
> My 2 cents is that Sprint PCS will be used in areas where QWest Wireless
> does not offer native coverage. The reason for this is simply to be able to
> offer wireless services in a greater area than they do now, to improve
> product marketing of bundled products. Native QWest service will remain
> native unless they sell the spectrum licenses and somebody else starts
> providing service.
>
> So, in other words, if you are getting native QWest signal now and you don't
> like SprintPCS for politics of your own, you will not be forced to use
> Sprint unless you *roam* into a non-QWest area that happens to be Sprint.
> Mostly, this deal appears to affect new subscribers that are not in QWest
> native wireless are currently.
>
> Tom Veldhouse

ccvcv wrote:

> Yea... into unemployment. Ever been there?


I have. But telling people to stfu (and constantly changing your
identity on here) does nothing to improve your situation. It just shows
you as being an employee with an axe to grind, and a very biased agenda
to pursue. No wonder you're hiding your identity: if I were a
prospective employer, I certainly wouldn't hire a guy with such a
temper. And if I were a management person at Qwest, I wouldn't keep you
even if there WERE no plans for layoffs (and my understanding is, none
have been officially announced yet anyway).

The last time I was laid off, I wasn't happy with the company that did
it either. But I didn't launch into some campaign, cnvicing customers
that the service of the acquiring company was crap (and that's an
opinion based only on your percieved threat of losing your job... not
very credible).

ccvcv wrote:

> In many of the smaller rural markets (Montana, Wyoming, etc. SLC, too)
> Qwest uses
> Ericsson equipment. Not the Lucent stuff. Wonder how much of a nuisance
> Sprint will see this as.

Probably none. Sprint has used Samsung, Lucent, and Motorola equipment
in various markets before.

Though chances are if Qwest hasn't deployed 1X yet, the switches will
probably get upgraded to something else.