T-Mobile Third Quarter 2013 Results: 1 million new customers, 254 metro areas covered by LTE

T-Mobile-HQ-645x483

Our beloved carrier is set to have its quarterly earnings call at 9am this morning (Eastern Time) in which it’s planning to discuss all results from last quarter. All in all, the third quarter of 2013 has been a fruitful one for Tmo. The carrier added an impressive 1 million net customers, 648,000 of those were branded postpaid customers. What that means is that for the second quarter in a row, T-Mobile has beaten its rivals in regards to new customers. Certainly seems the “UNcarrier” plans are paying off for magenta. T-Mobile now has 45 million customers.

Other highlights included postpaid churn of just 1.7% and a growth in revenue for the second quarter on the bounce. 4G LTE coverage is now available in 254 metro areas with 203 million people able to gain access to it (at least, if they were on T-Mobile, they would). Of course, last quarter’s biggest story was the launch of Simple Choice global data which introduced a breakthrough plan offering unlimited international texts and data in over 100 countries. We also saw the “Free Data for Life” plans for anyone buying a tablet, offering 200MB free each month to anyone and everyone buying a tablet on Tmo.

T-Mobile’s press release also includes some interesting developments on the MetroPCS front.

  • More than 1.5 million MetroPCS customers on the T-Mobile network

  • Expanding the MetroPCS brand into an additional 15 markets on November 21

In October, Tmo also acquired 10MHz AWS spectrum from U.S. Cellular bringing coverage to 32 million people in 29 markets in the Mississippi Valley region including St. Louis, Kansas City, Lexington, Nashville, Memphis, Birmingham, New Orleans, Louisville and Little Rock.

Things are certainly looking bright for T-Mobile. With it offering up more competitive pricing and plans as well as growing its coverage, it’s becoming the “one to watch” the US wireless industry.

For full details on the quarterly results, head on over to the full press release.

Tags: , ,

  • sushimane88

    thats great keep up the good work tmobile

  • ccnet005

    Oh nice Tmobile.
    Now can you do something for us existing customers with spotty coverage?!?!

    • chris

      I guess you didn’t read the article? They acquired more spectrums last month. At the same time they also have the on going network refarm. How about donating your billion dollars to them so they can do some contract hires and speed up your request.

      • gpt2010

        Finally someone calling out people who complain about coverage! Good one Chris! TMO isn’t for everyone. If you have spotty coverage, you probably need to think about switching instead of complaining. Or is it due to the fact that you will have to pay more for better coverage? If not, what is stopping you from switching? Final option if you can do it. MOVE!

        • ccnet005

          Actually it’s the fact that TMO is the most byod friendly.
          That’s why I’m still around, but Ting is looking like an alternative.

        • qmc

          yes! ting! byod.. you can bring your inactive sprint device, or … any other sprint device!

        • qmc

          Heh. I used ting’s “savings calculator”. They claim they’ll save me $216 over 2 years or $9/mo. But I put those same numbers (2 lines/999 minutes, 3 text messages, 400mb, paying $55/mo on tmo) in their pricing page and it tells me the bill would be $57/mo. So if I pay $2/mo more, at the end of 2 years, I’ll save $216! … YES!

        • maximus1901

          Straight Talk: $45/month, 2.5 GB full speed data, unlimited talk, talk
          Uses ATT network.

      • maximus1901

        it’s not gonna help coverage issues. Only low-band spectrum OR increasing tower density will help.

    • ThickAndJuicy

      STFU with your spotty coverage comments they are so irrelevant to any of the blogs, you sound like an annoying parrot repeating itself. If you want better coverage in your hut in the wilderness of Nebraska or out in the middle of Mojave switch to Verizon and STOP POSTING HERE!

      • E

        That’s Bullshit. I live in eastern MA, only about 30 mins from Boston and I have spotty coverage. I love tmobile but they have plenty of work to do. I just switched phones so that I can have wifi calling and not deal with the crap service in my house. I’m all for supporting my tmo that I’ve been with for over 10 years but the flaws need to be dealt with.

        • TYLERDERK

          Use WIFI calling and coverage at home is not an issue!

        • E

          Did you read what I wrote? That’s why I switched phones so that I can use wifi calling. It doesn’t help when I leave the house though.

        • Roger Sales

          I suggest you switch, but unless you live in a metro area expect those issues from most carriers. Consider this: With T-Mobile if you have service issues and wifi – you have an instant solution. if you have another carrier and the service isn’t working for whatever reason – you just have no workaround period.

        • kalel33

          True, most carriers would have the same issue, with the exception of Verizon and AT&T which both have prepaid services that rival the pricing of T-mobile, just without unlimited data.

        • SZL

          I live in Taunton. I get great coverage here for the most part. I have LTE for the most part. When I’m at work in Raynham, I still have HSPA+ with great speed. Woodsy areas are definitely lacking some High Speed coverage. We used to drive by a street that used to have Edge, but now have LTE. We just have to be patiently waiting.

        • maximus1901

          They’re not gonna increase their tower count to fill in those holes. They’re banking on 600 MHz.

      • AndroidProfit

        Are you OK? T-Mobile spotty coverage is a huge issue.

      • ccnet005

        Wow my first stalker!!!
        How many times did you like your own comment?
        Just wondering!

      • Danny Lewis

        T-Mo keeps doing better and better, but it takes time to improve their network. If you are not satisfied with their coverage, switch to someone else for two years (the length of the contract) and then try Tmo again.

        • Roger Sales

          That’s what upsets me the most – people not willing to wait. If T-Mobile provides service in your area there is no better deal financially to be had. This is the best the company’s ever been from the top to bottom – don’t expect them to be pulling rabbits out of hats. Go to Sprint and then you’ll really have something to cry about.(I’ve seen firsthand)

  • dubya

    “4G LTE coverage is now available in 254 metro areas with 203 people able
    to gain access to it (at least, if they were on T-Mobile, they would).”

    lol only 203 people.

    • Cam Bunton

      Hahaha.. Yeah. Thanks for that. I’ve changed it. It’s 203 million.

  • archerian

    With monthly plans, there is really no distinction between postpaid and prepaid users. And the prices are the same if not equal between postpaid and prepaid, with the cost going down for family plans. The only thing that keeps a postpaid user loyal is the optional EIP, and that adds a lot of expense to T-mobile via financing costs. Maybe its best to have more branded prepaid users in the long run.

    • besweeet

      Postpaid pays more in taxes and get more features (international, domestic data roaming, bigger pools of included tethering, better support, etc).

      • archerian

        I’m not sure what perspective you are looking at it from, but my point was with narrowing price points between postpaid and branded prepaid, there is no significant advantage in pointing out that the postpaid growth is significant in overall growth, especially in T-mobile’s case when even postpaid is month to month and there is no significant increased rates from a postpaid user.

        More taxes doesn’t really add to T-mobile’s coffers, and more of the postpaid features are coming to prepaid. It might make more sense to have these features for prepaid as after all, the charge is prepaid, which means less risk to the company, and no finance charge burden for EIP devices.

        • besweeet

          Prepaid users were actually hit with a BIG throttling problem, bringing fast speeds to a crawl. Lots of resources on this. My reply was original in regard to “With monthly plans, there is really no distinction between postpaid and prepaid users.”

        • archerian

          I see, my reference was from an operator perspective with no contracts for postpaid users – prepaid users might have lesser chances of sticking around, but there is no money spent in acquisition, retention or extra services more than postpaid, and typically usage tends to be lower too

        • Mark

          Stock analysts view postpaid customer growth as a primary metric when evaluating cellular carriers, because they’re seen as more lucrative, more likely to stick around, and less of a credit risk than prepaid.

        • archerian

          I agree stock analysts view postpaid customers are a primary metric, but that works only in a traditional contract based mode, where a new addition today means there is a good chance that customer will be around for the next two years, and if he leaves, the customer acquisition fee (whether in a device subsidy or commission to sales) will be regained in early termination fees. With T-mobiles model, there is no such guarantee. Additionally, in a model followed by VzW or ATT, postpaid customers are more lucrative. With no credit check postpaid plans from T-mobile, the risk still remains. Also, I don’t see how prepaid customers are more of a credit risk when everything is paid in advance. T-mobile does not expose themselves to any unknown risk by signing on prepaid customers, whether device subsidy or usage.

    • KingCobra

      That’s exactly the point though. TMO used to charge $200 for postpaid customers to cancel their service and leave. Now with EIP (which most postpaid users are using), often times the penalty to cancel, the remaining balance on the handset is higher than the old $200 ETF. The EIP is how TMO keeps postpaid users on the network and that’s why they want more of them. People are unlikely to leave when the penalty is high even if they are dissatisfied.

      • kalel33

        Used to? If I call T-mobile right now and cancel I get a $200 ETF fee.

  • Zach Mauch

    For LTE, the’ve hit plenty of metro areas IMHO. It’s time for them to start hitting interstates and highways. The fact that they don’t have major Highways like I-35 and i-70 covered with anything better than edge just feels shameful.

    That said, T-Mobile has been doing great so far and I’m optimistic about the future. They are getting a ton of new capital with this huge influx of customers and I’m really optimistic about what that will bring. IMHO, I look for uncarrier to begin spreading mid to late 2014 as the carriers realize they can’t stop the spread. We’ll likely see Sprint fall first.

    • Adrayven

      Yeah, between Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo, MI down M-131, it’s strong T-Mobile.. but all GPRS, not even Edge.. ack!

      • TmoJohnstownCustomer

        Out my way (Pennsylvania) they are slowly converting the GPRS to EDGE. used to have GPRS at my house and EDGE in the city. Between January and now they upgraded at least 3 towers in my area so now I have nearly seamless EDGE coverage. However, for the last 2 or 3 weeks I’ve had times where everything went to GPRS for a few hours (even areas that have always been EDGE). I’m hoping that means they are working on backhaul or something to go beyond 2G. Just wish Tmo would update their network upgrade strategy for the public.

    • Roger Sales

      Sprint is in a freefall. I don’t understand their vision as a company with announcing Sprint Spark. No one on Sprint cares about faster LTE service, and….they care about actually receiving LTE service, and not dreading the times when they fallback to 3G that makes EDGE seem next generation. Hesse, get it together and stop the sensationalism – deliver your company some actual results.

      • Zach Mauch

        totally agree. They are wasting time with that 2600 Mhz or whatever freq they are using for spark. They should cut their losses, sell that block, and throw EVERYTHING at 850 Mhz LTE.

        • maximus1901

          What does “throwing everything” mean? They are putting band 26 on every tower EXCEPT:
          1) near canada/mexico border because of interference with legacy public safety in those countries.
          2) where adding it to a tower will cause interference because it’s already so close to another tower with band 26.

      • maximus1901

        They’re replacing every component on all their towers. That takes time. It’ll be done by mid 2014 when Sprint will overtake TMO in LTE coverage because TMO’s ARPU is too low to support a further expansion.

    • maximus1901

      TMO is adding customers, right? This is despite them not having coverage on highways. By now, everyone knows the reputation of TMO as having poor coverage.
      And they’re still adding customers!
      My point: TMO is not gonna spend more money to add coverage when they’re winning customers.
      They’re probably saving their money for the 600 MHz auction. Don’t expect even HSPA+7.2 on freeways UNLESS customers start leaving.

      • Zach Mauch

        If true (though I would highly doubt it). This would be the DUMBEST thing T-Mobile could do. Investing in infrastructure is how Verizon has become the biggest carrier in the nation. Conversely, not investing in infrastructure is one of the primary reasons things got as bad for T-Mobile as they did. If they want to build a future and not just a temporary jump (pun not intended) they MUST invest in the future.

        The 600 MHz auction is nice, but it’s not the end of the world if they loose it. They still have an 800 MHz block of old tech that will be retired soon. Building out infrastructure is MUCH more important to solidifying T-Mobile’s future. Denying that rejects everything we know about the history of the industry.

        • maximus1901

          Verizon became the biggest carrier because they have pretty much nationwide coverage with 850 MHz. And they bought many carriers like Alltel.

          The reason things got bad is because TMO didn’t participate in the 2008 700 MHz auction.

          You’re confusing Tmobile with Sprint/Nextel. It’s Sprint that has 14 MHz of SMR that it’s using for Band 26 LTE along with one 1xA CDMA voice channel. Tmobile has NOOOOO 800 MHz except for in Myrtle Beach from when they acquired Suncom.

          It definitely is the end of Tmobile if they don’t acquire ANY 600 MHz. They’ll be the only carrier without any low-band freqs.

          FYI, if they don’t acquire any 600 MHz, it’s because they didn’t want to . . . so they could complain that they need to merge with Sprint.

        • marque2

          Why would they merge with that loser company sprint? I think T-Mobile already took all their customers and unless you have LTE in the handful of markets where Sprint has LTE, they are not going to gain much. Seriously a US Cellular merger would seem like a better deal

      • marque2

        I think they are spending all their available funds on the LTE upgrades. Yeah I wouldn’t expect secondary routes to be upgraded any time soon.

  • S. Ali

    Man, I really wish T-mobile would partner with Dish and Google to launch coverage in the 2ghz range.

    • Jared Wolfe

      The higher the frequency the shorter the distance it travels. Also harder to penetrate buildings. I want sub 1Ghz. T-Mobile to bid on 600Mhz early next year. We REALLY need and want this.

      • Danny Lewis

        I fear that Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint are not going to make it easy for Tmo when bidding starts.

        • Jared Wolfe

          (Sigh) Yeah its going to be difficult. I have a good feeling though. I will be watching closely.

        • Roger Sales

          I don’t have any fears about the future of the company with Legere on board. He has the full confidence of DT to make the moves necessary to take T-Mobile to the next level.

        • maximus1901

          They want to sell to Softbank. Fact (google it).
          All this stuff they’re doing right now is just to have leverage at the negotiating table. “The next level” is selling to softbank.

        • Jared Wolfe

          I agree. T-Mobile is positing itself to sell. The question is who. I wonder what Dish Network is up to these days. They have been quiet. Too quiet. I honestly hope Dish doesn’t buy T-Mobile. I used to work Dish. Terrible company. Their HQ is right down the road from me here in Denver.

        • maximus1901

          Softbank.

        • superg05

          it would never be approved

        • maximus1901

          Not under this administration but if a Republican wins in 2016, it’ll get approved.

        • emcdonald75

          This is not necessarily the reason. The administration wishes to encourage competition among four national cell carriers. If the administration allowed AT&T to buy T-Mobile, many of you would be upset because we wouldn’t know what Uncarrier is or what it looks like. The administration did not tell T-Mobile what prices they should charge or stop another large entity from purchasing T-Mobile. We all know that if AT&T bought T-Mobile, it would no longer exists. They would shut it down to destroy competition and announce they are the only GSM carrier in this country. If T-Mobile wants to charge more to increase their coverage, so be it. Don’t Republicans believe in competition. Let the market decide if charging more money will increase their consumer base. T-Mobile could have charged $80 or $100 for people who would like unlimited everything to test the market. I would have purchased such a plan if it meant unlimited everything, fast speeds and broad coverage. The problem with AT&T and Verizon is that $90 – $100 only gives you unlimited talk, text and 2GB of data. If they would give more data, I would pay $100 for unlimited talk, text and 10GB – 15GB of data. Verizon and AT&T encourage little data usage, it’s like having an airplane but only able to fly across the street.

        • maximus1901

          Tmobile wants to merge with Sprint

          http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-cfo-thinks-deal-sprint-possible/2013-09-26

          That is a fact. Therefore, Tmobile is not going to go all out against everyone because they’re going to weigh every dollar spent in terms of “will we be able to recover this in a merger negotiation”.

          They’re only spending what is necessary to stabilize and slightly grow their subscriber base.

        • marque2

          There are actually cheaper plans than T-Mobile, even before they became the uncarrier. The big problem is that FCC is very slow to allocate new bandwidth and they also do so inefficiently. For instance they gave tons of bandwidth to cable companies for free, and what are the cable companies doing? Just sitting on it. AT&T wanted T-Mobile because it had compatible systems, and it has a TON of extra bandwidth available for a company its size. It was really a way for AT&T to get more bandwidth. IF the FCC starts selling it off again, and confiscates unused spectrum from the cable companies, the AT&T – T-Mobile merge will not be a necessity, because there will be bandwidth for everybody.

        • superg05

          im aware

        • maximus1901

          Except spend as much as it takes.

      • Richard Finzel

        One thing that I have read is that the 600 MHz freq was going to remain to be used as public use… IE ultra WiFi…. I last heard that is what would happen to the 600 MHz freq that is recycled from the old analog TV broadcast towers

        • Jared Wolfe

          Whoa. Haven’t herd that. That would be a bummer. Where did you hear that?

        • Richard Finzel

          It was actually in the Washington post back in Feb. I read that the FCC was recommendingthat the 600 MHz freq be used as a public use spectrum for local governments and schools to effectively communicate over fairly long distance

        • maximus1901

          And then who’s gonna pay the broadcasters to vacate?

      • marque2

        My understanding is lower frequency travels further but has more interference, and is unable to penetrate buildings. High frequency has less static, but travels a shorter distance, but is more able to penetrate buildings (to a point) Though there is also an effect based on the materials involved.

        Nice companies would just install mobile boosters inside the office with an outside receiving antenna. But most are too cheap to do that.

        • superg05

          lower frequencies have better distance and building penetrator though higher frequencies can carry more compasity

        • marque2

          I was trying to be polite. But now. False – higher frequencies have better pemetration – look it up. Lower frequencies – esp VHF and Low band travel greater distances.

        • philyew

          I’m curious to know where you are looking up data that tells you higher frequencies have better structural penetration.

          I just did a check using “building penetration frequencies” in Google and the first 6 articles I opened at random all confirmed the common understanding that lower frequencies penetrate structures better.

        • marque2

          Because what allows signals into buildings is not what you think. What you are talking about is the frequencies ability to go through “soft tissue” water, air, wood, bodies, etc. But Office buildings are different, a coating of metal as thin as a piece of aluminum foil is enough to block all radio waves (if you sealed it properly – in addition the cement on the outside is almost impenetrable from any radio waves.

          To understand what is going on, you need to look at a microwave. You might notice the 2.5 gigahertz radio waves don’t go through the door, and yet the 580 Terahertz radio waves do? That is why you can see your food in the microwave and not feel the heat. The reason is that microwave radio waves have a low probability of going through spaces smaller than half the width of the wavelength. In the case of the microwave, the microwave is about 10cm, and the holes are 2 – 3 mm right – well yellow light wavelength ~= 0.0005mm – so it yellow light radio waves go right through

          So lets make a steel building and we will cut a round hole in one side that is 33cm in diameter. Otherwise the building is sealed.
          And we will broadcast VHF (smallest wavelength is 100cm) vs 900mhz UHF which is about 33cm.

          Well the VHF is mostly blocked in this case, the hole in the wall is too small, but the UHF goes right though unimpeded. This is why in cities 2 way Radios use UHF- it is more likely to go through the holes in the building, windows and doors, and cracks in seams than the VHF. IF you go from 900 to 2.5 gigahertz, you go from 33cm to about 10cm in wavelength, meaning the wavelength is much more likely to find ways into the building.

          It gets tricky though, because if a little bit of VHF gets in the building its attenuation is lower, than the UHF even though more UHF got in so you could have a stronger VHF signal anyway.

          Make sense?
          Basic summary offices are impermeable to radio waves, except in holes, which are windows, doors, and cracks in the ceiling. Small openings can be penetrated easier by higher frequency waves, because the waves are smaller.

        • marque2

          Note I found two articles for you. First which explains the concept above, and second by a ham radio operator who did some tests, and was aghast that the Internet was wrong (he got better signal from the UHF!) even though VHF is suppose to have better propagation!

          http://ezinearticles.com/?UHF-Versus-VHF—Which-Two-Way-Radio-Frequency-is-Better?&id=1328253

          http://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php?topic=79904.0

        • philyew

          Interesting. Thank you. Notwithstanding, the consistent anecdotal evidence still seems to support the commonly held view.

          There also appears to be a pervasive misunderstanding, if what you say is correct, across many technical sources. Here’s a quote from an article at the hightechforum.org site: “One advantage of lower frequencies is that the signals have better penetration, meaning they pass through objects such as walls with less attenuation. This effect results in better in-building penetration.” No one responding to the article demurred.

          Other professionals repeat similar statements. See the PDF on the topic from unisonsite.com.

          The statement can be found on the technical-leaning dslreports.com site with no contradiction.

          Following your argument, I would expect – based on statistical probability – there would be a much higher incidence of people reporting better experiences with TM than any of the other main carriers, but that does not appear to be the case.

          Mystifying.

        • marque2

          I tried to post some links to articles for you, but the web master blocks them until they are reviewed, it can take ages for that to happen. sorry.

        • philyew

          Thanks. I posted a message containing a link several hours ago, but it still hasn’t cleared the moderator yet.

          Posting the message and the links separately in discussions at least keeps the flow going when the response time from the mods isn’t immediate.

        • marque2

          Well I did post my discussion separately, I hope you could read it and the answer is satisfactory. Anyway, this is why city police departments almost never use VHF 2 Way radios, and use UHF instead (450Mhz, 800, 900 Mhz). I used to be a 2 way radio salesman about 20 years ago, we got the spiel from the Motorola reps.

  • Bori

    This US Cellular spectrum purchase was done months ago, that’s not news. At any rate,this is some awesome news, keep uo the work T-Mobile. Now let’s bring some LTE to Cincinatti, which is still considered a Metro area, last time i checked :-)

  • Kevin Zefa

    People that whine about spotty coverage, why the hell do you stay. TMO is not foreveryone, but if you live in a major metro area and have solid LTE speeds then tmo is a solid choice. I am in Denver and the Denver burbs and get 35 Mbps all the time and pay less thatn $70 a month for everything. Verizon and ATT would charge me a ton for data and it’s not worth it. Leave if your coverage sucks

    • Jared Wolfe

      I live in the suburbs of Denver. This statement above is true. We have great coverage and speeds here in Denver. Cant wait I get my Nexus 5 tomorrow to try out on s awesome network!

      • mreveryphone

        I can’t wait until my UNDEFEATED KC Chiefs come there!!

        • Jared Wolfe

          HA! Cant wait for your Chef’s (intentionally miss-spelled) to come to Denver. We are gonna hand you ur first loss of the season. 9-0 isn’t bad when you have the easiest scheduled since you finished DEAD LAST, last year. You should have lost the last 3 games. Its ok enjoy your fun while it last. You, I and eveyone knows the NFL is Quarterback league. Good luck with Smith. Great game manager. Cant wait till you play a real team. BTW for us Broncos fans, the real season starts in the playoffs. Question is will you even be there?!?!?! :-)

        • mreveryphone

          Well as I see it a win is a win… Should have lost 3 games is irrelevant when you WON THEM! Easy schedule or not the NFL is the NFL and everyone gets paid to play. When you have a defense as good as ours who cares about a quarterback league lol. Indy showed everyone the blueprint to beating Peyton and our defense is more than capable of doing that! It will be a good game for sure.

    • lynyrd65

      We complain because besides this one singular issue we would love to have tmobile!

      • maximus1901

        This one singular issue is why your bill is so low and why you love tmobile.
        Would you agree to across the board $20 increase in bill with no additional data? Cause that’s what it would take for TMO to match ATT, VZW coverage using only AWS, PCS

  • Kevin Zefa

    I will say when we had to go thru Missouri and KS I can say coverage was terrible, but hopefully I don’t have to go to either of those 2 states ever again. LOL

    • Danny Lewis

      They just bought the spectrum. They are going to need time to actually implement it.

      • maximus1901

        No they don’t. If they have at least HSPA+ basestations, they just need to say “broadcast on these additional frequencies” and it’s done.

  • BigMixxx

    Folks whine about spotty coverage. Everyone has spotty coverage. Even verizon drops to NO LTE in a bunch of spots. I dont know about yall, but i would much rather have edge than verizon or sprints ’3g’.

    Former t mobile customer…and hating it more and more. 13 months left and counting..

    • Bori

      I have to agree, I placed my phone on Edge yesterday just for fun and my web pages opened up faster than on my vzw phone on 3G surprisingly faster.

      • Richard Finzel

        Try using EDGE in a place where that is all you have… You will be singing a different tune… The reason why you get such a fast connection is because there is no one else using EDGE there… Normally EDGE means 50-150 kbps for me… That’s because the whole town is using Edge.

        • Bori

          I’m sure I would be singing to a different tune, but I don’t live in a “Edge only” town. I’m just sharing my experience in a major city.
          But I’ll be heading to a 2G only town for the holidays, so it will be very interesting to witness what you are talking about.

        • KingCobra

          I’d agree with that. In major cities Edge is actually usable. I was even able to stream Pandora with it back when TMO didn’t support 1900mhz 3G for the iPhone. In areas where it’s Edge only, sometimes it can be hard to do anything other than open up an email.

        • cubanito151

          You’re right. It was same for me a couple years ago when we only had edge. Everyone was using it and was painfully slow. Now we have 3g and its still painfully slow because of so many people here using T-Mobile 3g. 3g is non-existent, just about as fast as edge.

  • bryck

    T-Mobile needs to bye U.S Cellular already.

    • bryck

      ****Sorry I meant to say BUY LOL. ;-)

    • Alex Zapata

      Even if only for their sub 1GHz spectrum, yes.

    • Roger Sales

      I actually think this would be a good move. I think US Cellular in combination with nTelos, and Cincinnati Bell Wireless would be great for T-Mobile because they provide service in areas where T-Mobile has noticeable gaps. T-Mobile has done such a good job with MetroPCS, that even with the technology differences I have full confidence they could make it work – especially with Legere at the helm.

  • Deadeye37

    I would just love to see announcements of new area being covered – IE “Today, we have deployed towers covering 1000 square miles where no service existed before”. Gravy on the top if they said that the extra coverage also included 3G or LTE.

    I just hate being on road trips and my coverage dropping to nothing in the rural areas of the country. I would like to be able to make/receive calls in podunk town USA sometime (without resorting to WiFi calling, since none of the people I visit have Wifi).

    • Dakota

      That’s still their Achilles heel & why many folks refuse to give T-Mobile a shot. I have friends who travel or drive a lot due to their work & just can’t risk losing coverage randomly

      • maximus1901

        TMO blocks random ATT towers from its customers connecting.

    • besweeet

      I wonder if it would be worthwhile to get better roaming agreements with other carriers.

    • Roger Sales

      You’re asking for something no carrier is doing these days. everything nowadays is about maintaining and upgrading current cell sites.

      • LAGURL

        well as much as i love tmobile its coverage just craps outside the city were At&t usually has service . Only reason i still kept my att htc one even tho i got a phone with tmobile i still kept my att line active i just gave my mom the att one , but when i go to vegas or san fransisco or tijuana i always tell my mom lets switch phones i took my tmobile phone and wow was it bad its 2013 and some areas were not even 2G they were “G” dnt know if it was gprs or gsm because the s4 just displays “G” when i was on “G ” forget about data only calls worked and sometimes text ,and call quality was pretty bad. Now when i take the att phone its a whole different story not once and i mean not once do i see “G” or 2G when lte is not available i get “4G” which i guess its atts 3G idk but it works data always works and its fast ..

        • marque2

          If you really want service get Verizon, though you will pay through the nose for it. I have been to many out of the way places, (Kings Canyon National Park for instance) where the only service is available to bragging Verizon customers.

        • LAGURL

          Does att offer service in those places u go to?And yes verizon is expensive but i think ill stick with att ,like i said i only use it when i travel but when im in La I use my tmobile phone because not gonna lie all over La tmobile works much better than att i used both tmobile works much better ,better and faster data hspa and lte is faster than atts hspa and lte and it offers better call quality and less dropped calls its problems is once u go out the city it craps out were att comes tru.

      • superg05

        TMOBILE HAS ADDED LTE AND 3G TO NEW AREAS WHERE THERE WAS NONE

      • marque2

        Don’t they rent the sites from third parties and put up an antenna – I am pretty sure the towers frequently have 4 – 5 carriers on them.

    • marque2

      I was actually on a stretch of Highway I-20 from El Paso TX to Midland TX – about 300 miles without T-Mobile service on a major freeway. All my credit cards were frozen and I needed to call to get gas. I ended up using a voip phone service, via a hotel WiFi to get them unblocked.

      Overall T-Mobile is pretty good, but they definitely have a few more dead and low power spots than their larger competitors. Can’t beat the price though, and they do seem to be much friendlier when you need support.

  • Dakota

    So sounds like more than a third of the US population has no access to T-Mobile LTE.
    Just curious, if there are no contracts why does T-Mobile e still add all those extra fees and surcharges that prepaids don’t? I used to pay up to 20 percent extra but now on Straight Talk, I only pay 1.60 in tax. No surcharge or recovery fee or 911 fees, etc. I thought those were only for contracts. How much added approximately do you pay for your plans beyond the advertised amounts?

    • Roger Sales

      Because it’s not prepaid. you’re getting service with a financing installment contract at 0% interest, which by its definition is POST-paid. Prepaid means everything is paid for ahead of time(including the phones total cost). Those fees are not about nickle and diming, every telecom has to charge those fees as part of regulations, prepaid carriers merely bundle the fee into their pricing tiers.

      As far as too much of the US not having T-Mobile LTE yet, you’re talking about a country that spans almost an entire continent…European countries don’t have this problem.
      Verizon and AT&T roll out LTE faster because they overspend on infrastructure and a sped up build out – which means they end up charging their customers a LOT more for service. T-Mobile is rolling out LTE as they can afford to within their budget so that they can enjoy premium service as fast as possible without it affecting the customers bill – which is something *I* on a personal level appreciate. Unlike other carriers like Sprint, they’ve been honest about their plans and intentions as far as 4G LTE rollouts as soon as they themselves figured it out (200 POPs by 2013, 225 for 2014.) Sprint on the other hand promised their customers 260 POPS by the end of 2013 and ended up reneging on this promise. No carrier gives specifics as much as T-Mobile does.

      I understand that T-Mobile isn’t for everyone because of varying service in some areas and that’s OK, it’s not for you. but don’t lie to yourself and say that every other carrier doesn’t have the same problem, because top to bottom ALL of them have different experiences throughout the US.

      • steveb944

        Bravo sir, bravo.

      • marque2

        ” a country that spans almost an entire continent” The USA does span an entire continent.

        • Roger Sales

          Are you pretending Canada doesn’t exist?

        • Alex Zapata

          Until they make proper bacon, they don’t.

    • marque2

      I have their $30 text and data plan that they offered last year. The charge me exactly $30 a month.

      • kalel33

        Because you’re prepaid.

  • Tmo Guy

    Guys 2G coverage will still exist and be supported by t-mobile until 2018.

  • emcdonald75

    What are the new metro areas covered with LTE from the 233 metro areas they announced before? I cannot seem to find a listing. All I can find is that there are 254 metro areas covered now, so what are they?

  • KingCobra

    Tmobile is on an absolute tear right now. 2 consecutive quarters of 1 million+ subscriber growth is insane. I suspect that pretty soon AT&T and Verizon will have to do something to react to Uncarrier. This outpaces all 3 other carriers combined. If Sprint doesn’t improve their network soon, TMO might be coming for that #3 spot a lot sooner than any of us imagined.

    On a side note, I’m loving my iPhone 5S with truly unlimited LTE data on TMO right now.

    • marque2

      I was looking to get my Nexus 5 signed up with Sprint just to get a bit of diversity (if one phone doesn’t work on a family road trip the other might) It is impossible to get an unlocked phone on the network even though management says they are allowing the phone online. One help rep told me to go to the Sprint store, when I got there they told me the Nexus 5 doesn’t work on their network (that is actually one of the big deals with the phone) try going to T-Mobile. So just like with my Nexus 4, the Nexus 5 will be on T-Mobile, thanks the Sprint store Reps advice.

      Anyway, I can see why Sprint is losing business, it isn’t just the network, in fact their network is supposedly better where I live, it is the customer service, they act like they have too many customers and don’t want more.

  • guest

    i just passed a tmobile store five minutes ago and its busy

    • Oliver Jackson

      Ever since John Legere took over as CEO,every TMo store is always packed .The merger w/Metro PCS,NO contracts,Simple plans that make sense,acquistion of the iPhone 5/5c/5s,iPad Air,Mini w/Retina,soon to come Nexus 7 and 5 and best of all ….JUMP.

      Plain and simple,nothing beats TMobile and proud to have them…BTW,Galaxy Note 3 coming soon to me.

  • TylerCameron

    Them acquiring spectrum US Cellular means theyll expand coverage in the Memphis area? Does this mean I can expect to see 3G or 4G in areas around Memphis (such as Walls, MS) that have had EDGE in the past? I visit the area once a year and this would be a very welcome addition as internet is rather slow there.

    • maximus1901

      No. This spectrum is not ideal for coverage of wide-areas. This is for capacity in the metro areas.

  • mloudt

    So in the last 7 months T-mobile has added over 2 million customers this is great news for them. T-mobile better enjoy it because Leap shareholders have approved At&t’s purchasing of Leap/Cricket and that deal is expected to close late this year or early next year. As stated 1.5 million customers of Metro Pcs are now on T-mobile’s network. When At&t does the same thing with Cricket that T-mobile did with Metro Pcs I expect the Cricket brand to rise just like Metro Pcs did and some of Metro customers and even T-mobile’s prepaid branded customers might jump ship to the new Cricket running on At&t’s network.