T-Mobile’s latest #DefeatDuopoly video is just plain awesome

duopoly-verizon-att

As you will undoubtedly know by now, T-Mobile is going to be taking part in one of the biggest wireless spectrum auctions America has ever seen. The 600MHz incentive auction is due to kick off next year and as things stand, the two biggest carriers look likely to swoop up the majority of the spectrum. As they did in the AWS-3 spectrum auction last year.

While AT&T and Verizon are lobbying hard to keep the auction rules as they are, T-Mobile wants the Commission to reserve half of the spectrum available for the carriers who don’t already own a ton of low-band airwaves. Let’s not forget, T-Mo spearheaded a move last year to make sure that 30MHz blocks were reserved in each market for the smaller guys. Now it wants 40MHz.

To get consumers on its side, T-Mobile just published this awesome animated short video, tweeted by John last night:

In the video, AT&T and Verizon are represented by a double-headed enemy named “The Duopoly”. And – of course – John Legere is the hero leading his crowd of consumers who all want a future free from the Duopoly’s control.

Behind this comic-like video is a serious message: If you agree with T-Mobile and want to see the rules changed before it’s too late, hit social media hard. Tweet @FCC using the #defeatduopoly hashtag. The Commission – headed by Jack Wheeler – will be voting on the final rules for 2016’s auction next month, on July 16th. It’s not too late to have your voice heard.

Source: Twitter (@JohnLegere)

Tags: , , , ,

  • Jay J. Blanco

    Simply amazing

  • g2a5b0e

    I love T-Mobile & I agree with the point & message of the video, but I think it was perhaps, a little overblown & overdramatic. This isn’t exactly a social justice issue. Either way, as a T-Mobile customer for almost 12 years now, I hope we get the low-band spectrum we need.

    • J.J.

      agreed

    • Of course it is. The FCC acts as if the spectrum belonged to it and not to the people, so it wants to maximize revenue, instead of benefiting the consumer by curbing a duopoly.

      • g2a5b0e

        This is a social justice issue? Seriously? What about poverty? What about racism? What about gender inequality? What about homophobia? Get your properties straight, dude. Talk about first world problems.

        • Indeed, first world problems to list pelvic concerns alongside poverty and racism.

        • an0nim0

          Poverty? Racism? Gender Inequality? Homophobia? Those are 99% problems; (but a bitch ain’t) the 1% have their properties straight. :-P

        • g2a5b0e

          I think you’re being facetious, but I really have no idea. I’ll leave it at that.

        • an0nim0

          On the Internet, that’s a fair point; in person, it would’ve been obvious. ;-)

        • Walter Lonsdale

          Oh brother!!

    • Paul

      The over dramatics are on purpose. The important part is that you got the message.

      • g2a5b0e

        Of course it was on purpose. I just don’t think it was necessary.

        • archerian

          when you look past all the rhetoric, it’s a for-profit public limited company equating something it needs for its expansion to social equality and fairness. Life is never fair, especially when the govt. is involved.

        • Walter Lonsdale

          No, he did it to appeal to the younger generation that thinks hard times are when your phone is dead.

    • DStudio

      Perhaps it is a social justice issue, and you just missed it.

      • g2a5b0e

        Or perhaps I just disagree. Even if it is to some degree, I would place it very low on the totem pole.

        • DStudio

          Everyone has to make his own priorities. But if you don’t cover these so-called “higher-minded” issues (people’s rights, and societal order & justice), your society won’t have enough stability to adequately tackle the other issues.

          Plus you’ll always have *some* poverty and racism, because it depends on the decisions of individuals, as well as on society as a whole.

  • J.J.

    this ad is pretty ridiculous, obviously tmo wants more low band to compete in coverage with the big two so they too can make a butt load of money, but when you sift though all the bs(superheroes/mind control) John is right. i dont agree with lots of government interference but i dont think the fcc should let the big two squeeze out all the competition by using its prowess to claim all the spectrum.

    • archerian

      the fcc should let the big two squeeze out all the competition by using its prowess to claim all the spectrum

      If this is the interpretation from the ads and what JL is going around saying, it’s simply not true.

      As of today the FCC already has reservation rules in all markets such that ATT and VZW cannot bid on the reserved part in a lot of areas, especially the top 50 markets. There are also several locations where ATT itself holds inadequate low band spectrum that it becomes a “competitive carrier”. The crux of all the noise is now T-mobile wants ANOTHER 10 Mhz added to the reserved portion so it can fend off possible competition WITHIN the reserved blocks. If there is only 30 Mhz in the reserved portion, it can possibly lead to increased bidding and competition than if it were 40 Mhz.

      T-Mobile is a big proponent of competition unless they are facing it in an auction – there they prefer protection. They got 30Mhz of protection already, now clamor for 10Mhz more.

    • JE_25

      Some people are giving T-Mobile a hard time and saying that they should be controlled also so that other smaller carriers have a chance. I am not here trying to defend T-Mobile, just point something out. If you go to the site he mentions you will notice something. Save Wireless Choice is a project that involves T-Mobile, Sprint, Dish and many smaller companies, it’s not just T-Mobile.

  • lion7718

    That was just great…

  • A rather cavalier portrait of the FCC board. Instead of heroes being pressured by evil lobbyists, they’re actually little minions with puppy eyes on their next employment with them in 18 months.

  • Philip

    I don’t understand why FCC don’t play things evenly. The same thing why we only have monopoly on cable in every neighborhood. I think we don’t get enough news coverage on this! I am mad.

    • Ordeith

      the FCC is not responsible for the cable monopoly in your neighborhood. That responsibility lies much closer to you in the government of your local municipality. Fortunately for you that also means those responsible are a lot more accessible. Go to city hall, get a meeting with your representative, fill out a complaint form, fill out a suggestion box form, talk to the mayor, get your neighbors involved.

      Or just stay on the internet and complain anonymously, because that will change things. /s

  • VernonDozier

    Maybe secretly, during the day, John Legere wants to be Clark Kent during the day and works for AT&T at night.

    Still, it begs to question why didn’t they bid (and win) spectrum in the past..? They have been partially owned by the German Government, can’t they raise rates in Germany to finance spectrum auctions? Germany is the size of New Mexico and small compared to the US.

    T-Mobile Marketing must believe a pain point can always be fixed with a lower price point and cheap phone promotions. However, and without investment into providing a quality service, and saving money to purchase spectrum, it’s kicking the can down the road. Maybe they don’t want to be known as a highly regarded service provider; and prefer to subsidize (and take out loans from Germany) to sell phones at cheap price points. They must still not understand that spectrum sales very rarely happen twice. Licenses always get renewed.

    I don’t understand the “Game Of Handounts” (not “Game of Thrones”) and requests for government welfare. After all, when AT&T gave them free spectrum and $5,000,000,000.00 in cash when the merger didn’t work out, John Legere only thanked AT&T for the free loot, then went on to lobby the FCC should set AT&T’s and other company’s wholesale prices for roaming rates.

    John Legere is a risky scheme, and the Germany-based company might as well convince lawmakers to raise US taxes for the deficit of revenue collected at the auction. Because ultimately, that’s what’s going to happen.

    • Dustin Roe

      T-Mobile is a publicly traded company. Just because DT is majority stockholder does not make them cash source. How would you feel if you were asked to pay cash into a stock investment you made because it would help the company grow? AT&T set T-Mobile back about 6.5M customer they hemorrhaged (DT TMUS Quarterly reports) during the merger period and as risk mitigation for the expected loss agreed to give them the spectrum and double the cash they recieved. DT took 1/2 the cash to end the merger earlier and restart growth once the government verdict was in that it would not be allowed. This wasn’t a handout as much as a settlement on an insurance contract(That AT&T agreed to). Back when the 700MHZ auctions were going on T-Mobile was 1/3 the size it is now and didn’t have the demand on its spectrum when 2x5mhz was considered good since phone traffic was the primary use of bandwidth and T1 lines could support large metro areas. Why would they spend double their annual revenue for spectrum that would not be available for 5 years and was not needed at the time?

      • Fabian Cortez

        He’s nothing but a doosmday troll with ridiculous and outlandish scenarios.

    • Fabian Cortez

      Same long-drawn-out agenda from you again.

      Still, it begs the question why didn’t they bid (and win) spectrum in the past..? They have been partially owned by the German Government, can’t they raise rates or lobby for a raise in Germany’s taxes to finance US spectrum auctions? Germany is the size of New Mexico and small compared to the US. Surely they’d understand.

      Not important.

      T-Mobile Marketing must believe a pain point can always be fixed with a lower price point and cheap phone promotions. But without investment into assets required to provide a quality service, while saving money to purchase spectrum, it’s kicking their can down the road. The work put into cost containment makes me believe they don’t want to be known as a highly regarded service provider. They must not understand that spectrum sales very rarely happen twice. Licenses always get renewed.

      Their quality of service and their happy customers prove otherwise.

      I don’t understand the “Game Of Handounts” (not “Game of Thrones”) and requests for government welfare. After all, when AT&T gave them free spectrum and $5,000,000,000.00 in cash when the merger didn’t work out,

      The only handout here is what AT&T and Verizon received decades ago after being broken up by the government. T-Mobile will happily bid in this auction. They simply asked for a portion of the spectrum to be reserved so that the duopoly would not be able to touch, depending on spectrum holdings. The FCC agreed. Now they want more since it has become even more apparent that low band spectrum is needed even more.

      The “free” spectrum that AT&T handed to DT and the ~$5 billion in compensation agreed to prior to the deal. It is normal practice for businesses to engage in such dealings. But nice try.

      John Legere only thanked AT&T for the free loot,

      John Legere wasn’t the CEO of T-Mobile at the time.

      then went on to lobby the FCC should set AT&T’s and other company’s wholesale prices for roaming rates.

      The fact that T-Mobile can offer free, unlimited, data and texting in 120+ countries around the world is only proof of AT&T’s unwillingness to offer affordable roaming rates in this country. No other carrier to this day in this country can match the free international roaming that T-Mobile offers. T-Mobile simply went to the FCC in seeking clarification. And the FCC agreed.

      Also, you remembered the AT&T spectrum, you remembered the AT&T money, but did you forget the AT&T 7-year UMTS roaming agreement?
      But have no fear, T-Mobile will be aggressively expanding their native network in an effort to mitigate roaming on AT&T. What will you complain about then?

      If you ever go to the Emergency Room, and need blood, you don’t get to haggle with the doctor on the price of a pint of donated blood. Spectrum is that blood in this industry. You can’t pump services like data through arteries or tubes without it.

      Bad analogy.

      Spectrum is owned by the people and controlled by the government. Not to mention that the FCC is there to ensure competition in the wireless space.

      John Legere is a risky scheme, and the Germany-based company might as well convince lawmakers to raise US taxes for the deficit of revenue collected at the auction. Because ultimately, that’s what’s going to happen.

      Silly and doomsday-ish.

      Legere’s got to man up, realize he has carte blanche and a blank check called CEO. Place bids without Germany’s approval, then tell DT in Germany that this is the cost of doing business in the US. DT knew of these costs of doing business when it entered the world’s most competitive market.

      Well it’s a good thing you don’t run a company or are in charge of anything substantial and of value.

      • iMotoXperiaGalaxy

        Defend away! LOL

        Haha!

      • VernonDozier

        What are you talking about dude? You owe me an apology.

        Im a capitalist. Your probably a T-Mobile Employee defending the German socialist mentality.

        Look. I used to be a T-Mobile Employee, probably like you. Then I found greener pastures.

        Buy the spectrum at the price the market says its worth, otherwise Legere’s pants don’t fit the title.

        • Fabian Cortez

          What are you talking about dude? You owe me an apology.

          Im a capitalist. Your probably a T-Mobile Employee defending the German socialist mentality.

          Look. I used to be a T-Mobile Employee, probably like you. Then I found greener pastures.

          Buy the spectrum at the price the market says its worth, otherwise Legere’s pants don’t fit the title.

          Sure.

          you’re*

        • VernonDozier

          Ah, must be nice chaned to Germany for all your corporate decisions.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Ah, must be nice chaned to Germany for all your corporate decisions.

          There is no need for your red herring.

          But once again, you’d like to deflect from the article and topic at hand.

          You seem disgruntled and upset. I suggest your drop the T-Mobile service that you hang on to. After all, no one here would want you to continue to send your hard-earned union money over to Deutschland.

        • VernonDozier

          People who know me know I’m never disgruntled or upset. Have you reached out to Larry Myers, Chief People Officer at T-Mobile yet..?

          You’ll be a great PR person. I’ll recommend you.

        • Fabian Cortez

          People who know me know I’m never disgruntled or upset. Have you reached out to Larry Myers, Chief People Officer at T-Mobile yet..?

          You’ll be a great PR person. I’ll recommend you.

          Here, I’ll upvote you too since you like to upvote yourself.

  • GuyBorg

    That’s some serious awesome sauce right there!

  • Peter Smith

    Genius!!!!

  • Shane Walker

    Cam, the head of the FCC is Tom Wheeler, not Jack…

    • Ascertion

      He doesn’t know Jack!

    • Goat

      Whoops, he definitely made a slip up there :P

      • archerian

        well he must be on his notice period now.. previously errors were limited to typos, now its factual ‘typos’ too.

  • Goat

    This should be a commercial

  • Ordeith

    *sigh* If only T-Mobile’s network was up to the challenge…

    • Fabian Cortez

      *sigh* If only T-Mobile’s network was up to the challenge…

      Any context for your statement?

    • steven berson

      Up to the challenge? I get similar reception and data speeds similar to at&t (my last carrier) However save 50$ per month. The only carrier thats better is Verizon but cost 30-40% more. Not worth the extra cost.

      • Ascertion

        T-Mobile’s faster, but no where near as reliable as AT&T or Verizon. You may not notice much of a difference in a city, but once you travel anywhere, you’ll notice big time. There’s a reason Verizon/AT&T feel like their pricing structure is fair.

        • dtam

          “There’s a reason Verizon/AT&T feel like their pricing structure is fair.”

          because their shareholders tell them so.

      • Ordeith

        I have phones on both ATT (through Cricket) and T-Mobile right now. And T-Mobile constantly falls short. T-Mobile gives me 2G or no signal where ATT has LTE, calls dropped where T-Mobile shows signal, and data that doesn’t work if there are a large number of cell phone users in the area.
        8 years of this, and it only seems to be getting worse in my area.

        • Fabian Cortez

          I have phones on both ATT (through Cricket) and T-Mobile right now. And T-Mobile constantly falls short. T-Mobile gives me 2G or no signal where ATT has LTE, calls dropped where T-Mobile shows signal, and data that doesn’t work if there are a large number of cell phone users in the area. 8 years of this, and it only seems to be getting worse in my area.

          Then you should port out.

          If after 8 years they aren’t going to do anything for you, there’s no sane reason to believe they will tomorrow.

          Device and location?

        • Ordeith

          Honestly when ATT started AIO it was a godsend. I was on T-Mobile for price, and here was ATT offering their network at an even lower cost.
          I keep the one remaining T-Mobile line for the tethering and ported the rest. If Cricket ever allows tethering that last line will go as well.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Honestly when ATT started AIO it was a godsend. I was on T-Mobile for price, and here was ATT offering their network at an even lower cost. I keep the one remaining T-Mobile line for the tethering and ported the rest. If Cricket ever allows tethering that last line will go as well.

          So you’re tethering on T-Mobile when T-Mobile gives you “2G or no signal where ATT has LTE, calls dropped where T-Mobile shows signal, and data that doesn’t work if there are a large number of cell phone users in the area?”

          It’s one or the other.

          Also, it’ll be a cold day in hell once Cricket offers tethering. AT&T just won’t allow it.

        • Ordeith

          It’s not one or the other. Sometimes T-Mobile works.
          Other times T-Mobile gives you “2G or no signal where ATT has LTE, calls dropped where T-Mobile shows signal, and data that doesn’t work if there are a large number of cell phone users in the area.”

          Also, if I lose the T-Mobile line, how will I know if/when the network ever gets all those never materializing yet promised improvements?

        • Fabian Cortez

          It’s not one or the other. Sometimes T-Mobile works.

          Other times T-Mobile gives you “2G or no signal where ATT has LTE, calls dropped where T-Mobile shows signal, and data that doesn’t work if there are a large number of cell phone users in the area.”

          Also, if I lose the T-Mobile line, how will I know if/when the network ever gets all those never materializing yet promised improvements?

          For the third time: What’s your location?

          If anything, this article and T-Mobile’s lobbying efforts should demonstrate to you their willingness to acquire more low band spectrum in an effort to compete with the company that currently serves.

          Choice is good no matter what band name it comes under.

        • orlando duran

          Fabian, you just caught him lying. LoL. What an idiot

        • KingCobra

          Wow you’re straight up exposing all of these liars here. Bravo.

          Notice the complainers are usually afraid to reveal their locations because it makes the lies all too obvious.

  • iMotoXperiaGalaxy

    Too bad T-Mobile doesn’t hold a candle to any of the Big 3…

    Haha!

  • Rob H.

    Just an FYI to all the anti-T-Mobile trolls posting, more competition, lower prices, and more innovation is good for everyone, not just T-Mobile, Sprint and the smaller or regional carriers.

    • Ordeith

      I agree. and I wish T-Mobile were actually competitive. Maybe they got the short straw when it comes to spectrum and are completely unable to create a competitive network even if they wanted to. Maybe that’s not fair. But in the end what they have is an inferior service and it should be marketed and priced accordingly.
      Ideally the FCC would allow for shared spectrum like the European model. But I don’t see that happening here.

      • Rob H.

        There is nothing wrong with T-Mobiles network. The FCC just needs to keep companies from buying spectrum and hoarding it, ie: Dish and those other “holding firms”. FCC should give them 12 months if it’s not put use then it gets auctioned off again. I for one would refuse to pay in the ballpark of $100+ for a single line and a measly 3-4GB bucket of data.

        • archerian

          What, did you dare to mention that Dish was a potential spectrum rival to T-Mobile? No Uncarrier goodies for you!! :)

        • Rob H.

          Nope. Dish is not a rival. They could not build a network from the ground up even if they wanted too. They are another just sitting on the spectrum, they are like Sprint without a bad plan.

        • archerian

          Dish outbid T-Mobile for spectrum in the last auction, it could do the same again, and Sprint might jpon too. Hence all the push for more reserved spectrum so hopefully its less competition for the auction for T-Mobile.

      • Fabian Cortez

        I agree. and I wish T-Mobile were actually competitive.

        T-Mobile is competitive. Being the fastest growing carrier in the country and gaining 1+ million subs. per quarter for the last 8 quarters in a row doesn’t happen if one isn’t competitive.

        Maybe they got the short straw when it comes to spectrum and are completely unable to create a competitive network even if they wanted to. Maybe that’s not fair. But in the end what they have is an inferior service and it should be marketed and priced accordingly.

        Without low band spectrum, they’re able to provide equal or ever superior service to the other three carriers in major markets.

        Ideally the FCC would allow for shared spectrum like the European model.

        I agree. That is a much better model.

        But I don’t see that happening here.

        Location?

        • 21stNow

          “Without low band spectrum, they’re able to provide equal or ever superior service to the other three carriers in major markets”

          Not inside of buildings. I’m in the DC area and there are many times that I go inside of buildings and above-ground parking garages and lose signal or have serious signal degradation. The buildings don’t bother me as much, but not being able to start navigation in a parking garage is a problem. My solution is to pull out my AT&T phone to use for navigation, but most consumers don’t use multiple carriers.

    • DStudio

      As I’ve posted before, there’s NO single superior carrier.

      I have data devices with all four carriers. Reception and speed completely depends on the exact spot you’re in, combined with the congestion (~number of people) on that carrier there.

      The general ranking is:

      Verizon

      T-Mobile or AT&T

      Sprint

      However, I’ve worked from spots where Sprint is amazing (easily the best) and Verizon is useless. In fact it’s surprising how often Verizon is marginal to awful.

      There’s a good reason I have devices from all four carriers. I can’t do without any of them.

      Having competition here is definitely good for everyone.

      • Ordeith

        Sounds like you need a Quad SIM phone. :)

        From my own experience it’s:

        Verizon
        AT&T
        .
        .
        .
        .
        T-Mobile
        .
        Sprint

        • DStudio

          I’m sure it depends on largely on your general geographic location, as well as the specific spots.

          In Southern California, all but Sprint have pretty good coverage (although Sprint is strong in – or close to – LA). Verizon and AT&T get congested fairly often, because of the population density. So there’s no way I can rank them well above T-Mobile, as you did. Sprint is the only carrier that’s a dubious choice as one’s sole provider.

          In fact, AT&T is probably the least consistent. They can beat the pants off everyone at a given location (e.g. a hilly but populated area) and then be really slow a short distance away.

          As T-Mobile increases its customer base, it’s beginning to experience congestion too. I think Sprint’s coverage around here is too spotty to attract enough customers to get much congestion! When we had an “emergency” around here 2-3 years ago, Sprint and T-Mobile customers were the only ones who could get their phone calls through.

        • Ordeith

          From my (probably too many) visits to Disneyland, I stand by my ranking, even for Southern California.

        • DStudio

          I haven’t been to Disneyland for a while, but I’m pretty sure it’s still atypical.

          For living and working around Orange County, I think the picture is different. It also depends on what you’re doing – upstream or downstream, “transactional” or streaming activities, and how much latency and consistency matters (typically a weak spot with T-Mobile, even with LTE).

        • DStudio

          Also, I’ve seen all the carriers appear to get so slow in their upstream that their downstream becomes unusable.

        • orlando duran

          Sprint is horrid in LA

        • DStudio

          That may be true – there are only a few regular spots I go to in LA, so I don’t have a good overall picture of Sprint there. But at least they attempted to deploy their best network in and around the city. They haven’t even done THAT in many of the suburbs.

        • Melissa Cardenas

          Well i live in the heart of los angeles att here has a bad rep from the old days but reality is those days were it was congested are history, i have tmobile like i said here plenty of times ,my mom has At&t and in dwtwn,east la ,montebello etc it works better than tmobile sometimes callls dont go tru dwtn on tmobile , Dinsney land att full bars LTE and hspa all over the park while tmobile is Edge to no service more than half of the time same in 6 flags and knotts . Since my mom rarely uses her phone im always comparing speeds and att is not bad 10-20 average ,tmobile is usually the same . In east la At&t gets up to 50 while tmobile tops out at 35 . Other than that they get the same 10 to 20 just about everywere else . Only advantage att has is u walk in a store u mantain Lte while tmobile drops down to edge or sometimes nada ,other than that from i seen they about the same data speeds are same .

        • Fabian Cortez

          Disneyland is indeed a special case for AT&T.

        • DStudio

          Yes, I think AT&T has done a much better job than anyone else when it comes to specific large public venues.

        • Fabian Cortez

          There’s more to it than that at Disneyland.

        • DStudio

          Care to elaborate?

        • Fabian Cortez

          AT&T has an exclusivity agreement with Disney on their properties.

        • DStudio

          So no one else can place towers or microcells ON the premises? That would make sense. Perhaps they have such agreements at other places as well. I’ve certainly heard of cases like this – where many carriers have to try their best to strategically place cells near the perimeter of a large venue.

        • Ordeith

          Funny that there aren’t any problems with using Verizon on Disney Property.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Funny that there aren’t any problems with using Verizon on Disney Property.

          There are problems but they’re not as prevalent as on T-Mobile due to Verizon’s low band spectrum.

          So are you still going to ignore my question about your location?

        • VernonDozier

          So T-Mobile and Allan Tantillo couldn’t secure the Disney locations?

        • jay_max

          He won’t answer that question. Never has.

        • VernonDozier

          Howso?

        • Joe

          The inconsistentsy should be fixed by year end in a lot of California as they are building they’re 700 mhz network quite fast there.

        • DStudio

          Joe, I’ve also noticed (according to their newer maps) that T-Mobile’s now covering some much-needed areas where I’ve had slow/no coverage in the past. These include the highway routes between LA and Sacramento, or the Florida Keys.

          I’ll finally be taking the route north again in the Fall, so it will be interesting to see (and hear) how well it works (since radio sports is very patchy there, and it will be a major college football day).

        • Fabian Cortez

          This is location-dependent for sure.

        • VernonDozier

          Need a job? Send me your resume.

          Tell you what, I’ll put you at the top of the list I give to my neighbor who works at DishNetwork.

          Yes, I’ll put your resume on top of John Carney’s.

        • Fabian Cortez

          Unrelated to anything we’re discussing. Please stay on topic sir.

      • Trevnerdio

        Sprint? Amazing? Please share this mystical place.

        • DStudio

          Sorry, that’s my secret. It’s one of my most important locations, and I need it to remain that way (other carriers get badly congested there, right when I need them most).

          I will say, however, that it’s amazing because of Sprint’s robustness and low latency, combined with consistent excellent speeds in both directions. This is much more important to me than sometimes “mind blowing” downstream speed tests where the actual performance can fluctuate greatly, especially when congested.

          Sprint’s problem is they have far fewer very-good to excellent locations than anyone else – at least around here (and I suspect in most of the west, looking at their maps). In fact, they just have less coverage in general.

  • Mike

    Will Dish be participating ?

  • Genecio

    There was a time when Verizon was trash! Back during the Bell Atlantic Mobile days. Yes they’re one of the best now, but that wasn’t without building the network and acquiring smaller carriers and buying spectrum and acquiring spectrum thru acquisitions and swaps. I used to be a Verizon customer now while I can admit T-Mobile does have a lot of improving to do, one can at least cut them some slack. They are improving, possibly not as fast for your liking but they are none-the-less. Magenta needs this spectrum and unfortunately they’re saddled with having an owner that doesn’t want to invest in them. Believe-You-Me, if DT invested into T-Mobile USA like they did their EU and UK companies Magenta would not be one to f*** with!

    • Mike

      Don’t Fogel the spectrum the government gave Verizon

      • Genecio

        So right AND that too! All of the more reason to not give Magenta such a hard time. Although they did decide to sit out the 700Mhz auction back yesteryear, however they are paying for it now and buying it now. Magenta is getting there, slowly but surely.

      • archerian

        Which spectrum was that again?

        • Mike Thaler

          When cellular was born – two 800/850 mz spectrum groups were given out. There were “A” carriers and “B” carriers. I might have it backwards, but the government gave existing wireline carriers the “A” spectrum and gave “B” spectrum in various areas out via lotteries to diff. groups who spent the relatively small amount of dollars to win the lottery in the area they entered.
          When others came along some years later (Sprint and many other regional carriers) – all that was left for them was the 1900mz spectrum. That’s why TM has no 800mz.

        • archerian

          the government gave existing wireline carriers the “A” spectrum

          by most recent calculations, that spectrum accounts for only 3-5% of the Big 2’s total spectrum holdings, financially not even worth the cash and spectrum ATT gave T-mobile after their failed merger.

          groups who spent the relatively small amount of dollars to win the lottery in the area they entered.

          these people later turned and sold it to Bell for a great profit, including several senators. My point is Bell had to pay a heavy premium for this spectrum.

          When a technology is launched, it would make sense for the companies involved to obtain and use the best option available, and this so called “free” handover happened around 25 years ago, there was no way it was possible to keep it pending for a new player, just like real estate. Now reserving it today might be some “social justice” recompense to placate some people, but the fact remains that it is being given to a private company, not a non-profit wireless carrier. They are in it to make money. The latest push is to get more – they already for 30Mhz reserved, not they want 10Mhz more. Why? So that there is lesser bidding in the reserved area as there is more to go around.

          T-mobile came for the last auction with several billions and were swept away by Dish and its DEs, they want this to be minimized as much as possible and one way is to ensure there is a larger pool reserved for them to pick from. In the end, everyone is in it for the money, adding social justice or equality into the mix is just smoke and mirrors.

        • Aaron Davis

          How did Sprint, as a wireline carrier, not get any of that A spectrum?

  • 21stNow

    I’ll try not to be insulted that he thinks that people need a cartoon to understand his point.

    I’m torn between wanting at least four major carriers that do well in our business environment and being a supporter of capitalism and against any set-asides. I recognize that the lobbyists that the baby bells (and their mobile interests) can afford actually block the will of the people rather than promote it, but I don’t like the demonization of VZW and AT&T Mobility, either.

    • Anthony S Jennings

      The airwaves belong to the People, and the People entrust the FCC with fair distribution and administration of those airwaves. The People don’t, however, give up their voice in this area. However, corporate America routinely uses the system to drown out the voice of the People in order to get what they want. If I have to demonize two of the largest corporations in America in order to have my voice heard, I’m definitely going to do it.

      If capitalism were at all fair, there would be no need for set-asides, subsidies or quotas. Capitalism is inherently unfair, and that’s fine to some degree. Given that, capitalism cannot be left to run amok. All T-Mobile is asking for is equity so that capitalism works in a way that enables healthy competition.

      • archerian

        All T-Mobile is asking for is equity so that capitalism works in a way that enables healthy competition

        You mean a for profit company is asking ‘just’ for equity?

        • SirStephenH

          Hey! Corporations are people too!

          At least according to the conservative Supreme Court…

      • Set-asides, subsidies or quotas are not the stuff of capitalism, but of fascism. For, as Mussolini said, “fascism is the merger of state and corporate power.”

    • Jay Holm

      More like a comic than a cartoon, but whatever, if something like that is “offensive”, then your wayyy too sensitive!

      • 21stNow

        If I were sensitive, I would point out that it should have been “you’re”, not “your”. ;)

  • Mike Thaler

    SO – JL wants users to let the FCC know our opinion on the spectrum issue. HOWEVER-he doesn’t give out an email address anywhere!

    • Herb

      He wants you to tweet @FCC and use the hashtag #DefeatDuopoly

  • KingCobra

    That was a pretty solid presentation. Not bad TMO.

  • Raiterio Patterson

    Who is Jack Wheeler?

    • A man with a long career as a lobbyist for telecom corporations.

      • Herb

        Is he related to Tom Wheeler, the FCC Chairman? Perhaps an evil twin or something?

    • gmo8492

      Tom Wheeler’s better looking and more successful younger brother :P

  • Jay Holm

    How much total 600 spectrum will be available? Anyone know?

  • Yes, this is a threat, but so too is the IOS and Android duopoly.

    • Ordeith

      and T-Mobile doesn’t seem willing to address it.

      • And sadly, neither are the other four major carriers willing to address it.

        • eanfoso

          actually, I hate to say this but cricket wireless and at&t really do address it

      • Daniel Lawson

        hopefully Windows 10 forces them to address it

  • Cam Fas

    And then we get soft data caps

    • Herb

      Which we could probably have avoided if afforded the chance to purchase more spectrum in last year’s auction.

      • archerian

        Blame Dish for it, the bought most of the spectrum T-Mobile was after, not the Big 2. And blame back haul too.

  • Raiterio Patterson

    That cartoon is bananas…

  • eanfoso

    just wow *facepalm*