John Legere’s predictions for 2019 include 5G and T-Mobile going ‘beyond mobile’

tmobile-legere-predictions-2019

For the past several years, John Legere has taken time at the end of the year to lay out his predictions for the coming new year. Today he’s done it again, predicting some of the things he thinks we’ll see in 2019.

As you might expect from Legere, several of his predictions take shots at T-Mobile’s competition. He suggests that Verizon won’t show a 5G coverage map by the end of 2019 and that AT&T will have more “5G BS”. The T-Mo CEO is referencing the news that AT&T will soon show a “5G E” network indicator on some Android devices when connected to its 5G Evolution network, which is 4G LTE that uses network technologies like 4×4 MIMO, 256 QAM, and three-channel carrier aggregation to boost speeds.

When it comes to T-Mobile, Legere predicts that we’ll see live 5G and that his carrier “will continue to be the only company with a real plan for nationwide 5G”.

Legere goes on to take a couple more shots at Verizon, making predictions that Verizon will sell its Oath subsidiary of digital media and that Verizon Communications CEO Hans Vestberg will launch a cooking show called “SlowER Cooker Sunday”.

The T-Mobile CEO made some cable-related predictions today, too, like that T-Mobile will “start to take on the Cableopoly on all fronts — TV AND broadband”, which seems to confirm the rumors that T-Mobile’s TV service has been delayed to 2019. He thinks that competition will cause major cable companies will lose business and that Comcast and Charter will struggle as a result of new TV and broadband competition and that they’ll hit customers with “hidden fees and deceptive billing”.

Rounding out Legere’s predictions is a claim that at least one other major brand will adopt T-Mobile’s Team of Experts customer support feature that launched earlier this year.

Of course, Legere also made it a point to mention T-Mobile’s proposed merger of Sprint, saying that he’s “optimistic” that regulators will finish their review of the deal. T-Mo and Sprint have previously said that they expect their merger to close in the first half of 2019.

Do you have any predictions for 2019? What would you like to see happen in the new year?

Source: T-Mobile

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

  • Sayahh

    I like Tmo. I will keep liking them until they become number 1, then, I won’t immediately switch, but I will start to look for alternatives.

    • marque2

      Even at the fast rate they are accumulating business and with the merger it will still take 10-20 years to overtake Verizon, without it could take 40 years at current rates. Even with all the massive growth this decade,Tmo is about half of Verizon’s size.

      • I disagree. With the merger T-Mobile will have ~130 million subscribers, and AT&T will have ~140 million, and Verizon will have ~150 million. If their post-merger combined service is good enough, and if they win the 5G war (which it’s looking like they will) they will probably pass Verizon in less than 5 years.

        • marque2

          The smallest company will win the 5g war? They were years behind with LTE – and if you actually drive out of town you will notice they are still lacking vs others (though they have gotten much better)

          No Merger they need to meet Verizon’s growth plus 1.5 million a year to match in 50 years. Merger it is 15. It isnt hard math. No doubt they are growing faster than the others – but you don’t find 20 – 70 million new customers over night.

        • slybacon

          They were behind with 4G LTE cause the feds handed out 700 MHz spectrum to Verizon and AT&T in 2006. T-Mobile only had mid-band spectrum to work with. For Fifth Generation wireless internet, T-Mobile has the best spectrum for coverage (600 MHz) and speed (28 GHz). Add Sprint’s spectrum (2.5 GHz) and you have solid spectrum at every level. Verizon only has speed (28 GHz) on certain floors of certain buildings on certain blocks. Once Verizon shuts down their 4G LTE network (2030??), then they can use their 700 MHz for 5G.

        • marque2

          Um, no. They had HSPA+ with no LTE whatsoever long after Verizon already had the nation covered. 2 – 3 years behind. Now they are behind in rural areas and smaller towns but in big cities are on par with Verizon.

          For 5g – never mind all the great spectrum – and 600Mhz is considered quite suboptimal for 5g – Tmobile is already well behind Verizon. I am sure it won’t be as bad as the LTE debacle, but behind nontheless.

        • slybacon

          Sure, T-Mobile didn’t have LTE for years after, but again, that’s cause they didn’t get a free handout.
          For great 5G spectrum, “never mind”?!? Listen to yourself. Hahah.
          And what’s the difference between using 600MHz radio waves for 4G LTE vs 5G? For starters you will have speed increases and lower latency with 5G, but still the same huge coverage area (probably 100 times larger than Verizon’s non-standards 5G home internet). Verizon has zero standards-based fifth generation fixed or mobile internet. They are at ground zero still. AT&T now has some. T-Mobile is just waiting for a mobile device (without a puck).

        • marque2

          And what’s the difference between using 600MHz radio waves for 4G LTE vs 5G?

          Basically 600 Mhz spectrum does not come close to supporting the 5G data throughput requirements. I don’t think it could even with massive MIMO. The 20ms latency vs 4ms is really a non-issue. Most people aren’t complaining about the latency – especially since much comes from the back end and not front end, and it would be difficult to get to the 4ms on 600 Mhz anyway.

          Yeah you can throw a few 600 MHz towers out there and claim 5G but the speed will be so slow, no one will notice. May as well put LTE on them. Verizon, at this moment, has true 5G out in the field.

          Also the other problem is money. Socialist angels that wave wands and build towers for free, with the free labor of elves and dwarfs , doesn’t exist yet. Verizon has much more money to build out a network.

          I am really not sure what your point is.

        • slybacon

          Can you please search and find the data throughput requirements for “5G”? Please only give me numbers and units and no BS. And while you’re at it, the throughout data requirements for 4G LTE. Thanks.

        • marque2

          Here is the key line from the wiki I mentioned. Note that being the only band available in hard to reach areas could make it slower as lots of phones ping the same band 71.

          “5G New Radio can include lower frequencies, from 600 MHz to 6 GHz. However, the speeds in these lower frequencies are only slightly higher than new 4G systems, estimated at 15% to 50% faster”

        • slybacon

          You said the speed would be so slow no one would notice… 50% faster is another 25-50 mbps where I live. And also, whether a YouTube video downloads in 30 seconds or 3 seconds makes no difference to me. I can only watch it at 1.0x speed.
          Also, this is someone’s opinion. Again, 5G has no data throughout requirement!

        • Daniel

          I would really like to see a graph or chart or something showing how much throughput 5G NR technology can achieve on given bandwidths.

          In most regions of the country T-Mobile has at least 20+20mhz of band 71 (600MHz). On LTE, that can achieve theoretical peak speed of 392mbps through 256QAM + 4×4 MIMO.

          So I’m assuming 20+20 could achieve 500-600mbps theoretically on NR but that is just my guess.

          I’m sure T-Mobile will (eventually) use a combination of band 71, mid-band, Sprint’s 2.5Ghz, and mmw for 5G. What will be interesting is seeing how long it will take T-Mobile to implement the backhaul to take advantage of that.

        • marque2

          @600Mhz it will be closer to zero improvement. The amount of data that can be transmitted on a frequency is proportional to its frequency. 600Mhz just doesn’t oscillate that much to support much data. At best you would get 15%, this is a limitation of physics, not limitations of LTE. 600Mhz can not support a huge data rate. At the 2.5 gig range, you would start to see the 50% improvement, because of limitations in the LTE algorithm, not the physics, but you won’t get full 5G until your frequencies are over 7Ghz.

          As an example here – in a with no interference and short ranges, the max amount of data transmittable using an on/off style transmission for 600 Mhz would be 300 Mb/s – that can’t happen, because you also need error correcting, handshaking, the near impossibility of reading the signal perfectly at that rate … but assuming the same ideal lab transmission, 2.5 gigs can support a data rate of 1250 Mb/s That is 4x as much.

          I am not a radio guy – some radio guy will be able to explain exact transmission methods better, but I am pretty sure they would all agree that the higher the frequency the higher the proportional data rate.

        • slybacon

          Can you please explain “full 5G” and use number to define it? What data rate is “full 5G?” What data rate is “half 5G?”
          As another example, how do you explain WiFi 4 vs WiFi 5? They both use the same 2.4GHz or 5GHz, yet they seem to improve the data transmission rates immensely from one generation of tech to the next (450 Mbps to 1,300 Mbps, respectively). Are you saying that 4th Gen wireless to 5th Gen wireless won’t have similar improvements??

        • marque2

          WIFI is a little different, but similar to cell – you can get more data out of the bandwidth by having a more efficient algorithm “per channel” or by using more channels, or by increasing the frequency. My 5g WIFI is a cheaper model and only uses two channels, I can see my neighbors have better ones with 4 channels. Note when you buy a wifi router they are usually dual band so the “Max” speed includes 2.3 and 5 gig transmissions even though it is really not easily possible to mix both. My first wifi ever had one channel and supported the inefficient 11mb/s, second one was about 50, due to a new algorithm then with the new multi-channel MIMO model I got 150, 300, 450 due to combining channels. Then when I got 5ghz because of the frequency change it went to 900 because the frequency supports a higher data rate.

          Also you will notice just inherently because of the twice the bandwidth you get at least twice the data throughput per 5gig channel than the 2.3 gigs, which is why you see 450/900, or 1350 rated combined routers. The first number is (450) 2.3, the second is (900) 5gig speed rating.

          In Cell phones the MIMO is 4×4 MIMO – of which different phones can combine several different bands together. Samsung and Apple tend to allow more of this than say LG.

          Anyway good chatting with you. You can look up more info about frequencies and how WIFI has evolved on your own with the Duck, or Google, if you still use that.

        • slybacon

          2.3 GHz isn’t a WiFi frequency in the United States. It’s 2.4GHz and 5GHz. And my WiFi router combined them in setup. Not sure if they work simultaneously or if my devices have to pick one or the other. But it puts out ~295 Mbps to my phone, desktop, and tv streaming devices on a 250 Mbps connection.
          I haven’t played Duck, Duck, Goose in a long time.

        • disqus_fzPRZg4vOH briefly

        • Augustine

          That’s incorrect. Data throughput is proportional to the bandwidth, not frequency. The spectral efficiency of 5G NR is 3x better than LTE-A. This translates into 3x faster speed for the same spectrum width.

          The push to mid band and mm band is that, while LTE is limited to 20 MHz of bandwidth, 5G NR can go up to 100 MHz in low and mid band and 400 MHz in mm band. However, most of the spectrum below 3 GHz is fully occupied, leaving no room for the wide channels that 5G NR can use.

          Still, even at 5 MHz in band 12, or truly any other band, 5G NR is 3x faster than LTE.

        • marque2

          You should write a white paper about this since you are the only person with this knowlegable research. The radio community is waiting for your peer reviewed paper. It should increase throughput exponentially they follow through on your amazing research.

          Maybe we can all start using 20khz low and and forget all this. 5g needs 15 gigahertz stuff.

          Ah science – what will they come up with next.

        • Augustine

          You might have spared yourself the embarrassment by at least checking out the Wikipedia page on 5G before posting. Alas, suit yourself.

        • marque2

          Well since the WIKI article was already referenced in the thread and simce the very WIKI article says you won’t see much difference until about 7 gigs – I would suggest 1: read more carefully and 2: learn a little bit about how frequency data propagation works.

          Seriously the amount of data translatable all characteristics being similar other than bandwidth is roughly proportional to the bandwidth. And 600mhz just doeant support much data – you get 5g in name only.

        • Augustine

          If only you could read… Regardless of the carrier frequency, the throughput of 5G is still 3 times higher than 4G for the same channel bandwidth. This translates into 5G at 1 Gbps in a 15 MHz channel, the average bandwidth licensed by T-Mobile at 600 MHz. But, if you prefer to pretend that you know better than Neville Ray, the mirror is your friend. Enough said.

        • marque2

          The key point from the Wikipedia article is this:

          “5G New Radio can include lower frequencies, from 600 MHz to 6 GHz. However, the speeds in these lower frequencies are only slightly higher than new 4G systems, estimated at 15% to 50% faster”
          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G

          I will let others judge for themselves.

        • Augustine

          That’s not quite what it says:
          “However, the speeds in early deployments, using 5G NR software on 4G hardware, are only slightly higher than new 4G systems, estimated at 15% to 50% faster.”

        • marque2 already read

        • I actually have T-Mobile, and have had some other carriers in the past few years. T-Mobile’s coverage is by far the best (I don’t live in a major city, I live in Ohio btw), and in most areas, but not all, their speeds are superior (100Mbps+ in a few areas). Also they just bought over a billion dollars of spectrum in the last FCC auction that they’ll use for 5G, Verizon and AT&T didn’t buy very much at all. T-Mobile will win, mark my words.

        • Sharti24

          What city in Ohio?

        • Monroe (In between Cincinnati and Dayton), but I also go to University at Wright State (which is next to Dayton).

        • Sharti24

          Ok im in akron

        • marque2

          That imaginary city in Ohio that doesn’t really exist.

        • marque2

          As someone who has driven in almost all the states to get to jobs, I can tell you there are major gaps – but they are getting smaller. And just about every analysis I have ever seen shows Tmo has highest speed but the range is pretty poor. Tmo claims it is similar by saying they reach 98% or whatever the customers of Verizon but that doesn’t help when Verizon covers a spot on I10 while driving from Austin to El Paso and Tmo doesn’t – even though there arent many people living on that freeway. This stuff is important. Goodness I cant even get Tmo single a few hundred yards into San Diego Bay to Coronado. But I suppose few customers live on the water.

        • SirStephenH

          T-Mobile has a far better plan for 5G if the Sprint merger goes through that should result it more consistent coverage and faster overall speeds. The merger would also result in a company within spitting distance of AT&T and Verizon.

          T-Mobile was being re-organized as a company around when LTE came out and was much smaller. When it decided to deploy LTE though, it did it in record time.

        • (J²)

          To add to what everyone else has stated. T-Mobile lost the war to LTE because it didn’t have the necessary spectrum. When you are the younger and smaller carrier, you find yourself frequently being outbid for spectrum for sale over the years – only to be lucky to obtain any scraps. In addition to that, T-Mobile’s parent wasn’t investing in the US arm as they were looking to sell it as the US market was at one point seen as one of the worst to get ahead and be profitable in.

          Well, this time around none of the issues mentioned above exist. T-Mobile will be going into 2019 with the most unused spectrum prior to the merger with Sprint. Combined, they will have a lot of spectrum to put to use towards 5G.

          Right now, Verizon and AT&T are on pace to roll out 5G as fast as they did 4G/LTE which I do not think will be aggressive enough to keep pace with T-Mobile. We’ve seen them announce deployments almost weekly for most of 2018.

          I’d say in 3 to 5 years, T-Mobile will be the number 1 or 2 carrier if the merger is in fact approved.

        • James Smith

          I’ve heard this same song and dance about T-Mobile’s spectrum disadvantage for years.

          Now they have 700 and 600 spectrum and the service still sucks.

          They need more cell sites, not just spectrum

        • (J²)

          Well, unfortunately a lot of their new spectrum isn’t live. They don’t have the clearance in all makers. T-Mobile has had 600 spectrum available for close to 2 years here but it cannot be used now. 700 spectrum in my maker has improved signal stength just enough to reduce drop call rate. I was able to send back signal boosters last month.

      • Jason

        Your numbers don’t add up post merger.

        • marque2

          Ok Sprint has been losing customers and Tmobiles current pace is gaining about 1 million people a year greayer pace vs Verison. Keep that up and how many years will it take to make up the 20 million difference? Yes 20.

          Tmobile is a nice company and all (except for some of their lame SJW inclusiveness ads) but 20 million customers won’t appear over night.

        • Jason

          T-Mobile isn’t growing at 1 million a year. They have averaged 1 million NET adds per QUARTER. Your numbers are wrong by a factor of 4. You can find all the data. They publish the numbers in every quarterly report.

        • marque2

          To catch up to Verizon, Tmobile needs to gain more customers in a year than Verizon gains and Verizon is growing too. So Tmobile needs to get as many customers as Verizon plus some more to catch up up. That more is about a million customers. You could quibble a bit. But that about right.

          This shouldn’t be that difficult to comprehend.

  • HeatFan786

    T-Mobile needs to stop acting like a carrier. Look at their fumble with E-Sims.

    • SirStephenH

      Better get used to it if this merger goes through.

    • riverhorse

      Thank God, I want no part of esims.

  • SirStephenH

    “The T-Mo CEO is referencing the news that AT&T will soon show a “5G E” network indicator on some Android devices when connected to its 5G Evolution network, which is 4G LTE that uses network technologies like 4×4 MIMO, 256 QAM, and three-channel carrier aggregation to boost speeds.”

    To be fair, T-Mobile is right there beside AT&T in mislabeling HSPA+ as 4G. Only LTE and the now defunct WiMAX are 4G technologies.

    “T-Mobile will “start to take on the Cableopoly on all fronts” ”

    “Cableopoly” is a fun “word”. Cableopoly, cableopoly, cableopoly… :-)

  • Eric A

    He left out the prediction that T-Mobile promos in the future would require 2 lines be added instead of 1.

  • Dejah Thoris

    Well, maybe T-Mobile should try to actually provide LTE service first. I live in Espanola, New Mexico. Espanola is a town of 10,000 people with another 40,000 living in the immediate surrounding county. It is not a small place. Yet, T-Mobile knows their network here is totally overbooked, over sold. The network becomes usable sometimes at around midnight, sometimes later. During the afternoon and onto the evening he network is unusable. I define unusable as getting less than one meg a second of data download speed and phone calls that ring but do not connect, incoming calls may or may not make it. T-Mobile support continues to deny the problem exists, Ironically, they do advise you to wait a few hours and signal will improve! Basically, if you are planning a move to this area and you are on T-mobile, or Metro, Be prepared to switch carriers. You will not have service during the afternoon or evening or even late evening. The network is totally overwhelmed here. It works ok during non peak times but during peak hours, forget it. you aren’t getting anything done.

    • riverhorse

      Sounds like Virginia, and I’m sure a gazillion other regions. As soon as you exit major cities, forget about any signal, even in major areas where the cities are clumped fairly close together. And during times when tourists descend in hordes, wait until late night for decent speeds.
      North America is just too large and sparsely populated, if India and China are well on the way to 2 billion each…

  • MichaelSt

    5G will matter more about bandwidth saturation, latency, and consistent device speeds and not direct line feeds. IMO. I don’t care about 200mb/s to my device, there is no way to use it!

    I know someone who works in IT for a large retail business, and was tasked with testing multiple locations with various forms of speed tests to determine where the need is at. Many of their locations still use a 1.5mb line (that is bad..lol). Then they compared a couple of these stores to some others that had an upgraded 5mb line and 10mb line (in the business world internet isn’t as fast as home and costs a ton more per month). They did video loading, web page loading (some heavy sites and some lighter), and then saturated the line (left a video playing in the background) and tested again. What they found is that, of course, the 1.5mb line was much slower, especially once they loaded up a video. Moving into 5 and 10 mb lines made pages load 2-3x faster (They counted “loaded” based on the spinning symbol in chrome, not just what you see on the screen. By just what you see it was nearly instant at the higher speeds). However, the difference between 5mb and 10mb was only a matter of 1-2s difference even with a video playing. My conclusion. You don’t NEED all that speed, you just need a solid connection with enough speed to load what you see. Right now, we simply don’t need more than ~20mb/s.

    • MichaelSt

      I broke it up to avoid being so long in one reply.

      What do you use bandwidth for on a phone or tablet? Web surfing, watching videos, video calls, social media, etc. Within all of these there are multiple variables as to the perception of speed. What we call “Fast.” The ability for the device to render web pages, load apps, etc. also alter the perceived speed of the “internet.” Once you hit around 10-20mb/s, you no longer can tell much difference in loading times when factoring in the device as well. HD video streaming only needs around 4-6mb/s steady to play without buffering. Web pages load, and then are done within a few seconds (also dependent on the servers ability to upload the site as fast as you can download it). Social media just pulls internet like a video stream showing just what is on the screen with a little buffered ahead as you scroll. Even with that, you can watch video reviews of different phones pulling up Facebook information in varying speeds on the same home internet. The speed of the connection isn’t as big of a deal as we like to make it. It just isn’t needed. You hit a point of diminishing returns above ~20mb/s because you never use it for the average application. Stuff loads and you move on. My dad has a 100mb cable line, and I have a WISP (wireless line of sight) that gets 20-30mb/s. I can’t tell any difference in loading movies, web surfing, and general use between the two.

      What does all this say? We don’t need all the speed to one device, we need more consistent coverage at speeds that do not hinder loading whatever we are looking at/listening to. That’s all we will ever “see” on our end. For that purpose, 600mhz will make a major leap into the better coverage area while still offering plenty of speed to use a phone without so much waiting to load. I didn’t mean to make this so long, but I wanted to clearly state my point. Nobody needs 1gb lines. Nobody even “needs” a 100mb line. You simply won’t use it. Not yet. If you have 5 4k streams going (requires around 15mb/s steady to not buffer on Vudu), then a 100mb line is good. But for the average home and the average user, we would benefit a lot more from lower latency, solid ~10-20mb+ connection, and consistent signal (coverage). If you don’t think latency matters, try using satellite internet. My friend deals with issues all the time with stores that have good speeds, but due to latency the line feels very sluggish.

      There is a TON involved in you having “fast” internet experiences, but it isn’t dependent on quick speeds solely. 5G is going to offer a lot better experience because it will cover better and offer better connections with speeds that are much higher on average, as well as a lot bigger pipeline to avoid saturation.

      • riverhorse

        Hardware specs might play a larger part, especially since many folks surf with a gazillion tabs open WHILE having multiple progs running… especially given how out of control unwanted videos and ads are nowadays.
        Performance bottlenecks avoided much better on desktop vs portable, on Linux better than on Android better than on Windows, on the stock/native browser better than a third party’s(by security default will get deeper access to kernel system and hardware), by separate video RAM, by more system ram.

      • Clifton K. Morris

        You have a problem here with business-class internet versus consumer internet services.

        Business-Class internet will be prioritized higher than consumer speeds. It will also cost considerably more.

        Then, there’s a third tier of services. When you get into T-1 or T-3 services, that service is regulated, meaning the business or consumer is guaranteed T-1 or T-3 Speeds on a 24×7 basis. Service is subject to SLAs, guarantees, which if not met, the FCC can enforce and levy a fine.

        All this flies in the face with Consumer-Grade internet (and also services provided by a wireless provider are classified as consumer-grade.)

        Consumer-Grade internet is delivered (legally) as “best effort”. Under best-effort, there are no guarantees for speeds, service, or latency. The data often uses multiple providers (via “peering agreements”). Marketing can be advertised as “up to” speeds, and if the service doesn’t work, the FCC has no obligation to take a complaint or levy a fine.

        This is why Net Neutrality and customer protections are so important.

  • JG

    Prediction – AT&T will continue their “5G BS” … This is a given. The average user won’t know the difference. So long as they’re getting a 5G like connection, it’s 5G, especially if their phone says they’re on 5G. Anyone who says different, well that’s just FAKE NEWS! (SO SAD). Obviously it’s coming from a T-Mobile supporter trying to make T-Mobile’s fake 5G sound more real by lying about the only true 5G network, AT&T’s.

    Prediction – Verizon won’t show a 5G map in 2019. I predict they will. Even if they have to resort to AT&T inspired “5G BS” they’re going to have a map at some point. 5G is too much of a buzz to just sit on their hands and not market it. Maybe late spring/early summer we’ll see Verizon ads encouraging people to upgrade their phones to take advantage of the only real 5G network in the US during their summer road trips because look at how much of the US Verizon has 5G already!”

    Prediction – T-Mobile TV will disrupt the cableoploies… We’ll have to wait and see… I’m hopeful, but I don’t see it happening.

    Unless they’ve been secretly producing their own stuff, in order to have content to fill the TV service, T-Mobile is going to have to negotiate with the various networks out there.

    Somehow I doubt the networks — especially those owned by cable operators — will provide T-Mobile with any substantially different deal they’re already offering cable providers or streaming services. BBC-America has no reason to want T-Mobile to succeed over YouTube TV or Spectrum. They just want to get as much money as possible from us in exchange for allowing us to watch Doctor Who.

    I hope they prove me wrong and come out with something substantial. But I don’t really see them being able to offer anything that hasn’t already been done.

  • Boris Govnic

    Prediction Loss of Jobs; there were so many jobs in Wireless in the early 2000s and one could earn a good high paying white collar job as an account manager with 8 different companies Nextel, Verizon, At&t Wireless, Cingular, T-Mobile, Sprint, US Cellular, Alltel. These Consolidations put a lot of retail workers out of business as well as Account Managers. Call Centers etc…. With Sears about to fold and Walmart Amazon Taking over we are headed toward a dystopian Universal Basic Income future.

  • Augustine

    I agree that T-Mobile is the only carrier with a solid plan for nationwide 5G. After all, it’s the only carrier with fresh spectrum recently acquired. Of course, the result of a good strategic planning.

    But who cares about T-Mobile beyond mobile? That’s just a distraction. Especially if it’s cable TV: so 20th century…

    • Chris Collins

      Considering the caps and other things put on home broadband these days I think there is room to grow beyond mobile.