Wow, this sounds ominous.
👀
(continues)
...
AT&T would need to spend about US$5 billion on its wireless network to catch up with the coverage offered by Verizon Wireless, a financial research firm said Tuesday.
The public's perception of AT&T's network is poor and declining, apparently because of real shortcomings when compared with Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel, said Gerard Hallaren, director of research at TownHall Investment Research. The company hosted a conference call about AT&T for investors in conjunction with WJB Capital Group. TownHall announced it has reduced its rating of AT&T from "Favorable" to "Neutral."
The second-largest U.S. mobile operator has been buoyed by its exclusive deal to sell the popular Apple iPhone -- an edge that is
(continues)
...
Lets make sure this gets the proper attention!!
HaHa ATT blows! 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
AT&T's coverage woes could cost billions to remedy - analyst
By Brian Garner
Published: 10:00 PM EST
According to industry analysts, AT&T would need to spend at least $5 billion to equal Verizon's current level of coverage.
The shortfalls of AT&T's wireless network can be attributed to the company's lack of investment in infrastructure, said Gerard Hallaren, director of research at TownHall Investment Research in a conference call Tuesday. AT&T would have to spend between $5 to $7 billion in order to equal Verizon's current level of investment.
According to Hallaren, AT&T has benefited grea...
(continues)
HaHa ATT blows! 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
AT&T's coverage woes could cost billions to remedy - analyst
By Brian Garner
Published: 10:00 PM EST
According to industry analysts, AT&T would need to spend at least $5 billion to equal Verizon's current level of coverage.
The shortfalls of AT&T's wireless network can be attributed to the company's lack of investment in infrastructure, said Gerard Hallaren, director of research at TownHall Investment Research in a conference call Tuesday. AT&T would have to spend between $5 to $7 billion in order to equal Verizon's current level of investment.
According to Hallaren, AT&T has benefited grea...
(continues)
...
You know whats really scary...
As if everyone already didn't have an iPhone! 😳
According to Hallaren, AT&T has benefited greatly from its exclusive iPhone deal with Apple, but this exclusivity is to come to an end this year, most likely in May or June. Verizon is expected to be the next to offer the iPhone, followed by T-Mobile and Sprint.
As if everyone already didn't have an iPhone! 😳
...
Verizon's been spending at least $4 billion a year since 2000, on network upgrades alone more recently it's closer to $6 billion a year!
AT&T was not spending near that much, they may be spending a lot more now...
but it would take a lot of investing to make up for 8 or 9 years of relative neglect!!!! Hence why your network sucks and everyone but the lamest of fan boys knows it.
AT&T will never catch up. Verizon is partially rolling out LTE later this year and they will be way ahead of AT&T's LTE rollout. What good is it for AT&T to rollout LTE if their coverage sucks to begin with? By the time they get their coverage anywhere close to Verizon it will be too late. Verizon will be on 5G! 😁
AT&T was not spending near that much, they may be spending a lot more now...
but it would take a lot of investing to make up for 8 or 9 years of relative neglect!!!! Hence why your network sucks and everyone but the lamest of fan boys knows it.
AT&T will never catch up. Verizon is partially rolling out LTE later this year and they will be way ahead of AT&T's LTE rollout. What good is it for AT&T to rollout LTE if their coverage sucks to begin with? By the time they get their coverage anywhere close to Verizon it will be too late. Verizon will be on 5G! 😁
...
The difference may be in the technology and chip compatibility. You point out that Verizon will launch LTE 4G late this year in test markets. These devices are projected to reach 5-12 Mbps real world speeds initially and will need SIM cards to work with LTE.
Since LTE is voice *and* data vs. EVDO which is data only....The real elephant is...Will these new 4G devices be backwards compatible to work on EVDO or CDMA when 4G is not available? I don't think so.
When AT&T finishes 3G upgrades, the devices will reach speeds of 7.2 Mbps and then 4G will be backwards compatible with HSDPA. neat, huh?
Since LTE is voice *and* data vs. EVDO which is data only....The real elephant is...Will these new 4G devices be backwards compatible to work on EVDO or CDMA when 4G is not available? I don't think so.
When AT&T finishes 3G upgrades, the devices will reach speeds of 7.2 Mbps and then 4G will be backwards compatible with HSDPA. neat, huh?
...
No, they launched test markets last year. They are launching 20-30 Commercial markets this year, minimum. Verizon's pretty aggressive when it comes to product roll out.
They've already don't numerous tests with chipsets so that a data session can transfer seamlessly from LTE to EVDO (it even made the news here at phonescoop).
LTE is also Data only, and the only voice you can "currently" get on it is through VOIP. Verizon came out in support of VOIP voice, but any phones they release will still use their 1xrtt towers for voice until VOIP becomes a reality, while using 4g/3g for data.
I love it how you used Real world speeds for LTE, but switched back to theoretical speeds when talking about HSPA. Might want to fix that.
...
(continues)
They've already don't numerous tests with chipsets so that a data session can transfer seamlessly from LTE to EVDO (it even made the news here at phonescoop).
LTE is also Data only, and the only voice you can "currently" get on it is through VOIP. Verizon came out in support of VOIP voice, but any phones they release will still use their 1xrtt towers for voice until VOIP becomes a reality, while using 4g/3g for data.
I love it how you used Real world speeds for LTE, but switched back to theoretical speeds when talking about HSPA. Might want to fix that.
...
(continues)
...
No, but I read from multiple locations, and typically if it's the same in all those places, it has a heck of a lot better chance of being correct than information heard second hand or from a stupid "blog" like apple insider.
...
I doubt what he was repeating would pass as "training." When I worked for Verizon, even the stuff they told us about ATT was more accurate than that (though they did have fun spinning it)
...
I have been through lots of training with both carriers and when it comes to a brainwashing atmosphere and a mudslinging session, Verizon takes first prize. And you sort of contradicted yourself by saying that the stuff they told you about ATT was more accurate but then you go on to say that they had fun spinning it.
...
No, I am saying that I got more accurate information from verizon (even with their spin) about ATT than this guy is saying about Verizon.
It's the same as people saying that verizon's map is inaccurate because that red is showing their 1xrtt coverage than their 3g is smaller than ATT's. (people have tried saying that too)
It's the same as people saying that verizon's map is inaccurate because that red is showing their 1xrtt coverage than their 3g is smaller than ATT's. (people have tried saying that too)
...
LOL! we are all here discussing the future plans, we don't know the answers (though you seem to think you have the answers ; )
...
you're not discussing future plans, but future technology. tech that is pretty well documented.
...
its interesting. i only asked this question...
~~~~~~~~~~
"Will these new 4G devices be backwards compatible to work on EVDO or CDMA when 4G is not available? I don't think so."
~~~~~~~~~~
Did you notice how there is nothing posted stating I know this to be an equiviocal fact?
I noticed your posts don't include this humility.
~~~~~~~~~~
"Will these new 4G devices be backwards compatible to work on EVDO or CDMA when 4G is not available? I don't think so."
~~~~~~~~~~
Did you notice how there is nothing posted stating I know this to be an equiviocal fact?
I noticed your posts don't include this humility.
...
LG, Motorola, Nortel and Alcatel-Lucent have ALL demostrated workable LTE/ EVDO handoffs.
If 4 different engineering firms can come up with a independent solutions, you can bet your high silk hat that the capability to do that can be micronized and mass-produced.
I would be very, very surprised if Verizon ever sponsored/subsidized a 4G-only device prior to overlaying LTE on 95%+ of it's current 3G footprint.
http://mobile.engadget.com/2009/08/25/lg-and-nortel- ... »
http://www.cellphonehits.net/motorola-has-completed- ... »
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/41343.php »
If 4 different engineering firms can come up with a independent solutions, you can bet your high silk hat that the capability to do that can be micronized and mass-produced.
I would be very, very surprised if Verizon ever sponsored/subsidized a 4G-only device prior to overlaying LTE on 95%+ of it's current 3G footprint.
http://mobile.engadget.com/2009/08/25/lg-and-nortel- ... »
http://www.cellphonehits.net/motorola-has-completed- ... »
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/41343.php »
...
good to know they've demonstrated it in controlled conditions. let's hope the real world tests are just as successful.
I understand the EVDO>LTE handoff, but I was curious about the CDMA>LTE VOIP handoffs...do you think it will work the same way?
I understand the EVDO>LTE handoff, but I was curious about the CDMA>LTE VOIP handoffs...do you think it will work the same way?
...
Is LTE going to be governed by data roaming rules or voice? If the FCC forces Verizon to allow AT&T's customers to roam on their LTE towers this could give AT&T a chance to catch up by rolling out towers and slumming off of VZW towers...a Sprint did for years.
...
that or at&t just dos not want to be the first trial dummy for lte in the us. at&t took a big blind step with the iphone and figures let Verizon take this one. nobody knows how much data is gonna be used and or how to set up the billing structure for 4g data yet so why not let Verizon set it up first than just follow suit or make necessary adjustments based on how things pan out with Verizon.
...
Eventually it will all be packet (data) traffic voice channels are dedicated channels and take up more resources. packet or data traffic shares resources based on priority where voice is the highest priority becuase it's more noticeable if you drop packets. Data is lowest priority because if a packets get dropped you just request a resent so it takes your web site an extra few miliseconds to load. All of telecom, home, wireless, voice, video and data will all be packet traffic eventually, it will be better for the providers and the users.
...
Now I know I am beating this like a dead horse, but how can Verizon have better coverage generally with fewer towers?
Wherever I go in the Northwest AT&T is far superior to Verizon in coverage.
The real issue is 3G coverage. AT&T chose to not build out remote areas and rural towns with 3G. This does not make Verizon's coverage any better in markets where both have 3G. If I live in Los Angeles and don't leave the basin then it makes no difference that Verizon has better coverage in Colorado. That point becomes as moot as international roaming. If I live in Colorado and AT&T has less coverage where I would need it then they would not be a good choice.
Please do not paint everywhere with such broad brushstokes, it is not a relevant argumen...
(continues)
Wherever I go in the Northwest AT&T is far superior to Verizon in coverage.
The real issue is 3G coverage. AT&T chose to not build out remote areas and rural towns with 3G. This does not make Verizon's coverage any better in markets where both have 3G. If I live in Los Angeles and don't leave the basin then it makes no difference that Verizon has better coverage in Colorado. That point becomes as moot as international roaming. If I live in Colorado and AT&T has less coverage where I would need it then they would not be a good choice.
Please do not paint everywhere with such broad brushstokes, it is not a relevant argumen...
(continues)
...
Vodaphone is not going to sell so no worries there. They would bee fools to give up a cash cow like VZW.
...
The point is that capacity is enormously important. AT&T might spend that nationwide but that doesn't mean it is all that is needed. They need to spend and additional amount according to these firms.
...
Probably 2 thirds of all the discussions on Phone Scoop is about national coverage. I betcha all 90% of Americans care about is local, maybe some regional, but I really don't think most people care all that much about coverage in ALL 50 states.
...
besides whenever verizon announces a new phone without gsm global capabilities, it's flooded with "I can't use this phone overseas, so it's a non-starter." So if people only care about local coverage, not national, why do people care so much about international?
...
Thats just human nature, it gives them something to complain about. I highly doubt that that consistently makes or breaks a sale...in the US.
...
Only thing I can think of is the person is trying to find an excuse to bitch about Verizon.
...
The funny thing is for years Verizon didn't want to have the coverage they have. The strategy was the same as AT&T. Cover metro areas and Interstates and other major highways and let Alltel monopolize rural areas and pay them roaming fees. This was balanced by the fact that Alltel paid roaming fees to Verizon for its customers roaming, but of course...Verizon had more customers.
So what happened? Well Alltel sold out to private investors, and Verizon wanted to roll out Push To Talk (again) and things like VZ Navigator they were unwilling to pay off network for and let's face it...the price was right. Verizon can crow about coverage now (and rightfully so), but to me it is just a lucky break. Scott Ford approached Sprint TWICE prop...
(continues)
So what happened? Well Alltel sold out to private investors, and Verizon wanted to roll out Push To Talk (again) and things like VZ Navigator they were unwilling to pay off network for and let's face it...the price was right. Verizon can crow about coverage now (and rightfully so), but to me it is just a lucky break. Scott Ford approached Sprint TWICE prop...
(continues)
...
Where I live it would be important to fill in those gaps. Our states number one industry is tourism to remote areas and national parks. We get customer coming in all the time stating that their buddies with verizon have coverage but at&t doesn't. There are also many popular fishing and camping areas that at&t doesn't cover. We lose customers to verizon all the time for not having coverage in rural areas. Financially the cost to fill in those areas may be greater than the revenue those customers bring in, but in the long run they are going to need to fill in those areas anyways so why not bite the bullet now and make the investment.
...
