Wow, this sounds ominous.
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
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...
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! 😳
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! 😁
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?
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.
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)
"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.
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- ... »
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?
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...
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...