Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 259 posts

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#61

Post by rs999gti »

dragontamer wrote: post #42
candiddevmike wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with MVNOs, at least that I'm noticing as a Google Fi subscriber, is I believe MVNOs are deprioritized. In a congested area, folks who have direct service with Verizon or T-Mobile seem to have better reception and bandwidth than I do.

Are you using a Google Pixel 6/7/8 ? Its widely accepted that Google Pixel's radio is weaker than the competition. Google stopped using Qualcomm chipsets on Google Pixel 6. (Or the last time Google used a Qualcomm radio in its phones was in Pixel 5 generation). I'm sure Google is working on making its radio better, but it still a shame that of all the things they decided to cut to make it cheaper / hit the $600 price…

I have a Pixel 7 Pro, the mobile connectivity is hot trash.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#62

Post by KingFelix »

toast0 wrote: post #11

Post merger I went from a $25/month t-mobile plan to a $15/month t-mobile plan. Not entirely apples to apples, but close. My spouse went from $30/month to $25/month on Verizon for more data. And there's lots of options at https://prepaidcompare.net/

Stetson Dogge has created an awesome tool here - It's a crazy breakdown similar to the site you linked but with a bit more

https://airtable.com/appQ7TstG5Wn17FjY/shrraH105YVJQF2Yr/tbl...

and he made a website comparison as well

https://www.bestphoneplans.net/

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#63

Post by nickpp »

ndiddy wrote: post #47
soylentcola wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't done that in a year and a half, but when I spent a few weeks out of the country it was a simple matter of buying a $30 prepaid SIM from a vending machine at the airport and having more data than I had time to use. Honestly, no contracts or carrier locks has always made it easier to deal with travel compared to friends who occasionally have issues just swapping SIMs.

Unfortunately, the increasing prevalence of eSIMs in new phones makes temporarily switching to a foreign carrier far more inconvenient than "just buy a SIM at a vending machine".

iPhones (and probably Androids too) support up to 10 eSIMs with 2 active at the same time, if I'm not mistaken. And you can buy data eSIMs before even leaving the country in an app like Airalo.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#64

Post by treis »

Am I missing something or is there no actual evidence in the article that proves the title?

All I can see is a comparison between countries. Which is pretty weak evidence in general and definitely doesn't show anything about what happened in the US after the merger.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#65

Post by mattgreenrocks »

candiddevmike wrote: post #36
toast0 wrote: post #11

Post merger I went from a $25/month t-mobile plan to a $15/month t-mobile plan. Not entirely apples to apples, but close. My spouse went from $30/month to $25/month on Verizon for more data. And there's lots of options at https://prepaidcompare.net/

The problem with MVNOs, at least that I'm noticing as a Google Fi subscriber, is I believe MVNOs are deprioritized. In a congested area, folks who have direct service with Verizon or T-Mobile seem to have better reception and bandwidth than I do.

Not all MVNOs are deprioritized. Many are, but the Reddit thread mentioned in a sibling comment outlines it well.

Been with Verizon Wireless for 20 years. Got sick of how expensive their entry level 5G plan was with deprioritized data. Switched to US Mobile a few months ago. Half the price month-to-month, good prioritized data pool (35GB), and 5G UW access.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#66

Post by wyldfire »

dragontamer wrote: post #42
candiddevmike wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with MVNOs, at least that I'm noticing as a Google Fi subscriber, is I believe MVNOs are deprioritized. In a congested area, folks who have direct service with Verizon or T-Mobile seem to have better reception and bandwidth than I do.

Are you using a Google Pixel 6/7/8 ? Its widely accepted that Google Pixel's radio is weaker than the competition. Google stopped using Qualcomm chipsets on Google Pixel 6. (Or the last time Google used a Qualcomm radio in its phones was in Pixel 5 generation). I'm sure Google is working on making its radio better, but it still a shame that of all the things they decided to cut to make it cheaper / hit the $600 price…

> Qualcomm is basically raising prices behind the scenes

> it still a shame that of all the things they decided to cut to make it cheaper / hit the $600 pricepoint (instead of the $800+ flagship tier) is... the radio.

If it's truly a shame that they went to a lower-performing competitor then maybe Qualcomm thinks that their modem is worth more than they were charging because they provide a superior product.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#67

Post by mavelikara »

exabrial wrote: post #53
bklyn11201 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think would happen to the venture-capital-funded tech ecosystem and the resulting tech salaries if this were to happen?

The hope would be a vast increase in employers available rather than consolidation down to FAANG, increasing demand and driving salaries up.

> increasing demand and driving salaries up.

Despite the demand, the revenue per employee for the company might be low, and those companies might not be able to pay high salaries to employees.

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#68

Post by mattgreenrocks »

Alupis wrote: post #55
sgerenser wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched away from Visible to US Mobile due to deprioritization. I believe they now offer a non-deprioritized plan for $40/mo though, but U.S. mobile is less expensive for a non-deprio plan.

On Visible, your first 50GB of mobile data are not deprioritized. Some people use a lot of mobile data - but I'm on my phone all day/night for business and pleasure, watch a lot of video content etc, but usually am within Wifi range of my home or office. I struggle to use more than 6GB of mobile data per month... Before switching to Visible, I worried a lot about prioritization etc. After switching from Verizon (prop…

Looks like that's only on the nicer plan?

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#69

Post by lxgr »

TheAmazingRace wrote: post #5

I will say, I'm not terribly fond of mergers on principle. However, based on my insight as a former customer and shareholder of the company, Sprint's goose was most definitely cooked to a crisp. If this merger had not happened, I could have seen Sprint file for bankruptcy, with Verizon and AT&T picking the carcass clean. I think folks forget how dire Sprint's straits were at the time, and this specific merger truly w…

> If this merger had not happened, I could have seen Sprint file for bankruptcy, with Verizon and AT&T picking the carcass clean.

This situation seems extremely similar to the failed Spirit/Jetblue acquisition [1].

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-04/jetblue-a...

Re: Sprint, T-Mobile Merger Killed Wireless Price Competition in U.S.

#70

Post by dehrmann »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #2

Ah, yes, that's what did it, not the reunification of Ma Bell.

We're in a better spot then with the AT&T monopoly because there are three viable carriers almost everywhere. The Baby Bells were local monopolies, and you had to get long distance service from the national monopoly. I never understood how people see that as a win.
Post reply on HN