Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Sprint-Nextel merger?

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:38:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

I don't know if this is good or bad...

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/telecom/2004-1...

More about : sprint nextel merger

Anonymous
December 10, 2004 12:38:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Neon Knight wrote:
> I don't know if this is good or bad...
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/telecom/2004-1...

It would rock if I could call my father's Nextel phone from my Sprint phone and
have it billed as (unlimited) mobile to mobile!

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 1:09:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

In article <ofaud.2494$pZ5.732@trndny06>, "cr" <cr_resources@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Hopefully Verizon will step up and make a bid.
> From what I have read they have thought about a Sprint merger before

If so, then I'm really screwed: I absolutely refuse to conduct business
with Verizon under any circumstances due to their internet side being a
spamhaus. Boulder Pledge and whatnot.

I switched to Sprint from T-Mobile because I need good coverage,
digital/analog roaming, etc. in the US that's not provided by Verizon.
Sprint had the best offer going, not to mention some decent plans and
phones.

If Sprint and Verizon merge, then it would appear that I would be
without a cellphone. Not Fun(tm).

--
Pete Stephenson
HeyPete.com
Related resources
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 1:22:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Isaiah Beard wrote:

> If two networks merge, the ONLY logical reason for such a merger would
> be because the combined entity wants to see the two networks become one.

Telus runs an iDen network in Canada - the only one up there - and also happens
to run a 1900 MHz CDMA "PCS" network and markets the two services separately.
Visit clearnet.com - "Mike" is their brand name for the iDEN system, and below
it is the link for digital PCS. Or visit these direct links (these two happen
to be for Ontario):

http://www.clearnet.com/on/business_solutions/voice_ser...
http://www.clearnet.com/on/business_solutions/voice_ser...

I do NOT think it's out of the realm of possibility that the Nextel and SPCS
networks *would* continue being separate networks. Sure, maybe there would be
some enhancements like (somehow) getting Sprint's CDMA 1xRTT push-to-talk
system to talk to Nextel's SMR system. But why *not* run separate networks and
have one big entity marketing the relative strengths of each network to its
respective market??

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 3:37:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

In message <cpbf5u$icu$1@ratbert.glorb.com> Steve Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

>I do NOT think it's out of the realm of possibility that the Nextel and SPCS
>networks *would* continue being separate networks. Sure, maybe there would be
>some enhancements like (somehow) getting Sprint's CDMA 1xRTT push-to-talk
>system to talk to Nextel's SMR system. But why *not* run separate networks and
>have one big entity marketing the relative strengths of each network to its
>respective market??

Not only that, but like TELUS, it means they need less physical cell
sites (since they can put both sets of network gear into one site --
Admittedly they have to be spaced for PCS, since IIRC iDEN can transmit
farther). Running a cell site isn't cheap, especially if you put in
backup battery. This also means that they only need half the landline
network, running a DS3 per site gets cheaper when you only have half as
many sites.


--
What's orange, brown, black, and red? Give up?
They're COLOURS, idiot!
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:28:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:5U9ud.2$Z15.1@fe32.usenetserver.com...


>
> Sprint and Nextel? Forget it. Nextel runs on iDEN, which is
> TDMA-based, and not even a cellular phone protocol. Nextel's network is
> and always has been a Specialized Mobile Radio carrier masquerading as a
> cellular network, and has never truly done the phone side of things very
> well. And just HOW fast is Nextel's data network? Yeah, not even close
> to 2.5G, let alone 3G...

Two things to consider. The first- Nextel owns the rights to iDen/CDMA
bridge technology developed by Qualcomm, allowing the two platforms to talk
to each other very easily. Second, the data network being developed by
Nextel is running at speeds better than most on the market, again with
technology that is not reliant on a single protocol.

>
> Sprint on the other hand has a well established, technically superior
> network in terms of capacity and data capability. It's well poised to
> migrate to 1x EVDO and be truly a 3G network in relatively short order.
> Yeah, CDMA doesn't do two-way very well, but it doesn't seem like most
> of Sprint's customers really want that, and I know iDEN customers won't
> like losing their two-way service.

I don't see any of this as an argument against merger.

>
> If two networks merge, the ONLY logical reason for such a merger would
> be because the combined entity wants to see the two networks become one.
> You can't operate two seperate systems indefinitely and expect to see
> a synergy. And to merge THESE two networks will be a total nightmare.
> Nextel's still wrangling with a spectrum swap that isn't complete yet,
> and once it IS complete, any combined Sprint/Nextel entity will have to
> find a way to make the two spectrum bands from the two networks work
> well together. THEN they will have to pick either iDEN or CDMA and
> transition everyone from the "losing" side to the new choice. And
> regardless of what they choose, the costs involved in transitioning
> users will seriously detract from the move to 3G, prolonging network
> upgrades. They will be left in the dust by competing carriers who don't
> have this baggage to worry about; even Cingular will be way ahead of the
> game.

The transition to CDMA would not present a problem at all- allow the iDen
customers to remain using the Qualcomm technology and sign new customers to
CDMA. The iDen network wouldn't have to go away- what's to stop a CDMA
phone with iDen PTT from coming to market? Or if the Nextel data network
continues to show the speeds that have been reported, a CDMA phone with iDen
PTT and data? Seperate platforms for seperate functions would be anything
but a nightmare.

>
> And I'll say this now; if they go with iDEN, I'm DONE with Sprint. I've
> given iDEN a try many times over the past few years, and I couldn't
> stand it.

I've used iDen quite a bit over the last few years, and the technology has
made some very nice advances. I think you're failing to see that the best
of both worlds is possible.

>
> Just like the proposed merger with Worldcom several years back, this
> proposal STINKS if true. I seriously hope it doesn't go through.
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
>
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 10:11:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs, alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

I have been employed by Sprint PCS in the past, and am currently
employed by Nextel. Nextel has excellent benefits, and has a great
working environment. They don't just "talk the talk", they truly care
about their employees. They will even give you $3,500 to assist with
adopting a child.

Sprint, on the other hand, has mediocre benefits at best, and treat
their employees as "just another number".

The news of this merger is a big disappointment to me, and I advise all
Nextel employees to get ready for the "shaft".

I reactivated my resume on all of the major job boards today. Sprint is
not a good place to work.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:37:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

cr wrote:
> Hopefully Verizon will step up and make a bid.
> From what I have read they have thought about a Sprint merger before

Personally, I've had my problems with Verizon. But while I wouldn't be
too happy on principle, I'd still be more comfortable with such a
merger, since it would make more sense than Sprint/Nextel.





--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:45:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Joe Gill wrote:

> I saw the story in WSJ on Thursday, and from what I saw the main points
> were:
> - Nextel is already embracing CDMA and is making the move to it.

Yes, Nextel has been "embracing" CDMA since 1999, when those rumors were
first published too. Seeing as iDEN has a lot more in common with GSM
than CDMA2000, it would be just as entertaining to see them migrate to
that as it would be merging with Sprint.


> - The combined network is seen as a formidable 'threat' to Verizon and
> Cingular

What threat? Sprint is #3. If they merge with Nextel, their ranking
gets bumped up to... well, gee, they stay at #3. What a coup, huh?

Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
customers.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:54:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Steve Sobol wrote:
> Isaiah Beard wrote:
>
>> If two networks merge, the ONLY logical reason for such a merger would
>> be because the combined entity wants to see the two networks become one.
>
>
> Telus runs an iDen network in Canada - the only one up there - and also
> happens to run a 1900 MHz CDMA "PCS" network and markets the two
> services separately.

The Mike network is miniscule compared to that of Nextel's, and
economies of scale are different as a result. While Mike and Nextel
operate compatible networks, that's really where the similarity ends,
and it would be unwise to say that because Telus can do it, so can a
company in the US.

In the US, companies are driven primarily through the creation of
synergies and cost savings, while maintaining growth. A merger of two
separate networks takes care of the growth, but investors get very
finicky here about bloated costs. Yet that's all that continuing to
operate two separate networks would offer.

> Sure, maybe
> there would be some enhancements like (somehow) getting Sprint's CDMA
> 1xRTT push-to-talk system to talk to Nextel's SMR system. But why *not*
> run separate networks and have one big entity marketing the relative
> strengths of each network to its respective market??

Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
words, to do more with less.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:59:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message

>>Sprint on the other hand has a well established, technically superior
>>network in terms of capacity and data capability. It's well poised to
>>migrate to 1x EVDO and be truly a 3G network in relatively short order.
>> Yeah, CDMA doesn't do two-way very well, but it doesn't seem like most
>>of Sprint's customers really want that, and I know iDEN customers won't
>>like losing their two-way service.
>
>
> I don't see any of this as an argument against merger.

Then I guess to you, mass defections due to migration issues and
frustrations are acceptable. Good luck then.

> THEN they will have to pick either iDEN or CDMA and
>>transition everyone from the "losing" side to the new choice. And
>>regardless of what they choose, the costs involved in transitioning
>>users will seriously detract from the move to 3G, prolonging network
>>upgrades. They will be left in the dust by competing carriers who don't
>>have this baggage to worry about; even Cingular will be way ahead of the
>>game.
>
>
> The transition to CDMA would not present a problem at all- allow the iDen
> customers to remain using the Qualcomm technology and sign new customers to
> CDMA.

So what you propose is to continue operating an increasingly
unprofitable network indefinitely? Sorry, not even Nextel was willing
to do that when they went digital and forced their old SMR customers off
the analog networks.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 9:33:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:0huud.1104$757.359@fe32.usenetserver.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
>
> >>Sprint on the other hand has a well established, technically superior
> >>network in terms of capacity and data capability. It's well poised to
> >>migrate to 1x EVDO and be truly a 3G network in relatively short order.
> >> Yeah, CDMA doesn't do two-way very well, but it doesn't seem like most
> >>of Sprint's customers really want that, and I know iDEN customers won't
> >>like losing their two-way service.
> >
> >
> > I don't see any of this as an argument against merger.
>
> Then I guess to you, mass defections due to migration issues and
> frustrations are acceptable. Good luck then.

Migration happens whether there is a merger or not- spectrum swap. If
you've been reading at all, there is going to be no push for an immediate
single platform. Don't try to create issues where they don't exist.
Everybody is under the assumption that the new company will be operated with
no regard to what made Nextel profitable, and like it or not, they do
represent the business model that all of the rest hope to have.

>
> > THEN they will have to pick either iDEN or CDMA and
> >>transition everyone from the "losing" side to the new choice. And
> >>regardless of what they choose, the costs involved in transitioning
> >>users will seriously detract from the move to 3G, prolonging network
> >>upgrades. They will be left in the dust by competing carriers who don't
> >>have this baggage to worry about; even Cingular will be way ahead of the
> >>game.
> >
> >
> > The transition to CDMA would not present a problem at all- allow the
iDen
> > customers to remain using the Qualcomm technology and sign new customers
to
> > CDMA.
>
> So what you propose is to continue operating an increasingly
> unprofitable network indefinitely? Sorry, not even Nextel was willing
> to do that when they went digital and forced their old SMR customers off
> the analog networks.

I don't propose anything, and where does the term 'increasingly
unprofitable' come into play? Nextel is the most profitable and Sprint has
just recently cut losses tremendously. I don't see anybody concerned here
having a problem with profits.


>
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
>
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 5:28:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:hYudnfzwJdidaifcRVn-iA@adelphia.com...
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> news:0huud.1104$757.359@fe32.usenetserver.com...
> > Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > > "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> >
> > >>Sprint on the other hand has a well established, technically superior
> > >>network in terms of capacity and data capability. It's well poised to
> > >>migrate to 1x EVDO and be truly a 3G network in relatively short
order.
> > >> Yeah, CDMA doesn't do two-way very well, but it doesn't seem like
most
> > >>of Sprint's customers really want that, and I know iDEN customers
won't
> > >>like losing their two-way service.
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't see any of this as an argument against merger.
> >
> > Then I guess to you, mass defections due to migration issues and
> > frustrations are acceptable. Good luck then.
>
> Migration happens whether there is a merger or not- spectrum swap. If
> you've been reading at all, there is going to be no push for an immediate
> single platform. Don't try to create issues where they don't exist.
> Everybody is under the assumption that the new company will be operated
with
> no regard to what made Nextel profitable, and like it or not, they do
> represent the business model that all of the rest hope to have.
>
> >
> > > THEN they will have to pick either iDEN or CDMA and
> > >>transition everyone from the "losing" side to the new choice. And
> > >>regardless of what they choose, the costs involved in transitioning
> > >>users will seriously detract from the move to 3G, prolonging network
> > >>upgrades. They will be left in the dust by competing carriers who
don't
> > >>have this baggage to worry about; even Cingular will be way ahead of
the
> > >>game.
> > >
> > >
> > > The transition to CDMA would not present a problem at all- allow the
> iDen
> > > customers to remain using the Qualcomm technology and sign new
customers
> to
> > > CDMA.
> >
> > So what you propose is to continue operating an increasingly
> > unprofitable network indefinitely? Sorry, not even Nextel was willing
> > to do that when they went digital and forced their old SMR customers off
> > the analog networks.
>
> I don't propose anything, and where does the term 'increasingly
> unprofitable' come into play? Nextel is the most profitable and Sprint
has
> just recently cut losses tremendously. I don't see anybody concerned here
> having a problem with profits.

What's more, Nextel was going to have to spend a considerable sum to upgrade
their network to some sort of 3G EV-DO / EV-DV platform, so better to do it
with SPCS, so that they merge both networks into CDMA 2000.

Yes, the customers @ Nextel will have to replace their handsets when this is
done within a year or two, but what's new about that? We ALL replace our
handsets within two to three years anyway, as handsets tend to wear out and
become obsolete with current and future technology.

Bob
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:20:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

It will never work as the two companies have two different priorities.
Sprint goes after the very young adult that pays next to nothing per month
and is looking for free, free, free and uses a phone more as a toy. NexTel
goes after the business market where people expect to pay a little more and
usually receive it. Just look at their advertising and its all there. It is
also why Sprint consistently loses money and Nextel consistently makes
money. If you ask me it should Nextel buying Sprint and doing away with that
system all together. Just my opinion.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:20:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

> > It will never work as the two companies have two different priorities.
> > Sprint goes after the very young adult that pays next to nothing per
month
>
> According to the WSJ, they do a lot of business with large corporations
too.
>
> > and is looking for free, free, free and uses a phone more as a toy.
NexTel
> > goes after the business market where people expect to pay a little more
and
> > usually receive it. Just look at their advertising and its all there. It
is
> > also why Sprint consistently loses money and Nextel consistently makes
> > money. If you ask me it should Nextel buying Sprint and doing away with
that
> > system all together. Just my opinion.

Nextel is going after young adult as well just look at www.boostmobile.com
turn speakers up and use broadband for best effect. If you are less than 30
enjoy. By the way young adults will pay any price to get the right thing.
What did you pay for your last pair of sports shoes? Boost rates at .25 peak
..15 N/W are not that cheap. The Walkie-Talkie at 1.50 per day is not bad but
you could do better with a family plan and unlimited mobile to mobile. The
key is what you friends have if Nextel and Sprint can reach critical mass
then they can charge what they want. I don't think the best product or the
cheapest will win. The Sprint/Nextel and Cingular/AT&TW is all about market
share.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:20:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Rod Golding wrote:
> Taken from www.internetnews.com
>
> "There are some similar advantages in that Sprint PCS has tended to be more
> of a consumer offer, whereas Nextel has been a very powerful business offer
> because of the push-to-talk capabilities and a very extensive suite of
> software applications and services," Rehbehn said.
>

Right. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

You must be a Wall Street Journal subscriber to view their content online, so
you'd have to check Google Groups - the full text of the article was posted
here in the last 24-36 hours.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:44:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Pick either iden or CDMA? nextel has long known that iden is a dead
end. Whether Sprint PCS' current and future push to talk services will
meet the needs of those business customers that like it, is a good
question. nextel was facing a big transition phase already, and might
have gone under if facing it alone. Will Sprint PCS shift some
resources to cover nextel's transition? Definitely. Will that
seriously weaken Sprint PCS? I doubt it. Acquiring and developing
services that attract more (business) customers is a good move. PCS
frequencys and the new nextel frequencys are not as far apart/different
as cingular's PCS and cellular frequencys. Who knows? We may even see
Sprint PCS as the number 2 carrier in a few years. I am not sure who
would be number 1 at that time. hihi
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:50:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

A Sprint PCS/verizon merger is very unlikely, both from a FCC stand
point and a monopoly stand point.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 6:50:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Jerome Zelinske burbled to the world:

> A Sprint PCS/verizon merger is very unlikely, both from a FCC stand
> point and a monopoly stand point.

Since the new company would still be considerably stronger than
Cingular/ATT, I doubt that there are any regulatory or monopoly issues
at all.

Chris

--

I want to die in my sleep, like my Uncle Jack
not screaming in panic like his
---Jack Handy
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 11:02:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Pete Stephenson" <pete@heypete.com> wrote in message news:p ete-1DF6DE.22094809122004@news.isp.giganews.com...
> If Sprint and Verizon merge, then it would appear that I would be
> without a cellphone. Not Fun(tm).

Federal regulators would not allow that to happen, since it would
greatly diminish competition in the industry.

--
John Richards
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 1:14:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Steve, I am not saying that neither one doesn't go after one thing or the
other. I am just saying that TYPICALLY that is the way they go to market or
should I say in the WI market. I had Sprint at one time and it was when
roaming was very expensive. I understand they have changed that now, however
I have heard that you are not allowed to spend more that 50% of your airtime
on roam and because Sprint's coverage doesn't quite cut it in northern WI
they just are not a factor here. I guess the part I do not like about them
is that rather than having all the phones with all the toys, why don't they
invest in some towers to cover some of the areas they do not. I switch from
Sprint to USCellular and now am going to Verizon for nationwide. US Cellular
is great for coverage but their minute plans are not very competitive vs
Verizon.


"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:cpfn8o$k71$1@ratbert.glorb.com...
> Rod Golding wrote:
>> Taken from www.internetnews.com
>>
>> "There are some similar advantages in that Sprint PCS has tended to be
>> more of a consumer offer, whereas Nextel has been a very powerful
>> business offer because of the push-to-talk capabilities and a very
>> extensive suite of software applications and services," Rehbehn said.
>>
>
> Right. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
>
> You must be a Wall Street Journal subscriber to view their content online,
> so you'd have to check Google Groups - the full text of the article was
> posted here in the last 24-36 hours.
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
> Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
> sjsobol@JustThe.net
> PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
> Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 6:24:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:45:22 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
>fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
>that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
>companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
>companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
>customers.

Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
move.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 6:26:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:54:58 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Steve Sobol wrote:

> > Sure, maybe
>> there would be some enhancements like (somehow) getting Sprint's CDMA
>> 1xRTT push-to-talk system to talk to Nextel's SMR system. But why *not*
>> run separate networks and have one big entity marketing the relative
>> strengths of each network to its respective market??

>Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
>the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
>words, to do more with less.

So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
product to fig flavored hard candy? The strengths are combined, not
necessarily the products.
December 12, 2004 6:42:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Thank you for a voice of sanity. I don't know why people think that Sprint
and Nextel will pickout their own faults then say let's implement this with
this new company


"Al Klein" <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote in message
news:gfenr09odb4f7umfjqpkqn7gvmld2oho48@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:54:58 -0500, Isaiah Beard
> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:
>
>>
> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
> product to fig flavored hard candy? The strengths are combined, not
> necessarily the products.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 6:42:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"mjohns2" <ghck@kvj.com> wrote in message
news:27Pud.32262$zx1.6615@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Thank you for a voice of sanity. I don't know why people think that Sprint
> and Nextel will pickout their own faults then say let's implement this
with
> this new company
>


Finally- the voice of reason. You have a company with less than ideal
customer service but great marketing combining with one that always rates
high in customer service and has the lowest churn and bad debt numbers in
the industry. Hmmmm- I wonder what parts they'll keep.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 10:02:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:28:11 GMT, "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Yes, the customers @ Nextel will have to replace their handsets when this is
>done within a year or two, but what's new about that? We ALL replace our
>handsets within two to three years anyway, as handsets tend to wear out and
>become obsolete with current and future technology.

NO we ALL do NOT replace our headsets every two years, or every time some "cool"
phone/radio/headset comes out.

I've had exactly THREE (3)! handheld mobile phones in almost 20 YEARS with
Verizon since it was BellAtlantic Mobile in the mid 80's when they first built a
system.

1) Motorola 8000UH from day 1 to about ~ 95 or 96
2) Nokia 280 (or something like that, its in a junk box somewhere) from 95/6 or
so till 10/2000 when I moved to a PCS 1900 VZW area
3) Audiovox 9000 since 10/2000

The ONLY REASON I upgraded from the 8000 to the Nokia was I wanted digital, had
the 8000 CDMA version been offered and more widely distributed I would have went
to it, but BAM didn't offer it.

I have recently had to invest in Nextel iDEN technology via Boost for work
related issues since I don't get paid for my cell phone usage for work. I am not
a big fan of nexhell for alot of reasons, BUT this merger will KILL NEXTEL if
they SCREW WITH THE PTT USERS.

Nextel SYSTEMATICALLY KILLED the local & regional SMR systems in the US that
were providing local 2 way radio services to businesses. Nextel system is
designed to provide this, and thats what alot of businesses AND PUBLIC SAFETY
users want and use Nextel for. The fact that it CAN DOUBLE as a "mobile phone"
too is just an extra benefit. Alot of the iDEN radios have the cell phone
feature locked out as they don't want their people using it.

Killing the iDEN network to a CDMA network that is not as rich in PTT as iDEN
will KILL ALOT OF NEXTEL's customers. In areas where competition to Nextel
exists, mostly in the southern US, (GA, AL, TN, MS) SouthernLinc will BENEFIT
TREMENDOUSLY from this merger. With the possibility that SL may go national and
create a new iDEN network for all the displaced Nextel PTT/Dispatch users.
Probably could get an iDEN network cheap when the Sprintel decides to sell the
network after the merger. No need in keeping something you don't need. Why it
probably would be better business wise to dismantle it and sell as scrap to kill
competition, its worth more in place and operating.

QChat, which nextel has EXCLUSIVE rights to in the US, is NOT a replacement for
iDEN PTT/Dispatch, not even close.

Personally I don't see this merger/aquisition being of benefit to Nextel or
Sprint business wise, and most certainly not for Nextel PTT/Dispatch users, but
users are never really a concern any way.

Sprint & Verizon, or Sprint & Alltel, SURE. Actually, Alltel/Sprint would make a
LOT more sense.

Sprint has landline ILEC
Alltel has landline ILEC
Sprint has wireless
Alltel has wireless
Sprint CDMA
Alltel CDMA

That looks like the PERFECT MARRIAGE to me! You can replace Verizon for Alltel,
and it works too, but the FCC & DOJ & Commerce may have something to say about
that one.

Nextel NO landline ILEC
Nextel PRIMARILY PTT/Dispatch
Nextel iDEN TDMA
Sprint has landline ILEC
Sprint PRIMARILY VOICE/DATA CELLULAR
Sprint CDMA

Not any real common ground here. Hopefully the IRS kills it with not allowing
them to make a tax free sale of Sprints ILEC business.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 12:08:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

first off nextel is only moving their iden network to a high frequency
because the FCC is forcing them. DO you believe they want to spend
billions of dollars if they did not have to. and southernlinc cannot
but this frequency band because it is going to the public saftey/police
& fire. it will not be for sale. secondly nextel will not make the
move until they are satisfied with it working properly and I believe
they will work it out.


--
1badss
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cellphoneforums.net
View this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t159884.html
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 3:24:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Not sure exactly where you mean, but verizon cuts it even less than
Sprint PCS in northern WI. I don't think there are any places in WI
where you can sign up for verizon service but not for Sprint PCS. There
are places where you can sign up for Sprint PCS service but not verizon.
At my home town, you can not sign up for either, they both roam.
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 6:46:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Sprint has a small coverage area around Wausau and a very small sliver going
up hwy 51 to Rhinelander. Either side of the highway by 3 miles and it is
gone, very typical for Sprint and (Nextel) in rural areas. So they would be
roaming also and who they roam on I do not know. Verizon has no system
outside of the Fox Valley and roams on either USCC, Cellcom or Alltel ( in
that order per their PRL). Verizon roams on Cellcom digital as extended
network and it works fine with the exception of voice mail tags, internet
browsing, sms, picture sending. However Sprint's features wouldn't work
while roaming also per their advertisement. I live in Appleton and Verizon
has no conditions as to how much roaming you use as I checked before jumping
on board. I have been on all three over the last 2-3 years and USCC has the
best coverage but the highest costs. Sprints network works fantastic where
they have coverage and their cost is good, however they raped you on roaming
when I was on, and now I think that has changed. Verizon has good roaming
agreements and the cost per minute is good and they do not regulate how much
you roam.


"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LLWud.8649$yr1.3575@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Not sure exactly where you mean, but verizon cuts it even less than Sprint
> PCS in northern WI. I don't think there are any places in WI where you
> can sign up for verizon service but not for Sprint PCS. There are places
> where you can sign up for Sprint PCS service but not verizon. At my home
> town, you can not sign up for either, they both roam.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 12:56:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:


>>Then I guess to you, mass defections due to migration issues and
>>frustrations are acceptable. Good luck then.
>
>
> Migration happens whether there is a merger or not- spectrum swap. If
> you've been reading at all, there is going to be no push for an immediate
> single platform. Don't try to create issues where they don't exist.

Then I don't know what you've been reading, to be honest with you.
Nextel has long known that it needs to find something new to migrate to.
Sprint is going to be a convenient next thing. Eventually, and
probably sooner than later, a transition will have to happen.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 1:01:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
>>fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
>>that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
>>companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
>>companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
>>customers.
>
>
> Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
> move.

And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
entities and carry on? That's not how mergers work in the US. There
has to be a synergy, a cutting of costs, a maximizing of efficiency.
You do that in wireless by taking two networks and making them one.

That in mind, I agree with you: this whole thing is a stupid, stupid move.

It seems more definite though. I guess I'll stay a customer and watch
in amusement, until my service degrades. Then, time to move on.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 1:05:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
>>the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
>>words, to do more with less.
>
>
> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
> product to fig flavored hard candy?

No, that's a merger involving two different markets. Don't compare
apples with oranges.

If, however, Peter Pan Peanut Butter and JIF merged, guess what? You
MIGHT have two brands, but it's likely the two peanut butters are going
to made from the same plant, using the same machinery.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 1:08:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> You have a company with less than ideal
> customer service but great marketing combining with one that always rates
> high in customer service and has the lowest churn and bad debt numbers in
> the industry. Hmmmm- I wonder what parts they'll keep.


Generally, the ones that provide the quickest short term profits and
maximize cost savings. So let's see... which CS department earns less
and has fewer cs goals to meet, hmm?

--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 1:08:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:%I7vd.25845$GY5.15630@fe35.usenetserver.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > You have a company with less than ideal
> > customer service but great marketing combining with one that always
rates
> > high in customer service and has the lowest churn and bad debt numbers
in
> > the industry. Hmmmm- I wonder what parts they'll keep.
>
>
> Generally, the ones that provide the quickest short term profits and
> maximize cost savings. So let's see... which CS department earns less
> and has fewer cs goals to meet, hmm?
>

Wrong question- you're not even close. Try these (you'll find that they are
much more appropriate):

-Which business model has produced higher profit margins?
-Which business model has resulted in the highest ARPU in the industry?
-Which business model has resulted in the lowest churn in the industry?
-Which business model has resulted in much higher customer satisfaction
scores?
-Nextel has shown a profit how many consecutive quarters?

I believe the answer to any one of these would satisfy the great corporate
conspiracy you have uncovered. But the real question to you is, "What is
the benefit to Sprint in ignoring any of these results?" The single fact
that opposing technologies are in play here demonstrates that Sprint is in
no position to do a quick customer grab- they can't simply force customers
to switch to the Sprint network. And if you believe their intent is to
change the Nextel business model, then explain the benefit of buying an
incompatible network with the sole objective of having customers mass defect
to another carrier.

Cynicism is a great thing, but try to bring the facts into play every once
in a while.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 3:23:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 03:42:54 GMT, "mjohns2" <ghck@kvj.com> said in
alt.cellular.nextel:

>"Al Klein" <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote in message
>news:gfenr09odb4f7umfjqpkqn7gvmld2oho48@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:54:58 -0500, Isaiah Beard
>> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>> product to fig flavored hard candy? The strengths are combined, not
>> necessarily the products.

>Thank you for a voice of sanity. I don't know why people think that Sprint
>and Nextel will pickout their own faults then say let's implement this with
>this new company

I'm not saying that they won't do it - companies have been known to
self-destruct before. But there's nothing saying that they have to
combine the worst of both companies and disappear in a puff of
worldcom.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 3:23:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

> I'm not saying that they won't do it - companies have been known to
> self-destruct before. But there's nothing saying that they have to
> combine the worst of both companies and disappear in a puff of
> worldcom.

*grin*

That was funny. Thank you. "Puff of Worldcom." :) 

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 9:50:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Sprint PCS also covers, highway 10 I think, through Waupaca and west to
51/39. My personal wish is for them to cover 21 and then maybe 49.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 2:56:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

I do agree that the majority of people replace their handsets about
every 18 months across all carriers. Nextel is typically on the lower
end of the spectrum on this because the majority of their clientel are
businesses that are not going to replace hundreds of handsets every
year or so just because something new came out. they are going to keep
them until the don't work anymore. That being said, if nextel forces
people to turn in their old handsets for new ones I am sure they will
offer some sort of deal to the large businesses so that it is not such
a burdon. as it stands now they offer a buyback on almost every phone
they have ever sold towards the purchase of a new one.


--
1badss
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cellphoneforums.net
View this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t159884.html
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 4:09:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

They have expanded up hwy 47 from 41 to 29 in the last couple of months
also. They are working at it which I will give them credit for.


"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6Zavd.9779$0r.2108@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Sprint PCS also covers, highway 10 I think, through Waupaca and west to
> 51/39. My personal wish is for them to cover 21 and then maybe 49.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 7:55:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"JDaT" <jda1951@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:B1%ud.69223$fY.46412@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

> No Bob, he is not the exception, I have friends and associates who are
> in the construction industry.
> Most still have the i700 or older Nextel units. All they want is a
> phone that works and working Direct
> connect. Most could care less about some of the newer features. I over
> heard one of my friend telling
> his wife to get off the phone he was working!
>
> This is not the exception. But it is industry Dependant! When a older
> Nextel digital phone breaks,
> most all of my friends are happy just to get it fixed. You see the cell
> phone is not a major part
> of there lifes. Course its a bad day when there phones break and they
> can not order Beer and
> Pizza!

We all have friends & associates we know who use Nextel phones, and I can
quote as many of these folks around here, who have replaced their Nextel
handsets between 1 to 3 years ago. The same goes for Cingular, ATTW, Alltel,
& Verizon users.

Bob
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 5:57:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:01:45 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>Sprint has a very important strongpoint going for it: its network is
>>>fully homogenous and standardized, unlike the patchy kludged networks
>>>that other carriers operate, through years of cobbling together merged
>>>companies. Likewise, Nextel's network is equally homogenized. Both
>>>companies stand to erase that strongpoint to the detriment of all their
>>>customers.

>> Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>> move.

>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>entities and carry on?

Buy a company that makes a profit. Some of the most successful
mergers are those in which corporate keeps its hands off the purchase.

>That's not how mergers work in the US. There
>has to be a synergy, a cutting of costs, a maximizing of efficiency.
>You do that in wireless by taking two networks and making them one.

See Telus/Mike. (The border doesn't make much difference.)
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 5:58:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:05:32 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>Because it runs completely counter to the idea behind a merger, in which
>>>the strengths of two companies are combined to cut costs.... in other
>>>words, to do more with less.

>> So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>> product to fig flavored hard candy?

>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

So is Sprint/Nextel.
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:04:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:

> -Which business model has produced higher profit margins?
> -Which business model has resulted in the highest ARPU in the industry?
> -Which business model has resulted in the lowest churn in the industry?
> -Which business model has resulted in much higher customer satisfaction
> scores?
> -Nextel has shown a profit how many consecutive quarters?

Then why does Nextel feel it needs to merge with a company that, by your
standards, doesn't perform as well? Nextel could very easily have said
it was not for sale. Instead, all reports have pointed to Nextel having
started the talks and pursuing them off and on for quite some time.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:05:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>>Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>>>move.
>
>
>>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>>entities and carry on?
>
> Buy a company that makes a profit.

.... and then toss it down the tubes by creating duplications and
inefficiencies? Real smart.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:07:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

Al Klein wrote:

>>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?
>
>
>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

> So is Sprint/Nextel.

Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy? :) 



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:58:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:1HHvd.15508$RE2.5905@fe62.usenetserver.com...

> Then why does Nextel feel it needs to merge with a company that, by your
> standards, doesn't perform as well? Nextel could very easily have said
> it was not for sale. Instead, all reports have pointed to Nextel having
> started the talks and pursuing them off and on for quite some time.
>
>
> --

For starters, because of three very large expenses on the horizon, two of
which Sprint can provide relief for at no cost to Nextel:

Spectrum Swap
Development and deployment of a high speed data network
Eventual migration from iDen to CDMA

Why spend billions of dollars doing it yourself when somebody will do it for
you and pay you billions of dollars to use it? The networks are in place
(or being put in place) and the spectrum swap is a lot easier to swallow
when paid for with the revenue of 40 million subscribers.

It all points back to the questions that you ignored- like them or not,
Nextel has developed a business model that is the envy of EVERY wireless
carrier in the country. There is absolutely no indication that Sprint is
interested in changing that, and is probably hoping to bring the important
parts of that model to their side of the shop. If Sprint can drive anything
close to the margins that Nextel reports every quarter, this merger could
drive the two companies to the top of the pile.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 5:57:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:05:44 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

>>>>Only if they try to merge the two networks, which would be a stupid
>>>>move.

>>>And why else would they merge? Meld the books, keep operating as two
>>>entities and carry on?

>> Buy a company that makes a profit.

>... and then toss it down the tubes by creating duplications and
>inefficiencies? Real smart.

If Nextel makes a profit using its own tech staff, CS, etc., it'll
still make a profit using that same staff. It'll make more profit
using less staff. But it won't necessarily make more profit by
combining the two networks into one. People who want grapefruit and
people who want apples won't necessarily settle for apple/citrus
salad.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 5:58:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:07:36 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:

>Al Klein wrote:

> >>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change the
>>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?

>>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.

>> So is Sprint/Nextel.

>Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy? :) 

Nextel is basically a business walkie-talkie company - the cheap man's
radio system. Sprint Wireless is solely a cell phone company. Almost
totally different markets.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 6:11:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

"Al Klein" <rukbat@verizon.org> wrote in message
news:j0avr01l8i2v536hgb015fi5ieuha87d2b@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:07:36 -0500, Isaiah Beard
> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> said in alt.cellular.nextel:
>
> >Al Klein wrote:
>
> > >>>So if, just as an example, Nabisco buys LifeSavers, they'll change
the
> >>>>product to fig flavored hard candy?
>
> >>>No, that's a merger involving two different markets.
>
> >> So is Sprint/Nextel.
>
> >Oh really. Since when was Nextel making hard candy? :) 
>
> Nextel is basically a business walkie-talkie company - the cheap man's
> radio system. Sprint Wireless is solely a cell phone company. Almost
> totally different markets.

Yes, and with the merger, should make a stronger cellular company, with a
number of cost savings to update Nextel's system to CDMA.

Bob
Anonymous
December 16, 2004 1:57:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

The way I original read the news was this was just between
upper management at both companys.

But, don't the stockholders of both companys have a say as to
the out come of this proposed merger?

Are the stockholders of Nextel saying yes to the deal?
What about the Sprint stockholder?
What gives?

??
!