Sprint-Nextel merger?

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/2004-12-09-sprint_x.htm
58 answers Last reply
More about sprint nextel merger
  1. 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/2004-12-09-sprint_x.htm

    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.
  2. 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
  3. 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_services_mike.shtml
    http://www.clearnet.com/on/business_solutions/voice_services_pcs.shtml

    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.
  4. 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!
  5. 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.
    >
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
    >
  12. 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
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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
  17. 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.
  18. 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
  19. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.nextel (More info?)

    "Pete Stephenson" <pete@heypete.com> wrote in message news:pete-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
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. 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
  27. 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.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 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.
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. 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.
  37. 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
  38. 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.
  39. 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
  40. 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.)
  41. 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.
  42. 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.
  43. 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.
  44. 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.
  45. 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.
  46. 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.
  47. 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.
  48. 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
  49. 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?

    ??
Ask a new question

Read More

Nextel Internet Service Providers