Sprint's got a nice head start in the 4G race over Verizon and AT&T -- a message it's
heavily broadcasting these days -- but with the onslaught of
LTE networks and equipment around the world now just months away, momentum is unquestionably going to shift, giving the carrier every reason to act quickly to build out now and score as many subscribers as it possibly can. That seems to be the gist of a rumor coming out of
AndroidGuys today that says Sprint is working on a deal with Walmart to install WiMAX cells on all (yes, all) of its locations, a move that would give it a significant boost in national coverage while presumably lowering infrastructure costs significantly. As many Walmarts as there are, it seems like this would still leave huge coverage gaps (particularly in rural areas) between locations, but hey -- maybe these guys are going for the parking lot RV crowd, which would actually make a ton of sense. Best part? You'd probably be able to buy the modem right in the store.
posted January 12th 2010 4:09PM
lowest plans, great 3g coverage and speed...and now this! Seriously glad I stuck it through with Sprint.
@ljm Sprint really has nothing to lose, they are hemorrhaging customers (and employees) left and right, they've taken so long to deploy there decidedly inferior 4g option that they've almost squandered away what early adapter advantage they undoubtedly had, put half of their eggs in the pre-paid basket (jury still out) & they had a lack-luster showing at CES. They need a desperation move like this to pay off or they will be asking Obama for some bailout money before the world ends. (2012)
@ljm Um..... are you really serious when you say that. Sprint hasn't done anything, (hold up let me say that again) anything, worth talking about in 8-9 months. The network is a joke, American cars have low prices to, compared to their Japanese counterparts but does it really matter in the end. The same fate is inevitable for Sprint, and Oh and let's back Wimax a non-standard form of 4g, Wimax = HD DVD, it's great for now and some people will get it, but when a better STANDARD comes along it's lights out. How will Sprint recoup the money invested in this, along with the countless customers it losses every quarter.
@Banksta3 Wimax is NOT inferior to LTE.. They are both OFDM and Wimax's 100mb speeds are just as theoretical as LTE's.. And Clear stated that in a worst case scenario it would be fairly easy to switch to LTE..
And for the rest of your hate.. Sprint isn't hemorrhaging employees or customers AT ALL.. Nextel is losing customers because iDEN doesnt offer touch screen, slim, or 3g phones. And Sprint is laying off positions from that ill-fated acquisition.
Stop with the hate and ignorance.. Sprint is doing fine and is way to big of a company to be going anywhere.. Even if Sprint is bought out or BKs it will still be here just under a different name, and the new company will be forced to have relatively the same business strategy anyway..
Get used to it I get better service than you for cheaper, thats not changing anytime soon unless you come to Sprint.. So whatever reason you dont have Sprint just stick with that, there are dozens of valid reasons not to have Sprint, just dont make reasons up..
@1ofdakoolkidz
ummmm, yeah I am serious. So what is this 'anything' that is being done by any of the other carriers? How is the network a joke for you? I admit, living in SoCal the network coverage was not great for me. Living in Denver it's great, I get 3g (evdo) streaming of Pandora as I snowboard at the major resorts....so your blanket statement doesn't work well for my situation. Your analogy to US vs Jap cars is lame, makes no sense and is simply not true (if you are alluding to reliability, but I can't tell because that sweet line you came up with makes no sense).
I'm sure you would argue that when the GSM standard takes over the world CDMA is going to be LIGHTS OUT also....what will sprint do then???
@Celz
Do you actually use Clear's WiMax? I do in Portland, and the service and product suck the big, fat, hairy, wet one. Overhyped, oversold, and poorly maintained. Issues get addressed by "we will have that repaired within 60 days" and "we will offer a credit". Clear can't keep the service running for more than two days. The radio waves can't penetrate even the single pane windows I have. 6M DL throughput one day, .3 MB the next - with 4-5 bars on my home modem and 8-10 on the USB stick.
With no LTE to compare it to, WiMax stands alone right now. I can't get any other service to my house, so I'm stuck. When some version of LTE comes out, I'll switch the next day. Clear's implementation of WiMax in the real world blows chunks. Read up on DSLReports forums - hundreds seem to be in the same camp I'm in.
@Celz I think the term is "Denial" I don't know what article you read that said sprint didn't loose any customer or that Wimax and LTE are the same but sure would like to see it. I will say it again for the obvious people that don't get it, Wimax is not a STANDARD for 4g LTE is. So.....do you get it now, do you!
Hope you like the new $4.99 fee for not having automated payments. BS!
@1ofdakoolkidz Sorry, but how exactly can a non-existent technology be a standard? LTE may become "the standard," or WIMAX might, or maybe we'll continue to have multiple standards as we do with CDMA/GSM. The fact is, right now both are emerging technologies. Well, one is an emerging technology, the other is vaporware, but that's just a technicality, right?
@ljm You seem to know a lot about WiMax. I live about 3-4 mile radius from our local WalMart. Do you think I would be able to get a signal? I hope this works out. I can't get Cable or DSL here, and dumping a satellite for our local WISP was a relief, but still not quite broadband.
@bonesb "I can't get any other service to my house, so I'm stuck."
That should be your first clue. Just because you have bars doesn't mean the signal is clean. Too much interference and even the strongest signal won't give you those ultra-high speeds.
Even cable modems can slow to 300k on a busy day. Could just be too many users bogging down a system that hasn't been built out to handle them yet.
@bonesb i have had Clear for almost a year and the service is fast & reliable . stop the wimax hating
@bonesb
Had it two weeks in north Dallas. Love it. Great reception at home and most places I use it. But the stores have the interactive maps that let you see exactly where the towers are and where the coverage is. I actually did not think I would get good coverage but it is fine. And for the same i was paying Verizon, I have both home and USB modems.
@ljm Sprint's current coverage is less than stellar in my area now. There's also only one Walmart that I know of in my area, so this probably wouldn't have a miraculous change. Too bad, I wish I could get in on some 4G action.
thats some great photoshop work there. nice job. its also kind of frightening to think of walmart beaming anything to anyone.
@NaJaKwa
huh? You can see the "white space" that hasn't been erased at outer ring of the logo on the left hand side.
Hmm... that would be interesting.
Smart move...but Walmart is still the devil.
So thanks but no thanks. I'll wait for LTE...
@TheRogueFFAngel Why?? Morrow( Clearwire's CEO) said: Many of Clearwire's routers are compatible with WiMax and LTE, and a shift would essentially only require a software update.
@TheRogueFFAngel I don't give a rat's ass if Wal-mart is Tiger Woods at my fiancé's bachlorette party, I want LTE!
oops, tripped on the keyboard, WiMax.
Even some of the most rural areas have Walmarts. And Wimax has some hellified coverage capability, something like a 30-mile radius.
@plyx
Probably more. I've never even seen a WalMart in the SF bay area, though I know they exist.
I've never bought anything from them. Still protesting their crap-tacular music censoring.
@plyx I think the 30 mile radius is optimal distance. I'm guessing that in real world practice without line of site they need towers much closer together than 30 miles.
Hey Sprint, here's an idea, instead of using Walmart for locating your towers, why not use some of the cell towers you already have in place? Duh!
I could be way off base if WiMax operates vastly different from CDMA. Do they use a highly elevated tower to cover a huge area similar to terrestrial TV broadcasts?
@MBN
No it's a standard cell type technology.
And Sprint is deploying on as many of their current CDMA/iDEN towers as possible. This is the key advantage of the Clearwire deal as it allows Clearwire to use Sprint's rad centers and entitlements that Sprint has on towers without having to negotiate or renegotiate with the landlord. This lowers cost and speeds deployment.
@MBN
First, the "real world" deployment of their network is actually much closer to only (2) miles from the site location. Secondly, here's a question ... what makes you think they aren't already using Sprint locations, duh? Well, they are (including other carriers as well as multiple tower leasing companies and other infrastructure entities such as electrical transmission entities).
@UnixSystemsEngineer
We don't censor the music. We just buy the censored versions from the vendor. You want to complain? Complain to Anderson or the recording company for censoring the music in the first place.
On topic.
I think it's a little weird. We stopped selling anything Sprint related at my location over a year ago because no one wanted to buy it. We're about to that point with Verizon. I think we've sold about 10 Verizon phones in the last six months.
@plyx I agree. I'd actually say one of Walmart's greatest strengths is its toehold rural areas (at least the most populated areas around small towns.) Doesn't sound like a bad move by Sprint really.
@Maverick128 Wrong. Walmart has a policy to not sell music with explicit content, which forces the artists to make censored copies of their albums if they want to be sold in the biggest retailer in the country.
@plyx
Now if they installed one at every Starbuck's, we'd really be talking.
sprint is beating the giants because they are lazy and greedy... although verizon is honestly not that far behind. ATT on the other hand is dead last
@a dark day
It's mind-boggling how far AT&T has fallen in the last two years. I used to recommend them to literally anyone looking for cell service, because their rollover minutes really did help protect you from going over, they had the best rates, and always had the best smartphones (culminating in the iPhone).
Fast-forward, and voice minutes are SO much less important now. AT&T's rates are marginal at best, and who cares about rollover, because you never use your minutes anyway. Their phone selection is pathetic, aside from the iPhone. They might as well not even have a data network for how poorly it works, and their rates for data are absolutely insane.
My contract with AT&T is up in six months. If they don't do a complete 180, I'll be looking to another carrier (not Verizon, probably between Sprint and T-Mobile). Also, I'm done with contracts. I'll be buying an unlocked phone and paying month to month. Contracts are letting these companies lock people in and become lazy. FIGHT FOR MY LOVE, DAMN YOU!
@Hexydes
I said the SAME THING earlier. They honestly suck fiercely now. They've devoted all their time and efforts to promoting the iPhone that they've let their phone arsenal which used to be unarguably the best among the carriers. And what's worst is their customer service. It used to be so good. Now, it's easier for me to buy a new phone than it is for them to help me with issues--I've done it. Needless to say, when my contract expires, I'm out.
But the issue remains to where. As far as American telecoms go, it's a matter of picking one's poison. VZW looks least lethal.
@Hexydes If you go T-Mo, buy unlocked and go without a contract. If you go Sprint, you might as well sign a contract and get a discount on the hardware, because there's nothing to be gained otherwise. To get on the best rate plans (EPRP plans), you HAVE to sign a contract, and there is no discount for bringing your own hardware, so go ahead and get the best phone they offer you (I'd recommend either a Palm Pre or a Samsung Moment, unless they release something fresh and amazing between now and then, like hopefully a new Palm device)
thats actually a really good idea.
Please let this be true!
And renamed it WalMAX?
@GaryZ
Ha I love that WalMax.
@GaryZ i'm not even gonna lie that would make me fall in love with sprint all over again. launch it with a rumored wimax htc android device and i think we'll have a winner here :-D
I was told by a friend that travels a lot (a sales rep) that Walmart welcomes RV and overnight parking. Something about the founder liking RV's or something. I thought he said that there was already wifi. But not sure.
@burbskate The RV parking thing is true. It's a good business decision and a good use of acres of usually unused parking lot. Those RV people need to buy their beer and gummy bears somewhere. If you let them park there where else are they going to go?
@burbskate - It's true. My parents often stop at Walmart parking lots on long cross-country trips in their RV. And I wouldn't mock the RV crowd either, at least financially. A lot of those are driven by people with incomes FAR above average with rigs costing considerably more than a lot of nice homes.
Rural areas!??! Really? Most rural areas I've been to have a Walmart somewhere nearby. I can tell you that here in Fairfax County, VA the nearest walmart is on the western outskirts of the county. Most of the area within 25-30 miles of DC would not be covered (At least the VA side, can't speak for MD)
@akcpe I think you assume that the only way they'd have a WiMax cell is attached to a Walmart, thus your area wouldn't be covered.
That doesn't make sense to me. Seems like they'd partner with Walmart to cover wide swaths of America quickly, and then use traditional building techniques to cover dense areas without Walmarts. So they'd just build a regular WiMax cell somewhere in Fairfax county to cover the 30 mile radius with no Walmart.
@akcpe
On the Maryland side you got Clinton & Capitol Plaza in PG County and Germantown/Gaithersburg for Montgomery County
@TheFlamingoKing yeah I'd figured that. i just thought it was funny that TFA seems to think that the majority of walmarts are in urban areas. i think quite the opposite to be true
@akcpe Agreed! Even in urban areas, it seems they're on the outskirts of town if only for the land considerations.
I think the synergy between a large corporate box retailer like Walmart and an internet/wireless provider like Sprint is absolutely amazing.
In addition to cash, Walmart can partner with Sprint to provide all their internet services for each location. They can negotiate special deals like exclusive phones to compete against electronics retailers.
Sprint can build out a backbone very quickly because installing the cell on existing property is so much easier than acquiring property to place towers on. Walmart builds their facilities in locations that are calculated to be closest to the bulk of the local population, which means Sprint gets an awesome location to host a tower by default.
I can see this going places for sure. Building owners/management can arrange deals with wireless providers to exchange serving the building's internet/wireless needs for the rights to build towers on the tops of the buildings to cover more people. This allows the provider to steal customers away because of better service quality.
@TheFlamingoKing I couldn't have said it better myself. Why have 2 plots of land and double the infrastructure when the two can support each other so well. Lower costs to the companies results in lower cost plans (at least with how Sprint and Walmart's business models are typically) and/or faster rollouts. Everybody wins.
I hate Walmart.