
Amazon interested in buying Boost from T-Mobile, Sprint: sources - Geeek
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sprint-corp-m-a-t-mobile-amazon-com-e/exclusive-amazon-interested-in-buying-boost-from-t-mobile-sprint-sources-idUSKCN1T02OV
======
scarface74
Sprint has been hemorrhaging money and customers for years. I have no idea why
this merger is being fought. It’s not like Sprint is a real competitor.

But back on topic: Boost is just an MVNO running on Sprint’s CDMA network.
What worse combination of technology can you have than being on Sprint’s
network and CDMA?

~~~
bogomipz
>"What worse combination of technology can you have than being on Sprint’s
network and CDMA?"

Please explain why CDMA is so bad. Your post is devoid of any technical
details for such an assertion. CDMA has a number of advantages over GSM that
informed Verizon decision to go with it in the first place. Advantages of CDMA
include operating very well in noisy environments, soft hand offs, and better
spectrum utilization(frequency hopping)which allowed unlimited subscribers per
cell.

Verizon, who as much as I dislike them as a company has one the best networks
in the US in terms of both call quality and coverage.

~~~
greg5green
And Verizon is shutting down their CDMA network at the end of the year. It's
an old technology that is being sunsetted. The problem with Sprint is that
they are still relying on it for far too much (and they don't have broad
enough spectrum holdings to make dual networks work well).

Additionally, a lot of Sprint's rural coverage relies on Verizon CDMA roaming
-- which will be going away as Verizon sunsets their network.

~~~
bogomipz
>The problem with Sprint is that they are still relying on it for far too much
(and they don't have broad enough spectrum holdings to make dual networks work
well)."

Sprint has a crazy amount of 2.5GHZ spectrum holdings. They are already
deploying that with Massive MIMO to move everything to LTE Advanced.

~~~
joecool1029
> Sprint has a crazy amount of 2.5GHZ spectrum holdings.

Which gets stopped by walls and wet leaves. It's great if you're in line of
sight of a tower and own a device that supports HPUA (high-powered uplink).

If both aren't true your experience will be less than optimal as the phone
will have to fall back to band 25 and band 26 LTE which still isn't being
provisioned on 15mhz or 20mhz. This means the fallback frequencies will
congest easier. In most markets because Sprint either lacks the spectrum to go
wideband or needs to use it for legacy CDMA2k since they only support voLTE on
like 4 high-end phone models.....

~~~
bogomipz
>"Which gets stopped by walls and wet leaves. It's great if you're in line of
sight of a tower and own a device that supports HPUA (high-powered uplink)."

Which is why they are combining it with their 800MHZ spectrum from the old
Nextel iDEN service. 800MHZ can pretty much punch through anything.

~~~
joecool1029
They do not use carrier aggregation between band 25/26 and 41.

There is not enough spectrum to run band 26 on more than 5mhz in most markets.
This means it is slow and congests easily. The rest is used to support CDMA2k
clients. As the parent post said, they don't have enough spectrum to run a
proper dual network.

The stopgap solution at this time is to get a Magicbox[1] from sprint that
will grab band 41 signals from outside and relay it as a new tower on band 25
or 26. Then the phone will just fall back onto 1X for calls.

[1][https://business.sprint.com/magic-box/](https://business.sprint.com/magic-
box/)

~~~
bogomipz
I didn't say they used carrier aggregation. All of their macro cells are going
to be converted to tri-band - 800MHz, 1.9GHz and 2.5GHz.

------
niftich
Boost is an MVNO that runs off of Sprint's networks today, but the sale of
Boost is a commitment [1][2] T-Mobile made as part of their efforts to get the
FCC to approve their merger with Sprint, with some very generous terms.

Remember that with LTE, there's no longer a divide between the GSM camp and
the CDMA camp; it's the same LTE, although each carrier operates on various
bands.

With the merger, and as phone firmwares are updated and incompatible handsets
are cycled out, the combined LTE network is compelling. With Boost's current
target market of urban youth, the fact most current Boost phones only support
the Sprint's CDMA2000 3G and not T-Mobile's GSM-flavored 3G is less of an
unfortunate fit than with a more general MVNO.

[1] [https://newtmobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/FCC-
Filing...](https://newtmobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/FCC-Filing-
May-20.pdf) [2] [https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://newtmobile.com/wp-
cont...](https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://newtmobile.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/05/FCC-Filing-May-20.pdf)

~~~
mehrdadn
> Remember that with LTE, there's no longer a divide between the GSM camp and
> the CDMA camp; it's the same LTE, although each carrier operates on various
> bands.

Don't they have antennas in different locations though? Like even if your
phone doesn't have compatibility issues with SIMs or bands, calling it "the
same LTE" makes it seem like you could just pay someone else and get reception
in the same areas which I don't think is the case?

~~~
niftich
Your phone using a different-besides-your-home network is called 'roaming' and
it's not uncommon. For this to happen, your phone needs to know which networks
it should try to authenticate against.

A while back, Sprint and T-Mobile announced they'd launch a roaming agreement
for LTE that would last for 4 years, and that would be honored even if their
merger doesn't go through. According to some people [1] this went into effect
in Summer 2018.

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/9548zg/tmobile_data...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/9548zg/tmobile_data_roaming_has_begun/)

~~~
mehrdadn
Yes in theory. But you can't roam the entire time or everywhere another
provider has signal; in fact I've never managed to use it because I've only
tried it in locations where my provider has awful coverage, and my phone's
been unable to register. It's clearly only tailored to allowing you to get
some semblance of service when you go out of the official range on occasion.
It has various limits and T-Mobile terminates your contract if you roam more
than half the time. So it's not like you can live somewhere out of their range
and just change whom you pay your bills to and switch to roaming most of the
time.

~~~
niftich
I don't understand what you're asking in your prior post when you say whether
you could "pay someone else". Your carrier makes the agreements about with
which others your phone could roam (and with who it can't), and your phone
tries among the ones it can, but clearly not among the ones it can't. You
continue to pay your bill to your home network. And yes, there are often
restrictions with how much you can roam.

That being said, TMo and Sprint are making TMo sites advertise an old Sprint
network identifier to Sprint phones, so that Sprint phones don't even think of
it as roaming [1]. This is in effect for data only right now, not VoLTE.

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/96lai0/clearwire_b2...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/96lai0/clearwire_b2_what_suddenly_seeing_full_bars_of/)

~~~
mehrdadn
I'm saying their agreements are not equivalent to being on the other carrier
because they might not help you in the particular time/place/type/amount of
roaming you're interested in. Hence claiming it's all LTE because of the
existence of roaming and non-existence of SIM/band compatibility issues with
recent phones still paints the wrong picture that carrier doesn't affect where
you get reception, whereas it very much does.

------
Someone1234
I wonder if Amazon or the T-Mobile/Sprint side leaked this? Perhaps
T-Mobile/Sprint weren't eager enough to sell, so Amazon wants the regulator to
know an offer was made.

------
minderasure
This would be a win-win. Tmobile and Sprint get their merger and a bucketload
of cash to build out their 5G infrastructure. Amazon gets to piggyback off of
their network and potentially claim some wireless spectrum.

------
paxys
I'm sure Amazon has evaluated every company that's available for sale at some
point, but I'm willing to bet that's as far as their interest in Boost goes.
This deal makes very little sense for them.

------
brianbreslin
I didn't realize Boost mobile still existed. Would be interesting to see
Amazon build a google FI competitor which also rides on t-mobile spectrum in
the US.

------
tantalor
Another perk for Prime members.

~~~
sdan
It strengthens their monopoly.

~~~
sidr
Huh? Their monopoly in which market?

~~~
judge2020
I guess the internet? Apparently diversifying is monopolistic.

~~~
Meandering
Horizontal acquisition extends around the definition of monopoly. I'm not
against Amazon. I don't think they should be stopped from expanding... yet.

If the other conglomerates copy amazon then the possibility of a corporate
dystopian future looks brighter!

~~~
judge2020
The EU regular pretty much sums it up[0]:

> “If a company is dominant, that’s fine,” Ms. Vestager told reporters. “But
> if that dominance is abused, then we have an issue.”

Having a monopoly and not abusing it is impossible when you're dealing with
humans. Maybe in a hundred years where business decisions run through a DLNN
and are cross-referenced with the law to make sure they're in compliance, a
monopoly that doesn't abuse its dominance will become a reality.

0: [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/technology/google-
europe-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/technology/google-europe-
antitrust.html?_r=0)

~~~
Meandering
As I inferred with sarcasm, this divergence from vertical to horizontal growth
could effectively lead to oligopolies in the major markets(the few where they
don't exist).

I believe in the competitive market model up until economies of scale and
purpose driven occupation out weigh it's benefits. e.g. manufacturing jet
engines requires huge amounts of equity and legacy knowledge for safety. e.g.
automating warehousing may lead to more fulfilling or mentally stimulating
occupations.

Amazon as a force in the larger economy versus a subset of markets in the
economy could spur innovation in stagnant markets. On the other side of the
coin, leveraging their massive infrastructure gives them an unfair advantage
as they enter new sectors which can lead to an increased market barrier and
prevent firms with new ideas from competing.

As they stand, they aren't that much bigger than normal conglomerates[1]. But,
they have strategically placed themselves in critical service areas like cloud
computing. I think if they can force markets to evolve then we should allow
them to grow with a discerning eye.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_revenue)

------
crucifiction
I doubt they want to start a cell company, more likely it is to have favorable
terms for embedding 4G into Echo devices, making car and portable echos
possible. They have done this for years w/Kindle, which would also benefit.

~~~
whoisjuan
I doubt that would be the intention. At least not only that.

Amazon has some incredible network effects that would create a compelling
cellphone service offering. They could bundle cellphone plans as an extra in
Prime an undercut competition while giving unlimited access to Amazon.com,
Alexa, Twitch etc.

Having a cellphone company makes a lot of sense for any of the big tech
companies. It allows them to create end-to-end experiences that are compelling
just because they can vertically integrate different moments of their
customers journey.

------
axaxs
I'm honestly curious why. Boost is the worst major MVNO of the worst major
carrier. I feel it would be less expensive to build an MVNO from scratch than
it would be to try and improve that image..

~~~
knd775
Sprint and T-Mobile are trying to sell Boost in order to get the merger
approved. Amazon would most likely secure a promise the the MVNO agreement
would carry over to T-Mobile after the merger.

Additionally, the brand image doesn't matter. They'd likely just rename it to
something like 'Amazon Wireless'

~~~
axaxs
Gotcha. That makes some sense, thank you.

------
RyanAF7
Maybe cause they don't have any sustainable Revenue to justify their UNGODLY
stock price? And, now need to compensate.

Let's not forget Microsoft was at $65 the majority lf their life.

~~~
adventured
Amazon's stock is expensive, however markets - investors - do not price stocks
based on past results typically. Stocks are priced largely on future
expectations. This has been particularly true in the case of Amazon for a long
time.

They'll have near ~$30 billion in profit within the next four to five years,
which will bring their PE down to a high, but not ungodly, 30x.

AWS is worth $300-$350 billion now. Very soon it will soon be larger than
Oracle and it's growing extremely fast for a large business (a high multiple
would be granted). Their ad business is worth $100-$150 billion. In the next
four to five years, those two businesses together will be worth as much as the
entire company is today. That's a big part of what investors are betting on,
along with the expectation that Amazon is going to continue to find new profit
centers.

Sure, you might say, why is Amazon priced for earnings four or five years out?
Well, that's the standard practice of pulling future returns forward. Almost
always happens with growth companies, inevitably leads to a stagnation period.
Amazon will continue to grow into their market cap and their annual returns
will drift downward.

------
xyzzy_plugh
I wonder how much they would save running all the Kindles over their own
network (MVNO or not) instead of paying AT&T millions of dollars per month.

------
objektif
Its not just AMZN, other media giants are also interested in buying assets
from the merged company to start another provider. If thats the case I would
be OK with merger going ahead.

------
KirinDave
Oh. Sure. Just what Amazon needs: to also be a telecom. Sure would be a shame
if there was a single industry they couldn't strongarm.

------
duxup
A sort of Google Fi for Amazon?

------
josephjrobison
"It was not immediately clear why the largest U.S. online retailer would want
the wireless network and spectrum."

I think we can wager a few guesses.

