WOTW applauds Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile US and Sprint for using the vaunted Chewbacca defense in explaining network performance
Hello! And welcome to our Friday column, Worst of the Week. There’s a lot of nutty stuff that goes on in this industry, so this column is a chance for us at RCRWireless.com to rant and rave about whatever rubs us the wrong way. We hope you enjoy it!
The past few weeks have seen an interesting influx of commentary and observations in terms of the depth and reach of mobile networks. Sure, there’s always been talk in terms of how far a network reaches or how fast a mobile network can transmit data, but the recent chatter has shown carriers are taking these claims very serious to the detriment of consumers and common sense.
The market’s two smallest nationwide operators have been particularly aggressive in their network commentary, with both T-Mobile US and Sprint touting how their respective networks nearly match in one form or another those of their larger rivals Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility.
T-Mobile US has been playing up its “Extended Range LTE” coverage, which is the carrier’s use of its 700 MHz spectrum that currently covers more than 200 million potential customers, as part of its bigger network picture. The carrier added further fuel to the fire this week when it told CNet it expects its network to match the coverage of Verizon Wireless within the next 12 months.
In making the claim, T-Mobile US CTO Neville Ray said the carrier will be one of the first to tap into the 600 MHz spectrum being auctioned by the Federal Communications Commission. Oh wait, let me rephrase that: the 600 MHz spectrum that the FCC has yet to actually begin auctioning for commercial wireless use, which is also the auction many now think will last at least into early next year, with television broadcasters then provided up to 39 months to turn those licenses over to the auction winners. Let’s just say Ray is a “glass-half-full” sort of person. Good for him.
Sprint, not often known as a carrier touting network coverage, jumped into the boasting business with its new advertising campaign claiming its network is within 1% of Verizon Wireless in terms of “reliability.” I have already gone to great lengths in thinking this is an awesome advertising campaign, not so much for what it says, but for who they got to say it.
https://youtu.be/jXMS_3zeiwc
Well, all of this talk appeared to have finally migrated under the skin of Verizon Wireless, which in a recent press release attempted to infuse some “facts” into the ongoing network performance debate. The commentary cited the carrier’s spending on bolstering its network, data on the reach of its network and results from third-party performance testing to debunk claims by rivals of network parity.
Now, I am not always one to take facts as facts, but Verizon Wireless claims its LTE network covers 2.34 million square miles, while AT&T Mobility’s LTE network covers 600,000 square miles less, T-Mobile US around 1 million square miles less and Sprint about 1.5 million square miles less.
(As stated, these are claims by Verizon Wireless, and I have had a number of representatives from the other carriers reach out to clarify their coverage. For instance, Sprint notes it covers approximately 300 million pops, while T-Mobile US is claiming 311 million pops covered with a geographic reach of 1.6 million square miles. But, to Verizon Wireless’ point, these claims are indeed less than its claimed geographic coverage.)
Verizon Wireless throws more sand in Sprint’s face by stating a 1% difference “in reliability equals nearly 10,000 more failed connections per minute versus Verizon’s network.” Ouch!
Don’t get me wrong, I love this trumped up animosity between wireless carriers and only hope for it too continue. But, as with most “arguments” between operators, there is no real benefit to any of this for consumers.
There are so many different ways to measure the performance or reach of a network to make any claim seem legit. There are also so many different “independent” testing companies in the market that it really doesn’t take much to get someone to provide stats showing a network is superior in one way or another.
One specific area that has always ruffled my delicate feathers is in potential customer coverage, or pops. These figures are generally provided exclusively by the carriers themselves, so right off the bat they need to be taken with a grain or 10 of salt. For instance, Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility both claim somewhere around 315 million pops covered, T-Mobile US recently said its LTE coverage topped 310 million pops and Sprint is somewhere north of 270 million pops covered.
Further, as these numbers are based solely on coverage where people theoretically live they are easily inflated by throwing up a few towers in some of the nation’s largest markets. Many of us can remember back to when some questionable PCS spectrum holders were able to maintain control over their licenses by simply throwing up a few antennas in some downtown markets to meet FCC build out requirements, even though those networks did not support any customers.
But, as Verizon Wireless sort of points out in its commentary, there is a big difference in the number of people reached and the actual size of a network. Most consumers expect their phones to work anywhere they can see a barn, let alone a skyscraper.
Unfortunately, this is not the message wireless carriers want to get across. They instead want to take a page from politics and muddy the message so much that all eyes just glaze over. What better way to hype yourself than to bring everyone down to your level, or at least confuse everyone in the process.
Obviously, no one wins in this competition except for the media in terms of juicy stories to write, those employed to add color to maps and perhaps Wookiee translators.
https://youtu.be/TQIwEZlOzp4
You said it Chewie!
Thanks for checking out this week’s column. Here’s a quick extra to get you through the weekend:
–Speaking of Verizon Wireless, interesting to see the executive shuffle coming out of the carrier this week with Ronan Dunne set to take over as group president of the carrier’s wireless operations beginning next month. Dunne is set to replace David Small, who was assigned to the Verizon Communications’ wireline business.
With Verizon’s wireless operations generating a larger percentage of the telecom giant’s overall revenue and seen by many as the real growth engine for the operator, it would seem to be a step down for Small. Of course, Verizon also has some history in moving around executives to various parts of the business in order for them to gain experience in different divisions, so that could be what’s in play here as well.
But, there might also be some unhappiness from above in how Verizon Wireless has been performing over the past several quarters, with the one-time juggernaut growing at a slower pace than smaller rivals T-Mobile US and Sprint. Verizon’s current CEO Lowell McAdam is very familiar with Verizon Wireless operations, having run the division during its high-growth hey days. Sure, the market is very different now, but there seems to be no reason Verizon Wireless should not be a more aggressive player in the market considering its deep assets and pockets.
Having someone in Dunne that was the CEO of a wireless carrier and seen as a more charismatic leader than what we have seen in the recent past from Verizon Wireless come in to run its wireless division would seem to be a strong message from Verizon that it has high expectations from Verizon Wireless.
If we are lucky we can hope that means a more aggressive competitive posture from the carrier, and even better someone to match up with T-Mobile US CEO John Legere and Sprint CEO Marcelo Claure in the occasional social media battle.
I welcome your comments. Please send me an e-mail at [email protected].
Bored? Why not follow me on Twitter
