Google Merger with Sprint?

I would certainly embrace this over having a buyout by CenturyLink...my experience with them was that they were terrible.

 

The two do seem sorta cozy. Cozier than they should be for a casual venture.

Considering Sprint is allowing numbers to be ported to Google, that is a sign the two are getting along really well. This is not something you usually see from telco's, and I'm not sure what Sprint is getting out of it.

There has to be something brewing beneath the surface. Either a bigger venture, or acquisition, or something else.

I'm for it though. Especially as an android fan.

 

Google will need to step into the telecom market when the tmobile deal goes through and the only option for them would be sprint. Sprint and google have a long history together, so I would say 80% chance that sprint will be bought by google with in the next 2 years.

 

I was just about to type the exact same thing..

 

I dont like the idea of a Sprint buy out/merger, but if it was with Google, I would be A-OK with that.

 

Why would Google have to step into the telcom market if the AT&T T-Mobile merger goes through? My thought on this is ,well of course Google COULD do this but why? What benefit would this be? It would be like Apple or Microsoft merging with a Carrier. Google provides Android to manufacturers that supply phones to every Carrier and it behooves them for it to stay that way. If they merged Google would essentially be providing software to it's much larger competitors or it would have to make Android a Sprint exclusive in the States which destroys their market share. Or Verizon and AT-Mobile decide ok we aren't going to use Android anymore and again completely destroy there market share. A Merger with Sprint just doesn't make much business sense. Now a close knit partnership with things like the Google Voice integration and a launch pad for new devices could benefit both and also avoid alienating the big boys but Google has to play fair with all of them to kept that revenue growing.

 

Two reasons,

1.) Closed walled gardens. Both att and verizon want to make a walled garden just like the iphone is today. Verizon is going to do it with the vcast, separate market, separate pricing for apps, and separate apps. This will make it so they can get around the fcc ruling on the spectrum sale and get around the fcc ruling on roaming.

2.) Verizon and ATT will do tiered pricing. Google, facebook, netflix, and the thousand other sites require an unlimited and unrestricted internet. With 80% of the population forced into tiered pricing, they will be force to either be part of the walled garden, and when they do venture out of the garden, they will be on a short leash.

Making people pick and choose on where they will spend their 5 gb of data, will simply destroy the new markets that google/youtube, facebook/games, netflix/movies, and pandora/music have to offer.

4g services, like wimax and lte, are the future. Wimax can deliver the same speeds to your house as fiber, for a fraction of the cost.

Verizon, att, and comcast want to charge the people the choose to go outside "the wall" and the company's that want inside the wall. When you add up the total cost of "playing ball" with the simple fact of buying your own network, it becomes clear that you will need to buy your own network.

Look at it like this. You head for the mall, only to find when you get to the door, you are allowed only to visit 3 shops, well more likely get only 250 steps into the mall, unless the shop you want to visit is owned by the toll booth. Every store you pass by will have something you want to buy, but since you are limited to only 3 shops you get what you have to get, and use the toll booth operator for everything else. Everyone, regardless of how good the prices are or quality are subjected to limitation by an 3rd party that has their own interest in mind.

Sprint will not survive the next few years anyway, and has national coverage, so it makes the perfect buy out choice. If google does not buy out a national wireless carrier, they will take a revenue hit of billions of dollars over the next few years, as with the rest of the internet's big powered money houses.

You can not have competition at a market, when the only door has a toll booth for both the buyer and the marketer, and everyone that pass through it, pays a different price. Google will need to buy the toll booth, or suffer.

 

I hear what you are saying and I see what you are saying but I just still can't see how a buyout or merger on Google's part makes much sense. They buyout Sprint then they are making a line in the sand that says "F&*k you big boys" and then Verizon and AT-Mobile, in their walled gardens make it even more difficult to get to Google's services and Android goes bye bye on 80 percent of the nations phones. It makes sense on Sprint's side because I am with you on Sprint's survival chances after an AT&T T-Mobile merger are so low that they need someone like Google, but it makes more sense for Google to play nice with Verizon and AT-Mobile and get a piece of that pie from them.

 

But Verizon and ATTT have not and will not play nice with google. That is the biggest problem. It is currently very hard to get google services on those carriers. Verizon forced people to use bing has their search provider, regardless of personal choice. Android is going no where, they will simply take android as google produces it, change it to match their model and install it on their phones with encrypted boot loaders and later use lte as a filter.

If google play along, it will lose billion in revenue because of the walled garden, they have no interest in letting google play unless it pays.

That is the biggest problem, google made a name by simply doing things better then everyone else. When it became clear that other os's was going to make google pay for services, google created android.

If google buys sprint, att and verizon will have to carry android phones, because they will lose customers if they don't. Verizon and att will have to offer google services or lose customers.

If google does not buy sprint, sprint will still fail with in the next few years. Then google will be at the complete control of the carriers that will control 99% of the phone market. What is better for google. Take a claim in a market, forcing it to open its doors, or be at the complete control of 2 companies to provide services for 99% of america?

There are three things that are pretty much facts.

1.) Sprint will fail with in the next 5 years, when the tmobile deal goes through.
2.) Verizon and att have already and will continue to limit access to services and products to consumers by walled gardens and tiered pricing.
3.) The current internet market requires a unlimited and free choice for the consumer to choose the products that is best for them. With out a free choice and unlimited access, internet companies will lose billions of dollars. If you don't believe me, as those that have tiered internet plans if they can afford netflix streaming.

The cost to buy sprint, about 14 billion and the cost to build out a complete and structured network, about 9 billion, would be less then the amount of money lost to the walled garden.

As long as google can allow 100% complete and open access to this product base, it can force the other carriers to play along. Once sprint fails and google is forced to play games with the other companies that will control 99% of the base, google will lose way more then the 23 billion to buy out and build out a solid network.

 

We agree to disagree on this one as we are looking at it from different angles but those three things are not pretty much fact, 2+2=4 is a fact, they are your educated guesses, opinions, and observations. You are assuming alot here and again making statements based on guesses, opinions, and observations not fact (exactly the same as my thoughts on this).

 

Well the first is a guess, the rest are facts.

 

2) And will continue? Assumption not fact
3) With out a free choice and unlimited access? Again opinion not fact. This is a statement involving YOUR feeling about the market and prediction for loss of dollars. Even if it all turns out right it is currently not fact.

 

Google doesn't necessarily need to acquire Sprint, but the two can work together to ensure there is a vendor that provides mobile users with unlimited access to Google services.

Throttled, and tiered/metered internet hurts android and hurts Google because it discourages use of Google cloud based service. It discourages widget use, Netflix, Pandora and YouTube use as well.

A prime example is the new Google Music cloud service. Using those services works better on an unlimited internet service by Sprint, compared to limited internet by Verizon.

 

Google didn't create android.

 

nope, they perfected it and turned it into pure awesomeness.

 

Thats the rumor and if its true, does Sprint become the official (unofficial) Android carrier who gets the best phone first?

 

There may be some perks for sure. How it manifests is anyone guess.

Let's remember that Sprint only has 48 million subs, which is vastly smaller than AT&T and Verizon, and then there is the fact that Sprint is a CDMA company in a GSM world.

But like I said though, there will be perks for sure by going with Google-Sprint that feed directly into the overall Google experience.

 

Sprint is so missed managed that it would be nearly impossible for them to survive in the next 5 years. Look at the coverage maps over the last year.

 

Sounds like they are majorly improving on several fronts including Customer Service and adding subscribers:
Sprint joins Verizon atop customer satisfaction survey -- Engadget

As far as the coverage maps that has more to do with past managements dealings to expand the network without actually building out a network. The old coverage maps showed the coverage Sprint got via Alltel towers just as Alltel showed the coverage via Sprint towers (Reciprocal Roaming agreement which is now gone) which was supposed to last until I believe 2016. Verizon of course killed that and Sprint changed their map to reflect that.

 

Judging by the maps, I wouldn't put too much stock in changes to coverage considering the areas mostly affected are literally the least populated states in the union.

Even if Sprint had the entire population of MT, ND, SD and WY combined signed up, it would make up 5% of Sprint's customer base. In reality, that probably translates into less than 1% of Sprint's real business. This can easily be made up in major population centers by improving 3G and 4G speeds and coverage.

Yeah it sucks for the people in those states, but from a business standpoint, blanketing San Fransisco, L.A., NYC, and Boston in 4G has better ROI potential than putting up towers in MT.

 

I tend to agree that Google and/or Netflix is going to have to figure out how to get into the infrastructure part of the business. You have tiered data coming eventually from everyone, including cable/DSL/Uverse now. I bithc that Netflix does not have 1080p or 5.1, but in reality if they did people woudl be panicing about their data caps and tiers. I think what you need is for Google or Netflix to make a stack in the infrastructure side, they can buy Sprint or a huge portion of Sprint and then help Sprint gobble up Clear and some regional players and build out their infrastructure then be in control of the toll road so their content can be delivered unimpeded. I am not against data caps or tiers, they need to be reasonable and fair, $5 for 4GB from ATT is insane. Also think of their UVerse cap, sure 250GB sounds like alot, but why do I get the same 250GB cap with my 24/3 Internet as the person that is paying a fraction of my bill for 6/1.

 

Google is playing both sides of the fence anyway. They are one of the supporters of wimax and they helped Verizon write the whole mobile internet deal that lets carriers decide what is internet.

Wimax doesn't fall under that umbrella. What if they helped Verizon to help themselves. Now Verizon and att will be locking down services and capping data. Then Google goes with wimax and sprint to promote open internet and unlimited usage.

 

Unless there is a miracle, and I mean a huge miracle, clear will run out of money starting in November or December in 2011. They will probably have to declare bankruptcy in early to mid 2012 just to break even.

The current network has nothing to do with wimax, lte, cdma, and gsm. It has everything to do with complete miss management of the company. Intel has sold its share of Clear, because they know it will have zero investment return, they have dumped more capital into other wimax based providers.

Even though wimax is insanely cheap and easy to deploy and Clear had a huge cash advantage over lte and hspa+, they are just flat out of money. The only improvements to the network will be by comcast and other wimax partners.

Clear and Sprint have mismanaged themselves into a hole, a hole that is pretty hard to dig out of.

 

Clear is getting their act together as well. They have the commitment from Sprint through 2012 worth about a Billion, they are adding infrastructure to current Clear cities, they are increasing their Wholesale business, Best Buy is picking them up, they are farming out Managed services to Ericsson to save cash, etc. Yes they are currently losing money, partly because they should not have attempted retail, but they have good things in the works. Even their stock price is up like 5%. The deal with Sprint handles the cash flow problem.