It makes sense for Masa Son to be more the frontman for the combined organization than Hesse. Where would Legere fit in? He is not the person to have to build a confident image the combined company and might reflect poorly on the broader conglomerate. Sprint's marketing should continue to steer away from use of the CEO as the central theme.
The basic reason why its in the public interest is that LEAP is too small to convert networks and compete successfully in LTE. The company was headed toward extinction if not acquired. That might be said for Sprint and T-Mobile as well but they are funded well enough to pursue LTE convergence even if they continue to lose money and VZW and AT&T soak up all of the industry profits.
Extending this decision to Softbank-S's acquisition of T-Mobile is a mistake. While the FCC and DoJ aren't ignorant of the long term picture, they see the industry heading towards greater commonality of networks and devices that, when played into the new rules for unlocking of devices and other new rules, might be seen to play out more favorably for the two underdogs. The regulator's general opinion is 'Give innovation and open markets a chance'. If that does not work out, Softbank will have likely developed a more persuasive position to argue for te acquisition.
Is DoJ and FCC's opinions thawing? Nothing has fundamentally changed imo. Time is still needed since Masa Son said '"et me acquire Sprint and I'll show you".
Legere is a motivating CEO and appears capable, however, he lucked upon the scene largely not of his making: T-Mobile, Neville, CTO and others had been working diligently on building the network leading up to the company looking more attractive for acquisition by AT&T. The windfall of the breakup of of the AT&T deal infused T-Mo with cash and spectrum that led to acquiring operations, spectrum and new management brought in from metroPCS. All of that that set the stage for Legere to enter center stage to act like a monkey : ^)
besides, 'if not for Hesse' Softbank very well might not have been approached as a acquirer and Sprint might not have, in turn, had the funding to acquire the trouble child Clearwire.. or, if so, at more a distress sale price. "If not for Mr. Hesse, Joan Lappin's advice to buy/hold CLWR would be (further) down the toilet".
Joan has blasted Hesse while cheering for Clearwire.. claiming Hesse purposely was forcing CLWR down while giving little emphasis to the fact that Clearwire's basic problem was they were only attracting about 1/10th the planned number of direct subscribers needed to crossover from heavy losses into profits.
Now she retains the blame game that 'if not for Hesse everything would work out' including not admitting her flawed analysis of CLWR which probably encouraged many to invest/hold stock in the failed business plan.
Lappin makes some good points but lacks a core understanding of how technology can be used to drive down costs or drive markets. The results are the results.. of companies or of financial analysts.
That part of the presentation is designed for the public... the under-educated masses on the subject. If bandwidth were all Sprint needed to provide using the 2.6GHz spectrum Mr. Son mentioned Sprint has in common with Softbank, it would be fine. However, that is not all Sprint-SB must do. Providing hot-zone 100Mbps sucks hind tit behind competitors if the coverage issue is not solved as well. The history of Sprint and current track record shows that clearly enough.
Anyway, the presentation went well and Son probably is taking some of the limelight away from T-Mobile as the savvy new Maverick... even if its more talk than walk at this point. The reality is that Sprint bandwidth-coverage is at the bottom of the competitive heap and will stay that way until something changes. Near term acquisition of T-Mo is out even though Son helped present a new and improved image of where Sprint-SB can head.
I think all humans, period, are idiots some of the time and on some things. The point is that we Americans, a still 'new' nation in comparison to much of the world, can be a bit of a pill when it comes to overblown pride. I 'believe in America' in the sense that our system is right.. so long as we don't screw it up. Free enterprise and democracy work with a measure of checks and balances to keep it above board.
Masa Son has presented himself to the US public, regulators, and the financial community in a way that comes across as honest, open, logical, and, in basic sentiment, 'more American than many Americans'. Americans like to think we are the country of innovation on fair and open playing fields. We have had our religious, ethnic, and racial prejudices.. hey, Americans are human idiots.. we have made our share of mistakes. However, whatever may be said about what the founding fathers had in mind is that we are all basically equal if we prove ourselves to be so... and that this was a country to let the principles of equality, equal treatment under the law, and free enterprise not be suppressed by either foreign or domestic forces. I had followed Masa Son starting several years ago so his history and ethos was already thought to be 'what Sprint-CW needs' perhaps more than Softbank's technical prowess. Listening to his presentation reinforced that perception and I think the story will play out to find a harmonious chord with the public and regulators over time.
Softbank is interested in buying T-Mobile but more than that. The path to success is broader than that and, perhaps, the difficulty Sprint-SB has in acquiring T-Mobile will be good because it will allow Sprint-Son to express a new vision for how companies can operate and, even more broadly, how redemption of the American business model is to be found by embracing our new role as the collaborative rather than dominant world economic power.
I did not say PV offered poor proof.. they offered NO proof that shows how Qualcomm supposedly uses the patented technology as required by the Markman ruling.
What I report and have to say about technologies going into WBB/4G and individual company's patents and how that would work out for them through either licensing, cross-licensing or product-market protection has been right for over 15 years. That you don't know that I'm not surprised.. you have not shown much knowledge in anything else.
..Likewise, Sprint-Softbank first must show 'innovation in the network' in a 'balls to the walls' all out fashion before our government should be so (particularly this soon) willing to toss Masa Son and Mr. Hesse a life safer. I wish we common idiots got thrown more life savers ... "you do its called self-initiative idiot! Get off your duff and do what is needed!" should work equally for glorified billionaires as well as us little guys risking their all for a rung up the personal wealth and business ladder.
It looks like that may be the case. However, there has been a gulf between what I have seen as the way the 4G "wireless broadband revolution" networks based business model should be built and what any operator, including by degree, what Softbank has done in Japan. What has been happening is for market trends and technological evolution to move like glaciers: it moves downhill, following inevitable 'lines of least resistance' in unleashing pent up energies of higher network and device efficiencies and benefits to consumers (the links in the chain who pay all the bills and fat paychecks/spiffs). However, glaciers often move like tectonic plates rather than smoothly: they get hung up at friction points to build pent-up energy that is released unexpectedly, sometimes with great upheaval. Even though we are 'standing on the glacier' and know tension (the need for change through harnessing new technologies and end-to-end business methods) is inevitable, everyone waits for others to jump to what will look like the new safe ground .. after the glacier caves off/forms a crevasse (or the earthquake ruptures the ground). We have been approaching such a situation since wireless broadband became a reality years ago. Sprint has held firm on the part of the glacier that peers over the edge.. its been jump to the other side or see the company fall behind those better situated to manipulate their business structure.
The times have called for disruption... wireless has not been about voice for some time. It still fails to adopt methods of building networks and rendering itself up for use by consumers as makes economic sense.
Sprint-Softbank need to be more disruptive than the best examples, including Softbank in Japan. Will Masa Son press old-school Sprint to change that far? It will take a Maverick beyond T-Mos changes in service plan structure to cause such a shift. It can't be done by the small fy Sprint as incremental, following under Verizon and AT&T's skirts.
Fiber is a success story for Google.. because they have provided a higher speed competitive alternative and because they have focused on providing a grid structure that is open to implementing various 'first mile' connections to end users. Google's CEO was recently interviewed - he said something similar to what I have advocated including directly to municipalities considering how to promote broadband - first priority is to deploy a fiber optic to the node, FTTN, then allow the most competitive connection to the user through commercial firms competing on the basis of fair and equal access to the gigabit fiber nodes. When I say 'fiber nodes' these would be termination boxes using standard communications enclosures you might notice on the side of the street. There are various sizes, the nodes used would be large enough to accommodate termination to the fiber optic and additional commercial equipment such as smallcell routers/base stations. The 'vision' has been there for at least 12 years now... one blue moon we may witness it.
In theory that sounds good.. however, Google tries out many things and presses forward with very few. Some of their efforts are il advised: for instance, a few metroFi city wide deployments that Google helped push in municipalities and took some part in have failed due to miscalculations of the range and penetration of Wi-Fi. That was despite use of some MESH networking, self-backhaul, utility pole and other methods that are similar to what is used in smallcell densification of WRAN networks. I read the metro RFQs and significant numbers of the proposals at the time and have been familiar with WiFi MESH and real-world range characteristics of WiFi/802.11g/n and so I challenged advocates at seminars to justify their deployment schemes. The facts were that Phily, SFC, and other sites I looked at would require 2-3 times as many 'cells' as proposed to do the job. So, my regard for how masterful Google is has been tainted to 'let me see the details' before passing judgement. If the coverage and building penetration fall short, the bulk of the populace will use other alternatives no matter how cheap you offer it.
Over the past several years, every since '4G' was being fleshed out, it has made technical, logistical, and business sense, including detailed analysis, to put together a 'triumvirate' of 1) fiber optic grid or FTTN, fiber to the node, to provide the up to 100Gbps interconnectivity. 2) Layered on that is 'best means' connection to users: FTTP, fiber to the premises where that is feasible (~25% of locations, mostly in dense urban areas). Wireless broadband which is 'best connected' and most competitive choice between Wi-Fi, mobile RAN/LTE-Advanced, and wired connections including GigE, gigabit Ethernet and cable.
While this makes logical sense, the structure of US communications industry, deployed infrastructure and layered governance of rights of way and existing contracts makes it difficult to carry out as anything close to a nationwide program.
The 'problem' is that I've suggested basically the same thing, some for of collaboration short of an acquisition, for over 3 years and it hasn't happened yet. The situation has ripened significantly and with Son the new majority owner the prospects have narrowed and moved up as part of SB's set of priorities. Since Sprint-SB have gotten into discussions with TMUS-DT, it now looks possible for a 3-way deal to evolve between Sprint-SB, TMUS-DT and DISH. That is highly speculative.. however they all would stand to gain a more favorable competitive position and lower costs while being generally favorable to regulators.
When New Clearwire was first announced, I met with and called CW, Sprint, Intel, Cisco, Google, and infrastructure suppliers. I asked CW, Intel, Google and Cisco if there were plans to develop local WiMAX 'rooftop' type routers and set-top boxes and came away with either no or not yet. Of course, I thought the 3 cable companies might be taking part. Nothing came together until years latter Softbank acquired Sprint-CW for dimes on the dollar. Maybe it will now... Its so long in the tooth I gave up wishful thinking a long time ago.
It matters that PV did not show it was created anywhere. If its created somewhere else, PV never gave direct evidence. To prove energy accumulation takes showing a discrete measurement: the change of voltage across the alleged RC circuit with the impacts of the transmit signal.
The TX 'jammer' circuit is there to filter out transmit signal and noise from impacting the receiver. What PV testified as its use is nonsensical. Its up to PV to show proof in the particular circuit alleged to infringe.
Are you an expert in reading patents? I have read thousands in the field, written reports, consulted. All experts just have educated opinions of course. However, your statement makes no sense:
1) "PV claims the baseband is created in the energy transfer sampling process" The specific claims as asserted by PV claim energy accumulation. You cannot measure energy without a reference to time and prior voltage in context with the circuit. Most typically, and as PV claims against Qualcomm, the energy is transferred into a capacitor... you should be connecting the dots better than this... the infamous saw-tooth waveform is alleged to generated. The look of the waveform is not a major point imo because its so common I doubt its use as a signature of Dud2Dud sampling method, or if so, its covered well by prior art.
2) "...PV makes no claims against QCOM on TX jamming. Even if 20M times higher, it doesn't matter to the case at hand. " LOL! Of course they don't because they would never put the use of a TX filter as the energy accumulator in a patent. Even if there were some unique situation where it could be used, such as widely separated transmit and receive frequency bands, which is not the case for mobile devices, use of TX filter would be weird... if Qualcomm wanted to accumulate energy as alleged, they would use a RC circuit of staged series of RC with appropriate component values from which to accumulate and sample.
correction '''...Prucnal repeatedly admitted that PV or he had taken measurements to make a conclusion of infringement possible. No proof. " should be "...Prucnal repeatedly admitted that PV or he had Not taken measurements to make a conclusion of infringement possible..."
"... where Prucnal testified with demonstratives that each claim of each patent in suit was violated by the infringing qualcomm circuit and all it's 18 derivatives. " What you are saying is that Prucnal presented slides that purported to show where Qualcomm's circuit matched up to the claims. This mapping to the claims is only valid if the circuit functions in the manner required to violate the patent claims. Qualcomm tore Prucnal's testimony apart, knocking down every part of it. It was debunked by the admission that a) the circuit looks identical to conventional DB mixers, and b) the only way to show Q's circuit as infringing any of PV's claims was to show how it operated.. not just how it might operate via simple claim-to-circuit matching. Prucnal repeatedly admitted that PV or he had taken measurements to make a conclusion of infringement possible. No proof.
Furthermore, Prucnal and Sorrell's both admitted the baseband signal was produced prior to the input of the TX capacitor.
Further to that, the TX capacitor has 16 million times higher transmitted signal at its inputs. Typical harmonics can be several times the signal level of RX. Use of the TX filter is not possible. If it were possible it still has to be shown to be used in the way PV claims. Since no measurements or simulations that include impact of TX signal levels was shown, let alone the magic of how that could be made to work explained, Qualcomm has proven they do not infringe on three major counts, each one sufficient in itself.
Disney signed a similar deal with DTV.. however the trend is clearly toward OTT, over the top, of broadband networks delivery of video content and services. DTV and Comcast are also using devices or embedded licensed technology from DISH/Hopper in similar set-top storage-routers that make up an important aspect of the new 'TV' industry formulation.
The logic of DISH, DTV forming partnerships or joint development companies with mobile operators has appeared logical for several years. Along with consolidation and the shift to mobile broadband and content use, the pressures were seen for Sprint, T-Mobile, DISH, DTV, and remaining smaller mobile and satellite operators to consolidate or form partnerships. As LTE and 'densification of networks' has been proceeding, that pressure is building. And when Verizon open the doors to their new multicast TV service latter this year, change will become more present.
The alternative to M&A that raise objections, take time, precious capital and management bandwidth, is forging partnerships including joint ventures such as for joint network development. As hard as it is to overcome resistance, as pressures mount the odds greatly increase. Management at DISH, Sprint-SB, DTV, and the media companies know that while acquisitions face tough hurdles, they can bite the bullet to move forward
with working relationships that accomplish much the same desired results.. even though the CEO's/CFOs etc. must share the limelight and forgo some of the fat payola.
What is possible is for the industry to see partnerships for shared networks, cross-marketing between TV/satellite and media companies, that sidestep or greatly shorten most regulatory approvals. And if that works out to benefit of consumers, then the argument for such collaboration to turn into mergers becomes largely made with regulators and Congress.
There are few absolutes.. What many sharezombies rely on is simplicity: Legere is good, Hesse is bad (plug in any topic). Sorry dimwatts, Legere has less history with the FCC and is better known as having an image similar to "wild and crazy deals.. step come on down to Appliance King/Rebel's Auto Mart for the craziest deals this side of the Mississippi!"
I have not seen enough about Legere's management decisions to rate the guy. As a market, he is doing what makes sense for T-Mobile at a point when it has spun up higher capacity networks and coverage.. sell like a madman because that gets a high bang for the sales and marketing buck.
However, every major market has a dichotomy of potential customers. The cellphone and as the PC industry before it, has a strata of the market that thinks of itself as vanguards, rebels, anti-establishment authority, risk takers and those who put 'getting he best deal' out ahead of comfort and other purchasing values. T-Mobile is creating an image of the 'in your face' unconventional service provider. Some of that is true, however all operators are bound in how much they can be a revolutionary in terms of price... they must all repay debts, reinvest for ever newer and better services.
The mobile market has some percentage of it that the 'Maverick' provider can appeal to. Not everybody wants a Hundai/offbrand value. The "Wild and Crazy Deals" strategy grbs lots of attention but it has maybe 20% of the market to appeal to, some of which T-Mo already has. In other words, I expect the approach to look like a typical new market growth curve: rapid increase at first, slowing growth, saturation and leveling off or a competitor grabs the Maverick belt from around Legere's waste and takes on that more volatile share of the market. I think T-Mobile will see decline of growth within 9-12 months.