Any news on the Qwest-Sprint-Verizon deal?

Hey everyone,

I noticed the topic hasn't been talked about recently, so here I go:

Does anyone have any inside or new information about what's happening to the Qwest Wireless/Verizon deal about the remaining sites and spectrum?

I noticed, here in SLC, that Sprint didn't take over a lot of Qwest's sites(which they should have), I just discovered one last night that was converted to Sprint outside a local Mall which Sprint didn't cover at all in most stores(most other networks are great in the area).

Now I'm wondering, when does Sprint have to be done converting the sites; when will this deal about the remaining sites/spectrum with VZW be finalized? Press releases say 4th quater of this year, or early next year.

Thanks for any info you guys might have,
Andy

 

Yup, Larry, but that was on the maps as a future site This was a long needed addition...That explained why Sprint didn't actually have a store, but only a booth in the center of the 'hallway'; they didn't penetrate into stores.

I just hope this deal is done soon; I mean there are no more users actually using the Qwest network as their Ec/Io is -1.0 most places.

 

Rancid, thanks for your help I appreciate it!

The thing I forgot to add to my previous post is this:

What Sprint seems to have done with this site is totally convert it to Sprint, instead of running both, Sprint and Qwest SIDs. The Qwest signal is now off the air and I only receive a weak, polluted signal when forcing my phone onto Qwest, which seems wierd, since they always used to transmit both, Sprint and Qwest SIDs from converted sites.

 

Taken from the FCC Transaction website:

Informal Timeline
for Consideration of Applications for Transfers
or Assignments of Licenses or Authorizations
Relating to Complex Mergers

The following timeline is intended to identify generally what tasks the agency needs to accomplish in order to complete its review in cases involving complex or difficult issues, the normal order in which these tasks can be most efficiently performed, and the time normally needed to complete them.

The timeline represents the Commission’s goal of completing action on assignment and transfer of control applications (i.e., granting, designating for hearing, or denying) within 180 days of public notice. Routine applications should be decided well within the 180-day mark. More complex applications may take longer. It is the Commission’s policy to decide all applications, regardless of whether they are highlighted on the web page, as expeditiously as possible consistent with the Commission’s regulatory responsibilities. Although the Commission will endeavor to meet its 180-day goal in all cases, several factors could cause the Commission’s review of a particular application to exceed 180 days. Delay in action beyond the 180-day goal in a particular case is not indicative of how the Commission ultimately will resolve an application.

The timeline is intended to promote transparency and predictability in the Commission’s process. In addition to its descriptive function, the timeline represents an undertaking by the agency to accomplish these tasks within the stated time frames, and to keep the parties and the public informed of its progress. For transactions highlighted on the Transaction Team’s web page, the timeline provides the public with ready access to information about the status of a pending transaction. For transactions not highlighted on the Transaction team’s web page, the timeline still applies and the Commission will endeavor to complete action on pending applications accordingly.

The timeline also indicates the requirements and opportunities for participation by the interested parties -- applicants, supporters, opponents, and members of the public -- in order for the review process to move forward efficiently. Such a timeline helps to identify what can be done by parties other than the agency to contribute to a speedy and efficient consideration and resolution, and when actions by such other parties outside the agency’s control are responsible for delay.

Any such general timeline necessarily oversimplifies the process. Statutes and regulations require different procedures for different types of licenses or authorizations, and the circumstances of individual cases will differ (for example, the actions taken by other government agencies considering the antitrust, national security, or law enforcement issues relating to the transaction). The timeline should therefore be viewed as a flexible tool, not an effort to force the review of all diverse transactions into one inflexible mold. In particular circumstances, the order of performing the required tasks or the time to complete a task may vary. Generally, these stages and times are intended to indicate reasonable goals for the most complex cases. Cases that do not present complex or difficult issues require fewer stages and less time to resolve.

We also remind the public that, although the agency seeks to meet the 180-day benchmark, its statutory obligation to determine that an assignment or transfer serves the public interest takes precedence over the informal timeline. The Commission’s failure to release an order within the 180-day benchmark is not indicative of how it will resolve the issues raised in this proceeding.


All dates are approximate



Applicants’ Tasks—pre-Public Notice

Identify complete list of licenses, authorizations involved

Contact relevant Bureaus

Identify appropriate application forms, appropriate filing process (e.g., electric, paper), and related applications/requests and consolidation, in consultation with relevant FCC staff

File necessary forms, applications, and special requests for relief

Send Hart-Scott-Rodino waiver letter to U.S. Department of Justice or Federal Trade Commission (if required)


Day 0: Public Notice (PN)

Minimum requirements for an application to be accepted for filing — facially complete application addressing the relevant issues and providing sufficient support for agency analysis and meaningful public comment, with a complete and accurate identification of licenses and authorizations to be transferred

Consolidated FCC PN for transactions involving multiple licenses and authorizations

Contents of PN:

General nature of applications and related transaction (e.g., merger), and waivers and other rulings requested by parties

List of licenses/authorizations to be transferred/assigned/granted/discontinued, with associated file numbers

Outline of procedures (identify lead Bureau and contacts at all relevant Bureaus, whether proceeding will remain restricted or be permit-but-disclose, initial briefing schedule, procedures for obtaining access to confidential information, any special filing requirements)

PN starts 180 day clock. If separate PNs for the same transaction are issued by different Bureaus, then Day 0 will be the date on which the last related public notice is released.

A Protective Order may also be issued at or about this same time (a Protective Order will likely be issued if a Hart-Scott-Rodino waiver letter has been sent).


Days 1-30: Public Comment Period (filing of petitions to deny or comments)

Ordinarily 30 days, occasionally 45 days

Persons and entities that file petitions to deny become parties to the proceeding. They may participate fully in the proceeding, including seeking access to any confidential information that may be filed under a protective order, seeking reconsideration of decisions, and filing appeals of a final decision to the courts. Persons who file comments will have those comments duly considered by the FCC but may not have the right to participate in any formal hearing or file appeals to the courts.


Day 45: Oppositions to Petitions to Deny and Comments

Ordinarily due 15 days after Petitions to Deny and Comments are due. Waiting until the reply stage to introduce arguments and evidence that were clearly available and relevant at the initial application stage is discouraged and may require additional time for public comment that will not be charged against the agency’s time clock.


Day 52: Replies to Oppositions

Ordinarily due one week after Oppositions are due.


Day 90: Initial Information Request

The Commission will endeavor to send to the parties an initial request for information, if necessary, by Day 90. In certain cases, the Commission may be able to determine earlier what additional information it will need from the parties, and the Commission’s failure to issue an initial information request by Day 90 is without prejudice to sending an initial or subsequent request for information after this date.


Days 52-180: Analysis of Record; Discussions with Parties


Day 180: FCC issues Order granting applications, granting applications with conditions, or designating applications for hearing (denials without a hearing are possible only in very limited circumstances).


Considerations in “Stopping the Clock”

The Commission may “stop the clock,” that is, suspend its informal calendar, when the Commission’s ability to process and review the merits of an application is impeded by justifiable delay, the parties’ actions, or external events. Stopping the clock in such circumstances is intended to provide a more accurate picture of the time the Commission finds necessary to process a particular transaction. Stopping the clock does not itself delay a decision in a proceeding; it merely reflects that a decision could be delayed as a result of some external factor. When this occurs, we endeavor to send the parties a letter explaining our reason for stopping the clock and posting that letter on the web page. In our experience, the following are common, but non-exhaustive, examples of reasons for stopping the clock:

The Commission extends the time for filing pleadings.

The Applicants do not respond to a request for information within a stated time period.

The Commission finds it appropriate to await resolution of issues pending before the relevant U.S. law enforcement or national security agencies.

The Commission receives significant new information about an application, or the parties file a substantial amendment to the application.

If the Commission stops the clock, it generally will restart it as soon as the event justifying its stoppage has been resolved such that the Commission’s review process is no longer impeded. On rare occasions the clock may be reset to a prior date.


Sorry for the long post but using the link wouldn't work(maybe I'm just dumb).

But bottom line, does that mean that we might have to wait another 70 days for this transaction to take place or am I misunderstanding something?

Thanks,
Andy

 

Sounds good to me Then I suppose that if Qwest has moved all their customers over, there's no need for Qwest to keep their remaining sites and spectrum any longer, right? So it would be in their best interest to put away with it as fast as possible.

 

Larry, I don't think that's what's going to happen; the sites that are now onwed by Sprint, VZW will not do anything with, but the remaining Qwest sites they will convert...at leats that's what I thought

Bill, thanks for the information. Well, early 2005...I've been waiting forever, lol.
I don't think that there's a new Sprint site(I drove by at night, so couldn't really tell), but since the Qwest signal is gone, and now there's a strong Sprint signal, where, before, it would be anywhere from -high 80's to low 90's(and that outside of a shopping mall).

 

Bill,
so are you suggesting that VZW might not even use those Qwest sites or am I misreading your post? Also, yes, you are right that VZW's Utah network is generally built out very well(they have a great network here in SLC, in fact, it's said to be the best network around here), but there are some areas that VZW's indoor coverage is low(still no problems making and/or receiving calls usually), but there's a Qwest site right on top of the building which would improve Indoor coverage, etc. That's what I mean with the new sites improving service.
~Andy

 

Lol, yeah, I'm a little selfish. So by what you said, you are suggesting that they will/might not use the new PCS sites for voice, but only for data?? Am I understanding you correct.
Thanks for all your input, btw.
Andy

 

Bill,
Qwest's signal was superior to other carriers in a lot of areas here, they just put up little sites everywhere, but there were plenty of neighborhoods and areas where they plain out sucked...so if you were in one of their strong areas, great, but chances were that you were right in one of their low signal areas(and I mean really low to no service).

 

Dan, you can butt in anytime, no problem

Well here, Sprint is still weak in general, even though they could have chosen to take tons of Qwest sites that would have improved coverage. Outdoor Sprint coverage here is okay, but indoors suffers in a LOT of places.

VZW is the opposite, they are in general great here, although they have some weak spots too. That's right, not everyone wants to use their phones on the freeway, we also want to use our phones at home and sometimes outside the city limits...here, VZW is who gives this to you.

Andy

 

Larry, I drive throughout the Salt Lake Valley every single day, during the morning comute and the evening commute, sometimes I drive through the valley a couple times a day and I have seen the one or other site be converted to Sprint, but not enough. Most carriers(yes, in my opinion even CricKet) generally beats Sprints coverage here... it's just a fact.
If they convert more towers then I will give them the credit they deserve, but as of right now I don't think they deserve too much credit here in the S.L valley and in Utah in general. Yes, they are improving(they recently fired up a site in Wendover) but they are still far behind all other carriers here, that's a fact. Without roaming, as soon as you leave city limits your done. When I used to have them I used about 1000 minutes a month and had dropped calls all the time. Now with Verizon I use anywhere from 2000-4500 minutes a month and rarely ever drop a call.

 

I have a deactivated Sprint phone, which obviously shows me whether or not Sprint has service and which let's me connect to things like Customer Care...if it doesn't let me connect or if my phone says "No service" then Sprint obviously has issues in that area. Also, I force my Verizon phone onto the Sprint network(Sprint is Extended here) and make test calls that way as well.
Larry, go ahead and start a debate on this

 

Gman, I wasn't talking about debating coverage; I ment debating the way that I still test Sprint's coverage. What exactly do you mean with me being strongly opinionated?
~Andy

 

Thank you Fathead for coming in here and defending me
Larry as I said, I'm not only keeping a deactivated Sprint phone, I'm also forcing my Verizon phone over to the Sprint network a lot and leave it there to make/receive calls from time to time. Bottom line is, very high Ec/Io in a lot of busy places, quite a lot of dropped calls, etc. And now don't tell me forcing a VZW phone over to Sprint and using their network isn't a good way of judging.
Also, carrying around my deactivated Sprint phone with me also shows me where sprint doesn't have service, or is very weak, like a lot of indoor places...now don't tell me this isn't a fair way to judge a network.

I'm not just making things up, Larry, and I know it's hard for you to take that Sprint is weak an area like this. Hence, much more people use other networks than Sprint here.