Alltel/AT&T divested markets

[miley fan]

In the Dakota's (land of wind and...well not much else), Verizon has far more towers in rural areas. In fact, they have been pumping them out a lot lately. So much so it was in the news. Now it could be to prevent issues from the Alltel merger into AT&T and to prevent spotty coverage afterwards. But they do build more into rural than AT&T. In fact, Alltel and Verizon are the only 2 options in the Dakotas unless you live in Fargo or Sioux Falls. Both on the Minnesota border. Those are the only 2 that even remotely have rural coverage.

What's more amusing is that with AT&T your comment makes little sense realistically. Look at the AT&T coverage map for the Dakota's. Their 'AT&T Native' coverage is so small, it almost doesn't even matter. Most of the states are 'Extended Network' for them.

Rapid City and Sioux Falls are amongst the 2 largest cities in South Dakota for example. Barely a blip on the map for either. And on top of that, read AT&T wireless experiences in those cities. Most are HORRID to the point of being useless. Especially the Rapid City one. In fact, many are useless. I constantly have to deal with that in the Black Hills region. IPhones seem to do well, but damn near every other AT&T phone seems to suck. I know, I've scratched my head on that one, and so have others. My GSM service sucked out here as well. And you can usually tell when a tourist has a GSM phone. They are the ones buying a prepaid or are frustrated as all heck with no service.

So those spots of coverage by AT&T are so minuscule, it's almost pointless and worthless at the moment and likely do little to nothing in regards of saving on roaming fee's.

The Bowman, ND one is the funniest. That town is very small. Yet has some of the best coverage and it's randomly located in the middle of nowhere. ( I know, been through there many times.) With Dickinson and Bismark up there too. (South Dakota gets little love from AT&T atm.) Which is also pretty random. Bismark I can understand, but Dickinson? What about Jamestown. Seriously.

It's random, and in areas that (Outside of Bismark) few people actually travel. So loss of roaming fee's are minimal at best.

Will be interesting to see what all changes after the merger between Alltel and AT&T.

[robzuc97]

Again, what I said is it's to save their license and save on roaming charges. They have to serve a minimum population. There is no need for these sites to actually be connected to a network and accessible. But they have to exist and at least have a test mode broadcast. AT&T decided to go ahead and actually hook up the sites required to save their PCS licenses and let them work to save a bit on roaming fees.

(Yes, it's absurd that non-working sites and spectrum leasing and stuff count for buildout requirements).

My point was that doesn't mean AT&T won't be interested in maintaining a good network with their Alltel-acquired cellular license. Cellular service is far easier to run in rural areas than PCS *AND* they're buying a strong customer base - no need to try and win customers. There's no reason to believe AT&T will neglect these areas just because they neglected their PCS licenses.

[baseballfan35]

Actually we do have an AT&T Wireless' towers in Williston, ND, Minot, ND, Dickinson, ND, Bismarck, ND EVEN in Missoula, MT only one area has the AT&T towers of Montana. Yes I did heard there is in South Dakota as well. Formerly CellularONE purchased T-Mobile spectrum on their service therefore they both already has roaming agreements while they are able to roam on neither GSM coverages....

[guyitsover14]

They better be set up newer gsm which has no hard block limit for the booster to reach anywhere than the current gsm......

[tha maan wit know bwain]

The new technology thats replacing gsm is spost to be more flexible when it comes to hard distance limits. Shrinking a tower that has a 40 mile radius to a 22 mile radius would be huge step backwards.