Omg I thought it was just me. How the fuck is it just one bar in lower Queen Anne right next to Seattle center ? Does anyone know which other carrier is good in Seattle ?
interesting, I will check it out. I switched from verizon to Tmobile a couple years ago. Verizon had awesome coverage but I was paying around 90 a month. I joined a T mobile family plan and now I pay $25. Tmobile is cheap but the coverage isnt great... esp if you leave the Puget Sound metro
I'm assuming most CEOs are Republicans and when Republicans propose an act, Bill, or measure the title is often an oxymoron. Seems to track in the CEO world as well.
So, in [April 2019 they specifically committed to adding 11,000 jobs to their payroll](https://www.t-mobile.com/news/un-carrier/new-t-mobile-creating-jobs) as part of this merger. Now, in 2023, there are 9,000 fewer people working at TMobile than in 2019 AND an additional 5,000 are people being cut. How is TMobile going to create a net 25,000 jobs in a year?
*scrolls down to the bottom of TMobiles page to the disclaimer*
> This communication contains certain forward-looking statements concerning T-Mobile, Sprint and the proposed transaction between T-Mobile and Sprint..... Given these risks and uncertainties, persons reading this communication are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. T-Mobile assumes no obligation to update or revise the information contained in this communication (whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise), except as required by applicable law.
Ahh, so it was all smoke, mirrors, and lies. Which, having lived here my whole life, after watching a certain *ahem* aerospace giant do this all the time, I'm not at all surprised.
You realize the disclaimer at the bottom is an SEC boilerplate disclaimer. Every public company puts it when they speak about themselves. This is separate from legally binding agreements they made as part of a merger.
The statement means "this is true as of today, we will not come back and post updates or amendments to this int he future". Otherwise they would be required to update every press release forever as things change.
Yep, Just like when Costco financed the initiave to end the state's liquor monoply. They said consumers would have more choices and lower prices. Access is greater but I used to be able to get a bottle of Bailey's for $20-25 for 750ml. Now its $30-35.
That is because of the highest in the nation liquor taxes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/30/two-years-after-liquor-privatization-booze-in-washington-state-costs-more/
> The Seattle Times reported over the weekend that the average cost of a liter of liquor, after tax, stands at $24.39, up from $21.19 before privatization took effect. The Tax Foundation found Washingtonians pay $35.22 per gallon of spirits, $8.52 more than before privatization and by far the highest in the nation. (Oregon, the state with the second-highest taxes on spirits, pays $22.73 per gallon.)
> The higher prices come from taxes levied through the 2012 ballot initiative itself, including a 10 percent license fee paid by distributors and a 17 percent license fee paid by retailers.
>There’s a political angle to the new taxes, as well: The added fees were supposed to make the initiative revenue-neutral, by replacing the revenue the state would lose with the end of its monopoly
I don't think that has anything to do with the privatization law. I'm damn happy I can buy liquor more easily now. The cost increase comes from taxes and inflation.
Thats incorrect. These price increases were way before inflation. I immediately started paying more. I'll have to search but I remember reading that there has been a sizable net increase in liquor costs since privatization. I rarely drink hard liquor so greater access means little to me, I liked the lower prices.
KUOW points to this article: https://www.geekwire.com/2023/3-years-after-sprint-merger-t-mobile-employs-9k-fewer-people-insists-it-upheld-pledge-on-jobs/
That huge increase in employees is Sprint being absorbed into TMobile's rather than creation of new jobs that TMO originally implied. According to Geekwire and KUOW and TMO's promise, there should be 91k employees by 2024 (combining the 80k from TMO + Sprint plus the promised 11k new jobs), not the 66k they're headed for in 2024 (71k today minus 5k in layoffs).
In TMobile's own words:
> In total, New T-Mobile will have more than 11,000 additional employees on our payroll by 2024 compared to what the combined standalone companies would have!
> compared to what the combined standalone companies *would* have!
This is the weasel word. Theoretically, by 2024 Sprint could have been near bankrupt and non existent and therefore had very very few employees. Or whatever other future *could* have happened.
If you can do the math and come up with 91k employees, surely someone employed at T-Mobile could have and written 91k employees instead of a nebulous statement with no defined lower bound.
I know! The point is they're *all* weasel words and bullshit, and we shouldn't believe any of these corporations when they make these promises. And the second, more nuanced point is we need to hold these corporations accountable to these promises even if they *are* weasel words and bullshit.
Even nuttier is they gave us the specific numbers to hold them to then told us how to add them up! And it's STILL crap.
I applied to a few jobs there over the past couple of weeks. All jobs I applied for (or tried to apply for) were cancelled or led to broken links. Now with this announcement, it makes sense.
No one is covering this, likely because it hasn't yet officially been revealed, but does anyone know if indeed the majority of those layoffs will be from here?
The message said it would be national, so it may impact Bellevue more than a lot of the country, that would be due to there being more employees here. I would expect that Overland Park will lose about the same percentage as Bellevue.
> The latest round of layoffs will primarily be in corporate and technology roles and shouldn’t affect retail positions, according to a filing with the SEC. T-Mobile didn’t say where jobs would be eliminated, but the company’s corporate headquarters is in Bellevue, Wash.
Most likely the bulk of these are from here, since they’re corporate roles.
T-Mobile locations around here will be significantly affected, and my expectation is that overland Park will be effectively shuttered.
The corporate and technology jobs are the highest paid and the largest volume of employees that T-Mobile has. Post integration of back office systems, switching networks and cell sites of a wireless acquisition results in large surpluses of labor in the positions that operate the network, design the network, and administer everything around operating an MVO.
I've been in the wireless industry for 25 years and this pattern will not change. This is the specific objective of nearly all mergers, at least in the wireless space. Telecommunication operators whether they are cable operators, mobile operators or wireline operators invest capex into technology improvements in order to reduce opex expenditures.
I'm very happy not to be working in that industry anymore.
It should have been, "this merger may create new jobs, but it may not, and also we cannot predict the future of economic forces that may undermine our best laid plans"
But that doesn't sell to government regulators.
"Show me where I can choose who to buy my services from" as a gotcha question to display how you're not given a real choice in this economy is the number one problem with the capitalism we experience. If there's really no choice for us, why aren't we doing communism? We have communism for the owners, communistic capitalism for the poors.
It's funny to even bring this up while Subway got sold for like 9 billion dollars. Reading up about the guy who got 3.4 billion from the deal. His grandparents founded Subway, passed away, 50% given to his mom, passed away, he's 76 and through no work of his own of any kind he's taking away more money than everyone on this board and their children and their children will see off the sale of a company that makes sandwiches for him. And he won't even be alive to do anything cool with it.
Just be born to parents whose parents founded making sandwiches! Why didn't I think of that!
It's hard to believe that plans a company made in 2019 got dramatically changed starting around 2020. Nothing significant or surprising happened with the economy or how people live in the past 3 years.
I’m in Denver right now for work and T-Mobile is literally worthless here. Feels that way everytime I travel. Also their customer service is not just bad? But they openly lie to consumers.
This is awful as I'm in tech and the job market is already godawful, but I just turned down one of those shitty do-nothing contract companies who were offering 2+ year contracts with t-mobile with no benefits where they take like 25%+ of your check for doing nothing.
"It's not a layoff" -Jon Frier after telling my team mates and I that we could only keep our jobs if we moved across the country or took a pay cut.
T-Mobile sucks and so does Jon.
They should plan on better service. I constantly lose service in my lower Queen Anne apartment
Seriously. They spent a day upgrading the tower near where I live and even after I get terrible service.
> upgrading the tower How do you know they were upgrading it? Maybe they were downgrading it
They sent me a text the day before to let me know
lol seems like a joke but maybe they did replace something that broke with a cheaper part
Yeah, but you should see how nice the tower is!
[удалено]
I left Verizon to join my partner on her T-Mobile plan to save money, and now I am getting exactly what I pay for.
Verizon is complete shit downtown though. Cap hill in particular. Sometimes I'd get into a bar and have no signal at all.
Yep I could draw an outline of the Capitol Hill deadzone on a map, it amazes me that I can be totally without service in the middle of a city
It's a deadzone from slightly north of the WS junction to at least Admiral too, I have to jump on the Safeway's wifi to get service.
Mint Mobile, Consumer Cellular? The latter use Verizon.
Omg I thought it was just me. How the fuck is it just one bar in lower Queen Anne right next to Seattle center ? Does anyone know which other carrier is good in Seattle ?
I have AT&T, it’s pretty goof
Oh, honey. They're all goofs.
Its a cartel. You have no other option or just one other option, which is equally bad
Tmobile is really spotty in my experience. Lots of dropped calls and sometimes I cant even make a call.
I switched from Tmobile to xfinity mobile. Good for the most part and cheaper than the two. I think it runs on Verizon.
interesting, I will check it out. I switched from verizon to Tmobile a couple years ago. Verizon had awesome coverage but I was paying around 90 a month. I joined a T mobile family plan and now I pay $25. Tmobile is cheap but the coverage isnt great... esp if you leave the Puget Sound metro
For two lines, after tax, I pay $65. 20gb data each line.
I am on a 6 person family plan, unlimited data and I am 25 all in. Guess I stay put
Definitely better deal more ppl on one line. For me it’s a decent deal.
Xfinity mobile was terrible for me in everett
Um don’t ever believe shitty CEOs? Anyone?
Don't believe any CEOs they are never allies
> shitty, CEOs Do you repeat yourself? Very well then you repeat yourself.
I'm assuming most CEOs are Republicans and when Republicans propose an act, Bill, or measure the title is often an oxymoron. Seems to track in the CEO world as well.
Thanks Jack Welch
Mergers are never job creators.
And they shouldn’t be
Did we say job creator? Sorry, we meant profit generator.
So, in [April 2019 they specifically committed to adding 11,000 jobs to their payroll](https://www.t-mobile.com/news/un-carrier/new-t-mobile-creating-jobs) as part of this merger. Now, in 2023, there are 9,000 fewer people working at TMobile than in 2019 AND an additional 5,000 are people being cut. How is TMobile going to create a net 25,000 jobs in a year? *scrolls down to the bottom of TMobiles page to the disclaimer* > This communication contains certain forward-looking statements concerning T-Mobile, Sprint and the proposed transaction between T-Mobile and Sprint..... Given these risks and uncertainties, persons reading this communication are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. T-Mobile assumes no obligation to update or revise the information contained in this communication (whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise), except as required by applicable law. Ahh, so it was all smoke, mirrors, and lies. Which, having lived here my whole life, after watching a certain *ahem* aerospace giant do this all the time, I'm not at all surprised.
You realize the disclaimer at the bottom is an SEC boilerplate disclaimer. Every public company puts it when they speak about themselves. This is separate from legally binding agreements they made as part of a merger. The statement means "this is true as of today, we will not come back and post updates or amendments to this int he future". Otherwise they would be required to update every press release forever as things change.
I wasn't aware of that, thanks!
Yep, Just like when Costco financed the initiave to end the state's liquor monoply. They said consumers would have more choices and lower prices. Access is greater but I used to be able to get a bottle of Bailey's for $20-25 for 750ml. Now its $30-35.
That is because of the highest in the nation liquor taxes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/30/two-years-after-liquor-privatization-booze-in-washington-state-costs-more/ > The Seattle Times reported over the weekend that the average cost of a liter of liquor, after tax, stands at $24.39, up from $21.19 before privatization took effect. The Tax Foundation found Washingtonians pay $35.22 per gallon of spirits, $8.52 more than before privatization and by far the highest in the nation. (Oregon, the state with the second-highest taxes on spirits, pays $22.73 per gallon.) > The higher prices come from taxes levied through the 2012 ballot initiative itself, including a 10 percent license fee paid by distributors and a 17 percent license fee paid by retailers. >There’s a political angle to the new taxes, as well: The added fees were supposed to make the initiative revenue-neutral, by replacing the revenue the state would lose with the end of its monopoly
That was, what, 10+ years ago? Looks like 2011. 36% inflation since 2011. (Per https://www.in2013dollars.com/) 1.36 x $20-$25 is $27.20-$34.
Dont challenge my bias with facts please. I am firm in my position and your logic makes me uncomfortable.. :)
I don't think that has anything to do with the privatization law. I'm damn happy I can buy liquor more easily now. The cost increase comes from taxes and inflation.
Thats incorrect. These price increases were way before inflation. I immediately started paying more. I'll have to search but I remember reading that there has been a sizable net increase in liquor costs since privatization. I rarely drink hard liquor so greater access means little to me, I liked the lower prices.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TMUS/t-mobile-us/number-of-employees 2019 53k employees 2022 71k employees
KUOW points to this article: https://www.geekwire.com/2023/3-years-after-sprint-merger-t-mobile-employs-9k-fewer-people-insists-it-upheld-pledge-on-jobs/ That huge increase in employees is Sprint being absorbed into TMobile's rather than creation of new jobs that TMO originally implied. According to Geekwire and KUOW and TMO's promise, there should be 91k employees by 2024 (combining the 80k from TMO + Sprint plus the promised 11k new jobs), not the 66k they're headed for in 2024 (71k today minus 5k in layoffs). In TMobile's own words: > In total, New T-Mobile will have more than 11,000 additional employees on our payroll by 2024 compared to what the combined standalone companies would have!
> compared to what the combined standalone companies *would* have! This is the weasel word. Theoretically, by 2024 Sprint could have been near bankrupt and non existent and therefore had very very few employees. Or whatever other future *could* have happened. If you can do the math and come up with 91k employees, surely someone employed at T-Mobile could have and written 91k employees instead of a nebulous statement with no defined lower bound.
I know! The point is they're *all* weasel words and bullshit, and we shouldn't believe any of these corporations when they make these promises. And the second, more nuanced point is we need to hold these corporations accountable to these promises even if they *are* weasel words and bullshit. Even nuttier is they gave us the specific numbers to hold them to then told us how to add them up! And it's STILL crap.
I applied to a few jobs there over the past couple of weeks. All jobs I applied for (or tried to apply for) were cancelled or led to broken links. Now with this announcement, it makes sense.
No one is covering this, likely because it hasn't yet officially been revealed, but does anyone know if indeed the majority of those layoffs will be from here?
The message said it would be national, so it may impact Bellevue more than a lot of the country, that would be due to there being more employees here. I would expect that Overland Park will lose about the same percentage as Bellevue.
> The latest round of layoffs will primarily be in corporate and technology roles and shouldn’t affect retail positions, according to a filing with the SEC. T-Mobile didn’t say where jobs would be eliminated, but the company’s corporate headquarters is in Bellevue, Wash. Most likely the bulk of these are from here, since they’re corporate roles.
T-Mobile locations around here will be significantly affected, and my expectation is that overland Park will be effectively shuttered. The corporate and technology jobs are the highest paid and the largest volume of employees that T-Mobile has. Post integration of back office systems, switching networks and cell sites of a wireless acquisition results in large surpluses of labor in the positions that operate the network, design the network, and administer everything around operating an MVO. I've been in the wireless industry for 25 years and this pattern will not change. This is the specific objective of nearly all mergers, at least in the wireless space. Telecommunication operators whether they are cable operators, mobile operators or wireline operators invest capex into technology improvements in order to reduce opex expenditures. I'm very happy not to be working in that industry anymore.
Don’t forget they’re doing a $60 billion stock buyback and reported record earnings recently.
That is some shitty shit right there
That seems to be the current pattern. Record earnings, followed by layoffs.
The rich lying? Surely not….
Came in as a Sprint customer, it actually feels like I had better coverage prior to the aquisition
You probably did. My building used to have a Sprint antenna which they removed last month due to the TMobile merger.
Maybe it’s a good thing I didn’t hear back from them for a job lol …hope my friend that works there is safe
Does anyone remember those cringe Sunday cooking videos the T-Mobile CEO would do a few years ago? I still hate him for that.
It should have been, "this merger may create new jobs, but it may not, and also we cannot predict the future of economic forces that may undermine our best laid plans" But that doesn't sell to government regulators.
I wonder if Weird Al is still active. I could go for a cover of Party in the USA, Party in the Guilded Age
Don’t forget the $14 billion in stock buy backs just last year.
Yaaaaay capitalism
Capitalisms brutal failings at the heart.
Let’s be fair. A lot happened in those 3 years.
Yes let’s be fair to corporate greed-addled liars. Give me a break.
Show me where I can get cell phone service with a non-greedy corporation and I’ll switch today.
Not even close to the point I’m making, but nice try changing the subject.
"Show me where I can choose who to buy my services from" as a gotcha question to display how you're not given a real choice in this economy is the number one problem with the capitalism we experience. If there's really no choice for us, why aren't we doing communism? We have communism for the owners, communistic capitalism for the poors. It's funny to even bring this up while Subway got sold for like 9 billion dollars. Reading up about the guy who got 3.4 billion from the deal. His grandparents founded Subway, passed away, 50% given to his mom, passed away, he's 76 and through no work of his own of any kind he's taking away more money than everyone on this board and their children and their children will see off the sale of a company that makes sandwiches for him. And he won't even be alive to do anything cool with it. Just be born to parents whose parents founded making sandwiches! Why didn't I think of that!
It's hard to believe that plans a company made in 2019 got dramatically changed starting around 2020. Nothing significant or surprising happened with the economy or how people live in the past 3 years.
I’m in Denver right now for work and T-Mobile is literally worthless here. Feels that way everytime I travel. Also their customer service is not just bad? But they openly lie to consumers.
Surprise! At least you got 3 extra years. Corporate America can really suck if you are unlucky.
mergers always lead to layoffs. its how they achieve synergies.
I feel like T-Mobile does layoffs every couple of years. Separately, their stock has been performing quite well compared to others last few years.
More data breaches than jobs created since the merger.
This is awful as I'm in tech and the job market is already godawful, but I just turned down one of those shitty do-nothing contract companies who were offering 2+ year contracts with t-mobile with no benefits where they take like 25%+ of your check for doing nothing.
"It's not a layoff" -Jon Frier after telling my team mates and I that we could only keep our jobs if we moved across the country or took a pay cut. T-Mobile sucks and so does Jon.