Talk:List of mobile virtual network operators in the United States

2600hz
Rachel2600hz 2600hz is not listed anywhere as an MVNO. Please understand the definition of what an MVNO is. An MVNO is: A mobile virtual network operator (MVNO), or mobile other licensed operator (MOLO) is a wireless communications services provider that does not own the wireless network infrastructure over which the MVNO provides services to its customers. By definition 2600hz does not fill the requirement for the title. They do not sell services to customers (such as cellular voice/sms/data plans). They may be involved in packaging a Telecoms services to an MVNO, but that does not make them an MVNO, that makes them a dealer of MVNO packages. There is a difference. The article your originally posted from MVNODynamics points to a webpage that comes up with the following MVNO Dynamics. The next article you reference was to TechCrunch, with the claim in your statement that 2600 announced they were an MVNO for Sprint while there, but the article does not state that information anywhere, thus not substantiating your proposal. Also, you either work for or have a vested interest in 2600hz and that makes you partial to the company and this list, thus meaning you should not be contributing anything to this list at all. Even though 2600hz is not an MVNO, the are in the Telecom business, and as an employee/affiliate of such, you can not contribute to a telecom list, as only non-partial parties can be editors of such pages. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 00:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

The assumptions you're making are baseless. 2600Hz is a API based company that builds switches for companies, essentially helping the way they communicate. 2600Hz is not a dealer of MVNO services, it literally builds the environment for how MVNO's communicate, which would make it an MVNE and an MVNO. In the current mobile landscape, there are basically four companies that enable companies to be MVNO's which are Sprint, ATT, T-Mobile and Verizon. I can verify that 2600Hz is utilizing Sprint's infrastructure and if you go to their mobile page here: http://www.2600hz.com/mobile/ or on the 2600Hz website, here: http://2600hz.com/html/sell_mobile_integration.html

MVNO Dynamics is a neutral thought leader in the MVNO space. Here is their website: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/ Here is a piece about 2600Hz announcing them as a US MVNO: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/2013/09/16/mvno-2600hz-mobile-announcement/ Here is the MVNO Dynamics list of US MVNO's, 2600Hz is on there: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/mvno-companies/north-american-mvno-companies/us-mvno-companies/ Go back to the TC article and watch the video, at 2:10 it announces 2600Hz as a Sprint MVNO: http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/09/2600hz-launches-platform-for-opening-the-mobile-telco/

It also states on their reseller website "2600hz Mobile is NOT an app that runs on 3g/4g or Wifi. We have completed a native integration with Sprint which means that your mobile device acts as another end point on our fully-featured PBX system." http://partner.2600hz.com/html/unified_communications.html

I understand your need to make this page as credible as possible, but please stop painting such broad strokes and believing that your assumptions are correct. Rachel2600hz (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

MVNO's do not build the networks, or switches for companies. They do not help companies communicate better, and do not build the environments for which they do the communication. They do not PBX systems that a mobile device is an endpoint on. They do run off of 3G/4G or other mobile technologies, which the company page you point to states it does not. That is not what an MVNO does. What they do is listed at: Mobile virtual network operator. 2600hz does not do this.

I have already proven by the pic provided MVNO Dynamics that MVNODynamics website does not exist, so why do you keep defending this company that a simple Google search reveals no reliable source stating them as the leader you purport them to be. While the website at one time must have existed, it does not anymore. Also, https://www.whois.net/ shows the company has only existed for 2 years, meaning there is no way they could even be a leader in the decades old industry, as you state they are, even if the links you provided were real. All of the links you have go to this: mvnodynamics.com This domain name has just been registered., with nothing else but links to other related links to the telecom industry or mvno's, none of which have 2600hz listed. You also in one of your previous edits mentions TechCrunch as a source of 2600hz announcing themselves as an MVNO. There is the problem with this statement as well because no where in the article you posted did it state that, not even once, not that it matter much because a company can state all day long they are such and such, but the definition of MVNO does not fit what the company does. Your idea of what they do as fitting does not make it so. The definition of MVNO on both Wikipedia and many other verifiable sources do not fit with the business this company conducts. You may however, have MVNO confused with M2M or Machine to Machine. You might check that list and see about posting the company there. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 03:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

In effect, you have supplied no working links to any reliable sites that support your claim that they are an MVNO as described by definition in both Wikipedia, and all over the internet at other reliable sites. Finally, you work or are affiliated with 2600hz, by not only your screen name, but by your previous posts on the page for 2600hz, which are also the only contributions you have made to wikipedia. This means you are not a non-partial editor, and suggests you are simply trying to find multiple outlets to advertise your company. Wikipedia is not the place for that. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 03:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

You have not proven anything with the pic provided, that is a tinyurl of the wrong url you added, please click on any of the links I have provided you. Please clear your cache if necessary. If you're in the US, google MVNO - MVNODynamics the fourth item that is listed, so your assumption is again incorrect. MVNO has only become credible once again over the past few years..FYI. MVNO Dynamics is a neutral thought leader in the MVNO space. Here is their website: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/ Here is a piece about 2600Hz announcing them as a US MVNO: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/2013/09/16/mvno-2600hz-mobile-announcement/ Here is the MVNO Dynamics list of US MVNO's, 2600Hz is on there: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/mvno-companies/north-american-mvno-companies/us-mvno-companies/ Go back to the TC article and watch the video, at 2:10 it announces 2600Hz as a Sprint MVNO: http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/09/2600hz-launches-platform-for-opening-the-mobile-telco/

To become an MVNO a company must get a license (fee) from one of the big four telco companies. Typically this requires no engineering, support, etc, for MVP they just have to build a light infrastructure around it to work. Most of the companies listed as MVNO's are not their entire product offering, its a value add. What it looks like in 2600Hz's case is that they have created PBX functionality for business phones and integrated mobile with a PBX device. So for example transferring a call from your desk phone to your mobile device. The claim "2600hz Mobile is NOT an app that runs on 3g/4g or Wifi. We have completed a native integration with Sprint which means that your mobile device acts as another end point on our fully-featured PBX system." This states that it is not an app that is reliant on a data network. This is natively integrated with Sprint services, so when a call comes in, it is coming through the sprint voice network and not through an App, which relies on wifi, 3g or 4g. You interpreted this incorrectly. (Rachel2600hz (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC))

That is the exact same link you have listed here. I even went to it again just now for you, and made a new screen shot to reprove what I state, this site does not exist. This time I uploaded the large size image so you could see it's the same exact link you post here, and you get the same thing if you just go to www.mvnodynamics.com as well. Here's the proof: MVNODynamics Failed Link Itanaman Dakar (talk) 19:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Please stop saying you've proved something. That is a false assumption, the site does exist, here is the screenshots. Screenshot - Announcing 2600hz as an MVNO http://i60.tinypic.com/dbkqdz.png Screenshot - listing 2600Hz as an MVNO http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2wdowmr&s=8 Here is also a blog on 2600hz, stating that they are an MVNO, I checked this site has been up four years and this was announced in 2013: http://blog.2600hz.com/post/61407562417/2600hz-mobile To become an MVNO, a company basically has to partner with one of the big 4 telco's. Companies do not disclose whether or whether not they are an MVNO or not. In summation, you do not have the capacity to say whether or whether not they are an MVNO. (Rachel2600hz (talk) 21:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC))


 * information on Wikipedia must be verifiable. What reliable source do you propose using to support the inclusion of 2600Hz on this list? Please try to be concise; the conversation above is quite sprawling. VQuakr (talk) 22:48, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Its' quite simple, I am trying to re-establish 2600hz on Wikipedia as an MVNO, the company announced this at Techcrunch and is well documented 2. MVNO-Dyanamics a neutral MVNO thought leader lists 2600hz as a MVNO and even has a press release stating that 2600hz is an MVNO. If this is not enough information, you need to clarify with me what is. Also companies are not required to list what if they are an MVNO. There is no centralized database and it is up to the carrier and them to decide to release. I've done research on other companies and they have far less information available. Rachel2600hz (talk) 22:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Excel Mobile has no info on them being an MVNO, neither does CHT wireless. I have given you over 5 independent links stating that 2600hz is an MVNO. What more is needed, how are you credible if there is so much inconsistencyRachel2600hz (talk) 23:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I do not see any answer to my question in your response. I collapsed the "too long, no one will read" mess above. Please try again and please be concise. VQuakr (talk) 23:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * 2600Hz is an MVNO, here are the links that prove that Here is a piece about 2600Hz announcing them as a US MVNO: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/2013/09/16/mvno-2600hz-mobile-announcement/ Here is the MVNO Dynamics list of US MVNO's, 2600Hz is on there: http://www.mvnodynamics.com/mvno-companies/north-american-mvno-companies/us-mvno-companies/ The TC article and watch the video, at 2:10 it announces 2600Hz as a Sprint MVNO: http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/09/2600hz-launches-platform-for-opening-the-mobile-telco/ Here is also a blog on 2600hz, stating that they are an MVNO, I checked this site has been up four years and this was announced in 2013: http://blog.2600hz.com/post/61407562417/2600hz-mobile
 * Rachel2600hz (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * So does this conclude this warring, I have given you articles stating that 2600hz is an MVNO. Can this company be restored as an MVNO on this page? Rachel2600hz (talk) 23:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Please refer again to the reliable source that was asked. MVNO Dynamics does not fit that category, nor does TechCrunch simply publishing that the company stated they are an MVNO.  TechCrunch did not state they are, they state that 2600hz states they are, and that means that you need a reliable source still. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 00:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * 2600hz as an MVNO http://i60.tinypic.com/dbkqdz.png, Screenshot - listing 2600Hz as an MVNO http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2wdowmr&s=8 Here is also a blog on 2600hz, stating that they are an MVNO, I checked this site has been up four years and this was announced in 2013: http://blog.2600hz.com/post/61407562417/2600hz-mobile To become an MVNO, a company basically has to partner with one of the big 4 telco's. Companies do not have to disclose whether or whether not they are an MVNO or not. This is better cited than most of the MVNO's listed, you need to start purging your list if 2600hz is not on it. Rachel2600hz (talk) 00:50, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Here's a Press Release with the 2600hz CEO stating that they are an MVNO. That's six now. http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2014/08/14/7971086.htm Rachel2600hz (talk) 01:01, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understand. 2600hz, CEO, or any other affiliate of the company stating such is not considered a reliable source.  All of the links so far you have supplied are not considered reliable, verifiable sources, per the information that has been supplied already for you to read over. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 01:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * @Itanaman: I have read through this back and forth and I am concerned. I was in attendance for a Networking Dynamics event last year, a subsidiary of MVNO Dynamics. At this event included high level executives from Sprint and a lot of the MVNO's listed. I also heard 2600hz speak, and I can confirm that they are an MVNO. But the bigger point is how can you not see that by doing a google search, that MVNO Dynamics comes up 3rd when you google "MVNO," only below two wikipedia articles? I have been following this organization for years, I am in the MVNO space, and I am reliant on them for information and their events are the most prominent MVNO-related events in the industry. I just pulled this from their "about" page, it sounds impartial and abides by Wikipedia's standards. "MVNO Dynamics, is an online B2B portal that is dedicated to obsessively covering the MVNx community. The portal provides a wealth of news and resources with over 9500+ aggregated articles, 1307 MVNO profiles and 145+ MVNA/E profiles. Companies, or operators looking for new and exciting MVNO/MVNE solutions or ideas for their service utilise our resources and advisory service for in-depth overview and coverage of the market. MVNO Dynamics hosts local networking events, with multiple events in 2014, and 2015 and the company publishes ‘Dynamic Edge’, the industry’s only magazine dedicated to the MVNx market."
 * VoIPmasterblaster (talk) 10:48, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Please understand, MVNODynamics does not pass the verifiable test as it is not verifiable to all people who use Wikipedia (their webpages do not work in all areas of the world as shown by a couple users in screenshots of what appears for them, a key requirement for verifiable). This information has been freely given for reading previously by the admin on several occasions, and clicking the link will take you there also. As far as the Google side is concerned that has never been a good indicator nor a deciding factor for Wikipedia on reliable/verifiable sources, due to the very nature of how Google works.2607:FCC8:9D80:5C00:9196:BE2E:CC4D:36E6 (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Embarq
Embarq is the name Sprint chose to spin off their wireline services. Did they ever offer mobile? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.150.254.114 (talk) 13:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

MVNO list
Should this be included in the list of MVNOs? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmicray (talk • contribs) 13:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Why is this page dedicated to anything other than U.S. Mobile Virtual Network Operators? There are other areas on Wikipedia for listing if appropriate of these companies. Machine to Machine for instance has a page on Wikipedia, and M2M has very little to do with being an MVNO. I have removed this section accordingly. Please remember an MVNO is a company that sells resells cell phone service they have leased from another company. This is not what an M2M does. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

As a visitor, I'm perplexed with the "Wi-Fi" column in the MVNO table. What does this mean? It isn't explained anywhere. I thought Wi-Fi support was the province of the handset, not the carrier. And I thought Wi-Fi was a foregone conclusion in this day and age. I do see that Americans are subject to iron-fisted control by the carriers, certainly by comparison to the rest of the world, excepting perhaps Canada. So, what does this "Wi-Fi" column mean? Should it be footnoted to explain it to people like me? Freddy011 (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Jaguar Mobile/Other Minor MVNOs?
Jaguar Mobile uses CDMA and GSM technology through the Sprint, AT&T and Verizon networks. The home page is http://www.jaguarmobile.com/. Does this MVNO belong in this list, along with any of the other smaller MVNOs? What is the criteria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snarkeysrevenge (talk • contribs) 18:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Any active MVNO is OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.252.192 (talk) 20:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * This page is dedicated to service providers for phones, data modems and M2M communication devices. Services such as GM OnStar or Amazon WhisperNet should not be listed here as there as no choice of network or device, it's just part of the specifications of the whole product. The details can be found on the product page.

Infinium Wireless
Infinium Wireless should be removed from the MVNO list as it appears to not sell service directly to the public. According to their site they provide cellular service to Not For Profit companies and to Associations. Anotheruser2015 (talk) 07:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand what your thought is behind this, however, the title of this list is not List of United States mobile virtual network operators who sell to the Public, it is "List of United States mobile virtual network operators". Since Infinium is an MVNO who resells for all 4 of the major companies Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile As such Infinium should be listed. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Data2Go Wireless
Data2Go Wireless is an MVNO. We are a data only MVNO with a 499A certification as well as wholesale contracts with Network Carriers. We specialize in M2M services and Private Label our multi carrier MVNO Platform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamdavidbruce (talk • contribs) 01:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I was initially thinking you are not the same thing as an MVNO, for the fact, I don't see where you sell plans even to businesses. I do however, see you sell data plans. Where does the data come from? Who do you lease that from? Do you have something to show that (reputable source)? That would be enough I believe to be considered an MVNO (others please feel free to correct if I am wrong). On the Voice side, I see no where, you sell plans even to businesses. I see you package an MVNO service up for a partnership to companies, but no where there are actual plans sold. I may be missing it and if so could you please give a link to that? In the meantime, I have placed the information back on for you, but please do list that information Itanaman Dakar (talk) 02:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Data2Go Wireless is a full service MVNO with all four US MNO's aggregated to their Apogee IoT Management Platform. Data Plans are offerd for M2M, IoT and LTE Broadband services. Please refer to DataPro2Go™ and the M2M Flex Plan™ Pricing.

Data2Go Wireless has been removed due to being on Wikipedia's Spam Blacklist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist Itanaman Dakar (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Notes Section
This section has become more of an area for promotional statements for various companies, and as such is against the standards of Wikipedia. I have gone through and removed the many statements that were listed in this area, and in the process have questioned whether this section is really needed to be included at all. Would like some input from more established Wikipedia users on this matter please. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Unlimited Data Section -- Proposed Change
Wikipedia standards are to not promote any company. By listing various prices of unlimited data of various companies, this causes perhaps a inadvertent promotion nonetheless. I propose either this section be changed to Unlimited Data that is simply a YES/NO field, or remove the section altogether to bring it 100% to standards. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 04:32, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

With no user input/objections, changes have been made accordingly. This will not only help to discourage promotional statements, but will also eliminate the need to make changes as prices change. Itanaman Dakar (talk) 22:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

MVNO status of Cricket and MetroPCS?
Hello! I previously unilaterally removed Cricket and MetroPCS from the list of MVNOs. I probably should have suggested it here first. I feel that Cricket and MetroPCS should not be considered as MVNOs because of the definition of MVNO from the Wikipedia page on it:

"A mobile virtual network operator... is a wireless communications services provider that does not own the wireless network infrastructure over which the MVNO provides services to its customers. An MVNO enters into a business agreement with a mobile network operator to obtain bulk access to network services at wholesale rates, then sets retail prices independently."

Neither MetroPCS nor Cricket have independent leadership, so I'm not sure they can be considered to be setting retail prices independently. The only person publicly listed as part of the leadership team for MetroPCS is an executive of T-Mobile. He is also listed in T-Mobile's investor website as part of T-Mobile's management. Meanwhile, the present-day Cricket Wireless came about from Aio Wireless (specifically introduced as a prepaid brand of AT&T) absorbing Leap Wireless; the current president of Cricket was in charge of Aio and was moved from AT&T's Mobility Strategy department to lead Aio. thecowwentmoo (talk) 04:58, 15 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing this here. I am unsure myself on how to group this, however, was weary on just deleting them.  Neither companies are considered a telecom of their own at this time, to the best of my knowledge, and utilize the network of the owning companies.  In the case of MetroPCS, it does not own the wireless network infrastructure over which it provides services.  Rather Deutsche Telekom AG who owns 74% of T-Mobile/MetroPCS does: .  Previously T-Mobile was wholly owned by Deutsche Telekom as well, but now that is no longer the case as noted in the referenced article, which in essence might be considered to bring T-Mobile down to MVNO status by definition, however at the moment is still considered to be one of the big 4 Telecom's.  At the very least, changing of the status of MetroPCS may be premature, as you will note according to the article it also has it's own board and leadership according to the terms of the purchase.


 * As far as Cricket, it does have separate leadership, even if that leadership is originally part of AT&T. However, I am more apt to agree for it to be removed, as I can find nothing else myself to support otherwise.Itanaman Dakar (talk) 06:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

business statistics
Where can we find lists of comparative business statistics: number of subscribers, etc?-71.174.188.32 (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Xfinity Mobile
I have noticed Comcast being in the list of defunct, merged and acquired operators, but I believe this status has changed with their new service, Xfinity Mobile which uses 4G LTE from Verizon. I am unsure whether a new entry labeled Xfinity Mobile should be added and the older Comcast service being separate, or Comcast should be re-added to active operators. 2601:4A:8302:2E2E:EC32:1E03:36EE:2278 (talk) 02:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Why does the section on Minnesota and California Lifeline Assistance operators exist?
The paragraph states they're in all 50 states. So why are there two states highlighted?

Seems confusing, maybe a cleanup would help make it useful, focusing on all states.--Naadobea1776 (talk) 20:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Like other social services programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the so-called Obama Phone program is federal, but implementation is up to each state, and further, to individual operators in each state. The reason California and Minnesota are the only ones in the table is simply because only people from those states took the initiative to fill in information.
 * I agree this is confusing, but it would take a lot of work to research the MVNOs for each state. I think the best compromise would be to merge the Lifeline table into the main table.  Probably not necessary to add any new columns (note all of them have "Free Phone: Yes", so that data doesn't even need to be in the Notes column); they could be entered in a standard format like "Access Wireless: Lifeline".
 * For providers like Access that apparently only do Lifeline, there'd be only one row in the main table, while for providers like enTouch Wireless that do both, there'd be one "enTouch Wireless" row, and then below, it, an "enTouch Wireless: Lifeline" row. The states served could go in the Notes column.  --Dan Harkless (talk) 07:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I have now implemented my proposal above. I used slightly different formatting, with "Lifeline: state abbreviation list" in the new "Market" column, and "Provider [Lifeline]" in the Company column on the Lifeline version's row, for providers that offer both Lifeline and non-Lifeline service, and have significantly different offerings for the two.  For providers that offer the same stuff to both types of accounts (simply giving a discount to Lifeline customers), I'm combining them into a single row, with "   Personal" after the Lifeline state list, as on enTouch Wireless.  Also, I've filled in all the other Lifeline states besides CA and MN for enTouch, and will continue to do so as I go through these.  --Dan Harkless (talk) 03:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Having Access Wireless listed as a California provider is misleading, making it appear they only operate in California, which is untrue. They are a provider in many other states. Also, Access Wireless is no longer an MVNO of Sprint, but T-Mobile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.137.186.166 (talk) 19:20, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Viaero Wireless
I think Viaero Wireless qualifies for this list. I would add it myself, but I don't want to risk doing a poor job and someone else removes it because of that, so I guess this is the next best option. I also don't know what the source requirements would be for this list. They own and maintain their own local towers in the states they operate in, but they use AT&T and T-Mobile towers for nationwide coverage. (Found here: https://www.viaero.com/about-viaero-wireless). Svetroid (talk) 00:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Unlimited Fast Data Column is Confusing
Should the answer be yes if the mvno says they provide an unlimited 4g plan? Then color it yellow with the maybe template, and add if they throttle, network manage, or hard cap it? I feel like the only yes template green fields should be fully unthrottled, capped, or network managed. Although, if they have a hard cap, then should the answer be No, but colored yellow with the maybe template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jphein (talk • contribs) 16:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Technologies used by AT&T and Verizon
I am pretty sure that AT&T and Verizon are already in the process of rolling out their 5G bandwidth. I have decided to update the technologies section to reflect such recent events. My multiple edits were done due to the fact that I was unable to modify my edit summary for my first edit on this topic. Anyways, I do not have any intentions to vandalize this page at all. Leiwang7 (talk) 15:34, 13 September 2020 (UTC)