This isn't about coverage, it's about needs. If I could get away with less expensive coverage, I would. But I can't, so T-Mobile, sprint and AT&T will probably never see my business.
It's the report that says tmobile has the fastest LTE. That is laughable based on a comparison of the coverage area of tmobile vs the other big two.
I'm not the only one that finds the concept of the report bogus (and that is my IMO). T-Mobile may have the fastest AVERAGE LTE, but the speed depends on what square inch of land you are standing on, e.g. I posted my LTE speed a few posts up.
What good does it do anyone to know the average LTE speed of tmobile beats the other carriers, but the square inch of land you are on, you are barely able to make a voice call, much less do a speed test?
And this is in no way meant to take away what works for tmobiles customers. My comment was directed toward that bogus report.
I agree, coverage/service always matters based on wherever you are. That said, I can't think of anywhere I've traveled except through the NC/TN mountains a couple times where I couldn't even make a voice call. For me, having LTE on those 2 trips through that 15 minute stretch isn't worth the extra $1000+/yr to Verizon, for others it might be. As you said, everyone has different needs. To each his own.