Sprint wants to save $1B by relocating towers

[hescominsoon]

I'm only talking about existing sites. It seems silly to use microwave when fiber is already there. Unless the new sites they plan on using would have no fiber, then it makes sense. but that comes back to the original problem - relocating sites in the first place. Will take a lot of resources to do that. Microwave on new builds makes perfect sense.

Read my other response.  If they can convert fiber backhaul to rivals to microwave backhaul to their own tier 1 backbone the cost savings are huge even without relocating physical towers.

[hescominsoon]

Will microwave hurt pings though? It's a brilliant idea, I just am not sure about what its impact will be on pings.

for phones pings are not an issue.  You will notice nothing between a latency of 10ms to a 60 ms latency.  However with microwave latency is not an issue.

[hescominsoon]

A) Given Verizon's small and decreasing ILEC footprint, I doubt there is much backhaul money going to Verizon.

I've seen Sprint pass up competitive backhaul providers just to purchase from the incumbent. They have a lot of room to work.

C) Most of their microwave link budgets are crap. Way too small of antennas...  fixing that increases tower rent.

D) 10G backhaul isn't significantly different in price from 1G backhaul, so they could aggregate towers via microwave fairly reasonably...  at an increase in tower rent.

E) Verizon is moving to dark fiber backhaul instead of DWDM or MPLS\CE, but dark fiber can be expensive. I don't know if Sprint has the cash to do the same.

F) Sprint should probably just put me in charge of their backhaul and it'd be done right.  ;-)

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/7398-sprint-wants-to-save-1b-by-relocating-towers/page-3&do=findComment&comment=465328

 

ILEC is not where verizon makes its cash now.  alternet, worldcom, and other companies they own are the cash cows ont he back end(aka tier 1).

[mhammett]

I know that there I like is not the dominant division of the company. That's what point I was trying to make. The article was saying that Sprint is paying jobs of money to AT&T and Verizon. They simply can't be paying that much money to Verizon. Also, I think you're mistaken about the cash cow. The mobile wireless network is the cash cow. Their former UUNet, WorldCom, MCA, Verizon Business, etc properties have been rumored to be up for sale. Their data center and cloud properties are also up for sale. All Verizon will have left in a couple of years will be there us wireless network and BIOS in the former Bell Atlantic region.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/7398-sprint-wants-to-save-1b-by-relocating-towers/page-3&do=findComment&comment=465328

 

ILEC is not where verizon makes its cash now. alternet, worldcom, and other companies they own are the cash cows ont he back end(aka tier 1).

I have been with sprint since 2006! At this point even by cutting 2.5 billions in cost, that cost has to go right back into the network. So there won't be any profits in my opinion. Sprint has to make the network cheaper to make profit. The 2.5 billion in cost cutting made sense, but then looking at the new updated coverage map sprint is still has a lot of 3G sites along most interstates...... still needs a lot more band 41/26 rolled out. Plus the smalls cells are expensive as can be i read in an article they are anywhere from 5 to 10 thousand a piece so that 2.5 has to go back into the network in my opinion!

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

I know that there I like is not the dominant division of the company. That's what point I was trying to make. The article was saying that Sprint is paying jobs of money to AT&T and Verizon. They simply can't be paying that much money to Verizon. Also, I think you're mistaken about the cash cow. The mobile wireless network is the cash cow. Their former UUNet, WorldCom, MCA, Verizon Business, etc properties have been rumored to be up for sale. Their data center and cloud properties are also up for sale. All Verizon will have left in a couple of years will be there us wireless network and BIOS in the former Bell Atlantic region.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

a few sprint small cell sites have been spotted

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[hescominsoon]

I know that there I like is not the dominant division of the company. That's what point I was trying to make. The article was saying that Sprint is paying jobs of money to AT&T and Verizon. They simply can't be paying that much money to Verizon. Also, I think you're mistaken about the cash cow. The mobile wireless network is the cash cow. Their former UUNet, WorldCom, MCA, Verizon Business, etc properties have been rumored to be up for sale. Their data center and cloud properties are also up for sale. All Verizon will have left in a couple of years will be there us wireless network and BIOS in the former Bell Atlantic region.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

rumored yes...but i do not think vz is that anxious to sell honestly.  It gives them a huge cost advantage and a very large cash inflow as tier 1 gatekeepers.  If someone throws enough money at them sure they will sell because of their vodaphone buyout....but otherwise they'll take that milk..and lots of it..

[mhammett]

Their former MCI Worldcom network is far less important than it used to be (as is Sprint).

 

2008

=====

http://research.dyn.com/2008/12/winners-and-losers-for-2008/

 

(Screen shots of 2008 as they were Flash, Java, something not phone friendly.)

 

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/onwk7xtj6angc7e/dyn%202008%201.PNG?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8dr8g1d9g1ligu0/dyn%202008%202.PNG?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tb5bi5sobxwadfm/dyn%202008%203.PNG?dl=0

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8p4tiu8hg8q6fd0/dyn%202008%204.PNG?dl=0

 

 

2014

=====

http://research.dyn.com/2015/02/bakers-dozen-2014-edition/

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[tongboy]

I see this article as part of negotiations. It sounds like they are trying to get companies like Crown Castle, AT&T and others to give Sprint cheaper rates by telling them "Hey, we have this cheaper option"

 

Anyone else see that?

 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

[JeffDTD]

I see this article as part of negotiations. It sounds like they are trying to get companies like Crown Castle, AT&T and others to give Sprint cheaper rates by telling them "Hey, we have this cheaper option"

 

Anyone else see that?

 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

If so, that represents great negotiation setup.

 

Im going to choose to believe that the current leadership will delicately plan any moves made, meaning the new equipment is installed and ready to flip the switch prior to turning off existing equipment, or that new equipment is fully operating prior to decommissioning sites. Relocation for the purpose of savings would have been a beautiful thing in NV 1.0. By any regard, it has to be less disruptive than the rip and replace we went through otherwise churn is going to surge again.

 

Anecdotal to my market, Sprint has a high traffic site serving a 15k person university and the heart of my city just outside of the boundaries of said university. Seems to have significant down tilt to maximize depth. Less than a 10th of a mile west, on university property, there is a water tower currently being used by two wireless companies at an almost identical height to sprints panels on the nearby tower. So if Sprint could move it to the water tower and save $$, why not? Great idea

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tengen31]

Nothing about that article is true. Sprint is not moving any of their towers.

[tongboy]

Nothing about that article is true. Sprint is not moving any of their towers.

Care to explain?

 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

[Tengen31]

Care to explain?

 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

Some of the towers are leased and, the leases are good for years and years and they can't true abandon that.

 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[laqn1283]

Some of the towers are leased and, the leases are good for years and years and they can't true abandon that.

 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Did you answer for tongboy or are you the same person?

You said some of the towers are long term lease, then for the remaining, can they move?  Like you and probably everyone else on this board, I hope nothing in that article is true because the cost and the disruptions from that task will doom sprint forever.  

[jeffcarp]

After reading as much as I can find on this, I am really starting to feel like the original Recode article just didn't get it right. I really question whether the deployments that are primarily targeted for government facilities is actually the relocation of macro sites or whether it is the Mobilitie small cell deployments. Perhaps the existing two tower companies are now understanding the reality that they're not going to be in on this small cell deployment business and perhaps they took Recode along for a little ride of half truths when it came to this story?

[tyroned3222]

After reading as much as I can find on this, I am really starting to feel like the original Recode article just didn't get it right. I really question whether the deployments that are primarily targeted for government facilities is actually the relocation of macro sites or whether it is the Mobilitie small cell deployments. Perhaps the existing two tower companies are now understanding the reality that they're not going to be in on this small cell deployment business and perhaps they took Recode along for a little ride of half truths when it came to this story?

I think it might be true for new marco site deployment, but not for existing site

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[richy]

Sounds like a good move if well executed. If they can deliver some significant savings to help grow the company what's not to love. Not sending cash to the big two would be very sweet! 

Just my tmo 'fanboy' 2 cents.

[newyork4me]

Some of the towers are leased and, the leases are good for years and years and they can't true abandon that.

 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Nonsense. This happens all the time --> We've seen MetroPCS walk away from about 8,000 leases when they were integrated with T-Mobile, and Nextel left many leases behind too.  The carriers just pay a fee to the tower company and head out the door.

 

 

You statement is tantamount to: customers can't leave Verizon because they have a 2-year contract. 

[joshuam]

for phones pings are not an issue. You will notice nothing between a latency of 10ms to a 60 ms latency. However with microwave latency is not an issue.

I agree. But Marceo has bragged about their pings, so he'd look foolish if it slips significantly.

[JossMan]

Article seems misinformed, I believe this is going forward with Sprint's micro-cell deployment and any new macro sites that are needed (NGN).

 

Sprint could also be leveraging different ISPs such as smaller municipal providers for fiber backhaul to save money, help smaller ISPs, and still have tier 1 support.

[mhammett]

Much of their backhaul is backend fiber run to ATT or verizon.  one thing you have to realize is verizon owns more of the tier 1 backbone in the us than anybody and is in the top 5 in the entire world.  We have seen how vz prices it's wireless assets their backbone pricing is high as well and i am sure they are not giving sprint any kind of volume break either.  If they use microwave for their backhaul they can send the backhaul to places where they own the backbone fiber...drastically cutting their backhaul costs.  From a network engineering perspective this is something i thought sprint should have done long ago.  Leverage their own existing backbone assets.  using microwave backhaul allows them to do just that.,

https://www.sprint.net/images/North-America-Global-IP.png

Sprint doesn't have the fiber network depth to do much with it's own network. Sure, it can do some, but it is no match for Zayo, Windstream, cable, or any of dozens of other FTTT companies.

[mhammett]

I agree. But Marceo has bragged about their pings, so he'd look foolish if it slips significantly.

Microwave can have lower pings.

[mhammett]

Article seems misinformed, I believe this is going forward with Sprint's micro-cell deployment and any new macro sites that are needed (NGN).

 

Sprint could also be leveraging different ISPs such as smaller municipal providers for fiber backhaul to save money, help smaller ISPs, and still have tier 1 support.

There is a lot they could do in this space. They don't seem all that interested in doing what's best for everyone except their competitors, though.

[mhammett]

Verizon's enterprise fiber network hasn't changed significantly since the MCI Worldcom days, so I'm not sure there's that much opportunity to get tower backhaul. Plus there are plenty of cheaper companies to get necessary wavelength services from that have a larger footprint.

[schmidtj]

Microwave can have lower pings.

Correct me if I am wrong but Clearwire was a big user of microwave backhaul.

I was a Clearwire user and it worked well as long as there was no heavy rain within

25 miles. Heavy rain was certain to cause interruptions because microwave is

sensitive to things like that.