51 replies to this topic

[ChadBroChillz]

bigsnake49, on 01 June 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

It's not that valuable except in dense urban environments like NY and San Fran and a few other downtowns. That's why I am a firm advocate of Sprint acquiring both MetroPCS and Leap (Cricket) and maybe USCC and CSpire Wireless. That will force them to support the AWS band or try and spectrum swap PCS for AWS spectrum. The big monkey wrench is what Dish is going to do. If they clear the FCC unscathed, then Sprint is a natural to partner with them either to host Dish's spectrum or merge/acquire them. Sprint needs the steady income of either a wireline or a satellite TV network. Getting rid of Embarq was a big mistake in my mind. There's still money to be made on business lines.

How much AWS could they really get? Buying up Metro and Leap would probably cost them somewhere around 15+ billion dollars, and that would only give them around 10Mhz of nationwide AWS. I doubt they would ever get a good enough amount of AWS.

According to

http://specmap.sequence-omega.net/

Sprint has almost complete nationwide coverage using just Block A and B, which are 30Mhz blocks, plus more in blocks C-F, which are 10mhz and 10Mhz nationwide on the G-block

If you do not trust that source, One of our contributors, AJ, created this map some time ago of Sprint's spectrum holdings.



Even if we go by this map, Most areas are covered in 30Mhz of spectrum. This map does not include sprint's G-Block either.

Unless Sprint decides to buy the spectrumCo AWS, they will not get enough AWS for it to matter. It would be better to focus on bolstering PCS holdings, Buying Clearwire( which including debt would be cheaper than Leap or Metro), and possibly buying the rest of the SMR in the future.

[bigsnake49]

ChadBroChillz, on 01 June 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

How much AWS could they really get? Buying up Metro and Leap would probably cost them somewhere around 15+ billion dollars, and that would only give them around 10Mhz of nationwide AWS. I doubt they would ever get a good enough amount of AWS.

According to

http://specmap.sequence-omega.net/

Sprint has almost complete nationwide coverage using just Block A and B, which are 30Mhz blocks, plus more in blocks C-F, which are 10mhz and 10Mhz nationwide on the G-block

If you do not trust that source, One of our contributors, AJ, created this map some time ago of Sprint's spectrum holdings.



Even if we go by this map, Most areas are covered in 30Mhz of spectrum. This map does not include sprint's G-Block either.

Unless Sprint decides to buy the spectrumCo AWS, they will not get enough AWS for it to matter. It would be better to focus on bolstering PCS holdings, Buying Clearwire( which including debt would be cheaper than Leap or Metro), and possibly buying the rest of the SMR in the future.

I don't want them to buy them for their AWS spectrum. They should try to trade AWS spectrum from their acquisition for PCS spectrum.

While I agree on Sprint getting PCS H block (I have been hearing about this since 2004), SMR spectrum becoming available is news to me. What SMR spectrum is this? If it's 900MHz spectrum, Sprint does not own the whole 5Mhz block so they would have to buy out the rest of the spectrum holders. Would FCC allow it? Where is the other SMR spectrum going to come from?

[S4GRU]

I don't know of any SMR spectrum resources that Sprint could count on in the next few years, other than maybe SouthernLINC and Preferred Wireless. But Sprint should always keep a contingency plan in place for any useful SMR spectrum resources that could open up in the future.

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[ChadBroChillz]

bigsnake49, on 01 June 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

I don't want them to buy them for their AWS spectrum. They should try to trade AWS spectrum from their acquisition for PCS spectrum.

While I agree on Sprint getting PCS H block (I have been hearing about this since 2004), SMR spectrum becoming available is news to me. What SMR spectrum is this? If it's 900MHz spectrum, Sprint does not own the whole 5Mhz block so they would have to buy out the rest of the spectrum holders. Would FCC allow it? Where is the other SMR spectrum going to come from?

You are correct about the PCS H block. Seems like it has been in planning forever.I was talking about the rest of the SMR800, but I was saying it was a possibility, not that it is set in stone going to happen.

I was just pointing out that Sprint is in a good position in terms of spectrum. I really doubt the rural and sub-rural areas are going to need more than 20-30Mhz of spectrum, and the cities that do need it, have at least 70Mhz of 2500-2600.

[gangrene]

bigsnake49, on 01 June 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

It's not that valuable except in dense urban environments like NY and San Fran and a few other downtowns. That's why I am a firm advocate of Sprint acquiring both MetroPCS and Leap (Cricket) and maybe USCC and CSpire Wireless. That will force them to support the AWS band or try and spectrum swap PCS for AWS spectrum. The big monkey wrench is what Dish is going to do. If they clear the FCC unscathed, then Sprint is a natural to partner with them either to host Dish's spectrum or merge/acquire them. Sprint needs the steady income of either a wireline or a satellite TV network. Getting rid of Embarq was a big mistake in my mind. There's still money to be made on business lines.

What you are proposing would turn their network into an overly complicated and difficult to support mess.

TD-LTE is the long term solution to any capacity issues that might arise in their top 100 markets & in isolated high traffic areas within their peripheral markets.

Converting the existing Clearwire footprint over to TD-LTE from WIMAX is basically trivial.

Not to mention there's an ability to add capacity and eliminate performance bottlenecks wherever they start to appear by deploying small cells in high traffic areas like malls, universities, sports arenas, and airports.

Their network modernization program is so important because it allows them to have fine grain control over their infrastructure, do real time monitoring and address capacity problems on a site to site basis. Its absolutely key in terms of using their existing spectrum and infrastructure in the most efficient way possible.

Its inefficient/old fashioned thinking to view cellular networks as monolithic and assume that Sprint should purchase huge blocks of contiguous spectrum and blanket entire markets when performance bottlenecks are highly localized.

[iansltx]

So Dish got brought up...Sprint could do with them what they had planned to do with LightSquared. Would be good for both companies, and would keep AT&T and Verizon from trying to monopolize those bands as well.

[bigsnake49]

gangrene, on 01 June 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

What you are proposing would turn their netwok into an overly complicated and difficult to support mess.

TD-LTE is the long term solution to any capacity issues that might arise in their top 100 markets & in isolated high traffic areas within their peripheral markets.

Converting the existing Clearwire footprint over to TD-LTE from WIMAX is basically trivial.

Not to mention there's an ability to add capacity and eliminate performance bottlenecks wherever they start to appear by deploying small cells in high traffic areas like malls, universities, sports arenas, and airports.

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors, do you?
As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.

[gangrene]

bigsnake49, on 01 June 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors, do you?
As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.

You're completely missing the point.

Those suburban markets don't need additional spectrum as long as TD-LTE micro-cells are deployed in high traffic areas where people congregate.

It keeps the rest of the network, where there isn't a critical mass of people running smoothly.

Textbook Example: It prevents the 2500 students in a High School from dragging down the network performance in an entire neighborhood.

The extra capacity is only deployed where it is actually needed.

[S4GRU]

Quote

2500Mhz is not going to be deployed in the suburbs and that's where most people live and drive from/to. It just does not have the propagation. If it was that valuable people would be breaking down Clearwire's doors to get it. I don't see any broken down doors, do you?
As far as how easy or cheap it is converting from WiMax to LTE, we will see. If Clearwire keeps asking for money, it might not be.

This is true. But to be valuable to Sprint, it doesn't have to cover the entirety of the suburbs to be useful as additional capacity in the suburbs.

For instance, lets take the suburb of Richardson, Texas outside of Dallas. A LTE cell there starts to go over capacity and all PCS and SMR spectrum that can be used for an additional LTE carrier is used up. They will still deploy TD-LTE on that site for additional capacity, even though it is suburban.

Additional carrier capacity with TD-LTE does not need to be contiguous with other TD-LTE sites. It can be a complete island, just within the Sprint Macro FD-LTE network. And it doesn't have to cover the whole cell that is identified as approaching capacity. Because even if it covers only half the customers in that cell with a meaningful LTE signal, every one of those customers now covered can be shunted to TD-LTE, if needed.

Then all the customers who are remaining in the cell outside of the TD-LTE coverage can now have the 1900 LTE and 800 LTE carriers to themselves. They were near capacity before adding the TD-LTE carrier, and now with approximately half removed, lots of capacity is back available.

And in some instances, if there is a high demand zone right outside the edge of coverage of the TD-LTE signal island, an assisting TD-LTE picocell can be added. Sprint is in the process of finalizing a plan for urban picocells that attach to street lights, stoplights, etc.

Clearwire's TD-LTE is going to be a wonderful thing for Sprint and eventually us customers.

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

[gangrene]

Robert, would it be wrong to assume that micro/pico/femto cells are going to be way more prominent in the future?

This looked like a huge part of clearwire's strategy going forward and that the cost of installing them in shopping malls and schools is almost minimal.

[ChadBroChillz]

I found this nugget of information compared the spectrums building propagation.



Being from Verizon, I can understand questioning the validity, but It does bring up the question of how much better is AWS or 1900mhz compared to 2.5Ghz.

[bigsnake49]

ChadBroChillz, on 01 June 2012 - 04:19 PM, said:

I found this nugget of information compared the spectrums building propagation.



Being from Verizon, I can understand questioning the validity, but It does bring up the question of how much better is AWS or 1900mhz compared to 2.5Ghz.

I don't think that chart is accurate. It shows that propagation distance is inversely linear with frequency. From what I remember from my communication courses Loss = (c/(4*pi*f*d)^2. Signal loss is inversely proportional to the square of the frequency. Am I missing something or are the Verizon people wrong?

[WiWavelength]

bigsnake49, on 04 June 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

I don't think that chart is accurate. It shows that propagation distance is inversely linear with frequency. From what I remember from my communication courses Loss = (c/(4*pi*f*d)^2. Signal loss is inversely proportional to the square of the frequency. Am I missing something or are the Verizon people wrong?

Free space path loss (which is not really an ideal metric in this real world scenario, but it can still serve as a general measuring stick) increases by 6 dB for every doubling of frequency (i.e. halving of wavelength) or doubling of distance.

I empirically derived a quick way to calculate the free space path loss difference (in dB) between two frequencies. Use this formula: 20[log(F₁/F₂)]. To illustrate, 20[log(1900/850)] = 6.99 dB, as PCS 1900 MHz experiences ~7 dB greater free space path loss than does Cellular 850 MHz.

As for the VZW numbers referenced above, they are basically spot on. They use 2500 MHz as the baseline and calculate a ratio from there. For example, 2500/700 = 3.57, which jives with VZW's 3.5x ratio. Furthermore, plug the ratio into my formula to get the free space path loss difference then in dB: 20[log(3.57)] = 11.06 dB.

AJ

[Josh]

bigsnake49, on 01 June 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

I don't want them to buy them for their AWS spectrum. They should try to trade AWS spectrum from their acquisition for PCS spectrum. While I agree on Sprint getting PCS H block (I have been hearing about this since 2004), SMR spectrum becoming available is news to me. What SMR spectrum is this? If it's 900MHz spectrum, Sprint does not own the whole 5Mhz block so they would have to buy out the rest of the spectrum holders. Would FCC allow it? Where is the other SMR spectrum going to come from?

I personally think that buying the smaller regional players would not be a bad thing if they divested themselves of the AWS spectrum after they got it. The problem is that none of the smaller carriers have any significant amount of nationwide spectrum, especially not in just in PCS or AWS, as they are currently using a combination of the 2. The only way to really make it worthwhile to purchase them would be if Sprint was able to purchase multiple carriers, that together cover a significant portion of the US (or at the very least, where they have less than 30Mhz average spectrum). If they were able to purchase all the major regional carriers (and/or a consortium of smaller players) they would be able to gain a nearly nationwide blanket of new PCS spectrum, as well as a nearly nationwide blanket of AWS spectrum. Since AWS spectrum is not valuable to Sprint, they would be able to sell it to T-Mobile (or dish or whoever wants to buy it) and gain some of the losses back from purchasing the other companies.
After NV, there should be plenty of capacity to host all the new customers, and allow sprint to re-band the gained spectrum for additional LTE. The only problem is that many of these companies are pre-paid, and might not sign with sprint (possibly they could also make special promotions for them to switch to Boost/Virgin brands.

Another idea would be to actually work with T-Mobile to purchase the companies and split customers and spectrum. Areas that were primarily served by the AWS spectrum, the customers would go to T-Mobile; while areas that were served by PCS spectrum, customers would go to sprint. How much this would cost would depend on the percentages of Mhz of spectrum and percentages of customers each gained... but this would allow them to make sure that the big 2 couldn't overpower either of the smaller carriers individually.
I know that there is almost no chance of this actually happening, but it would be a way for each company to better compete with the big 2.

[TheBarron]

I don't think there is any doubt that WiMax was a good decision, as it wasn't so much a decision as something they had to do to maintain spectrum holdings.

What I can't understand is why Sprint ever let Clear manage themselves. With 51% ownership and ever-increasing evidence of ineptitude, wouldn't you eventually step in and take over?

[S4GRU]

Quote

What I can't understand is why Sprint ever let Clear manage themselves. With 51% ownership and ever-increasing evidence of ineptitude, wouldn't you eventually step in and take over?

And that is the question for the ages...

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[marioc21]

Quote

And that is the question for the ages...

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

They didn't want to be responsible for clearwire's debt load. They had they're own finances to worry about. That's why they dropped their voting power to less than 50%. They were worried if clear wire defaulted they would be forced to take over repayment.

Sent from my Acer A200 using Forum Runner

[shawn_kc]

Do you guys think Clearwire could possibly build "Carrier-Grade Service using Wi-Fi Over WiMAX"

Here is the article.
http://www.wimax360....i-fi-over-wimax

[S4GRU]

Quote

They didn't want to be responsible for clearwire's debt load. They had they're own finances to worry about. That's why they dropped their voting power to less than 50%. They were worried if clear wire defaulted they would be forced to take over repayment.

Sent from my Acer A200 using Forum Runner

I get that. However, Sprint could have upped their voting power, made some critical changes and then reduced voting power. There were other options. But Sprint was trying to keep their partner happy and not step on their toes. Any aggressive move by Sprint would have instantly soured the relationship and made things very difficult. It was a tough position to be in. Its just Monday morning quarterbacking.

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[S4GRU]

Quote

Do you guys think Clearwire could possibly build "Carrier-Grade Service using Wi-Fi Over WiMAX"

Here is the article.
http://www.wimax360....i-fi-over-wimax

I read this article. I'm not sure I get what he is proposing.

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner