What will this mean not enough spectrum

[Feech]

I haven't read it yet but I wanted to get it out to you guys for your thought

 

 

http://www.phonearena.com/news/WSJ-Sprint-may-not-have-enough-unused-spectrum-for-high-quality-LTE-rollout_id32527

[xcharles718]

Sprint doesn't have a spectrum problem. Simple as that.

It would be nice to have some more lower band stuff(ESMR), but that's just not possible.

[WiWavelength]

Sanford Bernstein, cited in the WSJ article, points to analyst Craig Moffett, who seems to have nothing but negative things to say about Sprint and does not appear to understand Sprint's spectrum position.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444097904577539313305919578.html

 

AJ

[ericdabbs]

Blah ba blah ba blah ba blah.....same old recycled garbage that uninformed wireless analysts who don't cover Sprint in detail always spit out about how Sprint doesn't have enough spectrum since its only doing a 5x5 LTE carrier and can't compete with Verizon and AT&T.

[centermedic]

So many Sprint haters. Maybe we should do a census!

[Contreramanjaro]

On Phone Arena, I measure the success of my comment by how many thumbs down I get. I only got three on that article. I've done better with up to five. That was about Nokia which seems to be the another very hated on company right now.

[irev210]

Sanford Bernstein, cited in the WSJ article, points to analyst Craig Moffett, who seems to have nothing but negative things to say about Sprint and does not appear to understand Sprint's spectrum position.

 

http://online.wsj.co...3305919578.html

 

AJ

 

It's pretty sad how ignorant that guy is.

 

There are other sell-side analysts that are much more bullish and see no problems with the 5x5 rollout on the G-Block to start.

 

The part I don't really get is - why does nobody poop on AT&T's spectrum plan? Outside of Dish's spectrum, AT&T has little options.

 

Can you think of any logistical reason of why AT&T wouldn't buy Dish's S-Band once it gets approved for terrestrial use?

[sparky222b]

On Phone Arena, I measure the success of my comment by how many thumbs down I get. I only got three on that article. I've done better with up to five. That was about Nokia which seems to be the another very hated on company right now.

 

I bet I can get at least twenty: "The only thing worse than Apple users are PhoneArena users."

[Thomas L.]

The premise of this article is like a sort of Straw Man fallacy... "Sprint is going to set up a single carrier in the ESMR band, so we're going to write this article like that's the ONLY spectrum Sprint has to launch CDMA on." - it's just not based on Sprint's actual spectrum situation. Lame.

[shaunm82]

Neal, from ExtremeTech wrote a pretty good follow up that I liked:

 

http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/133201-wsj-believes-sprint-is-in-trouble-but-it-really-isnt

[Conan Kudo]

The part I don't really get is - why does nobody poop on AT&T's spectrum plan? Outside of Dish's spectrum, AT&T has little options.

 

Can you think of any logistical reason of why AT&T wouldn't buy Dish's S-Band once it gets approved for terrestrial use?

 

AT&T is making it very hard to figure out what exactly its spectrum plan is. AT&T has done a lot of different confusing things in the last several months that make it rather difficult to figure out how AT&T plans it use its spectrum. Plus, with AT&T as the dominant GSM provider, analysts are never worried about it.

 

Also, AT&T will likely not be allowed to purchase S-band spectrum since WCS is now considered usable spectrum[1]. I expect carriers like T-Mobile, Sprint, and U.S. Cellular will aim to buy chunks, if not all, of the spectrum from Dish. As far as I'm aware, Dish is planning on doing the wholesale/direct to market hybrid business with terrestrial LTE.

 

I think Dish may be considering using LTE as a video delivery platform directly to consumers who can't use satellite, and offer broadband through wholesale, but that is speculation on my part.

 

[1]: http://www.extremete...llow-lte-on-wcs

 

Neal, from ExtremeTech wrote a pretty good follow up that I liked:

 

http://www.extremete...-it-really-isnt

 

Thanks!

Edited July 23, 2012 by Det_Conan_Kudo

[irev210]

AT&T is making it very hard to figure out what exactly its spectrum plan is. AT&T has done a lot of different confusing things in the last several months that make it rather difficult to figure out how AT&T plans it use its spectrum. Plus, with AT&T as the dominant GSM provider, analysts are never worried about it.

 

Also, AT&T and VZW will likely not be allowed to purchase S-band spectrum since WCS is now considered usable spectrum[1]. I expect carriers like T-Mobile, Sprint, and U.S. Cellular will aim to buy chunks, if not all, of the spectrum from Dish. As far as I'm aware, Dish is planning on doing the wholesale/direct to market hybrid business with terrestrial LTE.

 

I think Dish may be considering using LTE as a video delivery platform directly to consumers who can't use satellite, and offer broadband through wholesale, but that is speculation on my part.

 

[1]: http://www.extremete...llow-lte-on-wcs

 

Dish has said that they are going to build out an LTE network, but that seems like a ploy to just get the FCC to approve the S-Band for terrestrial use. If they did, I think it would be nice upside for sprint, since Sprint would be the best position to host Dish's network.

 

Not sure why AT&T wouldn't be allowed to buy S-Band? It's the perfect counter to Verizon's AWS play.

 

We will have LTE:

Verizon with nationwide upper 700MHz C block + AWS

AT&T with lower 700MHz B block + S-Band

Sprint with ESMR + PCS + ERS/BRS

 

The only national carrier that won't have LTE on sub-1000MHz is T-Mobile, which is sort of a bummer. I think to be competitive, you need sub-1000MHz spectrum for coverage + higher spectrum for capacity. It's the model everyone seems to be moving towards. For AT&T, the S-Band is the perfect fit.

 

I'm probably missing a few logistical reasons why AT&T wouldn't be interested in S-Band.

[Steven800]

Haha not every iPhone/ apple user is crazy. I'm not crazy about apple products and I have an iPhone and it's has some things better than android but then also when I can get my hands on an android phone im always looking at and checking it out lol. Oh and android has a number of things better than the iPhone as well.

[iansltx]

AT&T is making it very hard to figure out what exactly its spectrum plan is. AT&T has done a lot of different confusing things in the last several months that make it rather difficult to figure out how AT&T plans it use its spectrum. Plus, with AT&T as the dominant GSM provider, analysts are never worried about it.

 

Also, AT&T will likely not be allowed to purchase S-band spectrum since WCS is now considered usable spectrum[1]. I expect carriers like T-Mobile, Sprint, and U.S. Cellular will aim to buy chunks, if not all, of the spectrum from Dish. As far as I'm aware, Dish is planning on doing the wholesale/direct to market hybrid business with terrestrial LTE.

 

I think Dish may be considering using LTE as a video delivery platform directly to consumers who can't use satellite, and offer broadband through wholesale, but that is speculation on my part.

 

[1]: http://www.extremete...llow-lte-on-wcs

 

Re: Dish, my bet is that they'll actually just use the service for broadband, potentially mobile (Sprint spectrum hosting agreement anyone?). That, or sell the spectrum (the latter not being preferable, since then you have yet another non-nationwide band class for various carriers to force their mobile device manufacturers to integrate).

 

My two cents on video over IP is that you don't want to do that, unicast, on a cellular network unless you have tons of spectrum, and maybe not even then...maybe Dish would use their LTE network for that anyway to gain additional customers who can't get a dish to function at their residence but you can't put very many of those users on the network before everything comes to a grinding halt. As such, my guess is that Dish will self-label mobile and fixed broadband (S-band is similar propagation-wise to PCS) as the primary use for the network, plus maybe voice, and maybe wholesale to other providers if they find themselves awash in excess capacity.

[Conan Kudo]

Dish has said that they are going to build out an LTE network, but that seems like a ploy to just get the FCC to approve the S-Band for terrestrial use. If they did, I think it would be nice upside for sprint, since Sprint would be the best position to host Dish's network.

 

Not sure why AT&T wouldn't be allowed to buy S-Band? It's the perfect counter to Verizon's AWS play.

 

We will have LTE:

Verizon with nationwide upper 700MHz C block + AWS

AT&T with lower 700MHz B block + S-Band

Sprint with ESMR + PCS + ERS/BRS

 

The only national carrier that won't have LTE on sub-1000MHz is T-Mobile, which is sort of a bummer. I think to be competitive, you need sub-1000MHz spectrum for coverage + higher spectrum for capacity. It's the model everyone seems to be moving towards. For AT&T, the S-Band is the perfect fit.

 

I'm probably missing a few logistical reasons why AT&T wouldn't be interested in S-Band.

 

AT&T probably wouldn't be allowed because it has AWS and WCS along with PCS for usage with LTE. The other thing is that AT&T doesn't need to have a network that is too fragmented. Adding AWS-4 to AWS-1, PCS, and WCS would make AT&T devices very expensive compared to everyone else's devices.

[pyroscott]

Neal' date=' from ExtremeTech wrote a pretty good follow up that I liked:

 

http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/133201-wsj-believes-sprint-is-in-trouble-but-it-really-isnt

 

That was a very well written, accurate article. Gotta love telling WSJ to eat it...

 

From JBtoro on Forum Runner

[WiWavelength]

That was a very well written, accurate article. Gotta love telling WSJ to eat it...

 

I used to respect The Wall Street Journal. Perhaps that was just my naiveté. Or maybe times have changed. But it seems now that the WSJ is nothing more than a blindly capitalist rag, especially in its editorial policy.

 

That said, I do not really blame the WSJ for the referenced article. The sources are institutional investors, including Sanford Bernstein, who are increasingly out of touch with average Americans, even actively working against the wants/needs of average Americans.

 

Those money pushers should take a history lesson from Marie Antoinette. Their day of reckoning is coming, and le guillotine is sharp.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

Consider this a substantive, data focused counterpoint to the WSJ article and Sanford Bernstein claims of insufficient spectrum.

 

I laid out some spreadsheets and ran some numbers today. I focused, admittedly, on only one market, Los Angeles. But it is a PCS A-F block 30 MHz market, and it is a big one. So, what Sprint can pull off in LA, Sprint should be able to pull off in many smaller markets.

 

In the LA Metro market (i.e. Los Angeles County), Sprint holds the PCS A block 30 MHz license and has just under 1000 sites. Of those sites, average CDMA1X/EV-DO spectrum deployment is only 11.65 MHz per site. In other words, Sprint has an average of 18.35 MHz unused and available PCS spectrum per site, and that is comfortably greater than the minimum 10 MHz of spare spectrum that Sprint needs to slide in a second 5 MHz x 5 MHz LTE 1900 carrier.

 

Now, averages can be misleading, so I counted up the outliers. Of all the Sprint sites in the market, only five sites out of nearly 1000 have deployed greater than 20 MHz of spectrum. Those five (i.e. ~0.5 percent) are the only sites in the market that could not presently accommodate a second LTE 1900 carrier. But, as data traffic shifts from EV-DO to LTE, not to mention voice traffic declines, Sprint could relatively easily refarm CDMA1X/EV-DO spectrum in order to deploy a second LTE 1900 carrier on those five sites, too.

 

In conclusion, the naysayers may know how to crunch the financial numbers, but they do not seem to know how to crunch the spectrum numbers. In actuality, Sprint already has ample spare PCS spectrum for LTE in Los Angeles plus a great many other major markets. And S4GRU has been saying this from a position of knowledge for months now.

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...l-lte-carriers/

 

AJ

[Bob Newhart]

Do two adjacent towers use exactly the same frequency?

 

If so, can they both tx/rx at exactly the same time? Do they use gold codes like GPS satellites?

[WiWavelength]

Do two adjacent towers use exactly the same frequency?

 

Yes and no. That depends on airlink technology and frequency planning. For AMPS, TDMA, and GSM, frequencies have to be divided among nearby sectors/sites. But CDMA1X, EV-DO, W-CDMA, and LTE are typically deployed as single frequency networks. Also known as unity frequency reuse, the same frequencies are deployed on all sectors/sites, and this greatly enhances network spectral efficiency.

 

If so, can they both tx/rx at exactly the same time?

 

Simultaneous Tx/Rx is a different issue. That is FDD vs TDD.

 

Do they use gold codes like GPS satellites?

 

CDMA2000 uses PN codes and Walsh codes to separate different sectors/sites and users.

 

AJ

[boomerbubba]

In conclusion, the naysayers may know how to crunch the financial numbers, but they do not seem to know how to crunch the spectrum numbers. In actuality, Sprint already has ample spare PCS spectrum for LTE in Los Angeles plus a great many other major markets. And S4GRU has been saying this from a position of knowledge for months now.

 

One problem with these articles is that they conflated technical issues with business issues.

 

I don't give much credence to their not-enough-spectrum theory, and I think the technical merits of the NV project's state down the road are attractive. But I have to think Sprint's overall financial and business outlook is an open question. It's all about timing, and Sprint has to try holding on to subscribers while the NV buildout proceeds. I am neither a Sprint fan nor a hater, just a rational customer. And I have to say I would be hard pressed to stay with Sprint if I did not expect LTE coverage coming to my area relatively soon. (I do expect LTE pretty soon, thanks to this site. But many others are not so fortunate.) So while I join in hoping for Sprint's success because it is in our mutual interest, I recognize that success is not guaranteed. The carrier might lose revenue faster than it can rebuild its network.

[twospirits]

The WSJ has made numerous blunders on articles, statements and rumors. Shoot, the WSJ was the one that said one of their sources claimed that the Galaxy Note was coming to Sprint, & Verizon back in Dec 2010 as the Journal. yeah that came out to be true.

 

There are so many out there that want Sprint to fail that they will go out and spew crap hidden behind the veil of journalism.

 

TS

[WiWavelength]

Today, I pulled out the spreadsheets and ran the numbers for fallow and available PCS A-F block spectrum in the Kansas City market.

 

In the KC CMA (Johnson and Wyandotte Counties, KS; Cass, Clay, Jackson, Platte, and Ray Counties, MO), Sprint has the PCS A block 30 MHz license and has deployed just shy of 300 sites. Those sites average CDMA1X/EV-DO spectrum deployment of 12.18 MHz per site. Vice versa, those sites average 17.82 MHz of spectrum unused and available per site. As in Los Angeles, that is well above the 10 MHz minimum of available spectrum required to deploy a second LTE 1900 carrier.

 

As for the outliers -- those sites that greatly exceed the average -- seven sites (i.e. ~2.3 percent) in the market have deployed greater than 20 MHz of spectrum, hence have less than 10 MHz of remaining spectrum available. However, two of those sites are specifically intended as CDMA1X DAS at the Kansas Speedway. And four of the other five outliers have 7.5 MHz of spectrum available, so they need only one CDMA1X/EV-DO carrier to be refarmed in order to have sufficient spectrum available for a second LTE 1900 carrier.

 

AJ

[bigzeto]

AJ, how are you able to tell how much spectrum each site is currently using?

[Conan Kudo]

AJ, how are you able to tell how much spectrum each site is currently using?

 

He has a spectrum analyzer, which is basically a device that can pull in radio signals and visually represent them in a way that conveys how the airwaves are being used.