Jump to content

Lightsquared's LTE network doomed


Recommended Posts

LS2 is bleeding $ with only enough funding for a few more quarters. Clearwire is on life support from Sprint who is leveraged up the ying/yang in dept to fund NV and pay for the iPhone. I don't think a partnetship is going to happen. Unless LS2 can do a spectrum swap soon they can then rekindle their agreement with Sprint and may have a chance. if not, LS2 will soon become a footnote in a business textbook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint just needs to move on from Lightsquared and focus on Network Vision and Clearwire. Sprint needs to put strict tabs on Clearwire and cannot let them delay on their LTE deployment. Its going to be a long year to have just a single 5x5 LTE carrier on Sprint when it could really use the 2.5 Ghz LTE to offload customers when outside in dense urban cities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint just needs to move on from Lightsquared and focus on Network Vision and Clearwire. Sprint needs to put strict tabs on Clearwire and cannot let them delay on their LTE deployment. Its going to be a long year to have just a single 5x5 LTE carrier on Sprint when it could really use the 2.5 Ghz LTE to offload customers when outside in dense urban cities.

 

Yeah, with Clearwire having the first 5,000 sites date out there so far, I don't want to hear any excuses on delay.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LS2 needs to take the remaining funds it has and set up monitoring to see which industry devices bleed over into its spectrum and bill the offender for its use. LS2 could recoup a bunch of money that way. Silly, I know but its a waste to see a good idea and business plan go down the drain because of politicians, sloppy manufacturers and politicians.

 

What is terrible about this is that GPS systems are still not that accurate and have problems in cites, which is where they are needed most.

I think that the FCC should allow LS2 to swap their frequency at the next spectrum sale. There shouldn't have been a problem with the other frequencies, but if they can sell the spectrum to someone that will use it as intended for satellite transmission, they might still have a chance to become a viable company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is terrible about this is that GPS systems are still not that accurate and have problems in cites, which is where they are needed most.

I think that the FCC should allow LS2 to swap their frequency at the next spectrum sale. There shouldn't have been a problem with the other frequencies, but if they can sell the spectrum to someone that will use it as intended for satellite transmission, they might still have a chance to become a viable company.

 

I don't think that the FCC is interested in swapping spectrum. They are all for bringing internet to the people, but they aren't going to give up billions of dollars of spectrum to a company that tried to convert cheap spectrum into premium spectrum. No, it's not lightsquared's fault that GPS is spilling over into their spectrum, or that using their spectrum would cripple the GPS devices, but they bought satellite spectrum and tried to convert it to terrestrial spectrum. It was a good idea, but in the end it didn't work out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with lightsquare deader than a door nail what hope does Sprint have to launch a LTE network like they have been promising?

 

Can you elaborate? What does the LS deal have to do with Sprint's LTE?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with lightsquare deader than a door nail what hope does Sprint have to launch a LTE network like they have been promising?

 

Maybe you should read some of the articles on this site about how Sprint is rolling out their LTE network. Lightsquared was a partner to Sprint, and Sprint was going to build out the lightsquared network alongside their own LTE network in exchange for lightsquared paying cash and allowing Sprint to use their network for extra data capacity. Now that Sprint has cut lightsquared loose, they are continuing on their own course and plan to use clearwire for extra capacity. It's a good thing Sprint "didn't put all their eggs in the same basket" but it would have been very foolish to count on lightsquared for their entire LTE network as lightsquared wasn't guaranteed that they would even be allowed to use their spectrum for terrestrial service which is what sunk them in the end.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should read some of the articles on this site about how Sprint is rolling out their LTE network. Lightsquared was a partner to Sprint, and Sprint was going to build out the lightsquared network alongside their own LTE network in exchange for lightsquared paying cash and allowing Sprint to use their network for extra data capacity. Now that Sprint has cut lightsquared loose, they are continuing on their own course and plan to use clearwire for extra capacity. It's a good thing Sprint "didn't put all their eggs in the same basket" but it would have been very foolish to count on lightsquared for their entire LTE network as lightsquared wasn't guaranteed that they would even be allowed to use their spectrum for terrestrial service which is what sunk them in the end.

 

Sprint put all their eggs in the WiMax basket and look what it got them in the end, rotten eggs. They learned from that mistake and they won't do that again. All partner companies will only be used for extra LTE capacity from this point forward. Sprint is making the smart move to build their own LTE network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the general reporting on the LightSquared/Sprint deal was flawed in expressing the true nature of the relationship. Also, many people jumped to conclusions that the deal with LightSquared was exactly the same as Clearwire, just with LTE.

 

As was noted above, Sprint was not using LightSquared for LTE. Sprint was hosting LS's LTE, not the other way around. With losing LS, Sprint is losing revenue, not LTE. Sprint is still deploying its own LTE network and that plan is completely unaffected by LightSquared's failures to get FCC approval.

 

It is true that Sprint did negotiate a deal to use LightSquared for additional LTE capacity when needed. However, Sprint said they would not likely use it before 2015. Sprint would only use LS when and where it was absolutely necessary, because it would have to pay per GB charges for it. And there wouldn't have been Sprint devices that supported LS frequencies for a long time.

 

As I always say, stay tuned to S4GRU.com for all the latest on Sprint's LTE deployment. It is going to be two years of non-stop announcements!

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sprint put all their eggs in the WiMax basket and look what it got them in the end' date=' rotten eggs. They learned from that mistake and they won't do that again. All partner companies will only be used for extra LTE capacity from this point forward. Sprint is making the smart move to build their own LTE network.[/quote']

 

Well, that was the only basket at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint put all their eggs in the WiMax basket and look what it got them in the end, rotten eggs. They learned from that mistake and they won't do that again. All partner companies will only be used for extra LTE capacity from this point forward. Sprint is making the smart move to build their own LTE network.

 

I don't really blame them for using Clearwire and Wimax, LTE wasn't ready at the time, Clearwire was going to roll out a "nationwide" WiMax network, and the cost was relatively low in comparison to building the network themselves. Who knows, Sprint may have been planning on building their own LTE network the entire time... just using Clearwire to get the first 4G network and buy some time while Sprint saved money for their LTE network. Clearwire $#!# the bed on securing other wholesale customers and apparently was betting on their retail business to carry the network. Retail revenue wasn't what they expected, they had to slow their rollout and had to rely on Sprint like a crutch. Sprint could have let them go bankrupt, but losing 4G would have taken Sprint down too. So, it all comes down to, would you have rather seen Sprint stay 3G until now? Or be the first with a 4G network covering a good percentage of their customers?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we must not forget they had mobile broadband build out requirements on the spectrum. It took them from 2008-2011 building out WiMax to meet FCC Minimum Coverage standards.

 

They likely couldn't have gotten rolling with LTE until Mid 2010 at the absolute earliest (and to be an early adopter like that would have been hugely problematic). There is no way in the world they could have met the FCC Minimum Coverage standard in less than 12 months from Mid 2010 to May 2011. WiMax was really their only choice in the short term.

 

Robert, Roberto, Admin, Hey You! Its all good! But this was posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • This site is built but not live. eNB 41150 is still live. eNB 41188 is decommissioned but as far as I can tell the site at 200 West 55th is not built yet. This site is live gNB 1346302. This site is live gNB 1092074 This site is live gNB 1371671 This site is live gNB 1371860 — — — — — Sprint eNB 6156 -> T-Mobile gNB 1349260 Sprint eNB Unknown -> T-Mobile gNB 1325016 — — — — — Bonus T-Mobile 5G small cell, gNB 1348688 in Queens:  
    • FTTH JVs are city by city as well, so it's not going to really be sector by sector. It sounds like TMo wants to be able to sell everyone home broadband, but if that requires building additional infrastructure that infra will take the form of FTTH builds rather than mobile densification. Which involves tradeoffs, but the product is better than e.g. what AT&T is doing for me right now, which is offering only Internet Air in an area where they have 100/20 DSL available but not (yet) fiber.
    • Hopefully they do not wait until these sectors get so overloaded that they start getting nasty reviews and people abandon them. Getting fiber coverage to the area of a overloaded sector can take a year or more. I also question if this can all be managed.  Lots of sectors all over the country can get congested fairly quick.  Lots of work and money to get fiber installed and there goes the profitability on the venture.
    • MoffetNathanson Conference This is a conference where the CFO talks telecom financial analysts so obviously it takes a return on investment approach.  Broadly T-Mobile divides there world into top 100 markets (60%) and small town/rural (40%). They ultimately want to have at least 1/3 market share in rural. They also look at demographics like 50+ and Hispanic.  Reputation is now starting to help them with CIOs.  Did mention c-band buildout beginning in major cities as well as continued band migration to 5g. IMO they may become more aggressive at offering 5g phones to LTE holdover and 5g users without VoNR at a future date. mmWave not discussed. Price increases not discussed iirc. Did mention spectrum purchases from speculators. $9 billion all goes through same ROI process. FWA is down to hexagonal patterns by sector of fallow spectrum. Fiber JVs will go where sectors are overloaded.
    • I am lucky to be served by an excellent fiber ISP and that is the only reason I haven't tried TMOs FWA. Once you go fiber, it is REALLY hard to go back. The choice of sub-10ms ping times is a very artificial bucket, FWA will seldom get much below 10ms ping times but fiber regularly gets me 1-3ms ping times. Basically, at around those times, the speed of light and the distance you are from the server become the limiting factors. As an aside, my internet provider, ZiplyFiber, has been awesome. They peer like crazy at all the major IX in the area and, as a result, you end up with what essentially amounts to direct fiber connections to the vast majority of major data sources. While it isn't sexy, it makes my 1Gb/1Gb connection load pages significantly faster than my works 10Gb/10Gb connection. On the "sexy" side, they are also fastest ISP in the nation. They offer up to 50Gb/50Gb via a direct fiber connection to the router, albeit for an eye watering $900/mo.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...