Jump to content

Ericsson wants to stop Samsung from selling network equipment in the US


Recommended Posts

Original story: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE8B20XC20121203?irpc=932

 

My opinion: Samsung is bidding lower than Ericsson on some projects and winning those bids...and deploying faster than Ericsson in some cases (e.g. NV). So Ericsson wants to stop looking slow and expensive...by slowing Samsung down and making them more expensive.

 

I really hope that they can come to a reasonable resolution on this issue, since otherwise both Ericsson and Samsung NV builds could be slowed. And Ericsson in particular shouldn't get any slower than it already is.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Ericsson is pulling an apple type move. If you can't beat them sue them. Traditionally what I've seen as far as network build outs seems like Ericsson and Alcatel lucent had a duopoly type situation going on which those companies getting the majority of the work. Seems like Samsung has to beat them with price and faster rates of completion.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a somewhat related but somewhat unrelated question as well: does anyone know exactly how the bidding process happened, that is to say, how the country ended up split between the three OEMs? Did they bid by region, or is there a maximum size each one could handle, or how did it come to be that they decided to split it up? Was maybe Sprint trying to see if, in the end, one provider was better than the other, kind of like testing each one, or...? I find it very interesting they way they did it.

 

Tommy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a somewhat related but somewhat unrelated question as well: does anyone know exactly how the bidding process happened, that is to say, how the country ended up split between the three OEMs? Did they bid by region, or is there a maximum size each one could handle, or how did it come to be that they decided to split it up? Was maybe Sprint trying to see if, in the end, one provider was better than the other, kind of like testing each one, or...? I find it very interesting they way they did it.

 

Tommy

 

Probably like any other situation where a company wants something done. Sprint probably contacted several companies, told them what they want done, gave them a approx. time period, and how much they're willing to spend and then the companies responded with bids. Basically, the one that goes the lowest out of the numerous contacted companies get the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably like any other situation where a company wants something done. Sprint probably contacted several companies, told them what they want done, gave them a approx. time period, and how much they're willing to spend and then the companies responded with bids. Basically, the one that goes the lowest out of the numerous contacted companies get the contract.

 

I think they were asking more how it got split up geographically like it did. One would assume if it was as simple as each market getting an individual bid, the region split wouldn't be as even and in the chunks it is. Something along the lines of, whether Sprint split the country up into areas and then ask for bids on each area?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

This just came out today:

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2023400/samsung-seeks-a-ban-on-sales-of-ericsson-products-in-the-us.html

 

I was wondering if the Samsung and Ericsson patent issues may be effecting Ericsson's LTE deployment in the markets they are on slate to work on?

 

Of course Ericsson is supposed to be handling my market (Kentucky).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Ah I see... hopefully there won't be any interruptions in samsungs NV build from this

 

Trust me when I tell you the Samsung builds are anything but interrupted.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Trust me when I tell you the Samsung builds are anything but interrupted.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

I never understood that saying. It's like a double negative. Does that mean you think they are interrupted?

 

Sent from phone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I never understood that saying. It's like a double negative. Does that mean you think they are interrupted?

 

Sent from phone

 

On the contrary, I happen to know they are very much in progress.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

  • Like 2
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.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • The Kendall/Kerr/Gillespie PCS swap is a very nice win-win for AT&T and T-Mobile. Means both of them will have a 20x20 PCS channel, though in exchange T-Mobile goes from 10x10 to 5x5 on one of their spectrum blocks. I figure AT&T will start running n2 DSS on that channel, as they have enough customers in those areas to need the capacity, while T-Mobile will probably just run B2 LTE, as once Auction 108 finally clears they'll have plenty of n41 to play with. Guessing we'll see the non-G-block 5x5 slice running n25, but it would get aggregated with n71 rather than n41 I figure as n71 will remain 20x20 there until the STA goes away (and maybe after that, as if T-Mobile gets 700 MHz as the result of VZW buying West Central Wireless's spectrum there's no reason to run LTE in 600). Which makes me think that the next move is T-Mobile trading 700A for the 5x5 of orphaned PCS (E block) to VZW once the WCW transaction closes, as that would give VZW 20x20 PCS in the area, and would give T-Mobile 700 MHz in an area where they have none. Then VZW can either trade 700B to T-Mobile as well in exchange for the AWS I block in those areas (gives T-Mobile 10x10 B12, gives VZW 15x15 B66) or they can cut a deal with AT&T to give AT&T 10x10 B12 (AT&T has the lower C block), but I'm not sure what that deal would be if trading like for like (vs. AT&T handing VZW their upper tiny slice of B5, giving VZW 15x15 to play with in that band post-WCW-acquisition). EDIT: Just looked at AWS spectrum again, and if AT&T would rather have 10x10 B12 than 2x 10x10 AWS, they could swap AWS-D for VZW's 700B block. That would give VZW 20x20 AWS, and would take AT&T down to 10x10 + 5x5...which they'd likely be fine with as they have 20x20 PCS, small cells in the busy areas, and as a result of the transaction three 10x10 chunks of spectrum in the area below 1 GHz. And if VZW traded 700A to T-Mobile for PCS-E VZW would have 20x20 PCS as well. Which is quite useful in an area that's macro-only for VZW and likely not dense enough for proper mobile usage of CBRS or C-Band (and an area where VZW doesn't even run DSS now).
    • Yeah, $250 credit for an S22 is awful. tbf last year they didn't have solid upgrade credits until mid-late April, which is when I paid $225 to swap my S21 for an S22. Happy to wait 'til then for that kind of deal, though I'll be annoyed at battery life in the mean time.
    • Miserable upgrade credits from Samsung this year unless you want to rely on carrier financing. Sticking with S22U for a while. 
    • So far we've documented close to 100 Sprint conversions in NYC with permits still rolling in and that's only what we've identified manually. Tons of sites get converted/updated without permits so there's potentially a lot more that we haven't spotted yet. There are also dozens of sites that are still broadcasting the keep PLMN, some have been decommissioned but historically the vast majority have been converted.
  • Recently Browsing

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