Jump to content
marioc21

Sprint makes official offer to acquire Clearwire

Recommended Posts

Bingo! Pico-cells would be the socially responsible thing for all the carriers to do, but buying more spectrum and deploying more carriers is the path all the US carriers have decided to follow. Now they complain that we are in a spectrum crunch, even though the problem can be reduced with small cells.

 

I agree to an extent. But I will give the wireless carriers some leeway. Small cell technology has not taken off until recently. (Now, you can certainly view that as a "chicken or the egg" dilemma." Fair enough.) But moreover, our broadband infrastructure is broken. It is focused on making copious amounts of money for a few oligopolists, not on providing the proverbial "information superhighway" to commerce and society. If fiber were cheap and ubiquitous by now, as it should be, then carriers would have little excuse for not deploying countless small cells. In fact, many businesses, organizations, and even residential customers would love to host such small cells on their premises.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AT&T is addicted to spectrum. Its far cheaper than building and dividing cells.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

That in a sense is what I was somewhat trying to get to understand... Right now it seems its easier/cheaper to just gain more spectrum which will up the avg DL overall on already built site....as opposed to buying and deploying many little peco cells in constrained areas...

 

So another step back.... When we say when a tower gets over capacity and sprint will then roll a truck to add a carrier to said tower.... This can not happen unless sprint has extra in used spectrum in that area they didn't deploy initially...correct? Or did I just take 2 steps back in this learning session? Lol

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I agree to an extent. But I will give the wireless carriers some leeway. Small cell technology has not taken off until recently. (Now, you can certainly view that as a "chicken or the egg" dilemma." Fair enough.) But moreover, our broadband infrastructure is broken. It is focused on making copious amounts of money for a few oligopolists, not on providing the proverbial "information superhighway" to commerce and society. If fiber were cheap and ubiquitous by now, as it should be, then carriers would have little excuse for not deploying countless small cells. In fact, many businesses, organizations, and even residential customers would love to host such small cells on their premises.

 

AJ

 

Man has a point... I'd put one up free of charge if had the option... Told em that during the wimax ordeal when I had been stuck between two wimax towers and was in a black hole so to say. Lol

 

I am surprised that Cisco has not been a bigger player in this space.... Though I think I recall them getting involved with one of the other carriers recently... They did some big things for a TWC network switch hub a few years back I believe... Guess still not their full wheelhouse as the others...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So another step back.... When we say when a tower gets over capacity and sprint will then roll a truck to add a carrier to said tower.... This can not happen unless sprint has extra in used spectrum in that area they didn't deploy initially...correct? Or did I just take 2 steps back in this learning session? Lol

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

That is correct, if by "in used", you mean "unused"

 

Not trying to be a grammar Nazi, but it can make a big difference in the meaning of the sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree to an extent. But I will give the wireless carriers some leeway. Small cell technology has not taken off until recently. (Now, you can certainly view that as a "chicken or the egg" dilemma." Fair enough.) But moreover, our broadband infrastructure is broken. It is focused on making copious amounts of money for a few oligopolists, not on providing the proverbial "information superhighway" to commerce and society. If fiber were cheap and ubiquitous by now, as it should be, then carriers would have little excuse for not deploying countless small cells. In fact, many businesses, organizations, and even residential customers would love to host such small cells on their premises.

 

AJ

 

I sure would host a small cell for Sprint in my home just so I could have better service in my house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure would host a small cell for Sprint in my home just so I could have better service in my house.

 

Would you still feel the same way if that small cell were deployed on the backs of ants?

 

AJ

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you still feel the same way if that small cell were deployed on the backs of ants?

 

AJ

 

Don't get me started about ants tonight. :( We are getting Pest control out this week.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That is correct, if by "in used", you mean "unused"

 

Not trying to be a grammar Nazi, but it can make a big difference in the meaning of the sentence.

 

Correct...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure would host a small cell for Sprint in my home just so I could have better service in my house.

 

It would suck if someone volunteered to host a pico cell from their house and since they were under the cell, they saw so benefit of the cell... much like if you are standing at the base of a cell tower the signal overshoots you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would suck if someone volunteered to host a pico cell from their house and since they were under the cell, they saw so benefit of the cell... much like if you are standing at the base of a cell tower the signal overshoots you.

 

I agree with you on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am doing a happy dance at this news. So glad clearwire is gone.

 

I wonder if this means that sprint will pass on the h block in areas where they have 30MHz of PCS A-F.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does and it doesn't. If Sprint has a solid 30MHz of A-F in all of its markets

If Sprint has 50-150 MHz of BRS/EBS spectrum acquired from Clearwire, why does the 10 MHz PCS/AWS-2 H block matter so much, if at all?

 

AJ

 

It does and it doesn't. I am worried about handoffs between 2.6GHz cell and the PCS G/800Mhz. I think you need to minimize handoffs to minimize drops. If Sprint can get their hands on enough spectrum in the A-F bands to have a solid 30MHz in all their markets, then they have less need for PCS-H.

 

I just don't think that Sprint is buying Clearwire for the spectrum. They are buying them to sell them to Dish or DirectTV. They just did not want Dish to get them for cheap.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does and it doesn't. If Sprint has a solid 30MHz of A-F in all of its markets

 

 

It does and it doesn't. I am worried about handoffs between 2.6GHz cell and the PCS G/800Mhz. I think you need to minimize handoffs to minimize drops. If Sprint can get their hands on enough spectrum in the A-F bands to have a solid 30MHz in all their markets, then they have less need for PCS-H.

 

I just don't think that Sprint is buying Clearwire for the spectrum. They are buying them to sell them to Dish or DirectTV. They just did not want Dish to get them for cheap.

 

Why would sprint sell the spectrum? Sprint needs that spectrum. Sprint does not have boat loads of spectrum just laying around.

 

And do you believe dish or directv is going to pay top dollar for that spectrum? Sprint would need at least 7.7 billion for the deal to remotely make any sense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would sprint sell the spectrum? Sprint needs that spectrum. Sprint does not have boat loads of spectrum just laying around.

 

And do you believe dish or directv is going to pay top dollar for that spectrum? Sprint would need at least 7.7 billion for the deal to remotely make any sense.

 

They don't need this spectrum either. If they were to concentrate on PCS-H and/or getting some divestitures from T-Mobile/Metro and maybe acquiring Leap, it would be a lot cheaper. They did not have to pay $7.7B for Clearwire, just to use them for hotspots. So either they have other plans, such as using them for fixed broadband as well, or this deal makes absolutely no sense. The 2.6GHz band is well suited for dense urban areas like in Europe or China or NYC, but a total waste for the suburban/rural US.

Edited by bigsnake49

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does and it doesn't. I am worried about handoffs between 2.6GHz cell and the PCS G/800Mhz. I think you need to minimize handoffs to minimize drops.

 

The inter band handoffs will be fine, practically seamless. I am quite confident of that. Because LTE is a partly TDMA airlink, LTE UEs inevitably have dormant time slots that they can use to gauge channel conditions in the other band(s).

 

Moreover, standard voice will remain on CDMA1X for a long time to come. So, even if an inter band handoff got botched, a data user would not notice the 1-2 second interruption.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The inter band handoffs will be fine, practically seamless. I am quite confident of that. Because LTE is a partly TDMA airlink, LTE UEs inevitably have dormant time slots that they can use to gauge channel conditions in the other band(s).

 

Moreover, standard voice will remain on CDMA1X for a long time to come. So, even if an inter band handoff got botched, a data user would not notice the 1-2 second interruption.

 

AJ

 

It depends on the buffering. If you're streaming radio or video, you might have dropoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.2 billion dollar price tag plus 5.5 billion in debt is where I got the 7.7 billion. I doubt they are going to sell the spectrum for a loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It depends on the buffering. If you're streaming radio or video, you might have dropoffs.

 

Any competent mobile streaming software should have a multi second buffer. Failure to do so is bad software design, not the fault of any network.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.2 billion dollar price tag plus 5.5 billion in debt is where I got the 7.7 billion. I doubt they are going to sell the spectrum for a loss.

 

I know how they got there. I still think this has something to do with Dish. They might sell Clearwire's network and some of the spectrum to Dish.

 

Other people think that Dish is making a play to be acquired by AT&T whole. Or sell it's spectrum to AT&T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does and it doesn't. If Sprint has a solid 30MHz of A-F in all of its markets

 

I would think LTE hand offs to another carrier have been perfected whether to another carrier in the same band, a different band, or even another cell.

 

It does and it doesn't. I am worried about handoffs between 2.6GHz cell and the PCS G/800Mhz. I think you need to minimize handoffs to minimize drops. If Sprint can get their hands on enough spectrum in the A-F bands to have a solid 30MHz in all their markets, then they have less need for PCS-H.

 

I just don't think that Sprint is buying Clearwire for the spectrum. They are buying them to sell them to Dish or DirectTV. They just did not want Dish to get them for cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see sprint divesting some/most of its EBS. I doubt they will sell off any of their BRS though. 60Mhz of BRS nationwide would be plenty of capacity.

 

Prior to ATT buying up WCS from Nextwave, I believe they would make a play at dish's spectrum, but I believe now that ATT will focus on their WCS. I doubt they would be able to get the equipment necessary to deploy AWS-4 faster than WCS, which would be the only reason to go after Dish's spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dish has, in addition to their AWS-4 spectrum, 6MHz of 700MHz spectrum. They can definitely offer some decent speeds on their 20+15MHz of AWS-4 and 6MHz of 700MHz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe for future spectrum auctions and mergers the FCC is segmenting spectrum into sub-1Ghz, 1-2.2Ghz, and 2.5+ Ghz with value placed on the spectrum from most to least in that order. It's recognition of the fact that 700Mhz is more valuable than 2.5/2.6Ghz so I don't think the Clearwire spectrum will hurt Sprint at all in bidding for PCS H block.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...