T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[S4GRU]

To be honest I'm very happy for tmobile. My only concerns are: Are they going to refarm their edge coverage into LTE? And are they making a profit with all these un carrier changes

Answers to both of these questions is no...so far.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[twospirits]

hmmm With them getting 700 I'm left to wonder if that will have an impact on the Sprint takeover of T-Mobile and getting approval from the feds.

 

So how many frequencies will that make if they become one company?

[S4GRU]

Does the interference issue block them from using the whole block? Or could they place a 3MHz LTE carrier to avoid interference?

 

How large are voice carriers in the GSM world?

The interference must be dealt with to be used meaningfully. 3MHz placed as far away from Channel 51 as possible probably is not enough.

 

It may be possible to shove a 1.4MHz carrier all the way to the right hand side and not interfere. But testing would probably have to be done to prove it. Over half of these new markets have interference problems. They need a comprehensive solution. Although, I think Tmo probably has a better plan that reducing the carrier widths to mitigate the problem.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

[S4GRU]

hmmm With them getting 700 I'm left to wonder if that will have an impact on the Sprint takeover of T-Mobile and getting approval from the feds.

 

So how many frequencies will that make if they become one company?

The usable amount of 700 is not very grand pre interference resolution. Post interference resolution, it still is not an amazing amount. My gut tells me this is not enough to sway anyone at the FCC who was for it to now be against it.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

[SpenceSouth]

Eh not very impressed with the pickup.  They do need the coverage but they paid for relatively little gain.  This isn't going to help a lot of the rural areas that need it the most, which is my mind is the biggest reason not to switch to T-Mobile.  

I'm hoping they make a big play at the 600mhz auction along with Sprint.  Both of these carriers need more sub-1000mhz spectrum.

[WiWavelength]

Eh not very impressed with the pickup.  They do need the coverage but they paid for relatively little gain.  This isn't going to help a lot of the rural areas that need it the most, which is my mind is the biggest reason not to switch to T-Mobile.

Why would T-Mobile care about rural areas? It practically admits that it does not, that urban/suburban areas are its bread and butter.

 

T-Mobile already has significant GSM footprint across many rural areas. It could update that rural footprint to W-CDMA and/or LTE in its existing spectrum. But it has opted not to do so. Lack of <1 GHz spectrum is not really the issue.

 

I'm hoping they make a big play at the 600mhz auction along with Sprint.  Both of these carriers need more sub-1000mhz spectrum.

No, T-Mobile's Lower 700 MHz A block move is a hedge against doing much, if anything in the 600 MHz auction, which may get delayed for several more years and is unlikely to produce enough spectrum for a truly "big play" for any licensee.

 

AJ

[irev210]

I am surprised that more people aren't talking about the WIN verizon landed on this deal.

 

They picked up 10MHz of PCS and 10 MHz of AWS in spectrum-starved San Francisco.  Not bad, not bad at all.

 

T-Mobile really wanted sub 1GHz spectrum and it shows.  They should have just waited for 600MHz, but with possible years of waiting... I guess they wanted to get started.

[SpenceSouth]

I am surprised that more people aren't talking about the WIN verizon landed on this deal.

 

They picked up 10MHz of PCS and 10 MHz of AWS in spectrum-starved San Francisco.  Not bad, not bad at all.

 

T-Mobile really wanted sub 1GHz spectrum and it shows.  They should have just waited for 600MHz, but with possible years of waiting... I guess they wanted to get started.

 

Touche. Verizon certainly put themselves in a good position.

[richy]

Is this band 12? So it will not only require new phones to use it but will also mean potentially moving away from sharing at&t's phone designs unless at&t agree to add band 12 to their designs? So they just spent a lot of cash just for the spectrum, it isn't nation wide (I'm obviously not bitter at all about it not covering hawaii!!) and they still have to find the money to build it out when their LTE rollout seems to be slowing (at least from local experience, I guess it could be awesome elsewhere).

 

It's better than nothing but $2bn in cash and about $1bn in spectrum is a lot for a less than convincing 'win'. Albeit for virgin spectrum, although it comes with potential issues. Can they go after other Lower A block spectrum from other license holders to start filling in those gaps?

 

Edit: I just checked on reboot for Hawaii and that block is registered to cavalier wireless

[S4GRU]

Is this band 12? So it will not only require new phones to use it but will also mean potentially moving away from sharing at&t's phone designs unless at&t agree to add band 12 to their designs? So they just spent a lot of cash just for the spectrum, it isn't nation wide (I'm obviously not bitter at all about it not covering hawaii!!) and they still have to find the money to build it out when their LTE rollout seems to be slowing (at least from local experience, I guess it could be awesome elsewhere).

 

It's better than nothing but $2bn in cash and about $1bn in spectrum is a lot for a less than convincing 'win'. Albeit for virgin spectrum, although it comes with potential issues. Can they go after other Lower A block spectrum from other license holders to start filling in those gaps?

 

Edit: I just checked on reboot for Hawaii and that block is registered to cavalier wireless

 

Yes, yes and yes.  You're on fire.  I do expect to they are pursuing other 700-A block licenses vigorously.  But they will have to pay a lot for them.  The next company knows they desperately need it.  

 

Tmo really has no choice but to pursue this vigorously.  There is no guarantee of when 600MHz is coming up.  It could take several more years.  And the licensing scheme is likely to be very complex.  And the places where providers will want 600 the most (urban areas) are more likely to have interfering channels and less likely to have broadcasters wiling to give them up.  600 is going to be a mess.  No one should be counting on it as their sole lower frequency plan.

 

Robert

[richy]

Interesting, so if the bet plays off they could have a 5x5 of LTE at 700MHz which some kind of purchase \ roaming agreement or network hosting agreement with the other lower A block holders. It could all go horribly wrong and they could end up with only being able to use half of it for a downlink carrier ag link like I seem to remember at&t wanted to do . 

 

Methinks they might have luck with working with the other owners to build out and manage the network for them in return for usage rights at subsidized rates. Unless they can keep going back for more cash from share issues \ bonds etc. If they move quickly on this then the market might be more confident in them. At least finally I can see them committing to some kind of plan for the future. They are still very far behind Sprint but at least this is some kind of a start. 

[WiWavelength]

Interesting, so if the bet plays off they could have a 5x5 of LTE at 700MHz which some kind of purchase \ roaming agreement or network hosting agreement with the other lower A block holders.

 

Right.  I intended to post this earlier today, but you beat me to the punch.

 

T-Mobile USA champions itself as the "little guy."  A lot of other truly little guys, such as rural telcos, hold Lower 700 MHz A block licenses.

 

If T-Mobile actually has designs on rural expansion, look for it to purchase A block licenses from those license holders.  Additionally and more likely, though, "little guy" T-Mobile will use its status among the big four national operators to legitimize an A block ecosystem, which has yet to materialize.

 

Sprint has long used affiliates and rural alliance partners.  T-Mobile could do likewise.  Will it do so?

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Sprint has long used affiliates and rural alliance partners.  T-Mobile could do likewise.  Will it do so?

 

AJ

Didn't this kinda bite Sprint in the butt though when all quite a few of those partners either got bought up or went away from Sprint?

[richy]

Right.  I intended to post this earlier today, but you beat me to the punch.

 

T-Mobile USA champions itself as the "little guy."  A lot of other truly little guys, such as rural telcos, hold Lower 700 MHz A block licenses.

 

If T-Mobile actually has designs on rural expansion, look for it to purchase A block licenses from those license holders.  Additionally and more likely, though, "little guy" T-Mobile will use its status among the big four national operators to legitimize an A block ecosystem, which has yet to materialize.

 

Sprint has long used affiliates and rural alliance partners.  T-Mobile could do likewise.  Will it do so?

 

AJ

 

God I hope so. They need to do something. At least they purchased an already recognized band, it's not like they bought the frequency Furby's speak to each other on so that is one small battle won. Legere has said that they have 15000 sites outside of chnl 51 markets and that the chnl 51 issue will go away soon, I don't know how accurate that is.

 

http://www.lightreading.com/mobile/spectrum/t-mobile-channel-51-interference-a-non-issue/d/d-id/707173

 

Has some interesting comments, especially the bit about AT&T. My gut feeling is that AT&T would not be rushing to do anything that may benefit tmobile, even if it is to their own benefit. I really hope this spurs some action. It seems to me it would make a lot of sense for tmobile to move very quickly on setting up agreements with the other license holders, be it network sharing or renting or buying licenses. They already have a lot of sites that would speed it up for the license holders and they could start recouping their investments more quickly than if they tried to build out themselves from scratch. At least this is some movement on the issue, one Sprint may inherit! 

 

One benefit for tmo is that they already have wifi calling which could relatively easily be changed to use 700mhz LTE when only that was available so there wouldnt be need for a voice carrier at 700MHz to get the benefits of having a 700MHz band if that makes any sense. 

[S4GRU]

Didn't this kinda bite Sprint in the butt though when all quite a few of those partners either got bought up or went away from Sprint?

Did it bite them in the ass? They had a contract. It had a period of time. Sprint only had guaranteed access for that period of time. It received it. Contract fulfilled. After the agreement, the result is the same as before. No native coverage.

 

Also, not all of their agreements have fallen apart. Only a couple. The big one of all was Alltel. But it was bought out.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

[WiWavelength]

Didn't this kinda bite Sprint in the butt though when all quite a few of those partners either got bought up or went away from Sprint?

 

The affiliates generally used Sprint licensed spectrum under contract.  That effectively kept them in the fold by the letter of the FCC, since Sprint remained the licensee of record.  Of course, that proved problematic following the Nextel merger because of non compete clauses, as Nextel brought spectrum and network to many of those affiliate areas.

 

The rural alliance partners generally used their own spectrum or Sprint partitioned/disaggregated spectrum.  In other words, Sprint did not have control or relinquished control over the spectrum.  And that proved problematic when turncoats, such as Pioneer Wireless, got suckered into or just opened their legs wide to the VZW LTE in Rural America "Trojan horse."

 

AJ

[Nickel]

I'm more talking from a consumer side where you used to have "native" coverage you're now likely roaming. 

[S4GRU]

I'm more talking from a consumer side where you used to have "native" coverage you're now likely roaming.

I'll take some Sprint coverage for 10 years and then go back to ATT after that. Not a bad deal for consumers at all. It's better to have choice for a period of time than not at all.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

[jamesinclair]

Uncarrier 4:

 

"Take our plan, get out of your contact, if it doesn't work, go get AT&T's plan. They'll pay you to come back!"

[jamesinclair]

Why would T-Mobile care about rural areas? It practically admits that it does not, that urban/suburban areas are its bread and butter.

 

Theres not much benefit to covering rural areas due to the low number of residents.

 

However, tmobile also doesnt cover popular vacation/tourist areas, like Yosemite. No one lives there, but theres millions of visitors a year.

 

Thats true around the country - lakes, ski resorts....places people travel to for a day or two.

 

Sprint doesnt cover these places either, but Verizon does, so we get coverage there.

 

I have a family member who spends 97% of her time in the city - but she likes hiking, and she wants the peace of mind that she has emergency coverage. Without coverage or roaming agreements, that means tmobile is a no.

[khammondnm]

Uncarrier 4:

 

"Take our plan, get out of your contact, if it doesn't work, go get AT&T's plan. They'll pay you to come back!"

They aete throwing a lot of money into this. It's going to attract a lot of customers...but then what?

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

 

[Terrell352]

I hope tmobile does gain a lot of customers. Other carriers will change there ways and maybe tmobiles network will start to slow down so they can stop trolling so hard

[iansltx]

Hopefully (fingers crossed) T-Mobile uses 700A to expand rural coverage a bit. I wouldn't expect 700-only sites...more like Sprint NV where coverage "naturally" falls from high-band to low-band as you get further from the site (in T-Mobile's case that's AWS -> PCS -> 700, or maybe just AWS -> 700). But the extra coverage of 700A, plus potential roaming revenue from US Cellular and the like (yes, I could see a time when USCC data-roamed on T-Mobile and vice versa for LTE), could make it viable to upgrade existing EDGE-only sites to LTE.

[iansltx]

I hope tmobile does gain a lot of customers. Other carriers will change there ways and maybe tmobiles network will start to slow down so they can stop trolling so hard

 

Remember that TMo can add LTE in PCS A-F whenever they feel like it, as long as they start pushing devices that support the band into the channel around the same time. If the next round of devices, the ones with 700A support, don't have LTE in PCS and VoLTE support I'll be very surprised.

 

That's germane to this discussion because real-world LTE capacity per 5MHz are 30+ Mbps, where it's more like 17 Mbps per 5 MHz on HSPA+, if you're really lucky. More like 14 Mbps most of the time. So T-Mobile can keep its network fast for a bit longer. Though Sprint will meet or beat 20x20 with 20 + 20 TD-LTE soon enough.

[Terrell352]

Tmobile is at 147mbps real world speeds. Sprint is at 60 and in 2-3 years will match that right?