Dish Network proposes merger with Sprint Nextel for $25.5 billion

[MacinJosh]

 

Agree with Chaplin 100% . Almost sounded like he dipped into our thread here today haha

 

Maybe he did, lol.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

[ChadBroChillz]

I believe This is Verizon's plan to get the EBS to be counted against the spectrum screen or get spectrum that does not count against them. It is basically a win win for them.

 

If it counts against sprint, then they would be likely not able to participate in the PCS H Block sale or the future 600Mhz/AWS.

[WiWavelength]

Yes, but Verizon thought enough about it to extend a $1.5B offer for EBS leased spectrum.

 

Minus the current lease costs, it would net only $900 million, according to Tim Farrar.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

Minus the current lease costs, it would net only $900 million, according to Tim Farrar.

 

AJ

 

Which is still a nice chunk of change. Do we know the average spectrum depth per market for the offer? 40Mhz, 60MHz?

[Guest 503ducati]

An analyst stated that Dish's offer lacks Capital

 

http://us.rd.yahoo.c...html?cmpid=yhoo

 

Source: Bloomberg

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

 

It seems when it comes down to real world implications of each deal, the Softbank merger just makes more sense.

 

http://blogs.wsj.com...s-no-slam-dunk/

 

Sprint management is likely to have its own views on a transaction like this. Softbank and Sprint have been talking about their business strategy for months—since before the merger agreement was signed up last October. All of the Sprint executives likely know where they stand in a Softbank deal. In addition, although Softbank undoubtedly would make changes, the fundamental business of Sprint does not look like it would substantially change in a Softbank deal. And equally important, in the Softbank deal, Sprint would survive as a public company, albeit controlled by Softbank.

 

If I were an executive at Sprint, I would be concerned about my future in a Dish/Sprint combination. Although Dish has not said what it plans to do with management, it appears that Dish envisions a very different business plan for Sprint as it uses Sprint to transform Dish’s entire business. At the very least, the Sprint executives will be required to execute Dish’s transformative business plan.

[WiWavelength]

Which is still a nice chunk of change. Do we know the average spectrum depth per market for the offer? 40Mhz, 60MHz?

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...post__p__127085

 

Well, here is a little quick math: 5 billion MHz·POPs works out to 16.7 MHz per capita. So, if this leased spectrum (i.e. EBS 2600 MHz) were fully nationwide, that would equate to three 5.5 MHz TDD leases per market.

 

Now, more recent reports are that VZW's 5 billion MHz·POPs offer is for large markets. Does that mean the top 100 million? Top 200 million? That affects the spectrum depth per market calculation.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

I am still interested in the plans that Sprint/Softbank have for the Clearwire spectrum. 160Mhz is a hell of a lot of spectrum, no matter how you look at it.

[bigsnake49]

http://s4gru.com/ind...post__p__127085

 

 

 

Now, more recent reports are that VZW's 5 billion MHz·POPs offer is for large markets. Does that mean the top 100 million? Top 200 million? That affects the spectrum depth per market calculation.

 

AJ

 

Yes, it does. Does nobody have any insight on the particulars?

[WiWavelength]

I am still interested in the plans that Sprint/Softbank have for the Clearwire spectrum. 160Mhz is a hell of a lot of spectrum, no matter how you look at it.

 

In that 160 MHz average figure, WiMAX is currently taking up a lot of bandwidth. Clearwire did not deploy WiMAX as a single frequency network. For co channel interference mitigation (or reasons unknown to me), Clearwire deployed a different WiMAX carrier channel on each adjacent sector and each adjacent site. Thus, one three sector WiMAX site with a 10 MHz TDD carrier per sector occupies 30 MHz bandwidth. Multiply that by an n=3 or n=4 frequency reuse pattern, and WiMAX easily occupies 90-120 MHz of BRS/EBS bandwidth.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

Here is what Charlie had to say in ex parte summarizing two meetings with FCC commissioners at the end of last week.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017310402

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

In that 160 MHz average figure, WiMAX is currently taking up a lot of bandwidth. Clearwire did not deploy WiMAX as a single frequency network. For co channel interference mitigation (or reasons unknown to me), Clearwire deployed a different WiMAX carrier channel on each adjacent sector and each adjacent site. Thus, one three sector WiMAX site with a 10 MHz TDD carrier per sector occupies 30 MHz bandwidth. Multiply that by an n=3 or n=4 frequency reuse pattern, and WiMAX easily occupies 90-120 MHz of BRS/EBS bandwidth.

 

AJ

 

Yes but, that can be easily remedied.

[WiWavelength]

Yes but, that can be easily remedied.

 

Not necessarily. As I stated, I am not sure why Clearwire did not use a single frequency network configuration. It may have legitimate technical reasons for not doing so. And WiMAX may continue to occupy a disproportionate amount of bandwidth until it is retired.

 

AJ

[SpenceSouth]

 

 

In that 160 MHz average figure, WiMAX is currently taking up a lot of bandwidth. Clearwire did not deploy WiMAX as a single frequency network. For co channel interference mitigation (or reasons unknown to me), Clearwire deployed a different WiMAX carrier channel on each adjacent sector and each adjacent site. Thus, one three sector WiMAX site with a 10 MHz TDD carrier per sector occupies 30 MHz bandwidth. Multiply that by an n=3 or n=4 frequency reuse pattern, and WiMAX easily occupies 90-120 MHz of BRS/EBS bandwidth.

 

AJ

 

Curious... Could that have been because they had to use the spectrum or lose it?

[Fraydog]

Here is what Charlie had to say in ex parte summarizing two meetings with FCC commissioners at the end of last week.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017310402

 

AJ

 

Am I the only one who reads that and notes how similar his positions are in all this compared to AT&T and Verizon's positions on 2.6 GHz spectrum?

[bigsnake49]

Not necessarily. As I stated, I am not sure why Clearwire did not use a single frequency network configuration. It may have legitimate technical reasons for not doing so. And WiMAX may continue to occupy a disproportionate amount of bandwidth until it is retired.

 

AJ

 

The reason why they did it is that they did not want to tune the network. With the amount of spectrum they had you can waste the spectrum without worrying about interference between adjacent sectors or sites. Now I had heard that they only did it for adjacent sectors, but had never heard that they did it for adjacent sites.

Edited April 15, 2013 by bigsnake49

[delta772er]

I don't think this is the slam dunk for DISH that they are making it out to be. The total purchase price may be higher, but it should be noted that two other important metrics will also be considered by the board/shareholders (info from WSJ)...

 

Debt: SoftBank $21.3 bil vs. DISH $45 bil

 

EBITDA: SoftBank $18 bil vs. DISH $9.4 bil (this is a big one, it indicates that the SoftBank deal offers a more efficient operation which turns in to better long-term returns for shareholders)

 

Cash on hand: SoftBank $14.8 bio vs DISH $8 bil

[twospirits]

has anyone listened to the call this morning?

 

If yes - I don’t know what all of the negative posts are about - Dish seems to like the unlimited data and see value in it! And like Soft Bank Dish see’s HUGE value to going the TD-LTE route!

 

I don’t see any negative side to it…

 

so tell me how I’m wrong facts please!

Many of us know Charlie's past and do not like it one bit...

Of course Dish is going to say all the right words in its conference call. Its trying to win a battle over Softbank and Sprint shareholders for the rights to Sprint Nextel. If Dish came out and said that they would get rid of unlimited data and not go the TD-LTE route for Clearwire spectrum that would be asinine. Sprint has already made it clear that these are 2 things that are part of their current strategy anyways. Dish would be dumb to all of a sudden come in and disrupt that strategy when its really the only path they can go especially with Clearwire and TD-LTE.

As I read this thread and numerous news outlets about this deal I can't help but come to compare Charles Ergen to Carl Icahn (with the TWA takeover), or fictional Gordon Gekko (from the movie Wall Street) where they are the ruthless corporate raider out to takeover a company to only sell off its assets to repay the massive amount of debt used to purchase the company in the first place.

I believe like so many others that Dish will asset strip Sprint, its name, fire its' main execs and just leave the wireless industry worse off than before.

 

Its going to be a very interesting seeing how this unfolds in the upcoming weeks/months.

 

TS

[jegillis]

Curious... Could that have been because they had to use the spectrum or lose it?

 

Another reason may be with spectrum leases, 5% of capacity on the spectrum lease must be made available for educational use. Requiring a buildout of all leased frequencies within each 35 mile license area.

 

"EBS licensees must adhere to the following substantive use requirements, which are designed to maintain the traditional educational purposes of ITFS:

• There must be a minimum of 20 hours per 6 MHz channel per week of educational use of EBS spectrum.
  
• For analog facilities, EBS licensees must retain a right to recapture an additional amount of 20 more hours per channel per week capacity for educational purposes.
  
• For digital facilities, the EBS licensee must reserve at least 5% of its transmission capacity for educational purposes.
  
• The EBS licensee must retain responsibility for compliance with FCC rules regarding station construction and operation.
  
• Only the EBS licensee can file FCC applications for modifications to its station’s facilities.
  
• The EBS licensee must retain some right to acquire the EBS transmission equipment, or comparable equipment, upon termination of the lease agreement."
  

[Deval]

In that 160 MHz average figure, WiMAX is currently taking up a lot of bandwidth. Clearwire did not deploy WiMAX as a single frequency network. For co channel interference mitigation (or reasons unknown to me), Clearwire deployed a different WiMAX carrier channel on each adjacent sector and each adjacent site. Thus, one three sector WiMAX site with a 10 MHz TDD carrier per sector occupies 30 MHz bandwidth. Multiply that by an n=3 or n=4 frequency reuse pattern, and WiMAX easily occupies 90-120 MHz of BRS/EBS bandwidth.

 

AJ

 

Wait, seriously? I did not know that.

 

Makes HSPA look downright attractive at that point.

 

So how the hell is Clearwire planning on deploying LTE?

[utiz4321]

I think my opinion is with the majority on this thread. SoftBank has a proven track second in the wireless space and dish has no experiance. SoftBank would be a better match for sprint and better for the wireless industry as a whole. Unfortunately, sprint might not have any choice in the matter. If dish's offer is better for Sprint's share holders sprint is require by law to take it.

[bigsnake49]

Wait, seriously? I did not know that.

 

Makes HSPA look downright attractive at that point.

 

So how the hell is Clearwire planning on deploying LTE?

 

It has nothing to do with WiMax. It has something to do with Clearwire's frequency planning and not wanting to take the time to tune the network. Actually Wimax can have fractional frequency reuse.

Edited April 15, 2013 by bigsnake49

[Fraydog]

I think my opinion is with the majority on this thread. SoftBank has a proven track second in the wireless space and dish has no experiance. SoftBank would be a better match for sprint and better for the wireless industry as a whole. Unfortunately, sprint might not have any choice in the matter. If dish's offer is better for Sprint's share holders sprint is require by law to take it.

 

Not if the EBITDA is way higher for SoftBank it isn't.

[WiWavelength]

Not if the EBITDA is way higher for SoftBank it isn't.

 

EBITDA CAPEX GAAP AARP CSI UCLA TNT. I think you know what I mean.

 

 

AJ

[jegillis]

I think my opinion is with the majority on this thread. SoftBank has a proven track second in the wireless space and dish has no experiance. SoftBank would be a better match for sprint and better for the wireless industry as a whole. Unfortunately, sprint might not have any choice in the matter. If dish's offer is better for Sprint's share holders sprint is require by law to take it.

 

 

Mind citing what law requires Sprint to take the "better" offer? Are you licensed to practice law?

[Fraydog]

 

EBITDA CAPEX GAAP AARP CSI UCLA TNT. I think you know what I mean.

 

 

AJ

 

You lost me halfway through.