Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

[WiWavelength]

 

 

Also just imagine 600/800/850/1900/2500 OMG!!

Naw, try 600/700/750/800/850/1900/2000+2200/2100+1700/2300/2600. OMFGZ!

Honestly, the sheer number of bands/band classes is becoming ridiculously a lot like this...

http://www.hulu.com/watch/1447

AJ

[JayLuvsCiara]

 

 

Naw, try 600/700/750/800/850/1900/2000+2200/2100+1700/2300/2600. OMFGZ!

 

Honestly, the sheer number of bands/band classes is becoming ridiculously a lot like this...

 

 

AJ

 

 

Lol!!! So true. I wonder if sprint will let vzw use its clearwire spectrum if sprint does get clearwire

[digiblur]

Damn I didn't even know 600mhz existed (I'm new to all this) but if sprint does get access to 600mhz how long do you think it will take for them to deploy TDD-LTE? I know the auction is next year so should we say 2015-2016? Do you think Sprint will have 600mhz phones by next year?

 

Doesn't exist just yet. TV stations are still there.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

[WiWavelength]

Change the standard to TV-LTE. Maybe that will get the ball rolling...

 

AJ

[RCM]

Change the standard to TV-LTE. Maybe that will get the ball rolling...

 

AJ

 

There is an interesting comment submitted to the FCC from "Trip Ericson" of RabbitEars.info regarding the refarming of TV spectrum. He refers to the essentially non-existent standard of ATSC 3.0.

 

Heavily borrowing from your suggestion, rename it to ATSC 4G. Give it a sexy, marketable title that will get the attention of the unwashed masses and politicians alike.

 

http://www.rabbitear...tion-Proceeding

[WiWavelength]

Heavily borrowing from your suggestion, rename it to ATSC 4G.

 

I understand the possibilities surrounding the UHF DTV spectrum sharing-refarming issue. But, in all honesty, my post was just a joke, riffing on the the "TD-LTE" nomenclature.

 

AJ

[RCM]

I understand the possibilities surrounding the UHF DTV spectrum sharing-refarming issue. But, in all honesty, my post was just a joke, riffing on the the "TD-LTE" nomenclature.

 

AJ

 

I got it. Just sayin' slap a "4G" label onto anything to grab the attention of the "Oooh, aaah, shiny objects!" crowd.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Its interesting to me that they are advocating for TDD on the 600 band.

 

I wonder if their real intentions in doing that is to push the FCC into making FDD and TDD bands where the TDD bands would be much less likely to be bid on by anyone but themselves (lower price), securing a 600mhz TDD block to Sprint as their own proprietary band.

 

Sprint is not gonna bid for it all even if it's all TDD.

According to people more knowledgeable than I, the entire 600 MHz auction could raise $31 billion

 

http://www.fiercewir...m-auction-guide

 

I doubt Softbank would spend that much. They're probably more interested in buying 10 MHz in 600 MHz auction and then, as someone else said on this site, deploy 2.5 GHz toward ubiquitous coverage, not just "hotzones".

Edited May 13, 2013 by maximus1987

[MacPCS]

Battery powered TVs and generators work just fine. I have a small LCD that receives digital OTA. Used it last hurricane when I had no power for a week.

 

I would hate to see any OTA channels go away as many people use them. I use them myself even combined with satellite TV. I enjoy having the additional sub channels and the quality is better getting it from the source. My satellite receivers put them right there in the guide and even let you DVR the channels like any others.

 

There's also another aspect people do not think of. Many cable companies and satellite POPs in the various cities receive the local channels via OTA since it is much cheaper than fiber to simply snag the digital 19 megabit signal out of the air.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

the only TV channels I get are OTA. I have no cable or satellite of any sort. That shit is far too expensive for me to justify right now. Gotta watch my football on sundays still, so I'm also definitely in favor of keeping the OTA TV alive and well thankyouverymuch.

[Josh]

Lol!!! So true. I wonder if sprint will let vzw use its clearwire spectrum if sprint does get clearwire

 

If there is going to be a restriction for anyone that has over "xxx" amount of spectrum, then it would be in sprints best interest to divest some of the clearwire spectrum in advance of the auction. I am not advocating a large amount of spectrum, but maybe 20Mhz to verizon, which will actually help sprint even if they only deploy in hotspots. It will drive down the costs of parts and increase the availability both for phones and equipment, and if sprint/softbank deploy it in more places, they can charge verizon roaming and make money on the back end. (although with verizon's other spectrum holdings, this is very unlikely)

 

But even if this does not happen, sprint will make some money off the sale of spectrum, which will put them in a better position both financially and spectrum wise.

 

I got it. Just sayin' slap a "4G" label onto anything to grab the attention of the "Oooh, aaah, shiny objects!" crowd.

 

Its less about the shiny allure of the 4g moniker, but if people are required again to purchase a new digital set-top box, they should think that they are getting a better quality of service. Otherwise it looks like the government is just interfering with something they see as their right to have.

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

But even if this does not happen, sprint will make some money off the sale of spectrum, which will put them in a better position both financially and spectrum wise.

 

 

I say nay. In the same way that low-freq gave VZW and T advantages in coverage, 2.5GHz will give Sprint advantage in capacity which is the next challenge for carriers. Finally, Sprint will be able - though they may not choose to - to provide nationwide coverage with 800 SMR 1xA voice and LTE so it can choose to be at parity with T and VZW in terms of coverage.

But with regards to capacity, Sprint will be king. Why should it give any 2.5GHz away? To qualify to bid for 600 MHz auction? Even if FCC requires this, which I highly doubt as DOJ is openly - by name - favoring TMUS and S,

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/att-accuses-doj-favoring-t-mobile-sprint-600-mhz-auction/2013-04-26

 

I predict Softbank will decline. Sprint doesn't need 600 MHz in the same way that T-Mobile needs 600MHz cause TMUS has no sub 1-GHz spectrum, only PCS and AWS. I think Sprint will bid for maximum 10 MHz (whether it's TDD or FDD 2x5) if the price is right.

Sure, Sprint won't be able to deploy 2x5 LTE on SMR everywhere - cause it doesn't own all SMR - but if there's a town that's only covered by 2x3 MHz SMR LTE and it starts sucking up capacity, Sprint can add a cluster of PCS LTE towers and capacity problem solved.

[Josh]

I guess that as long as no one tries to use their unlimited data outside the cities, it will be fine. Places where there are a majority of users farther away from the cell sites, and where the spacing was built for 1X coverage, which is usable even at the edge of signal. But since LTE degrades faster, and by proxy is far less usable at the edge of service, the speeds will be slow and not give the quality of service that customers will expect.

 

The problem with increasing the tower count is that it is very expensive, if there is not a tower already in an area it costs around $250k to put one up. And one of the benefits to shutting down nextel was that they were going to operate fewer towers to save on costs. If they put more towers up, it will not only cost to put them up, but it will also cost to run them. If they increase their subscriber count, it will make it more feasible to add towers eventually, and if they are able to win some of the 600Mhz spectrum, it will take fewer towers to provide good coverage.

[cletus]

Would this mean quad or penta-band phones? I really don't see what the gain is here for Sprint as it has so much spectrum when Clearwire is included.. I would rather they take those $$Billions$$ and use it to have a fully functioning network that can finally compare to AT&T and Verizon.

 

If anything, T-Mobile needs the spectrum the most by far.

[S4GRU]

Would this mean quad or penta-band phones? I really don't see what the gain is here for Sprint as it has so much spectrum when Clearwire is included.. I would rather they take those Billions and use it to have a fully functioning network that can finally compare to AT&T and Verizon.

 

If anything, T-Mobile needs the spectrum the most by far.

 

Some would argue Sprint needs more low frequency spectrum to be able to have at least one 10MHz wide channel like Verizon and AT&T. Then Sprint could use SMR for all its voice needs forever. They could then use PCS and EBS/BRS for data capacity. Sprint doesn't even have enough SMR for a 5MHz LTE carrier nationwide.

 

Tmo definitely needs their share too. Tmo and Sprint should both go for a 10MHz swath each. One problem for Tmo is if they go to TDD banding on 600MHz, that limits them to VoLTE only for voice. And Tmo needs voice and data on 600 to help them compete.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

One problem for Tmo is if they go to TDD banding on 600MHz, that limits them to VoLTE only for voice. And Tmo needs voice and data on 600 to help them compete.

 

Robert, what am I missing?

 

My day off has not gone well. I tried to do some yard work, stepped wrongly on a stump that I cut, badly sprained my ankle, and am now under the influence of pharmaceuticals.

 

That said, I hope that I am still thinking clearly enough. Whether the 600 MHz band is FDD or TDD, it will be all LTE, hence all VoLTE. Even T-Mobile -- which I have criticized at times for its over abundance of spectrum dedicated to W-CDMA -- would not try to push through a W-CDMA standard for the yet to be created 600 MHz band.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

That said, I hope that I am still thinking clearly enough. Whether the 600 MHz band is FDD or TDD, it will be all LTE, hence all VoLTE. Even T-Mobile -- which I have criticized at times for its over abundance of spectrum dedicated to W-CDMA -- would not try to push through a W-CDMA standard for the yet to be created 600 MHz band.

 

AJ

 

I was not aware that 600MHz was relegated to LTE only. No matter what then, it looks like Tmo's voice future for low frequency will be VoLTE. And it will match their LTE coverage and likely be a noticeable improvement over their AWS/PCS voice footprint. VoLTE on 600MHz sounds much better than VoLTE on AWS or PCS with anemic coverage.

 

Robert

[WiWavelength]

Mea culpa. I may have come across too emphatic, previously. Nothing has been set in stone for this potentially upcoming 600 MHz band. But I highly doubt that any operator or 3GPP itself will push through W-CDMA standards for this band. Now, I could be dead wrong...

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

VoLTE on 600MHz sounds much better than VoLTE on AWS or PCS with anemic coverage.

 

Robert

 

Do you think TMUS and Sprint will build out their 600MHz to cover 300 million like ATT and Verizon have with their 700 MHz?

[WiWavelength]

Do you think TMUS and Sprint will build out their 600MHz to cover 300 million like ATT and Verizon have with their 700 MHz?

 

Possible, but doubtful under the current market conditions and regulatory regime.

 

That said, I am 36 years old. If any major competitive changes are/were to happen, ask me again when I am at least 50.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

 

Possible, but doubtful under the current market conditions and regulatory regime.

AJ

 

Why doubtful and what particular regulatory rules would discourage it?

 

Coverage is a major advertising point: there's a Sprint internal letter somewhere on this forum that states Sprint is rolling out LTE to small markets first to get the market count up quickly.

 

What incentive would TMUS and S not have to expand to 300mil?

[WiWavelength]

Why doubtful and what particular regulatory rules would discourage it?

 

Well, the answer is rather simple.

 

VZW and AT&T reached the 300 million POPs benchmark by each buying up roughly a quarter century of Cellular 850 MHz geographic buildout. They built relatively little themselves, yet the regulatory environment allowed them to acquire about as much as they desired.

 

Now, you are asking why Sprint and/or T-Mobile would not build out similar footprints. Ah, see the difference?

 

AJ

[dnwk]

Agree that mobile data is more important?

 

Well, you will find that, particularly in emergency situations, OTA is much more important than mobile data.

 

Maybe a text message to alert the emergency is more efficient than OTA broadcast.

[Mobilesolutions]

Well, the answer is rather simple.

 

VZW and AT&T reached the 300 million POPs benchmark by each buying up roughly a quarter century of Cellular 850 MHz geographic buildout. They built relatively little themselves, yet the regulatory environment allowed them to acquire about as much as they desired.

 

Now, you are asking why Sprint and/or T-Mobile would not build out similar footprints. Ah, see the difference?

 

AJ

 

 

I understand right now expanding a network footprint is extremely expensive, but given future technologies it may be very simple to add coverage in even the most remote towns.

 

Close to 60 million folks in the US live in rural/remote areas, If you have the ability to cost effectively provide coverage to a town it would make Sprint a strong contender to the Verizonites.

 

Quote of Wednesday "margins matter"

[S4GRU]

 

 

I understand right now expanding a network footprint is extremely expensive, but given future technologies it may be very simple to add coverage in even the most remote towns.

 

Close to 60 million folks in the US live in rural/remote areas, If you have the ability to cost effectively provide coverage to a town it would make Sprint a strong contender to the Verizonites.

 

Quote of Wednesday "margins matter"

 

I think Softbank is more likely to expand coverage with new sites than the current Sprint. However, in the current scheme of things, I don't predict a huge swing.

 

If you think about it, it's unprecedented. No major wireless carrier in the past 10-12 years has started an organic large scale tertiary/rural market build out. No one has done it because it is expensive and extremely risky.

 

I believe Sprint is up to something though. We know that Sprint has been testing LTE 800 in Montana. We can't help but assume the sites there in this FIT are not limited to LTE 800 only. To really properly test the LTE 800 network, you'd have to add LTE 1900 and CDMA 800/1900 to test device network priorities and handoffs, etc.

 

We don't have details of the 800 FIT there. But it is probably between 5 and 20 sites in a cluster. One would have to assume that the FIT will be turned over to native service when testing concludes. It seems like an awful waste of money to set it up and tear it right back down.

 

If they leave the FIT running up there, it could be used to see what it does for new rural build out. They would know exactly how much it cost. They would be able to monitor how much usage and roaming cost it saves and they could get a good gauge on operational costs.

 

Heck, it may make a lot of sense just to deploy CDMA 800 and LTE 800 in these new markets. They could save on site spacing and just put one carrier of each up initially. If a specific city starts to take off with a customer base, they can add CDMA/LTE 1900 for capacity. Add additional sites when/if the population can support it.

 

Even a city like Billings, a well placed site in the middle of town could serve almost the whole city with 800 SMR. And the places it doesn't reach can roam. If and when roaming becomes a problem, add another site on the fringe. Not a bad idea, really. It just comes down to economics.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[Mobilesolutions]

I think Softbank is more likely to expand coverage with new sites than the current Sprint. However, in the current scheme of things, I don't predict a huge swing.

 

If you think about it, it's unprecedented. No major wireless carrier in the past 10-12 years has started an organic large scale tertiary/rural market build out. No one has done it because it is expensive and extremely risky.

 

I believe Sprint is up to something though. We know that Sprint has been testing LTE 800 in Montana. We can't help but assume the sites there in this FIT are not limited to LTE 800 only. To really properly test the LTE 800 network, you'd have to add LTE 1900 and CDMA 800/1900 to test device network priorities and handoffs, etc.

 

We don't have details of the 800 FIT there. But it is probably between 5 and 20 sites in a cluster. One would have to assume that the FIT will be turned over to native service when testing concludes. It seems like an awful waste of money to set it up and tear it right back down.

 

If they leave the FIT running up there, it could be used to see what it does for new rural build out. They would know exactly how much it cost. They would be able to monitor how much usage and roaming cost it saves and they could get a good gauge on operational costs.

 

Heck, it may make a lot of sense just to deploy CDMA 800 and LTE 800 in these new markets. They could save on site spacing and just put one carrier of each up initially. If a specific city starts to take off with a customer base, they can add CDMA/LTE 1900 for capacity. Add additional sites when/if the population can support it.

 

Even a city like Billings, a well placed site in the middle of town could serve almost the whole city with 800 SMR. And the places it doesn't reach can roam. If and when roaming becomes a problem, add another site on the fringe. Not a bad idea, really. It just comes down to economics.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

Bingo with the last sentence!