Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Once LTE is rolled out on 1900, 800, and 2500 what is Sprint - assuming it owns Clearwire - going to do with WiMax towers/equipment?

 

1) Is it costing them much to simply "keep the lights on" for the declining number of WiMax people?

2) Is it "costing" them in terms of occupying spectrum that could be used for LTE?

3) At some number of users - 5 mil, 1mil, 100k, etc. - will Sprint decide it's cheaper to do a device exchange for LTE-equivalents instead of maintaining WiMax?

4) Once someone's contract is up, does Sprint have the legal right to simply stop WiMax service? Would they do something like that and risk customer backlash?

 

Also, how would the answers to any of these question differ if Sprint does NOT own Clearwire outright but instead is left with a 65% stake?

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/softbank-ceo-sees-no-need-sprint-raise-clearwire-offer/2013-05-01

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good questions all..as a Sprint sub here in the Vegas area and daily user of Wimax AND a phone upgrade due in two months I'd like to know the answers...(1)hang onto my Sammy S2 (Wimax) or(2) hope Sprint really nails LTE with NV & spring for an S4 with a new 2 yr contract OR (3) bail and go to T-Mo...unfortunately with all the distractions now with DISH and ownership of Clearwire it's unclear how ultimately this plays out.. hopefully come Aug 1 LTE here is more of a reality & I can go with option (2) above..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think no matter what happens with the Sprint/Softbank deal, Sprint will continue to have Wimax service up until 2015. Since Sprint is still selling Wimax phones on its own brand and its prepaid divisions I don't see how they can shut down Wimax before then. Sprint will have to have every tower upgraded to Network Vision with LTE before they even consider shutting down the Wimax network. The longer Sprint can leverage capacity off its Wimax network instead of putting stress on its current LTE network , the better it will be for user experience until they can deploy LTE on every Network Vision tower.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearwire already committed to maintaining the current WiMax network through 2015, that won't change. After that, my guess would be the towers going offline almost immediately, saving overhead costs associated with operating two separate networks. Sprint knows the hassle two separate networks creates (iDEN/CDMA). One of the fundamental advantages Network Vision brings is a single unified network with nearly identical hardware nationwide.

 

Sprint has been hamstrung operating two entirely separate networks including overhead such as power, maintenance, leasing, etc. while getting very little in return from that second network that the first couldn't already provide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearwire already committed to maintaining the current WiMax network through 2015, that won't change. After that, my guess would be the towers going offline almost immediately, saving overhead costs associated with operating two separate networks. Sprint knows the hassle two separate networks creates (iDEN/CDMA). One of the fundamental advantages Network Vision brings is a single unified network with nearly identical hardware nationwide.

 

Sprint has been hamstrung operating two entirely separate networks including overhead such as power, maintenance, leasing, etc. while getting very little in return from that second network that the first couldn't already provide.

 

Not sure I quite understand why the "overhead" is so unsustainable. If there are WiMax phones that are generating positive cashflow - revenue minus expenses > 0 - then what's the problem?

 

Also, isn't WiMax tower spacing tighter than LTE 1900? So they can't simply move all WiMax equipment to nearest Sprint tower because then you won't have coverage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not sure I quite understand why the "overhead" is so unsustainable. If there are WiMax phones that are generating positive cashflow - revenue minus expenses > 0 - then what's the problem?

 

Also, isn't WiMax tower spacing tighter than LTE 1900? So they can't simply move all WiMax equipment to nearest Sprint tower because then you won't have coverage.

 

They need to keep the WiMax network operating until December 31, 2014. They don't necessarily have to provide the same coverage until that time. It just cannot drop below the minimum required by FCC Substantial Service Requirements.

 

Sprint should, at a minimum consider consolidating all the WiMax sites that are colocated on the same site as Sprint into Network Vision. 40% of Clearwire sites are on the same site as Sprint. That's a lot of double overhead that can be reduced. And it would result in no change to the Clearwire WiMax footprint. But a cost/benefit analysis needs to be done. Because the cost to move WiMax to NV may not save over the cost of decommissioning those sites over that short of period. It seems like it would, but it should be studied. And I bet Sprint is doing or has done that already.

 

Additionally, WiMax can be reduced down to one carrier as needed should more spectrum should be required. So I'm not concerned about WiMax spectrum needs interfering with LTE spectrum needs.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I quite understand why the "overhead" is so unsustainable. If there are WiMax phones that are generating positive cashflow - revenue minus expenses > 0 - then what's the problem?

 

Also, isn't WiMax tower spacing tighter than LTE 1900? So they can't simply move all WiMax equipment to nearest Sprint tower because then you won't have coverage.

 

Using that same logic then iDEN shouldn't have been an issue. Nextel had the highest ARPU (Average Revenue Per User) of all the carriers in the country, yet they were looking at a merger... And they chose Sprint... Why would that be? Everyone was touting Sprint/Nextel as the greatest merger in wireless history (slight hyperbole but not by much).

 

After the merger was completed however, the truth came to light. Nextel was failing, they were utilizing an outdated technology that only a handful of companies used in the world. This mean economy of scale was not on their side. Since Motorola had created iDEN, they controlled all licensing for the technology, and priced all of their competitors out of the market with that advantage. Only a handful of iDEN devices were ever made by companies other than Motorola, Blackberry and I believe Sanyo had one or two, but I could be wrong on that one.

 

The iDEN network had plenty of cash flowing in from it's operation, and the highest customer satisfaction rating in the country, but the company wasn't doing good. Cash and CSAT are only part of it. My assumption is that despite having the highest ARPU, Nextel also had the highest outlay for network maintenance, partially because the equipment was only made and licensed by and to Motorola, seeing a pattern here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The build out requirement is based on Spectrum, not technology. In theory, could Sprint/Clear install EBS/BRS LTE on a Sprint tower in a town that currently has a WiMax Protection Site, then shutdown the legacy Clear Wimax site to save costs? The same number of POPs would still be covered and an extra lease/backhaul/power/maintenance/etc could be saved without endangering a license.

 

(I may have asked this in a previous thread, but can't really remember)...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They need to keep the WiMax network operating until December 31, 2014. They don't necessarily have to provide the same coverage until that time. It just cannot drop below the minimum required by FCC Substantial Service Requirements.

 

Sprint should, at a minimum consider consolidating all the WiMax sites that are colocated on the same site as Sprint into Network Vision. 40% of Clearwire sites are on the same site as Sprint. That's a lot of double overhead that can be reduced. And it would result in no change to the Clearwire WiMax footprint. But a cost/benefit analysis needs to be done. Because the cost to move WiMax to NV may not save over the cost of decommissioning those sites over that short of period. It seems like it would, but it should be studied. And I bet Sprint is doing or has done that already.

 

Additionally, WiMax can be reduced down to one carrier as needed should more spectrum should be required. So I'm not concerned about WiMax spectrum needs interfering with LTE spectrum needs.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

For sites that are collocated, Sprint can use the dual-mode WiMax/TD-LTE RRU's by Samsung to accomplish that task. Of course, it still doesn't explain the Ericsson RRUS41 TD-LTE RRU's I found.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

The build out requirement is based on Spectrum, not technology. In theory, could Sprint/Clear install EBS/BRS LTE on a Sprint tower in a town that currently has a WiMax Protection Site, then shutdown the legacy Clear Wimax site to save costs? The same number of POPs would still be covered and an extra lease/backhaul/power/maintenance/etc could be saved without endangering a license.

 

(I may have asked this in a previous thread, but can't really remember)...

 

Yes, absolutely. But if they move the location of the site, they will have to make sure that the change in number of POP's covered at the new site is still sufficient.

 

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the above is accurate. The site location does not matter. The technology does not matter -- Sprint/Clearwire could deploy iDEN 2600 if it wanted to do so. It would merely need to produce token demonstration that the sites in question provide "substantial service."

 

In the end, the FCC really lacks adequate staff to police "license protection" coverage. And it has yet to take me up on my offer to become the full time Spectrum Czar.

 

;)

 

AJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, the FCC really lacks adequate staff to police "license protection" coverage. And it has yet to take me up on my offer to become the full time Spectrum Czar.

 

;)

 

AJ

 

Spectrum Czar Andrew J. Shepherd does have a nice ring to it. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would "speak softly and carry a big spectrum analyzer."

 

AJ

 

And you'd have a badge so the police wouldn't question you when you get "talked" to...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, absolutely. But if they move the location of the site, they will have to make sure that the change in number of POP's covered at the new site is still sufficient.

 

Robert

 

With the Urban deployment of Protection sites, Sprint should have a tower close by that covers the same number of POPs. Two of the three protection sites in my area are non-Sprint, but there is a Sprint tower near by. I hope Sprint shuts down as many of the non-Sprint towers to save more costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

With the Urban deployment of Protection sites, Sprint should have a tower close by that covers the same number of POPs. Two of the three protection sites in my area are non-Sprint, but there is a Sprint tower near by. I hope Sprint shuts down as many of the non-Sprint towers to save more costs.

 

Population density can change very rapidly from one site to the next. However, even if the next Sprint site over from the Clearwire site has less density, just put up a second one. It is cheaper to run two EBS/BRS Protection Sites in a given community on the Sprint Network Vision platform, than to keep the one Clearwire site online with all redundant costs.

 

So I definitely agree with you. Sprint should commute all Clearwire WiMax protection sites over to the Sprint network where Sprint offers coverage and make them TD-LTE protection sites. And then, in non-Sprint coverage areas, Sprint should convert Clearwire Protection Sites to full Network Vision and provide an island of Sprint coverage there, since they have to pay to keep a site active anyway at that location. Just slap up an NV panel and one carrier card for each band/technology.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Population density can change very rapidly from one site to the next. However, even if the next Sprint site over from the Clearwire site has less density, just put up a second one. It is cheaper to run two EBS/BRS Protection Sites in a given community on the Sprint Network Vision platform, than to keep the one Clearwire site online with all redundant costs.

 

So I definitely agree with you. Sprint should commute all Clearwire WiMax protection sites over to the Sprint network where Sprint offers coverage and make them TD-LTE protection sites. And then, in non-Sprint coverage areas, Sprint should convert Clearwire Protection Sites to full Network Vision and provide an island of Sprint coverage there, since they have to pay to keep a site active anyway at that location. Just slap up an NV panel and one carrier card for each band/technology.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

I wish I could click the like button about 100 times for this post. Can you use the secret S4GRU batphone and call this one into Masa and Dan ASAP?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Population density can change very rapidly from one site to the next. However, even if the next Sprint site over from the Clearwire site has less density, just put up a second one. It is cheaper to run two EBS/BRS Protection Sites in a given community on the Sprint Network Vision platform, than to keep the one Clearwire site online with all redundant costs.

 

So I definitely agree with you. Sprint should commute all Clearwire WiMax protection sites over to the Sprint network where Sprint offers coverage and make them TD-LTE protection sites. And then, in non-Sprint coverage areas, Sprint should convert Clearwire Protection Sites to full Network Vision and provide an island of Sprint coverage there, since they have to pay to keep a site active anyway at that location. Just slap up an NV panel and one carrier card for each band/technology.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

Why weren't the Sprint+Clearwire sites colocated in the first place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why weren't the Sprint+Clearwire sites colocated in the first place?

 

Many Sprint and Clearwire sites are coincidentally collocated. Clearwire is usually on a lower rack, since it was often the last arrival. But Clearwire wanted to wholesale WiMAX service to many other operators besides Sprint, hence did not want to display excess synchronicity with Sprint. Plus, prior to Network Vision, Sprint rarely had extra room on its rack, which was typically occupied by legacy panels. Now, with Network Vision upgrades, Sprint can frequently accommodate/host at least one additional panel per sector.

 

AJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sites that WiMax is on the same rack as Sprint, could they be the ones in which Sprint put up when they launched Xohm in 2007/2008?

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sites that WiMax is on the same rack as Sprint, could they be the ones in which Sprint put up when they launched Xohm in 2007/2008?

 

If I recall correctly, the only Xohm market was Baltimore.

 

Xohm, by the way, was a cool name and logo. I wonder sometimes if WiMAX would have been more successful had Sprint retained the Xohm branding.

 

AJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If I recall correctly, the only Xohm market was Baltimore.

 

Xohm, by the way, was a cool name and logo. I wonder sometimes if WiMAX would have been more successful had Sprint retained the Xohm branding.

 

AJ

 

Chicago and Philadelphia were the next 2 cities that were supposed to launch, so they could have already been building those networks out when they merged Xohm with Clearwire.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought Vegas was also an original market?

 

No, it was a later market. They might have been in pre-planning at that point.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Yes Sprint  will continue to support the 4g wimax devices until 2015, after that people who have 4g wimax devices will  get offers for 4g lte devices  or they can continue using their 4g wimax devices in 3g mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By lilotimz
      Samsung TDD-LTE gear which are being utilized in Clearwire priority sites. .   Clearwire - Samsung TDD-LTE RRH SLS-BD106Q & Antennas           Samsung TD-LTE RRUs mounted behind BRS/EBS Antenna     Sprint 2500-2600 mhz TD-LTE Setup Note the Antennas are much thicker and fatter than the antennas being utilized by Sprint Network Vision.  
       

       
      Clearwire TD-LTE Base Station / Cabinet
      May be subject to change as TD-LTE sites start being integrated into the Network Vision setups.
       

       

       

       
      Happy Hunting!
        I'll clean the post up this weekend when I have more time.   Courtesy of Sbolen from Missouri market. Samsung TDD RRH SLS-BD104Q1
      Samsung TDD RRH SLS-BD106Q
    • By S4GRU
      S4GRU members, want to see your name up in lights? Here is your chance...The WiMax countdown clock is up on the front page of The Forums. http://s4gru.com/index.php?/index 
       
      As a fundraiser for S4GRU, you can claim "naming rights" to the WiMax countdown clock for a day for a $20 donation.  Now, who will step up to the plate and meet my challenge to keep the sponsorship going? Celebrate the shutdown of WiMax! Show your support for multiple B41 carriers and carrier aggregation. And, of course, see your name get recognized by tens of thousands of others around the country.  
       
      Just make a $20 PayPal donation, put "WiMax Countdown" in the message, and the clock is yours for a day (or more).   You can sponsor as many days as you like.  This is open to anyone, including S4GRU Staff.  Only banned members cannot participate.  Donations will counted toward your membership cumulative totals, including upgrades to Sponsor, Premier Sponsor and Honored Premier status. Donations will go to the next open day available to be Sponsored. We will not allow specific days to be selected.
       
      We are auctioning off the final day.  The highest bidder will get the Sponsor privileges of the final day. See post below for more info.  
       
      Help support S4GRU and be a part of history as WiMax fades off into the sunset. Click here to donate and Sponsor the WiMax Clock
    • By KnarfOH
      I am presently customer of the old Clearwire for home internet service.  By twist of fate, there are no other high-speed internet providers in my area - NOTHING! - unless you consider satellite services.  Clearwire was reluctant to give me a CLEAR EXPRESS HUB and sign me up originally because my home is literally shown to be in a marginal area of service.  My lot was shown to be covered but not the adjacent lots (not sure how that happens?).  Anyway, they gave me the modem and I experience around 6 Mbps downloads and 1 Mbps uploads (with an outside antenna).  For someone coming off dial-up and satellite (Wildblue) these speeds were terrific!  I am happy!  I understand my service is not as good as many others, but for this area it is fabulous!   With the recent announcements that Clearwire's Wimax service will be phased out by the end of 2015 - I am on pins and needles waiting for the other shoe to drop.  I live in Canal Winchester (suburb of Columbus, OH) and would be devastated If I lost my Clearwire service and we are not part of some Sprint LTE upgrade that will allow us to obtain high-speed internet when Clearwire goes away   Why isn't Sprint more open about their future plans to provide service to areas they acquired from Clearwire, including types of services and time frames other then generalities that I sometimes see published.  The tower I ping off of is located in Columbus (moderate density housing) and I have to believe that Columbus (15th largest city in the USA) would be near the top.  The tower is 3 to 4 miles away.  

       

    • By lequonrobinson
      i wanted to know what round will maryland be in and is nv going underway in this market right now i have seen speeds 1.5 to 2 megs down consistantly before it was under 600 kps so i wanted to ask
    • By bandwithhog
      I found this while looking at FreedomPop's site and followed some of the links. It seems like that FP is part of connect2compete.org and they offer services for schools and other non-profits via mobilecitizen.org.
       
      Now I found this on their website:
       
      Mobile Citizen's wireless broadband is powered by WiMAX, a 4G technology from CLEAR. In 2006, CLEAR entered into a 30-year excess capacity agreement with the five EBS licensees which established Mobile Citizen. This agreement allows Mobile Citizen to offer advanced mobile broadband service exclusively to schools and nonprofits, helping to further learning and productivity by providing internet access beyond the classroom or office. Mobile Citizen has been providing its low-cost mobile Internet services since 2009.
       
       
      ----
       
      Now their prices are really great and $120 for unlimited Internet is not bad. But will they transistion to LTE eventually or will Sprint / Clearwire keep some WiMax runnung which covers their EBS licensees?
       
       
  • Posts

    • If they trade it'll be AT&T most likely since they own the B block and Bluegrass has C block. 
    • Initially T-Mobile was simply slapping n41 panels onto existing sites which meant that NR+LTE aggregation aggregated all available LTE bands with NR. Now, T-Mobile seems to be replacing 600/700MHz antennas every time they add n41 and as a result, the city is getting covered in split eNB IDs. On a local (legacy) 600MHz site by my home, when I connect to n71 it's n71 + Band 2 + Band 66 + Band 71 or Band 12 for a combined total of 50MHz of spectrum. However on my home site, because of the split eNB, when I force my phone to connect to n71 it only aggregates n71 + Band 2 + Band 66 for a total of 45MHz of spectrum. It seems weird that T-Mobile is allowing this to happen instead of fixing it so that they can squeeze as much performance out of their network as possible. 5MHz of LTE is not much but it's still an extra ~37Mbps of speed and capacity that could be provided in NSA mode. Interestingly this problem is not something I experience in LTE-only mode much anymore. My phone seems to have no issue aggregating LTE bands across the split most of the time.   Another thing that has been bothering me is that according to the FCC dashboard T-Mobile has 400MHz of spectrum in the 39GHz band here in NYC that they won in December of 2019 but they haven't done any upgrades to actually use that spectrum here. Instead they've been relying on the two 50MHz blocks aggregated together in the 28GHz band which performs worse than n41 on average.
    • Betting VZW trades that B12 to TMo for B66 eventually.
    • Confirmed that AT&T is running dedicated n5 here, at 10 MHz, by process of elimination. LTE is 10x10, and H+ is 5x5. They might be running DSS or n2 or n66 but I kinda doubt it. Guessing they aren't running H+ on every site anymore either; signal appeared a good bit weaker than the B5 LTE signal when I band selected to it. Also, B14 is pretty obviously not on every site here; signal levels at my place are comparable to B2 and, well, 700 should be a lot better than that. Explains why I wasn't seeing B14 aggregated normally. Though apparently they have 25 MHz of B66...one 15 MHz carrier, one 10 MHz.
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...