Jump to content

DISH and nTelos Test 2.5 GHz Fixed Broadband in Rural Virginia


4GHoward
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, if you don't have a license for a swath of spectrum, what exactly are you going to do with it? It's neat and all that they can do it, but if Ergen can't get Clear (likely), then this will be a massive waste of money, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if you don't have a license for a swath of spectrum, what exactly are you going to do with it? It's neat and all that they can do it, but if Ergen can't get Clear (likely), then this will be a massive waste of money, no?

 

Hold on.  Clearwire does not control every single ounce of BRS/EBS 2600 MHz spectrum in every single market across the country.  Dish or nTelos could easily be licensed some BRS in rural Virginia, but I would have to check.  I am not going to check EBS, however, because it is a pain in the ass to track down.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like Ergen is doing a little "let me make sure I really want this spectrum".    "Decide to buy based on an idea.... worry about the actual value later"...  seems like a trend with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we know what Dish is going to be using Clearwire's spectrum for. I would like for Softbank/Sprint to detail their plans for the spectrum. And no, they don't need it all for mobile. So besides the cable cos not wanting the spectrum to fall in Dish's hands what is Sprint going to use it for? They will not use it for proving fixed broadband since that will take business away from the cable cos. At this time, it looks like Sprint/Softbank are operating as puppets of the cable cos. What are they getting in return? The only thing I can think of is very sweetened backhaul deals. 

 

Let's just say that Sprint/Softbank ultimately prevail. They add at least $4-5B worth of debt. Hotspot duty for the spectrum will not make up for the debt they are assuming. Remember the EBS leases are just that. Leases that expire. What happens if the educational institutions that have these leases decide to extract their pound of flesh from Sprint?

 

Softbank/Sprint what's the endgame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dish should have waited. Crest and the rest of the greedy team now sees even more dollar signs. RIP Dish's offer. Clearwire's stock is now trading above Dish's offer. 

 

I love how it is so easy to say other people are "greedy" but if, for example, someone offered you 30% more than what you were asking for your home, you would go with the higher offer (assuming both actually had the cash to close, which in CLWR's case, that is true).

 

I don't really get this whole "greed" thing.  It's the board of clearwire to accept the highest actionable offer - if they didn't, they would get sued.  It's just baffling that people say greed is driven by those looking for best execution.

 

I suppose it's only greed if they aren't doing what is in your best interest.

 

Bottom line, DISH feels like owning 12-25% of clearwire is a very good idea and they're willing to pay 4.40/share to own it.  What does that have to do with Crest?

 

Crest is an owner of clearwire - they have votes (not that many, but votes regardless).  Just because they value clearwire higher than what sprint does, doesn't mean anything.  It doesn't mean greedy, it just means they have a different opinion.

 

Given the democratic nature of voting on an offer, I don't see where the greed comes in.  They are given a chocie, people are going to vote what they feel is in their best financial interest to do so - that's why they are a public company.

 

Again, Greed has nothing to do with anything here.  Clearwire never needed to become a public company - you could say that Clearwire was "greedy" for going public... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we know what Dish is going to be using Clearwire's spectrum for. I would like for Softbank/Sprint to detail their plans for the spectrum. And no, they don't need it all for mobile. So besides the cable cos not wanting the spectrum to fall in Dish's hands what is Sprint going to use it for? They will not use it for proving fixed broadband since that will take business away from the cable cos. At this time, it looks like Sprint/Softbank are operating as puppets of the cable cos. What are they getting in return? The only thing I can think of is very sweetened backhaul deals.

 

Let's just say that Sprint/Softbank ultimately prevail. They add at least $4-5B worth of debt. Hotspot duty for the spectrum will not make up for the debt they are assuming. Remember the EBS leases are just that. Leases that expire. What happens if the educational institutions that have these leases decide to extract their pound of flesh from Sprint?

 

Softbank/Sprint what's the endgame?

Whoa! Sprint and SoftBank are not puppets of the cable companies. They don't want to serve rural broadband. Do you think Masayoshi Son wants to do rural broadband with, egads...high frequency spectrum, but is being stopped because of the cable companies? Get real!

 

SoftBank and Son have shown no desire whatsoever to become rural broadband providers. They want massive spectrum holdings to go after the duopoly with unlimited data services and mondo fat pipes. They also want economies of scale in the TDD 2600 band. Just because SoftBank's plans do not conflict with the minority cable company shareholders, does not make them puppets.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we know what Dish is going to be using Clearwire's spectrum for. I would like for Softbank/Sprint to detail their plans for the spectrum. And no, they don't need it all for mobile. So besides the cable cos not wanting the spectrum to fall in Dish's hands what is Sprint going to use it for? They will not use it for proving fixed broadband since that will take business away from the cable cos. At this time, it looks like Sprint/Softbank are operating as puppets of the cable cos. What are they getting in return? The only thing I can think of is very sweetened backhaul deals.

 

Let's just say that Sprint/Softbank ultimately prevail. They add at least $4-5B worth of debt. Hotspot duty for the spectrum will not make up for the debt they are assuming. Remember the EBS leases are just that. Leases that expire. What happens if the educational institutions that have these leases decide to extract their pound of flesh from Sprint?

 

Softbank/Sprint what's the endgame?

I believe their end game is nationwide( urban/suburban areas) coverage with the spectrum. ATT/Verizon/Tmobile are all planning on deploying 20x20 lte. Sprint's current holdings will not allow them to compete with that speed and capacity. Clearwire will.

 

Maybe they do plan to offer fixed broadband. Or maybe Sprint wants the CableCos to drop their partnership with Verizon for Sprint. Sprint could be looking for a wifi offloading deal. We will not know until it is too late. Sprint wants to keep that edge. I would be happy with someone using that spectrum to offer fixed wireless broadband.

 

I also believe Dish is not being complete honest with their intentions. If all they wanted was 2.5 spectrum, I am sure they could have gotten some if they made an offer for the leased spectrum, but they went after the BRS. Also if they plan on using 2.5 for fixed wireless, then what about their spectrum.

 

I have no problem with crest extracting the best price they can, however their method is where I have a problem. They have tried to block the deal as well as put Clearwire in risk of bankruptcy to force a deal they feel is fair. They have filed almost as many as Dish has against Sprint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe their end game is nationwide( urban/suburban areas) coverage with the spectrum. ATT/Verizon/Tmobile are all planning on deploying 20x20 lte. Sprint's current holdings will not allow them to compete with that speed and capacity. Clearwire will.

 

Maybe they do plan to offer fixed broadband. Or maybe Sprint wants the CableCos to drop their partnership with Verizon for Sprint. Sprint could be looking for a wifi offloading deal. We will not know until it is too late. Sprint wants to keep that edge. I would be happy with someone using that spectrum to offer fixed wireless broadband.

 

I also believe Dish is not being complete honest with their intentions. If all they wanted was 2.5 spectrum, I am sure they could have gotten some if they made an offer for the leased spectrum, but they went after the BRS. Also if they plan on using 2.5 for fixed wireless, then what about their spectrum.

 

I have no problem with crest extracting the best price they can, however their method is where I have a problem. They have tried to block the deal as well as put Clearwire in risk of bankruptcy to force a deal they feel is fair. They have filed almost as many as Dish has against Sprint.

Sprint will have 20x20 even without Clearwire's spectrum if they go after PCS H. The only way to have nationwide coverage with Clearwire's spectrum is to have cable strand mounted DAS. But then if you have that kind of density you don't need 180MHz worth of spectrum.

 

No, Dish wants both fixed and mobile broadband. They want a network and they don't want to build their own. I also don't think they want to be the 5th wireless carrier. Clearwire they want the whole spectrum, but they also want somebody that has a nationwide network. Clearwire does not. Clearwire+ Sprint or Clearwire+T-Mobile do.

 

Crest is only interested in maximizing their investment. I can't blame them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear that dish offered 20 million dollars to clearwire's ceo and another 20 million to other's at clearwire if their deal goes thru.

 

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

If that's the case, that's bribery, and if that really is true, then Clearwire has the moral obligations to turn Dish in for such an act.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Softbank's offer now has too many obstacles for Dish to make a new offer. Dish cannot get all of Clearwire's Spectrum without Sprint.

 

Dish also will not have enough votes to stop sprint from changing the EHA to remove the 75% requirement. The only thing stopping sprint would be the investor rights agreement, which sprint has said they will sue to kill.

 

This is assuming Dish gets the chance. I believe the IRA does not come into effect until Dish has met the minimum requirement and the deadline has past. That gives Sprint 7 days from when their deal is killed to make an enhanced offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Sprint and SoftBank are not puppets of the cable companies. They don't want to serve rural broadband. Do you think Masayoshi Son wants to do rural broadband with, egads...high frequency spectrum, but is being stopped because of the cable companies? Get real!

 

SoftBank and Son have shown no desire whatsoever to become rural broadband providers. They want massive spectrum holdings to go after the duopoly with unlimited data services and mondo fat pipes. They also want economies of scale in the TDD 2600 band. Just because SoftBank's plans do not conflict with the minority cable company shareholders, does not make them puppets.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

Economies of scale, the product of wireless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Sprint and SoftBank are not puppets of the cable companies. They don't want to serve rural broadband. Do you think Masayoshi Son wants to do rural broadband with, egads...high frequency spectrum, but is being stopped because of the cable companies? Get real!

 

SoftBank and Son have shown no desire whatsoever to become rural broadband providers. They want massive spectrum holdings to go after the duopoly with unlimited data services and mondo fat pipes. They also want economies of scale in the TDD 2600 band. Just because SoftBank's plans do not conflict with the minority cable company shareholders, does not make them puppets.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

And you think they can use all 160 or 180 MHz to offer mobile broadband every half a mile? Where the heck do you think they will find the demand to use all that spectrum? With a 4x4 MIMO arrangement feasible at 2.5Ghz. There is no possible mobile demand for that kind of bandwidth. Remember there's also the big 2 that serve oh, let's see >200M people. Even if all Sprint subscibers within a sector are streaming Youtube, you still can't fill up those pipes.

 

Economies of scale can be gotten outta China Mobile that is going to be using 2.5GHZ TDD with their 700M customers, not Sprint's puny 56M. I really don't see a scenario that Sprint benefits from swallowing Clearwire whole. Too much debt, no customers... Now if they want to keep the BRS and sell the rest to Dish along with the Clearwire network and also get some hosting money, then we're talking. They get rid of debt, get some money for hosting and Bob's your uncle.

 

They are the puppets of the cable cos because they need them to have 66 1/3% of the voting shares to change the bylaws. If you don't think that the cable cos are against selling to Dish, then there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. And it isn't about selling rural broadband. It's about seeling suburban broadband. You know, where most of us live. 

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Whoa! Sprint and SoftBank are not puppets of the cable companies. They don't want to serve rural broadband. Do you think Masayoshi Son wants to do rural broadband with, egads...high frequency spectrum, but is being stopped because of the cable companies? Get real!

 

 

SoftBank and Son have shown no desire whatsoever to become rural broadband providers. They want massive spectrum holdings to go after the duopoly with unlimited data services and mondo fat pipes. They also want economies of scale in the TDD 2600 band. Just because SoftBank's plans do not conflict with the minority cable company shareholders, does not make them puppets.

 

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

 

 

And you think they can use all 160 or 180 MHz to offer mobile broadband every half a mile? Where the heck do you think they will find the demand to use all that spectrum? With a 4x4 MIMO arrangement feasible at 2.5Ghz. There is no possible mobile demand for that kind of bandwidth. Remember there's also the big 2 that serve oh, let's see >200M people. Even if all Sprint subscibers within a sector are streaming Youtube, you still can't fill up those pipes.

 

Economies of scale can be gotten outta China Mobile that is going to be using 2.5GHZ TDD with their 700M customers, not Sprint's puny 56M. I really don't see a scenario that Sprint benefits from swallowing Clearwire whole. Too much debt, no customers... Now if they want to keep the BRS and sell the rest to Dish along with the Clearwire network and also get some hosting money, then we're talking. They get rid of debt, get some money for hosting and Bob's your uncle.

 

They are the puppets of the cable cos because they need them to have 66 1/3% of the voting shares to change the bylaws. If you don't think that the cable cos are against selling to Dish, then there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. And it isn't about selling rural broadband. It's about seeling suburban broadband. You know, where most of us live.

 

I don't recall saying they are going to use all the spectrum. They will sit on a lot of it for future capacity.

 

Also, Clearwire does not have 160-180MHz of spectrum nationwide. Not even close. In some places they have as little as 60MHz. They average just over 100MHz per market. Very few markets have over 150MHz.

 

If they are not required to divest it, they want to hold it. And the places they will be holding a large chunk is really just a handful of markets. And if DISH wants 40MHz of spare spectrum in about 10 markets, I say give it to them.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, at this point, let Dish buy up the non-Sprint parts of Clearwire for $4.xx per share (probably $4.75). That should serve to buy Dish into a partnership with Sprint, wherein NV sites host AWS-4 (a la LightSquared) for Dish...and are much more likely to get TD-LTE in 2600 because you now have two reasons to use it: fixed wireless and mobile offloading.

 

That was probably more or less Dish's endgame anyway, forcing Sprint to help them build out AWS-4 on NV sites in return for access to 2600 spectrum for mobile. A half-purchase would get them a seat at the table, so to speak, but would allow Sprint to get the math right on wholesale TD-LTE access to itself such that offloading from PCS to 2600 still makes sense.

 

Yes, doing the math this way will be more difficult. But it makes sense financially to move many Clearwire sites to NV gear to reduce tower lease costs and, to an extent, backhaul costs, such that even when Sprint charges Clearwire for those items Clearwire comes out ahead (so Dish can't complain). And those costs will be offset by revenues from Sprint anyway...mostly. The remainder will come from Dish's fixed wireless component, which will be heavy enough to tip the scales on bandwidth costs...but since the fiber is already there to many sites you're looking at decreasing marginal costs per megabit as you go along.By owning 50+% of Clearwire Sprint can tip those marginal costs in its favor and actually have Clearwire as a revenue center relative to if Dish wasn't there.

 

Passing stuff off to the right 4G core (Dish probably won't use Sprint's) might be a bit tricky, but we're talking about IP-only traffic on LTE 2600 anyway so that's not an insurmountable issue.

 

Lastly, using LTE 2600 for fixed wireless will mean that more rural sites will get that base station tier added than otherwise would occur...which is a good thing for customers though most of those sites would be just fine with 5x5 in both PCS and SMR. Going back to backhaul, things get a bit more tricky for sites that are fed via microwave (Sprint's or someone else's) because backhaul capacity is finite, but since Clearwire's network is already marked differently for coverage than Sprint's (and Sprint won't care on its own maps which band is available) you could just deploy sites where fiber could be hooked directly to them and call it a day...and that would probably be enough to meet the AWS-4 buildout requirement.

 

P.S. Those speeds are nice, but 10x10 FD-LTE rel 8 can do better in an unloaded situation like that, and the latency on that connection is just horrid for LTE with an obviously-good signal. Also, Bandluxe is a lower-end provider of equipment than AlcaLu or whoever...Dish said they were using Alcatel-Lucent and Ericsson gear for the deployment, but I guess they just meant the base stations. To be fair though, they aren't the first in the US to do this; Bend Broadband in Oregon used AlcaLu base stations and Bandluxe modems for their AWS HSPA+ network a few years back (they've since moved to LTE).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall saying they are going to use all the spectrum. They will sit on a lot of it for future capacity.

 

Also, Clearwire does not have 160-180MHz of spectrum nationwide. Not even close. In some places they have as little as 60MHz. They average just over 100MHz per market. Very few markets have over 150MHz.

 

If they are not required to divest it, they want to hold it. And the places they will be holding a large chunk is really just a handful of markets. And if DISH wants 40MHz of spare spectrum in about 10 markets, I say give it to them.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

Clearwire's (NASDAQ:CLWR) extensive 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings have long been considered the struggling operator's ace in the hole and a major selling point for Softbank's recent investment in Clearwire partner Sprint Nextel (NYSE:S). Two new analyst reports commissioned by Clearwire reinforce that line of thought, highlighting the operator's Band 41 spectrum and growing global interest in its TD-LTE deployment path.

The reports lend credence to Clearwire's contention that its average of 160 MHz of spectrum in the top 100 markets puts it ahead of competitors in terms of bandwidth potential. The company has said it will start offering LTE with a 20 MHz channel and will use intra-band aggregation to combine that with another 20 MHz, eventually creating a 40 MHz pipe at every sector.

 

 

 

Read more: Clearwire touts spectrum holdings, Softbank alignment - FierceBroadbandWireless http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/clearwire-touts-spectrum-holdings-softbank-alignment/2012-10-28#ixzz2WDvMn9hk 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Clearwire's (NASDAQ:CLWR) extensive 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings have long been considered the struggling operator's ace in the hole and a major selling point for Softbank's recent investment in Clearwire partner Sprint Nextel (NYSE:S). Two new analyst reports commissioned by Clearwire reinforce that line of thought, highlighting the operator's Band 41 spectrum and growing global interest in its TD-LTE deployment path.

The reports lend credence to Clearwire's contention that its average of 160 MHz of spectrum in the top 100 markets puts it ahead of competitors in terms of bandwidth potential. The company has said it will start offering LTE with a 20 MHz channel and will use intra-band aggregation to combine that with another 20 MHz, eventually creating a 40 MHz pipe at every sector.

 

 

 

Read more: Clearwire touts spectrum holdings, Softbank alignment - FierceBroadbandWireless http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/clearwire-touts-spectrum-holdings-softbank-alignment/2012-10-28#ixzz2WDvMn9hk 

 

 

 

I've seen this quote before.  However, I don't believe it's accurate.  I spent a lot of time in 2011 going over Clearwire licenses in EBS and BRS spectrum.  I stand behind my quotes, as they are actually based on my own research.  Which I trust more than this quote.  Also, this conflicts with previous quotes they said in the past that aligned more with my research.  I don't know if this specific press release is a typo or what.  However, I'm pretty sure they have not purchased more spectrum since 2011.

 

Additionally, Clearwire has some EBS leases that expire as soon as next year.  And they have leases that expire every year after that.  There will always be a constant rotation of licenses up.  And there is a good grouping of schools that are refusing to renew, as they believe they have been severely under paid by Clearwire for the spectrum.  And the new valuations that will come out of the sale of Clearwire will only add further fuel to this fire.

 

Also, one key point of Clearwire spectrum is the misunderstanding that most of the spectrum in each market is not contiguous.  The holdings are not contiguous and very disjointed.  It is an amalgamation of 5-8 blocks of spectrum of varying sizes.  You cannot install a 20MHz carrier on every one of the blocks.  Also, in EBS, the schools kept some of the spectrum.  Sometimes they kept a specific whole block(s), sometimes they kept a portion of one block, sometimes some of the part of a block they kept is in the middle, sometimes they kept portions of several blocks.  The reason being is that they have legacy uses of the spectrum that they did not want to relocate.  

 

So this has left Clearwire lots of not very usable or completely under-usable spectrum islands.  Of course, when Clearwire is trying to sell other people how vast their spectrum holdings are, they include all kinds of info to make their numbers sound grand.  However, when Clearwire is talking to the FCC and spectrum screens, they then downplay their holdings.  The truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

Trying to make a point out of Clearwire Spectrum Holdings using exact MHz quantities is just not a good or accurate way to make a point.  The only truth that can really be said is that Clearwire has more spectrum than anyone else and that it is highly variable from market to market.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen this quote before.  However, I don't believe it's accurate.  I spent a lot of time in 2011 going over Clearwire licenses in EBS and BRS spectrum.  I stand behind my quotes, as they are actually based on my own research.  Which I trust more than this quote.  Also, this conflicts with previous quotes they said in the past that aligned more with my research.  I don't know if this specific press release is a typo or what.  However, I'm pretty sure they have not purchased more spectrum since 2011.

 

Additionally, Clearwire has some EBS leases that expire as soon as next year.  And they have leases that expire every year after that.  There will always be a constant rotation of licenses up.  And there is a good grouping of schools that are refusing to renew, as they believe they have been severely under paid by Clearwire for the spectrum.  And the new valuations that will come out of the sale of Clearwire will only add further fuel to this fire.

 

Also, one key point of Clearwire spectrum is the misunderstanding that most of the spectrum in each market is not contiguous.  The holdings are not contiguous and very disjointed.  It is an amalgamation of 5-8 blocks of spectrum of varying sizes.  You cannot install a 20MHz carrier on every one of the blocks.  Also, in EBS, the schools kept some of the spectrum.  Sometimes they kept a specific whole block(s), sometimes they kept a portion of one block, sometimes some of the part of a block they kept is in the middle, sometimes they kept portions of several blocks.  The reason being is that they have legacy uses of the spectrum that they did not want to relocate.  

 

So this has left Clearwire lots of not very usable or completely under-usable spectrum islands.  Of course, when Clearwire is trying to sell other people how vast their spectrum holdings are, they include all kinds of info to make their numbers sound grand.  However, when Clearwire is talking to the FCC and spectrum screens, they then downplay their holdings.  The truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

Trying to make a point out of Clearwire Spectrum Holdings using exact MHz quantities is just not a good or accurate way to make a point.  The only truth that can really be said is that Clearwire has more spectrum than anyone else and that it is highly variable from market to market.

 

Robert

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-45-clearwire-releases-4th-quarter-2011-results-talks-about-td-lte/

 

About middle of the page:

 

"To provide some analysis of the four points above, first and second, Clearwire holds an average of ~160 MHz of BRS/EBS spectrum bandwidth in the top 100 markets.  However, as noted above, some of this spectrum (EBS) is leased from educational institutions, not licensed directly to Clearwire.  Additionally, higher frequency spectrum is generally less valuable than is lower frequency spectrum.  Otherwise, Clearwire's ~160 MHz of spectrum would be valued in the tens of billions of dollars."

 

Believe me, I don't think that Clearwire is worth all the fuss. I would rather that Sprint merge with T-Mobile. That way they get both spectrum and customers.

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...