Jump to content

Sprint interested in the 1755-1780 spectrum?


bigsnake49

Recommended Posts

T-Mo may have crappy rural coverage but they are doing some great things to shake up the wireless industry which Sprint is far from doing.

Awfully short sighted statement. Sprint is one if not the only reason "unlimited" returned to tmo when it did. Had Sprint let unlimited go, it would have permanently become something we talked about on of those "I love the 00's" shows.

 

If a brand new phone with a debt commitment instead of a contract and a loud mouth middle aged man in magenta with a bolshy twitter assistant is "shaking up" the industry.... ehh, we all need to get out more.

 

Sent from my Note II. Its so big.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back on-topic...

 

Freeing up 25+ MHz (or maybe even 25x25?) of AWS spectrum gives Sprint a decent reason to get into the AWS game (like they would've if SpectrumCo didn't end up siding with VZW). At the risk, of course, of either creating a standardized LTE band across all four carriers (God forbid, right?)...or ending up with a Band 12/17 debacle where Sprint buys all of the newly minted corp-licensed AWS and everyone else just keeps turning out older-AWS-band LTE phones.

 

Then again, the second scenario would mean that Sprint would get a nice chunk of spectrum in the PCS-ish range to slap LTE onto, and maybe some roaming partners who used the same spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see T and VZ all over this spectrum and maybe even tmo. Sprint will probably be focusing on the three bands they have and possibly acquiring H block. Tmo has been grabbing the attention of a lot of people lately. Honestly until about 4 months ago I wouldn't even consider tmo in my choice of carriers.

 

Sent from my EVO

Maybe TMO? Maybe?

No low band spectrum is the ONLY reason why TMO sucks.

 

And sprint will get at least 5x5 if for no other reason than to move to volte.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back on-topic...

 

Freeing up 25+ MHz (or maybe even 25x25?) of AWS spectrum gives Sprint a decent reason to get into the AWS game (like they would've if SpectrumCo didn't end up siding with VZW). At the risk, of course, of either creating a standardized LTE band across all four carriers (God forbid, right?)...or ending up with a Band 12/17 debacle where Sprint buys all of the newly minted corp-licensed AWS and everyone else just keeps turning out older-AWS-band LTE phones.

 

Then again, the second scenario would mean that Sprint would get a nice chunk of spectrum in the PCS-ish range to slap LTE onto, and maybe some roaming partners who used the same spectrum.

Sprint buying ALL the 25x25? I don't think so. That'd be much moola. Especially given the timing of the future auction and NV.

There's enough for everyone to get extra 5x5 with one leftover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe TMO? Maybe?

No low band spectrum is the ONLY reason why TMO sucks.

 

And sprint will get at least 5x5 if for no other reason than to move to volte.

 

And all that EDGE coverage. If they get good backhaul and LTE on all their sites, they'll be a serious competitor. For now, at least here in WMI, they're kinda a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe TMO? Maybe?

No low band spectrum is the ONLY reason why TMO sucks.

 

And sprint will get at least 5x5 if for no other reason than to move to volte.

 

I don't see Sprint bidding on the AWS-3 spectrum especially since they'll probably be participating in the PCS H block and 600 MHz auctions already.  A 600/800/1900/2500 network is good enough.  Let Tmobile/ATT/Verizon fight for the AWS-3 spectrum.  At some point the FCC should enforcing LTE roaming on all the carriers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see Sprint bidding on the AWS-3 spectrum especially since they'll probably be participating in the PCS H block and 600 MHz auctions already. A 600/800/1900/2500 network is good enough. Let Tmobile/ATT/Verizon fight for the AWS-3 spectrum. At some point the FCC should enforcing LTE roaming on all the carriers.

What is there to enforce? Has sprint complained that Verizon won't agree to LTE roaming? TMO complained about ATT?

 

Sprint just reduced roaming limits for those new consumer friendly plans, remember? TMO already has the 7-year roaming agreement from breakup but they don't allow TMO subs to roam onto ATT's 3G.

Why should the FCC do anything with LTE roaming if sprint and TMO barely let you roam on 3G?

Edited by bluespruce1901
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is there to enforce? Has sprint complained that Verizon won't agree to LTE roaming? TMO complained about ATT? Sprint just reduced roaming limits for those new consumer friendly plans, remember? TMO already has the 7-year roaming agreement from breakup but they don't allow TMO subs to roam onto ATT's 3G. Why should the FCC do anything with LTE roaming if sprint and TMO barely let you roam on 3G?

 

This is the best point you've ever made.  How useful is 100MB of LTE roaming?

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I (now) do think that softy should go for some AWS-3 but only if they get at least 10x10 or 15x15.

 

Sure they'd have 600/800/AWS-3/pcs/TDD phones but the VZW/sprint iphone 5 already has 5 bands - 1,3,5,13,25 - so I don't think that'd be a problem.

 

There are those - shortsighted - who's say "sprint already has 'enough' spectrum so why complicate things by adding another band?"

 

Enough for today, tomorrow, five years, sure. What about in 10 years? Look what happened with TMO and its no-show in 700 MHz auction. I guarantee you they regret not having one 5 MHz FDD block; it would've changed their destiny. Obviously, aws-3 wont be the dealbreaker for sprint as 700 mhz was for tmo but the point remains: you dont buy spectrum for today but for tomorrow.

 

Robert and AJ might say "it'd be cheaper, less complicated to just add small cells supporting pcs, TDD LTE" and if it is, then sprint should do that but they shouldn't not buy AWS-3 because they're unsure if they can afford it. TMO already made that mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this TMO study regarding feasibility of spectrum sharing in AWS-3 uplink band and while its not relevant anymore since FCC is gonna clear it, it is interesting to see just how efficiently (cough, cough) federal users can use 25 MHz.

http://assets.fiercemarkets.com/public/commissioner-baker-presentation-7-19.ppt

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.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • T‑Mobile Shatters World Record for 5G Uplink Speed https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/t-mobile-shatters-for-5g-uplink-speed The biggest news in this is that T-Mobile only recently got access to n258 after swapping their n260 for it with AT&T and they wasted no time deploying it at SoFi Stadium. Hopefully that means we're gonna start seeing a lot more mmWave deployments in stadiums soon. *fingers crossed*
    • Would anyone else be curious in helping me compile a list of quirks for various devices/modems/chipsets for SCP? I've noticed that Mediatek chipsets seem to report more information than Qualcomm. I bought a cheap Moto G 5G 2024 and notice that it displays the LTE downlink bandwidth, and the NSA information of T-Mobile, something that my S22+, which is also Qualcomm, won't do. I'm hoping that we can convince either Google or OEMs to fix their reporting on various devices. So far across all Qualcomm devices I've tested: - NR neighbor cells don't report - NR downlink or uplink bandwidth doesn't report (NR doesn't appear with CA as a result, only showing LTE) - NR signal levels randomly stop updating for various period of time before continuing to update (affects CellMapper more) - LTE CA levels randomly report and don't always update quickly when CA changes   On the S22: - LTE Timing Advance (TA) doesn't work and always reports 0, reported issue to Samsung and waiting to hear back   On the Samsung Galaxy S series (USA - Qualcomm Snapdragon): - LTE downlink or uplink bandwidth isn't reported - T-Mobile NR NSA doesn't report band information, AT&T & Verizon work OK (n5 & n77 tested)
    • Definitely. There are still a handful of Sprint sites here that haven't been decommissioned yet but also haven't been upgraded yet and they're offline. I think T-Mobile really wants to keep them but for one reason or another is running into trouble.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...