T-Mobile CFO makes case for U.S. consolidation, Sprint deal

[bigsnake49]

I think the stars are aligning for the following things to occur:

 

1. Sprint and Dish sign a spectrum hosting deal, thereby providing the FCC with the semblance of a 4th competitor

2. Dish gets the Lightsquared spectrum, and gets the FCC to let it use the 2000-2020MHz band as supplemental downlink

3. Sprint and T-Mobile merge

4. Sprint sells the EBS leases to Dish

 

Sprint (NYSE:S) CFO Joe Euteneuer said the carrier remains open to using its multi-mode base stations to host another company's spectrum, provided such a deal was beneficial to both parties.

"I think we're still open to look at opportunities that make sense for both sides," he said during an appearance at the Goldman Sachs Communacopia Conference. Sprint struck an ill-fated spectrum hosting deal with LightSquared that was scrapped after LightSquared's conditional license to operate an LTE network was revoked by the FCC amid concerns about interference between the company's L-band airwaves and GPS receivers.

..............................................

 

"I think in an ironic sort of way, Sprint becomes a really kind of an interesting potential partner for us as well, and I think people just assume maybe that, that's not the case," Dish Chairman Charlie Ergen said on the company's second-quarter earnings conference call in August, according to a Seeking Alpha transcript. "But the fact is, we actually understand Sprint and Clearwire probably better than we do any of the other wireless providers."

Euteneuer said that "in any type of joint venture arrangement it's going to an arm's length negotiation that has to work for both parties" and that such an arrangement would help get more spectrum deployed for mobile broadband, which he said the FCC would laud. "I would think they would view that positively," he said.

..........................................................................................................................................

The Sprint finance chief also talked about Sprint's own Network Vision deployment. He said by the end of the year, Sprint aims to have LTE covering 200 million POPs via its 1900 MHz spectrum, and there will be around 5,000 Clearwire sites deployed using TD-LTE on 2.5 GHz spectrum. He said Sprint is evaluating vendors now to build out a nationwide TD-LTE network on the 2.5 GHz spectrum. Sprint plans to deploy Clearwire's 2.5 GHz spectrum on all 38,000 of its planned Network Vision cell sites and even more sites than that in a nationwide rollout starting next year.

Euteneuer did not say how many more sites will be needed to accomplish that, but said Sprint's engineering team is working through those calculations. He said the 2.5 GHz deployment will use both macrocells and small cells.

Read more: Sprint CFO: We're still open to spectrum hosting deals - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/sprint-cfo-were-still-open-spectrum-hosting-deals/2013-09-26#ixzz2g1241N9B 

[WiWavelength]

Yeah but they would have it already if they merged. Im not saying do hspa+ 42 but the 21 option and it would give them an advantage even over ATT in my opinion 

 

Some current Sprint handsets that support SVLTE also have the hardware for simultaneous CDMA1X and W-CDMA because the 3GPP2 and 3GPP modes utilize different RF paths.  However, that simultaneous capability is just locked out in firmware.

 

So, pairing Sprint CDMA1X with T-Mobile W-CDMA would be technically feasible but of little benefit to Sprint subs.  T-Mobile requires W-CDMA for circuit switched voice, and it is all W-CDMA 2100+1700 or W-CDMA 1900.  Coverage wise, that would provide no advantage over CDMA1X 800 and LTE 800, which are far better options for fallback due to the sub 1 GHz spectrum.

 

AJ

[Destroyallcubes]

Some current Sprint handsets that support SVLTE also have the hardware for simultaneous CDMA1X and W-CDMA because the 3GPP2 and 3GPP modes utilize different RF paths.  However, that simultaneous capability is just locked out in firmware.

 

So, pairing Sprint CDMA1X with T-Mobile W-CDMA would be technically feasible but of little benefit to Sprint subs.  T-Mobile requires W-CDMA for circuit switched voice, and it is all W-CDMA 2100+1700 or W-CDMA 1900.  Coverage wise, that would provide no advantage over CDMA1X 800 and LTE 800, which are far better options for fallback due to the sub 1 GHz spectrum.

 

AJ

yeah I think of it as a beneficial backuo in cities like the 2600 will be. It would give about the same evdo coverage that currently exist, but would provide a slightly better data performance if LTE isnt there or is congested. If only they had some 850mhz thatd be nice ha

[WiWavelength]

yeah I think of it as a beneficial backuo in cities like the 2600 will be. It would give about the same evdo coverage that currently exist, but would provide a slightly better data performance if LTE isnt there or is congested. If only they had some 850mhz thatd be nice ha

 

W-CDMA backup would be unnecessarily redundant.  Once LTE 800 is rolled out, LTE signal will be ubiquitous inside the Sprint footprint -- except for the lost souls in the IBEZ.

 

Trust me, you do not want Sprint dipping its toe in the W-CDMA waters.  If SoftBank were to roll together Sprint and T-Mobile in the next few years, it would almost certainly make the push to go 3GPP only on the device side.  CDMA2000 capability would be dropped from new devices.  Thus, you would lose CDMA1X 800 and be relegated back to a T-Mobile quality level of voice coverage.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

W-CDMA backup would be unnecessarily redundant.  Once LTE 800 is rolled out, LTE signal will be ubiquitous inside the Sprint footprint -- except for the lost souls in the IBEZ.

 

Trust me, you do not want Sprint dipping its toe in the W-CDMA waters.  If SoftBank were to roll together Sprint and T-Mobile in the next few years, it would almost certainly make the push to go 3GPP only on the device side.  CDMA2000 capability would be dropped from new devices.  Thus, you would lose CDMA1X 800 and be relegated back to a T-Mobile quality level of voice coverage.

 

AJ

 

I think by the time the integration is well underway, VOLTE will be ready. AJ, are you trying to scare the kiddos, again?

Edited September 26, 2013 by bigsnake49

[Destroyallcubes]

W-CDMA backup would be unnecessarily redundant.  Once LTE 800 is rolled out, LTE signal will be ubiquitous inside the Sprint footprint -- except for the lost souls in the IBEZ.

 

Trust me, you do not want Sprint dipping its toe in the W-CDMA waters.  If SoftBank were to roll together Sprint and T-Mobile in the next few years, it would almost certainly make the push to go 3GPP only on the device side.  CDMA2000 capability would be dropped from new devices.  Thus, you would lose CDMA1X 800 and be relegated back to a T-Mobile quality level of voice coverage.

 

AJ

that is a good valid point. I personally wasnt fond of tmobile voice. I just was thinking 800 will have more coverage, meaning more people per sector lowering its performance. But yet again by the time a merger would happen LTE advance features would be implemented negating the extra bandwidth idea I had.

[WiWavelength]

AJ, are you trying to scare the kiddos, again?

 

Yeah, scare them straight.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Yeah, scare them straight.

 

AJ

AJ, am I crazy for thinking that VoLTE won't ever be "fixed" because of the nature of LTE's fragile airlink?

[MrZorbatron]

I think by the time the integration is well underway, VOLTE will be ready. AJ, are you trying to scare the kiddos, again?

VoLTE will NOT improve coverage and penetration.  It will WORSEN it!  The LTE signal is far more fragile and no amount of tinkering with the standard will both reverse that and maintain compatibility with other LTE devices!

[utiz4321]

Mergers between large utility companies is rarely good for the consumer or employees. A three player oligopoly isn't much better than a duopololy and looking at markets such as the UK, Japan, Germany and other developed countries four major players seem to be the norm (and those markets are smaller). Tmobile and sprint both have large spectrum positions and more spectrum is being made avalible (slowly), so I don't the advantage to the consumer. Tmobile and sprint share holders however do have great benefits to a merger happening, prices will likely rise and margins expand with is good for them.

[afazel]

VoLTE will NOT improve coverage and penetration.  It will WORSEN it!  The LTE signal is far more fragile and no amount of tinkering with the standard will both reverse that and maintain compatibility with other LTE devices!

 

It might, however, make WiFi calling a possibility due to the full-data nature of VoLTE. Transition back and forth between WiFi and LTE for your voice calls seamlessly? Maybe it's just a dream, but it's a nice-sounding one.

[WiWavelength]

AJ, am I crazy for thinking that VoLTE won't ever be "fixed" because of the nature of LTE's fragile airlink?

 

LTE is simply not built for the low signal strength found across much of rural America, even suburban America -- especially in building.  It is yet another Eurasian wireless standard that is folly for the US.

 

This is far from a perfect analogy, but it is serviceable.  You can liken CDMA1X voice to a ball bearing rolling down a two inch pipe.  Sure, if too many ball bearings try to roll down the pipe at the same time, that can be problematic.  If only a few ball bearings do at a time, though, there is lots of leeway.

 

On the other hand, VoLTE is like a ball bearing trying to roll down a single straw among a large bundle of straws.  In total, the bundle of straws is even greater in diameter than the two inch pipe.  But each individual straw is only slightly larger than each ball bearing itself.  Even if only a single ball bearing tries to roll down the straw, it still has very little leeway.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

LTE is simply not built for the low signal strength found across much of rural America, even suburban America -- especially in building.  It is yet another Eurasian wireless standard that is folly for the US.

 

This is far from a perfect analogy, but it is serviceable.  You can liken CDMA1X voice to a ball bearing rolling down a two inch pipe.  Sure, if too many ball bearings try to roll down the pipe at the same time, that can be problematic.  If only a few ball bearings do at a time, though, there is lots of leeway.

 

On the other hand, VoLTE is like a ball bearing trying to roll down a single straw among a large bundle of straws.  In total, the bundle of straws is even greater in diameter than the two inch pipe.  But each individual straw is only slightly larger than each ball bearing itself.  Even if only a single ball bearing tries to roll down the straw, it still has very little leeway.

 

AJ

Right, which is why I still think they might make something like 1X, but have it only for voice/SMS. That's probably wishful thinking on my part though.

[bigsnake49]

LTE is simply not built for the low signal strength found across much of rural America, even suburban America -- especially in building.  It is yet another Eurasian wireless standard that is folly for the US.

 

This is far from a perfect analogy, but it is serviceable.  You can liken CDMA1X voice to a ball bearing rolling down a two inch pipe.  Sure, if too many ball bearings try to roll down the pipe at the same time, that can be problematic.  If only a few ball bearings do at a time, though, there is lots of leeway.

 

On the other hand, VoLTE is like a ball bearing trying to roll down a single straw among a large bundle of straws.  In total, the bundle of straws is even greater in diameter than the two inch pipe.  But each individual straw is only slightly larger than each ball bearing itself.  Even if only a single ball bearing tries to roll down the straw, it still has very little leeway.

 

AJ

 

I think you will see improvements to LTE's airlink come from the same people that improved CDMA (Qualcomm). They dominate LTE chipsets even more so than WCDMA chipsets.

[Nickel]

I think you will see improvements to LTE's airlink come from the same people that improved CDMA (Qualcomm). They dominate LTE chipsets even more so than WCDMA chipsets.

How is Qualcomm going to make the signal more usable? I would think that would fall more into the lap of network vendors.

[iansltx]

Count me in as pro-merger.

 

Partially because there's almost no chance of SMR getting its own HSPA band. So 1x sticks around.

 

Partially because T-Mobile's in-city LTE network is very strong at AWS frequencies, and my bet is that the equipment they have online could do LTE in PCS A-F with little issue.

 

In more rural areas, T-Mobile and Sprint get to consolidate around the Sprint-operated sites. The combined entity would have to add equipment on those sites, but we're talking about a migration similar to what Sprint is already doing with Clearwire. Not the end of the world.

 

I do think though that the combined entity would need to agree to host Dish's spectrum (for a new operator #4) in order to get merger approval. Which is fine. More money for #3 to roll things out.

 

Also, they should probably hold off on merging until they each get some 600MHz spectrum. Maybe they have to divest some of it post-merger, but why fight fair when the Big Two don't?

[iansltx]

Re: LTE having a fragile airlink, it's probably not in the current LTE spec but one could envision a "high reliability" mode for VoLTE, where the voice conversation was confined to one or two subcarriers, possibly with frequency hopping for the subcarriers to keep from sitting on problem frequencies. This mode only happens in areas of low signal, but when it does the handset concentrates its Tx power on those subcarriers, and the tower does the same. That should bump RSRP and SNR up a few notches, allowing VoLTE to perform a bit better in marginal areas.

[ericdabbs]

Count me in as pro-merger.

 

Partially because there's almost no chance of SMR getting its own HSPA band. So 1x sticks around.

 

Partially because T-Mobile's in-city LTE network is very strong at AWS frequencies, and my bet is that the equipment they have online could do LTE in PCS A-F with little issue.

 

In more rural areas, T-Mobile and Sprint get to consolidate around the Sprint-operated sites. The combined entity would have to add equipment on those sites, but we're talking about a migration similar to what Sprint is already doing with Clearwire. Not the end of the world.

 

I do think though that the combined entity would need to agree to host Dish's spectrum (for a new operator #4) in order to get merger approval. Which is fine. More money for #3 to roll things out.

 

Also, they should probably hold off on merging until they each get some 600MHz spectrum. Maybe they have to divest some of it post-merger, but why fight fair when the Big Two don't?

 

Until the 600 MHz auction has occurred and VoLTE is ready for commercial deployment this merger should not happen yet.  Any earlier than this and the merger becomes Nextel all over again.  By the time Sprint and Tmobile should merge there should not be talks about moving Tmobile to CDMA or Sprint to WCDMA.  They should both be moving towards VoLTE at that point.

[MrZorbatron]

 

I think you will see improvements to LTE's airlink come from the same people that improved CDMA (Qualcomm). They dominate LTE chipsets even more so than WCDMA chipsets.

 

Qualcomm, like all other radio manufacturers, can refine the radio.  This might improve its sensitivity, as well as its stability in a low signal environment.  It doesn't do anything at all to change that due to the fundamental design of the signal, LTE is inherently more susceptible to noise/fade and dropoff at the edge of the cell.

 

Remember what I said about how CDMA2000 can operate (at a reduced capacity) in an environment with a negative signal to noise ratio?  Negative SNR means that the radio is hearing more interference than signal.  LTE can't do that, and neither can UMTS/WCDMA.  This is why 1x/1xA is a better voice standard, period.  No amount of refinement to LTE radios will change that.  If you can improve the sensitivity of the LTE radio, you can similarly improve the sensitivity of the CDMA radio, and again the CDMA regains its lead.

 

As for Qualcomm being the leader in WCDMA, they aren't.  There are many manufacturers of WCDMA/3GPP chipsets.  Qualcomm is the leader in 3GPP2 chipsets.

 

 

Re: LTE having a fragile airlink, it's probably not in the current LTE spec but one could envision a "high reliability" mode for VoLTE, where the voice conversation was confined to one or two subcarriers, possibly with frequency hopping for the subcarriers to keep from sitting on problem frequencies. This mode only happens in areas of low signal, but when it does the handset concentrates its Tx power on those subcarriers, and the tower does the same. That should bump RSRP and SNR up a few notches, allowing VoLTE to perform a bit better in marginal areas.

 

No.  LTE already does some of this.  It IS a spread spectrum signal, it DOES prioritize subcarriers with lower interference, it does use an adaptive downlink at the base station end according to what the mobile reports back for its reception.  RSRP wouldn't change there, as it is a composite of all subcarriers.  Prioritizing subcarriers makes no sense because adaptation to interference is a much better idea.  All subcarriers need to be transmitted and received with approximately the same amplitude for the signal to work properly, so it is unlikely that you could improve the strength of a very few subcarriers for voice.  Also, if you limit LTE to just a few subcarriers for high reliability, its spectral efficiency drops substantially below CDMA2000/1x, which can make it through this level of interference without a hitch already.  This makes no sense.

[bigsnake49]

Until the 600 MHz auction has occurred and VoLTE is ready for commercial deployment this merger should not happen yet.  Any earlier than this and the merger becomes Nextel all over again.  By the time Sprint and Tmobile should merge there should not be talks about moving Tmobile to CDMA or Sprint to WCDMA.  They should both be moving towards VoLTE at that point.

 

 

Until the 600 MHz auction has occurred and VoLTE is ready for commercial deployment this merger should not happen yet.  Any earlier than this and the merger becomes Nextel all over again.  By the time Sprint and Tmobile should merge there should not be talks about moving Tmobile to CDMA or Sprint to WCDMA.  They should both be moving towards VoLTE at that point.

 

It is nowhere near Nextel. 

[Fraydog]

We're one with Eurasia now. 

 

[bigsnake49]

 

 

 

Qualcomm, like all other radio manufacturers, can refine the radio.  This might improve its sensitivity, as well as its stability in a low signal environment.  It doesn't do anything at all to change that due to the fundamental design of the signal, LTE is inherently more susceptible to noise/fade and dropoff at the edge of the cell.

 

Remember what I said about how CDMA2000 can operate (at a reduced capacity) in an environment with a negative signal to noise ratio?  Negative SNR means that the radio is hearing more interference than signal.  LTE can't do that, and neither can UMTS/WCDMA.  This is why 1x/1xA is a better voice standard, period.  No amount of refinement to LTE radios will change that.  If you can improve the sensitivity of the LTE radio, you can similarly improve the sensitivity of the CDMA radio, and again the CDMA regains its lead.

 

As for Qualcomm being the leader in WCDMA, they aren't.  There are many manufacturers of WCDMA/3GPP chipsets.  Qualcomm is the leader in 3GPP2 chipsets.

 

 

 

No.  LTE already does some of this.  It IS a spread spectrum signal, it DOES prioritize subcarriers with lower interference, it does use an adaptive downlink at the base station end according to what the mobile reports back for its reception.  RSRP wouldn't change there, as it is a composite of all subcarriers.  Prioritizing subcarriers makes no sense because adaptation to interference is a much better idea.  All subcarriers need to be transmitted and received with approximately the same amplitude for the signal to work properly, so it is unlikely that you could improve the strength of a very few subcarriers for voice.  Also, if you limit LTE to just a few subcarriers for high reliability, its spectral efficiency drops substantially below CDMA2000/1x, which can make it through this level of interference without a hitch already.  This makes no sense.

 

 

So much misinformation, I don't know where to begin. CDMA 1x and UMTS (WCDMA) are spread spectrum techniques, OFDMA is not. Edge perfomance for LTE is enhanced by Inter-Cell Interference Coordination at the PDCCH (Physical Downlink Control Channel). Basically the PDDCH reduces co-channel interference by increasing the cell edge SINR.

 

It does that by coordinating both in the frequency and power domain. ICIC can allocate different resouce blocks to users in different cells to minimize or totally avoid co-channel interference with direct neighbors. LTE also uses a few other mechanisms to avoid interference within the same resouce block, among them HII, OI, RNTP with the first two being uplink measures.

 

On the power domain, the power level on selected resource blocks can be changed to favor cell edge users. On the uplink the cell edge use power levels can be increased.

 

Now, that means that the PDCCH will have to be very robust because all this coordination is processing intensive. VOLTE, is particularly troublesome since you have a high number of low rate users, instead of small number of high rate users.

[dnwk]

Just want to know, if Network Vision is capable of adding support for GSM or other technology?

Edited September 27, 2013 by dnwk

[MrZorbatron]

So much misinformation, I don't know where to begin. CDMA 1x and UMTS (WCDMA) are spread spectrum techniques, OFDMA is not. Edge perfomance for LTE is enhanced by Inter-Cell Interference Coordination at the PDCCH (Physical Downlink Control Channel). Basically the PDDCH reduces co-channel interference by increasing the cell edge SINR.

 

It does that by coordinating both in the frequency and power domain. ICIC can allocate different resouce blocks to users in different cells to minimize or totally avoid co-channel interference with direct neighbors. LTE also uses a few other mechanisms to avoid interference within the same resouce block, among them HII, OI, RNTP with the first two being uplink measures.

 

On the power domain, the power level on selected resource blocks can be changed to favor cell edge users. On the uplink the cell edge use power levels can be increased.

 

Now, that means that the PDCCH will have to be very robust because all this coordination is processing intensive. VOLTE, is particularly troublesome since you have a high number of low rate users, instead of small number of high rate users.

Didn't say WCDMA isn't spread spectrum.  I just said its signaling doesn't work with a negative SNR.  LTE, by the way, with its multiple subcarrier approach over a wide frequency range, does qualify as a spread spectrum technology.  It isn't a frequency-hopping spread spectrum, but it is a wideband spread spectrum signal.

 

Inter cell interference coordination improves performance where cells overlap, not where cell sites are too far apart.  Your post didn't tell me anything I didn't know, and trust me, I would have considered it or even wrote it if it mattered.  Unfortunately, it doesn't matter at all in rural cell's edge coverage.  This is all great and quite necessary in an urban cell situation, in which case one cell might be overlapped by 10 others or more, in varying degrees and in varying locations.  This does no good at all in widely spaced environments.  On rural PCS site spacing, VoLTE simply will not work well because those sites were spaced for a technology that was more robust in the case of fade and weak signal.

 

Why don't you do this...  Take a compass or circle template and draw a few circles, much as a cellular network would be laid out, trying to cover as much as possible of your paper with as little overlap as possible.  Remember, your anti-interference techniques are great and all, but each and every one reduces capacity, so it's best to marginalize their use whenever possible.  Use red ink.  This is your CDMA2000 coverage.

 

Now, dial your compass down about 5-6% and make new circles using green ink, using all the same center points.  This is your effective LTE coverage.  Even though the signals on both technologies extend beyond the circles we have drawn, the circles visualize the usable range in which there will still be sufficient signal for your phone's radio to operate properly.  Look at all the holes!  "Hole"y s**t, there are a lot of dead zones!  Now, it should be noted that this only takes open air signal losses into account.  In a wooded area, or with building obstacles, this problem becomes even more serious..

 

Plain and simple, LTE needs more signal to operate at all, and where that signal isn't there at that level, your phone won't work.  Shifting power within a signal won't work to fix this.

 

Incidentally, I agree with your last paragraph and will add something to it.  Pushing LTE technologies so far in order to service edge of cell users will absolutely destroy performance closer to the center of the cell.

[MrZorbatron]

Just want to know, if Network Vision is capable of adding support for GSM or other technology?

The MMBS and backhaul architecture can host whatever technologies.  GSM is dead though, no one deploys it anymore.  It would work fine to host UMTS, which is the migration path from GSM.