WSJ: Sprint looking at T-Mobile purchase

[mozamcrew]

No way Sprint is dropping that AWS if they merge. It's too valuable and that would mean all of T-Mobile's LTE work was for nothing. Sprint would likely begin including Band 4 LTE radios in devices so Sprint devices could use T-Mobile LTE. To put W-CDMA on a Network Vision tower is not much of a hassle and would mean Sprint could easily put HSPA+ on it's existing footprint with the necessary RRU's. No?

 

Sprint saw something like this coming with Network Vision.

 

What spectrum would you have them divest? If they are going to buy TMUS, they are going to have to give up some spectrum. I think that divesting AWS would be the least painful of all the choices. I'm assuming that the eventual plan is to shut down most of TMUS cell sites.

[milan03]

What spectrum would you have them divest? If they are going to buy TMUS, they are going to have to give up some spectrum. I think that divesting AWS would be the least painful of all the choices. I'm assuming that the eventual plan is to shut down most of TMUS cell sites.

What's the reasoning behind divesting fully deployed AWS spectrum and rendering 40 million devices obsolete, and how's that less painful than divesting 2.5Ghz spectrum that's barely been deployed which Sprint has in insane quantities?

[mozamcrew]

I hope you realize that there are 40+ million subscribers currently connected to T-Mobile's AWS, whether its their WCDMA or LTE. 

 

AWS isn't going anywhere unless T-Mobile uses greenfield licenses for trading purposes. 

 

I'd say adding WCDMA on PCS to Sprint's existing footprint, followed by B41 and 800Mhz on T-Mobile sites is more realistic. 

 

I think there is some confusion. When I say that Sprint would divest the AWS spectrum, they won't have to do it immediately. They will be given maybe 2-3 years to reach agreements to sell it (Just like Verizon was given to sell its lower 700Mhz spectrum as a condition of getting CableCo's AWS spectrum). Here is how I would handle integrating TMUS if I were managing Sprint.

 

Almost immediately:

• Sprint stops selling new TMUS phones. All new UE will be Sprint gear. 
• Sprint makes TMUS LTE (AWS) "native" for UE that supports it. I imagine the iPhone 5S or the Nexus 5 could take advantage of this with a simple software update? (AWS is being used as a "bridge" while the merger and the TD-LTE rollout are completed.

As more TMUS subscribers move to Sprint handsets/UE:

• Sprint gradually repurposes TMUS PCS spectrum for Sprint LTE. 
• Sprint strategically 'thins" TMUS sites, converting selected TMUS sites to NV sites.
• Announce a firm shutdown date for the TMUS network. 
• Reach agreements with buyers for AWS spectrum (maybe they get some immediately the remainder when the TMUS network is shut off)

At the end (about three years from the date of the merger):

• All remaining TMUS sites are shut down
• Remaining AWS spectrum is transferred to whomever purchased it.

[milan03]

 

I think there is some confusion. When I say that Sprint would divest the AWS spectrum, they won't have to do it immediately. They will be given maybe 2-3 years to reach agreements to sell it (Just like Verizon was given to sell its lower 700Mhz spectrum as a condition of getting CableCo's AWS spectrum). Here is how I would handle integrating TMUS if I were managing Sprint.

 

Almost immediately:

• Sprint stops selling new TMUS phones. All new UE will be Sprint gear. 
• Sprint makes TMUS LTE (AWS) "native" for UE that supports it. I imagine the iPhone 5S or the Nexus 5 could take advantage of this with a simple software update? (AWS is being used as a "bridge" while the merger and the TD-LTE rollout are completed.

As more TMUS subscribers move to Sprint handsets/UE:

• Sprint gradually repurposes TMUS PCS spectrum for Sprint LTE. 
• Sprint strategically 'thins" TMUS sites, converting selected TMUS sites to NV sites.
• Announce a firm shutdown date for the TMUS network. 
• Reach agreements with buyers for AWS spectrum (maybe they get some immediately the remainder when the TMUS network is shut off)

At the end (about three years from the date of the merger):

• All remaining TMUS sites are shut down
• Remaining AWS spectrum is transferred to whomever purchased it.

 

All of that is unnecessary because Sprint owns 100+ Mhz of EBS/BRS on average nationwide, and if they deploy 60-80Mhz they can still divest 20-40Mhz. That's already an insane amount of capacity! Why would you ever "thin out" fully capable T-Mobile's LTE network that Sprint subs can start benefitting immediately? I don't get it.

[Conan Kudo]

 

I think there is some confusion. When I say that Sprint would divest the AWS spectrum, they won't have to do it immediately. They will be given maybe 2-3 years to reach agreements to sell it (Just like Verizon was given to sell its lower 700Mhz spectrum as a condition of getting CableCo's AWS spectrum). Here is how I would handle integrating TMUS if I were managing Sprint.

 

Almost immediately:

• Sprint stops selling new TMUS phones. All new UE will be Sprint gear. 
• Sprint makes TMUS LTE (AWS) "native" for UE that supports it. I imagine the iPhone 5S or the Nexus 5 could take advantage of this with a simple software update? (AWS is being used as a "bridge" while the merger and the TD-LTE rollout are completed.

As more TMUS subscribers move to Sprint handsets/UE:

• Sprint gradually repurposes TMUS PCS spectrum for Sprint LTE. 
• Sprint strategically 'thins" TMUS sites, converting selected TMUS sites to NV sites.
• Announce a firm shutdown date for the TMUS network. 
• Reach agreements with buyers for AWS spectrum (maybe they get some immediately the remainder when the TMUS network is shut off)

At the end (about three years from the date of the merger):

• All remaining TMUS sites are shut down
• Remaining AWS spectrum is transferred to whomever purchased it.

 

Why in the world would Sprint be so stupid as to give up such bandwidth for a paltry LTE FDD network on PCS? Especially when PCS isn't even the band of choice for LTE anyway!

 

Given the layout of PCS spectrum, it makes more sense to retain UMTS service on PCS and accelerate the shift of UMTS to PCS and LTE to AWS. It is more likely that Sprint's PCS G block would be divested rather than AWS, because it's an island band that simply isn't very useful.

 

CDMA to UMTS conversions are quite commonplace and very easy to do with today's gear. No one sells CDMA gear that doesn't have support for UMTS because there have been many situations where CDMA operators have chosen to switch platforms as part of a strategy or a government order.

 

More importantly, AWS is the global roaming band for the Americas. Removing that would be foolish. AWS has some special characteristics that make it uniquely qualified to be a global band, and every operator in the Americas knows this.

 

All of that is unnecessary because Sprint owns 100+ Mhz of EBS/BRS on average nationwide, and if they deploy 60-80Mhz they can still divest 20-40Mhz. That's already an insane amount of capacity! Why would you ever "thin out" fully capable T-Mobile's LTE network that Sprint subs can start benefitting immediately? I don't get it.

 

No device can use more than 40MHz due to PA, filter, and antenna restrictions on user equipment. It makes very little sense to have the entire band. BRS+EBS is an easier divestment to make, as well as PCS G block.

[mozamcrew]

What's the reasoning behind divesting fully deployed AWS spectrum and rendering 40 million devices obsolete, and how's that less painful than divesting 2.5Ghz spectrum that's barely been deployed which Sprint has in insane quantities?

 

Precisely because Sprint has so much BRS/EBS, and will have significantly deployed in their network it before this merger ever closes. It's also already baked in to newer Sprint phones. Also, getting rid of leased EBS will be less helpful with FCC approval than agreeing to give up AWS.

 

To make this work as a business proposition, they are going to have to thin their combined site count. I'm assuming the network gear and UE that does get scrapped or resold will be the TMUS stuff. They don't have to get rid of all TMUS sites, just eliminate ones with overlap and where Sprint has plenty of capacity, post NV. Once you decide that, then the AWS spectrum is the logical spectrum to divest, especially given its resale value. Lots of regionals would love to have some, as well as ATT and VZW.

[milan03]

Precisely because Sprint has so much BRS/EBS, and will have significantly deployed in their network it before this merger ever closes. It's also already baked in to newer Sprint phones. Also, getting rid of leased EBS will be less helpful with FCC approval than agreeing to give up AWS.

 

To make this work as a business proposition, they are going to have to thin their combined site count. I'm assuming the network gear and UE that does get scrapped or resold will be the TMUS stuff. They don't have to get rid of all TMUS sites, just eliminate ones with overlap and where Sprint has plenty of capacity, post NV. Once you decide that, then the AWS spectrum is the logical spectrum to divest, especially given its resale value. Lots of regionals would love to have some, as well as ATT and VZW.

Still, it doesn't make too much sense since user equipment currently can't aggregate more than 10+10Mhz. Next year 20+20Mhz will be possible for theoretical peaks of 300Mbps. Let's assume that in 2015-16 frame Qcom figures out how to aggregate three 20Mhz component carriers, that's still under 50% of Sprint's 2.5Ghz spectrum nationwide capacity... By that time 600Mhz auction will take place, AWS-3 will take place, who knows maybe even 3.5Ghz, so if Sprint absolutely HAS TO divest their spectrum, the vacant spectrum is what should be utilized. Verizon has already expressed their interest in it, and I'm sure Charlie would be all over it. Cannibalizing the existing footprint is just not smart.

[Conan Kudo]

Precisely because Sprint has so much BRS/EBS, and will have significantly deployed in their network it before this merger ever closes. It's also already baked in to newer Sprint phones. Also, getting rid of leased EBS will be less helpful with FCC approval than agreeing to give up AWS.

 

To make this work as a business proposition, they are going to have to thin their combined site count. I'm assuming the network gear and UE that does get scrapped or resold will be the TMUS stuff. They don't have to get rid of all TMUS sites, just eliminate ones with overlap and where Sprint has plenty of capacity, post NV. Once you decide that, then the AWS spectrum is the logical spectrum to divest, especially given its resale value. Lots of regionals would love to have some, as well as ATT and VZW.

By that logic, PCS would be a better divestment, because everyone uses PCS. Every operator would love to get their hands on parts of Sprint's PCS D+B+E+F spectrum throughout the country, since it's smack in the middle of the band and goes well with all currently deployed technologies except LTE from an ecosystem perspective.

[bigsnake49]

Still, it doesn't make too much sense since user equipment currently can't aggregate more than 10+10Mhz. Next year 20+20Mhz will be possible for theoretical peaks of 300Mbps. Let's assume that in 2015-16 frame Qcom figures out how to aggregate three 20Mhz component carriers, that's still under 50% of Sprint's 2.5Ghz spectrum nationwide capacity... By that time 600Mhz auction will take place, AWS-3 will take place, who knows maybe even 3.5Ghz, so if Sprint absolutely HAS TO divest their spectrum, the vacant spectrum is what should be utilized. Verizon has already expressed their interest in it, and I'm sure Charlie would be all over it. Cannibalizing the existing footprint is just not smart.

 

Yeah, by the time this merger could potentially close, TMUS would have deployed brand new AWS LTE gear all over their foorprint. Why would they totally dismantle a brand new network? They could divest all of EBS and they would still have about 60Mhz of BRS left. Not exactly peanuts, and that's on top of all the AWS and PCS spectrum. 

[Conan Kudo]

Why would they have to divest anything? They'd still be smaller than VZW, ATT.

Because combining Sprint's >200MHz of spectrum with T-Mobile's ~80MHz of spectrum is more than twice the spectrum screen limit for any operator. Further subdividing into spectrum classes, the only spectrum they wouldn't be required to divest is 700MHz, ESMR 800MHz, and Cellular 850MHz spectrum. They'd have to get rid of either some PCS or AWS, and a great deal of its BRS+EBS would have to be divested, because there's no rational public interest benefit to Sprint controlling damn near the entire 194MHz of the 2.6GHz band.

[bigsnake49]

Why would they have to divest anything? They'd still be smaller than VZW, ATT.

Because they would have like 300MHz of spectrum in some areas. 

[mozamcrew]

All of that is unnecessary because Sprint owns 100+ Mhz of EBS/BRS on average nationwide, and if they deploy 60-80Mhz they can still divest 20-40Mhz. That's already an insane amount of capacity! Why would you ever "thin out" fully capable T-Mobile's LTE network that Sprint subs can start benefitting immediately? I don't get it.

Sprint doesn't "own"most of it. IIRC they only own the BRS, about 55 Mhz of it. All the EBS spectrum is leased and varies greatly by market. The FCC doesn't count the EBS spectrum against Sprint's total in it's spectrum screen, so giving it up doesn't help much with getting the FCC to sign off on the deal, which is why Sprint is divesting the spectrum in the first place.

 

You thin the T-Moblie LTE network because it only offers LTE on AWS and, in many places, is still stuck on GSM/EDGE with no HSPA or LTE at all. Sprint's network will do LTE seamlessly across 3 different bands. By the time Sprint/Softbank gets FCC approval for a TMUS merger, they will have far more extensive LTE coverage than TMUS. You thin it as more and more users move to Sprint devices that support LTE across all bands, not just AWS. 

 

 

[GinaDee]

If this really goes down I hope Sprint uses Milan and retain the entire T-Mobile network team.  Those guys really know what they are doing.  Let them remain in charge.  

 

My mood would be softened if I knew Sprint would adopt 3GPP standards and maintain a HSPA+/LTE network in favor of the older CDMA networks and allow any compatible HSPA+/LTE device (BYOD) onto their network without contract.  

 

I hate Sprint's current methods of manual activations, locked down devices and whitelists that prevent BYOD.

Edited December 16, 2013 by GinaDee

[milan03]

You thin the T-Moblie LTE network because it only offers LTE on AWS and, in many places, is still stuck on GSM/EDGE with no HSPA or LTE at all. Sprint's network will do LTE seamlessly across 3 different bands. By the time Sprint/Softbank gets FCC approval for a TMUS merger, they will have far more extensive LTE coverage than TMUS. You thin it as more and more users move to Sprint devices that support LTE across all bands, not just AWS. 

 

Why would you force T-Mobile subscribers to new CDMA devices if a large number of Sprint's existing devices already support GSM/WCDMA on 1900Mhz band? Not to mention the CDMA chipset licensing that even Verizon is trying to get rid of!

[GinaDee]

Sprint doesn't "own"most of it. IIRC they only own the BRS, about 55 Mhz of it. All the EBS spectrum is leased and varies greatly by market. The FCC doesn't count the EBS spectrum against Sprint's total in it's spectrum screen, so giving it up doesn't help much with getting the FCC to sign off on the deal, which is why Sprint is divesting the spectrum in the first place.

 

You thin the T-Moblie LTE network because it only offers LTE on AWS and, in many places, is still stuck on GSM/EDGE with no HSPA or LTE at all. Sprint's network will do LTE seamlessly across 3 different bands. By the time Sprint/Softbank gets FCC approval for a TMUS merger, they will have far more extensive LTE coverage than TMUS. You thin it as more and more users move to Sprint devices that support LTE across all bands, not just AWS. 

 

 

 

Will Sprint's advanced LTE network support simultaneous voice and data for devices that access all 3 LTE bands?

[milan03]

If this really goes down I hope Sprint uses Milan and retain the entire T-Mobile network team.  Those guys really know what they are doing.  Let them remain in charge.  

Let AJ be the leader, Neal and myself would provide moral support, and Ray Neville will do what we demand

[mozamcrew]

Will Sprint's advanced LTE network support simultaneous voice and data for devices that access all 3 LTE bands?

Once they begin rolling out VoLTE it will, certainly by the time the TMUS network is shut off this will be the case.

[Conan Kudo]

Once they begin rolling out VoLTE it will, certainly by the time the TMUS network is shut off this will be the case.

T-Mobile already has VoLTE on its network. It inherited it from MetroPCS. While GSM/UMTS/LTE handsets do not have VoLTE active (they use CSFB by default instead), T-Mobile will relaunch VoLTE on Lower 700MHz A block spectrum with a new class of GSM/UMTS/LTE handsets.

[mozamcrew]

T-Mobile already has VoLTE on its network. It inherited it from MetroPCS. While GSM/UMTS/LTE handsets do not have VoLTE active (they use CSFB by default instead), T-Mobile will relaunch VoLTE on Lower 700MHz A block spectrum with a new class of GSM/UMTS/LTE handsets.

As someone who suggested that Sprint go after the 700Mhz A block instead of waiting on the 600 Mhz auction, I'd like a combined SprinT-mobile to keep that spectrum!

[WiWavelength]

Here is a topic:

 

If Sprint-T-Mobile comes to fruition, the combined operator will likely rebrand.  What will be the new name?

 

Discuss...

 

AJ

[Conan Kudo]

Here is a topic:

 

If Sprint-T-Mobile comes to fruition, the combined operator will likely rebrand.  What will be the new name?

 

Discuss...

 

AJ

American Cellular Corporation

[hescominsoon]

softmob

[milan03]

Softbank US

[WiWavelength]

Softbank US

 

No, hell no.

 

As I have said numerous times, SoftBank is a weak name.  Plus, it has no cachet in the US.  It sounds like a flaccid place to get a checking account.

 

AJ

[Conan Kudo]

Softbank US

I think people would be rather confused. Unlike Japanese people, who don't actually know what "SoftBank" would mean, it would be very weird for such a name to be used for a mobile phone company in an English-speaking country.