Jump to content

Golden State Cellular and Mobi PCS -- Twin Bells unabated shopping spree continues


Rawvega
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Verizon Wireless consumes Golden State Cellular and Mobi PCS
April 21, 2014 | By Mike Dano
 

Verizon Wireless (NYSE: VZ) is expanding the reach of its LTE network in California and Hawaii via new deals with two small carriers, Golden State Cellular in California and Mobi PCS in Hawaii. Under the terms of the two separate deals, which both still require FCC approval, Verizon will essentially buy the small carriers.

 

Read more: Verizon Wireless consumes Golden State Cellular and Mobi PCS - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-wireless-consumes-golden-state-cellular-and-mobi-pcs/2014-04-21#ixzz2zcaJVHqu 

Subscribe at FierceWireless

 

 

I'm sure the FCC won't bat an eye at either of these transactions either. As I believe AJ described it, death of a thousand cuts.  :unsure:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like Sprint can't do the same at this point so I don't really get the complaining. I feel like S should try to do the same and acquire smaller regionals. But anyway Vzw is just actively expanding their network through acquisitions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like Sprint can't do the same at this point so I don't really get the complaining. I feel like S should try to do the same and acquire smaller regionals. But anyway Vzw is just actively expanding their network through acquisitions.

 

Sprint is doing the opposite by getting an alliance of interdependent small carriers via CCA and NetAmerica. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint is doing the opposite by getting an alliance of interdependent small carriers via CCA and NetAmerica.

my concern with that is anything stopping vzw or Att from buying one of these CCA members effectively shutting Sprint out?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my concern with that is anything stopping vzw or Att from buying one of these CCA members effectively shutting Sprint out?

 

No but why would the CCA members want to be bought out when they can operate and compete effectively as individual entities under the umbrella of CCA / NetAmerica with the full financial / material support of Sprint / Softbank? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No but why would the CCA members want to be bought out when they can operate and compete effectively as individual entities under the umbrella of CCA / NetAmerica with the full financial / material support of Sprint / Softbank?

I was thinking the same thing. I just hope they aren't looking for a quick payday with a buyout.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking the same thing. I just hope they aren't looking for a quick payday with a buyout.

 

There are always those that are looking for a quick payday but I venture the vast majority of the owners want to keep control of their companies. These small carriers are typically locally owner and made and very tight nit compared to the nationwide carriers who often don't know what the right hand and left hand is doing. 

 

These small carriers now have the material, financial, and alliances available to them so they can compete as themselves with their own visions and methods of doing stuff. It's an extremely attractive offer and I would venture most would love to be part of it.

  • Like 1
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

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • That's actually really useful information when trying to locate/map these. On CellMapper, if I look for B46 it cuts through a lot of th noise.
    • Crunching the numbers a bit more, covering the full MSA would result in slightly under 80% population coverage. But they'd have to deploy on essentially every micro/macro cell in the area.   Yeah, I'm not gonna pretend like I know how either negotiations with squatters or Auction 108 will pan out. That said, I can't see 3.45GHz being *that* valuable to squatters considering the strict buildout requirements.  Another interesting thought I had was a possible spectrum trade with Dish. Dish is still leasing 600MHz to T-Mobile in quite a few metro areas, and I'm sure T-Mobile is looking ahead to what their lowband spectrum situation will be once those leases expire. If T-Mobile is truly going to rely on n71+n41 CA as much as they say they will, it sure would be nice to be working with more than 5MHz-10MHz of n71 uplink capacity. Don't go quoting me on that, though, total (pipedream) speculation haha.
    • Great job on your analysis of small cells versus the 3.45GHZ and the population coverage requirements. I wonder if the fcc is stalling because they may address the key limitation of of 2.5: the convoluted frequencies. Not sure how they would get there, but it would be better public policy if you could actually use a single license in current times, ie 5, 10 or 20MHz. Of course they could also go in more of a nonprofit or small business direction. But most likely they will keep it as planned given how messy the transition would be. In many/most metro areas BRS/EBS is fully licensed. Would be nice if they put pressure on the squatters.
    • I didn't actually look at the buildout requirements before making that comment - they're definitely going to have to deploy on macro sites if they want to hit the buildout requirements. PEA001 has a population of 25,237,061, of which they will have to hit 45% in 4 years (11,356,677) and 80% in 8 years (20,189,649). If they were to cover the entirely, all five boroughs, of NYC using only small cells (something I'd say is impossible considering their current small cell density), they'd only be covering 32% of the population in the PEA. And this is with spectrum that only adds 300Mb/s per sector and will likely have only 50% the range of their current n41 equipment. Doesn't really seem worth it to me. I'm of the opinion that they're looking to hedge their bets in further EBS/BRS acquisition. 
    • These strand mounts also are deployed with Band 46 (LAA), in my experience. I have yet to encounter a strand mount with exclusively 2/66. 
  • Recently Browsing

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