600 MHz auction results posted and transition schedule

[EvanA]

In Chicago where I'm at, the FCC lists it at 10 blocks with zero impairment, all category 1 blocks. What does this mean exactly? How much of the 500mhz spectrum is going to be auctioned off here?

Each block is 10MHz of spectrum, so 100MHz will be auctioned off in 10MHz paired chunks. Category 1 spectrum is spectrum with 0 to 15% impairment, and category 2 is spectrum with 15 up to 50% impairment. Most of the spectrum is category 1 though.

[caspar347]

Eyyyyy 10 blocks in Charlotte. Nice.

[Arysyn]

Each block is 10MHz of spectrum, so 100MHz will be auctioned off in 10MHz paired chunks. Category 1 spectrum is spectrum with 0 to 15% impairment, and category 2 is spectrum with 15 up to 50% impairment. Most of the spectrum is category 1 though.

 

This really helps to know, since I'm likely keeping T-Mobile for the forseeable future with my new Vivo Xplay 5 Elite device. Although, I'll need to get a device upgrade when the 600mhz becomes activated on the T-Mobile network, it still is nice to know these chunks of spectrum are big.

 

However, what I'm now wondering, is say that T-Mobile buys a block of 10mhz spectrum. Can they divide it up by 5x5 or do they have to buy two 10mhz blocks if one block can only be used as downlink while the other block for uplink?

[Trip]

Each block consists of 5 MHz downlink and 5 MHz uplink.

 

- Trip

[Trip]

And I feel the need to remind everyone that just because 10 blocks are being offered at the outset doesn't mean the end result will necessarily be 10 blocks.  If the wireless companies don't pay enough to cover the cost of paying the broadcasters, then the amount of spectrum is reduced and bidding continues.

 

- Trip

[Arysyn]

Each block consists of 5 MHz downlink and 5 MHz uplink.

 

- Trip

 

Thank you for the information. Although I view this as disappointing, as I was hoping the nature of this would be that the block of spectrum would have to be used fully for one or another, meaning either downlink or uplink. This means T-Mobile could very likely just purchase one block of spectrum in a particular market. So, likely no more than just 5x5 here in the Chicago market where they really need much more than that.

 

I'd really like for T-Mobile to purchase three contiguous blocks and have 15x15, or at least two for 10x10, though now I know they won't have any sort of forced situation where they have to purchase at least two blocks. I'm hoping they will do something different than what they've claimed they are going to do by just filling in areas they don't already have 700mhz in. It'll probably be a missed opportunity, especially since the broadcasters likely know how badly T-Mobile needs this spectrum and could try to get the bids up high enough where they know they'll get what they want out of the carriers. Then again, I wonder how the reserved spectrum issue plays into this knowing broadcasters have a strong say in this, at least this is what 'm perceiving from what I've been reading here.

[Arysyn]

Alright, I just read something I want to address, which is something realistically-based here, although it do want this to be a point for why I've been so adamant about having a different system of spectrum distribution than auctions, but certainly not the kind of winner take all Trip mentioned it use to be. I really want there to be a better way for this somehow, even if it couldn't be the mass spectrum giveaway to all carriers at low rates that I'd like it it be.

 

Here is where I see a problem. On TmoNews, it is quoted directly from FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler making this statement regarding the 600mhz auction :

“Robust broadcaster participation is key to the success of the Incentive Auction. Today’s announcement reflects the voluntary decision by many broadcasters that this auction truly is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. The 126 MHz initial clearing target ensures that wireless carriers and other forward auction bidders have their chance to compete for the maximum amount of low-band ‘beachfront’ spectrum. The wireless industry has said it needs additional spectrum to meet growing customer demand and usher in the age of 5G. The broadcasters have stepped up and done their part to fulfill that demand.

“I look forward to a robustly competitive auction and the vast economic and consumer benefits that await.

​

http://www.tmonews.com/2016/04/fcc-announces-600mhz-spectrum-auction-clearing-target-bidding-round-schedule/

 

My issue with what Tom Wheeler said there has to do with his misunderstanding of what the 600mhz spectrum is being used for by the carriers, which I think isn't good he said this if he really doesn't get it. The carriers are primarily looking to high-band for 5g, not low-band. This 600mhz spectrum auction s turning out messy and I can understand why some people here on S4GRU want this auction to fail. 600mhz isn't about being a primary band for the next generation of wireless, which is 5G using high frequency bands. The 600mhz really should have been used for the smaller carriers primarily who do not have much low-band already. I certainly agree with John Legere's motives in his trying to keep more of the spectrum away from AT&T and Verizon who have quite a bit of low-band as it is, The smaller carriers, and of course T-Mobile would benefit greatly from a decent amount of this. Now of course I'm not happy with T-Mobile's direction of claiming they are going to get just enough of this to fill in the voids where they don't have 700mhz. T-Mobile really ought to be trying to get at least two, if not three 10mhz contiguous blocks out of this. But that doesn't seem to really be T-Mobile's goal, which goes to show that this really isn't about 5G, its about getting that little bit of additional low-band capacity in on these networks.

 

The last thing Tom Wheeler said there is what really gets to me. This auction is not going to have vast economic and consumer benefits to wireless users, especially if the broadcasters decide they aren't getting enough money for this. The broadcasters essentially are being given the power over the wireless industry's advancements they could be using with this spectrum, but likely will not be given over enough to be what Tom Wheeler thinks it will be. If he really wanted to see major economic and consumer benefits for the wireless industry and its customers, there are better ways he could be trying to do to get that achieved. Yet, if this fails as some people here have stated they'd like to happen, then this ought to be on Tom Wheeler and the FCC for making it fail, especially as they are giving broadcasters the ultimate choice here. I'd blame the broadcasters otherwise, though that wouldn't be fair, considering the circumstances.

[WiWavelength]

It's here.  The PN announcing a 126 MHz clearing target, good for 10 blocks in most markets:

 

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-16-453A1.pdf

 

 

Am I missing something?  Are my calculations off?  Look at the FDD offsets -- the emphasis on plural.

 

Because of the need to protect radio astronomy UHF channel 37, the 600 MHz A-F blocks have an FDD offset of 73 MHz, while the 600 MHz G-J blocks have an FDD offset of 61 MHz.

 

Do you know what that means, folks?  Separate 3GPP bands in 600 MHz.  Two more incompatible LTE bands.  Yea, everybody from manufacturers, to operators, to end users loves even more bands.  The battle of the bands.

 

This auction -- the planning and the impetus behind it -- is looking more and more like techno political bullshit.  I mean no insult to you, Trip, and I am sorry for all the work that you have put into this unnecessary auction.  But I do, I really do hope it falls flat on its face.

 

AJ

[Arysyn]

 

Am I missing something?  Are my calculations off?  Look at the FDD offsets -- the emphasis on plural.

 

Because of the need to protect radio astronomy UHF channel 37, the 600 MHz A-F blocks have an FDD offset of 73 MHz, while the 600 MHz G-J blocks have an FDD offset of 61 MHz.

 

Do you know what that means, folks?  Separate 3GPP bands in 600 MHz.  Two more incompatible LTE bands.  Yea, everybody from manufacturers, to operators, to end users loves even more bands.  The battle of the bands.

 

This auction -- the planning and the impetus behind it -- is looking more and more like techno political bullshit.  I mean no insult to you, Trip, and I am sorry for all the work that you have put into this unnecessary auction.  But I do, I really do hope it falls flat on its face.

 

AJ

 

I know how you dislike this auction, AJ. I've referred you as a person who doesn't when I've written my previous few posts regarding this auction in various ways. I'm always in favor or wireless carriers getting more spectrum, though definitely not through what I view as badly planned unnecessary processes of distributing spectrum in such ways as these auctions and particularly this one.

 

I've of course given my view on an alternative for this. Call it fantasy or whatever, at least I've thought about this and given what I'd like done. I haven't had any technical oppositions to these ideas, meaning no one has said my opinions can't technically be done, something which if someone ever did prove my ideas not to be technically possible, I would back down immediately and admit defeat completely. I would like to give more information as to how I would like that to be done technically, if it were ever socially possible some day, then see if I at least have my technical theories correct. I'll save that for another post though given some time from having written so much here about it lately.

 

So regarding the 600mhz auction though, it sounds as though the problem is how this is going to affect device manufacturers, or is this mainly a huge strain on network equipment manufacturers to get this spectrum to work properly on wireless networks without interfering with broadcasters on this spectrum? Oh, I did get the map you showed me to work properly, AJ. My computer's internet browsers don't always show things properly. Thank you though for sharing it here. Hopefully that also helped those here who were confused about the Houston market's spectrum, as reading it from them confused me as well.

[EvanA]

 

 

I'd really like for T-Mobile to purchase three contiguous blocks and have 15x15, or at least two for 10x10, though now I know they won't have any sort of forced situation where they have to purchase at least two blocks.

Purchasing 30MHz of spectrum wouldn't be very useful because 10MHz is the widest LTE carrier possible due to interference issues with wider carriers.

[Trip]

My issue with what Tom Wheeler said there has to do with his misunderstanding of what the 600mhz spectrum is being used for by the carriers, which I think isn't good he said this if he really doesn't get it. The carriers are primarily looking to high-band for 5g, not low-band. This 600mhz spectrum auction s turning out messy and I can understand why some people here on S4GRU want this auction to fail. 600mhz isn't about being a primary band for the next generation of wireless, which is 5G using high frequency bands. The 600mhz really should have been used for the smaller carriers primarily who do not have much low-band already. I certainly agree with John Legere's motives in his trying to keep more of the spectrum away from AT&T and Verizon who have quite a bit of low-band as it is, The smaller carriers, and of course T-Mobile would benefit greatly from a decent amount of this. Now of course I'm not happy with T-Mobile's direction of claiming they are going to get just enough of this to fill in the voids where they don't have 700mhz. T-Mobile really ought to be trying to get at least two, if not three 10mhz contiguous blocks out of this. But that doesn't seem to really be T-Mobile's goal, which goes to show that this really isn't about 5G, its about getting that little bit of additional low-band capacity in on these networks.

 

The last thing Tom Wheeler said there is what really gets to me. This auction is not going to have vast economic and consumer benefits to wireless users, especially if the broadcasters decide they aren't getting enough money for this. The broadcasters essentially are being given the power over the wireless industry's advancements they could be using with this spectrum, but likely will not be given over enough to be what Tom Wheeler thinks it will be. If he really wanted to see major economic and consumer benefits for the wireless industry and its customers, there are better ways he could be trying to do to get that achieved. Yet, if this fails as some people here have stated they'd like to happen, then this ought to be on Tom Wheeler and the FCC for making it fail, especially as they are giving broadcasters the ultimate choice here. I'd blame the broadcasters otherwise, though that wouldn't be fair, considering the circumstances.

 

By the time the repacking process is done, it will be 2019 at the very earliest.  By then, LTE may very well be replaced by some newer 5G technology in any event.  I don't think it's entirely unreasonable.  But you are also correct that most 5G discussion has been on much higher frequencies.

 

As far as the broadcasters and money, well, that's how the free market works.  If the buyers won't offer a price the seller wants, then that's that.  If you offer $5 for a flagship smartphone, they won't sell you one.  That doesn't make it unfair to you in any way.

 

And the auction, and its free market means of repurposing spectrum, was mandated by Congress well before Tom Wheeler was in the picture. 

 

 

Am I missing something?  Are my calculations off?  Look at the FDD offsets -- the emphasis on plural.

 

Because of the need to protect radio astronomy UHF channel 37, the 600 MHz A-F blocks have an FDD offset of 73 MHz, while the 600 MHz G-J blocks have an FDD offset of 61 MHz.

 

Do you know what that means, folks?  Separate 3GPP bands in 600 MHz.  Two more incompatible LTE bands.  Yea, everybody from manufacturers, to operators, to end users loves even more bands.  The battle of the bands.

 

This auction -- the planning and the impetus behind it -- is looking more and more like techno political bullshit.  I mean no insult to you, Trip, and I am sorry for all the work that you have put into this unnecessary auction.  But I do, I really do hope it falls flat on its face.

 

AJ

 

AJ, I believe there's a requirement for 600 MHz interoperability in the new rules for the band, which means that even if two duplexers and two bands are required, the phones should be certified for both bands.  I could be wrong about that, but I do recall a discussion about it a while back.

 

And if the clearing target drops to 84 MHz, then you're above channel 37 at that point anyway, so no split should be needed.

 

I'm a TV guy at heart; you probably can guess what my overall opinion of the auction is, but I figured it's better to be there and make sure it's done properly as opposed to being absent and potential mistakes being made. 

 

But it's definitely looking like it will happen and will succeed, at some level of clearing.  The real question, to me, is how much.

 

So regarding the 600mhz auction though, it sounds as though the problem is how this is going to affect device manufacturers, or is this mainly a huge strain on network equipment manufacturers to get this spectrum to work properly on wireless networks without interfering with broadcasters on this spectrum?

 

Broadcasters will be repacked into the remaining UHF TV band.  That's the point.  Only in certain places might TV stations be able to interfere, which is what the "impairments" are all about.

 

- Trip

[Arysyn]

Purchasing 30MHz of spectrum wouldn't be very useful because 10MHz is the widest LTE carrier possible due to interference issues with wider carriers.

 

Ah, I see. I figured this was going to be more similar to other spectrum. I guess not.

[mozamcrew]

I guess I think the idea of clearing channels below 37 is just stupid anyhow..

[payturr]

So the widest carrier is 10x10, and the FCC believes this will guide the 5G kickoff? That's garbage. No carrier is investing in 10x10 unless it's in a market where spectrum is slim, AKA the tiny rural carriers are the only ones buying, and T-Mobile and AT&T where it really hurts. This spectrum won't be usable for years, and they think the max size of 10x10 is worth billions of dollars? What a joke.

[NYC126]

I always felt Sprint didn't need this spectrum from a Data point of view. I thought Sprint needs more low band for coverage and VOLTE.

 

A 10x10 block will go for several billions and face fierce competition for it. This is the type of Spectrum block carriers love to deploy then it gets congested and carriers have to go back to that macro site and install AWS spectrum panels ( I am looking at you Verizon). The end joke is carriers have to add density to their network regardless of which bands they operate.

[RAvirani]

I always felt Sprint didn't need this spectrum from a Data point of view. I thought Sprint needs more low band for coverage and VOLTE.

 

A 10x10 block will go for several billions and face fierce competition for it. This is the type of Spectrum block carriers love to deploy then it gets congested and carriers have to go back to that macro site and install AWS spectrum panels ( I am looking at you Verizon). The end joke is carriers have to add density to their network regardless of which bands they operate.

Fully agreed. If sprint wants to do VoLTE without some sort of 3G handoff, they need lowband. Since we're looking at about 100mhz of usable spectrum, I think there's probably enough for everyone. Assume the four major carriers each get 20mhz (10x10) from this - there is still 20mhz up for grabs by other smaller carriers (eg USCC, NexTech, etc). SoftBank should jump on his opportunity - it may be sprints last chance to get some lowband.

[SkyGuy98]

Fully agreed. If sprint wants to do VoLTE without some sort of 3G handoff, they need lowband. Since we're looking at about 100mhz of usable spectrum, I think there's probably enough for everyone. Assume the four major carriers each get 20mhz (10x10) from this - there is still 20mhz up for grabs by other smaller carriers (eg USCC, NexTech, etc). SoftBank should jump on his opportunity - it may be sprints last chance to get some lowband.

Definitely. I know Sprint has plenty of spectrum in most places and I want Sprint and Softbank to save money when possible, but it would be a big miss not to get 10x10 600MHz to use as their VoLTE band. I know that is not enough for great speeds or data capacity, but that'd be good for voice. If you think about it, it'd be pretty cool to have that-

 

2.5GHz: Speed and Capacity

1.9GHz: General LTE

800MHz: Extra coverage

600MHz: VoLTE

 

Just my humble opinion. I am also totally cool with Sprint/Softbank sitting this one out.

[Arysyn]

So the widest carrier is 10x10, and the FCC believes this will guide the 5G kickoff? That's garbage. No carrier is investing in 10x10 unless it's in a market where spectrum is slim, AKA the tiny rural carriers are the only ones buying, and T-Mobile and AT&T where it really hurts. This spectrum won't be usable for years, and they think the max size of 10x10 is worth billions of dollars? What a joke.

 

I'd much rather it be 15x15 or 20x20. The only upside that it at least isn't 5x5, though I am concerned that is all T-Mobile will do with it.

[payturr]

I'd much rather it be 15x15 or 20x20. The only upside that it at least isn't 5x5, though I am concerned that is all T-Mobile will do with it.

There's no reason for T-Mobile to pay extra for large chunks of frequency that won't be addressable until the early 2020s when 39GHz 5G networks will be the norm.

[red_dog007]

Looking at some history, Nextel used to own a lot of spectrum between 806-817MHz.  Then they got moved to 817-824MHz due to public safety.  Had to vacate 806-817MHz. 

 

Yet SouthernLinc got exempt from this somehow and operate largely in 813.5-817MHz. Is SouthernLinc deploying just a 3x3MHz block so they can fit in B26 and be usable as a Sprint roaming partner?

 

Does Sprint still own the spectrum below 817MHz?  Could Sprint eventually use that?  If they don't own that spectrum anymore, who has it and is that something Sprint would be interested in acquiring?

 

If another 6 or 10MHz opened up in SMR for utilization, there wouldn't really be a need to participate in 600MHz. 

[Arysyn]

There's no reason for T-Mobile to pay extra for large chunks of frequency that won't be addressable until the early 2020s when 39GHz 5G networks will be the norm.

The viewpoint regarding this spectrum has people thinking differently, of course. I'm not a fan of this auction and whatnot, but from living in the Chicago area using the T-Mobile network, I want T-Mobile to get whatever and as much of whatever spectrum T-Mobile can get, because they are sorely lacking in spectrum in the Chicago market. I'd imagine if I lived in a market where there is a lot more spectrum T-Mobile has, I might think differently, at least until I heard from someone in an area like Chicago saying how badly T-Mobile needs spectrum in that area. Then of course I'd understand why.

 

This is a major reason I'm against the auctioning system. It ends of with carriers getting different proportions of spectrum in various markets. Customers in one market may claim their location gets great service that rarely gets congestion even during traffic, where a customer in another market may claim their service sucks even in the middle of the night. Sure I can understand why customers leave their carrier for another if the service issues happen to ne network-related due to site issues, proximity to the sites and that sort of thing. However, most customers not aware to the technicalities of wireless are not necessarily aware of the various issues regarding spectrum. I believe people shouldn't have their wireless experiences hindered by that.

 

At the same time, I also realize the problem with network misuse and all of that, so carriers have to deal with that in the meantime until they get more spectrum. Regarding the ultra high-and spectrum, I've heard people in the WiFi community are concerned how carriers using these unlicensed spectrum will affect WiFi.

[payturr]

Yet SouthernLinc got exempt from this somehow and operate largely in 813.5-817MHz. Is SouthernLinc deploying just a 3x3MHz block so they can fit in B26 and be usable as a Sprint roaming partner?

That's because SouthernLinc is using it exclusively in iDEN like Nextel previously was. Due to the extremely small carriers iDEN uses (sub-1MHz), they can continue to maintain the network without public safety interference.

[payturr]

The viewpoint regarding this spectrum has people thinking differently, of course. I'm not a fan of this auction and whatnot, but from living in the Chicago area using the T-Mobile network, I want T-Mobile to get whatever and as much of whatever spectrum T-Mobile can get, because they are sorely lacking in spectrum in the Chicago market. I'd imagine if I lived in a market where there is a lot more spectrum T-Mobile has, I might think differently, at least until I heard from someone in an area like Chicago saying how badly T-Mobile needs spectrum in that area. Then of course I'd understand why.

 

This is a major reason I'm against the auctioning system. It ends of with carriers getting different proportions of spectrum in various markets. Customers in one market may claim their location gets great service that rarely gets congestion even during traffic, where a customer in another market may claim their service sucks even in the middle of the night. Sure I can understand why customers leave their carrier for another if the service issues happen to ne network-related due to site issues, proximity to the sites and that sort of thing. However, most customers not aware to the technicalities of wireless are not necessarily aware of the various issues regarding spectrum. I believe people shouldn't have their wireless experiences hindered by that.

 

At the same time, I also realize the problem with network misuse and all of that, so carriers have to deal with that in the meantime until they get more spectrum. Regarding the ultra high-and spectrum, I've heard people in the WiFi community are concerned how carriers using these unlicensed spectrum will affect WiFi.

While I too want T-Mobile to accumulate more spectrum, the 600MHz auction is not the route to go. The prices the FCC plans to charge are absurd, and no one, not even the Twin Bells, will humor them. This spectrum isn't worth more than a few million a license.

 

In regards to the auctioning system comments, it's better off this way. It allows heathy competition & cash flow, and a profit to be made for the government who then ensures net neutrality is protected and that no one is interfering with wireless signal. I'm happy with the system, disappointed with the judgement on the value of this garbage 600MHz.

[Fraydog]

I'm looking at the evidence on the board and seeing this auction differently. I'm leaning toward the opinion it can be a moderate success. Maybe not the money printing operation the last AWS auction is, but I don't see where the doom and gloom is on it.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[red_dog007]

That's because SouthernLinc is using it exclusively in iDEN like Nextel previously was. Due to the extremely small carriers iDEN uses (sub-1MHz), they can continue to maintain the network without public safety interference.

But they are deploying LTE.