Jump to content

Dish moves closer to gaining control of LightSquared assets


bigsnake49

Recommended Posts

I know that most of you could not care less about Dish, but they have been in the news lately so here it goes. The first piece of news is that the fixed broadband trials with Sprint in Corpus Christi and with Ntelos are going very well and could turn into a real business. I think Sprint needs to exploit the wealth of EBS/BRS spectrum they have in the rural and exurban areas that are not served by the wired incumbents.

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/dish-execs-sprint-ntelos-fixed-td-lte-trials-could-turn-real-business/2014-11-05

 

The second piece of news is that Ergen is about to get control of Lightsquared, securing about 60% of the new company with J.P. Morgan getting 31.9%. Now, a lot of you have written Lightsquared off but I bet Charlie Ergen will do something about it. He just might sue the FCC and force them to give him compensatory spectrum or force them to force the GPS community to start putting steep filters on their receivers so that the spectrum that Lightsquared owns can be usable. I would not put it past him. He is very wily and persistent. I bet he goes after the unpaired blocks in the AWS-3 auction for the minimum. Between all of his spectrum holdings he will control quite a bit of spectrum.

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/dishs-ergen-would-get-control-lightsquared-latest-restructuring-deal/2014-11-04

 

Now granted, he does not have a network yet, but I am thinking Sprint will be happy to host some of his spectrum.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet he goes after the unpaired blocks in the AWS-3 auction for the minimum. Between all of his spectrum holdings he will control quite a bit of spectrum.

 

Well, that would leave Dish with a lot of unpaired, uncertainly paired, or unusable spectrum:  Lower 700 MHz E block, L-band 1500 MHz, L-band 1600 MHz, AWS-3 1700 MHz, S-band 2000 MHz, and S-band 2200 MHz.  Plus, you can basically forget about the S-band spectrum being AWS-4 and band 23 and the L-band spectrum being band 24 -- as both of those are pretty much off the table now.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that would leave Dish with a lot of unpaired, uncertainly paired, or unusable spectrum:  Lower 700 MHz E block, L-band 1500 MHz, L-band 1600 MHz, AWS-3 1700 MHz, S-band 2000 MHz, and S-band 2200 MHz.  Plus, you can basically forget about the S-band spectrum being AWS-4 and band 23 and the L-band spectrum being band 24 -- as both of those are pretty much off the table now.

 

AJ

 

So what does all that spectrum do for old boy Charlie? I have to believe there is some plan for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that would leave Dish with a lot of unpaired, uncertainly paired, or unusable spectrum:  Lower 700 MHz E block, L-band 1500 MHz, L-band 1600 MHz, AWS-3 1700 MHz, S-band 2000 MHz, and S-band 2200 MHz.  Plus, you can basically forget about the S-band spectrum being AWS-4 and band 23 and the L-band spectrum being band 24 -- as both of those are pretty much off the table now.

 

AJ

 Well one thing they can do is to turn both the 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200 into downlinks and use both Lightsquared's 1626.5-1660.5MHz uplink and whatever other uplink they get from the AWS-3 auction to have a 40x40+ spectrum block.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Well one thing they can do is to turn both the 2000-2020MHz and 2180-2200 into downlinks and use both Lightsquared's 1626.5-1660.5MHz uplink and whatever other uplink they get from the AWS-3 auction to have a 40x40+ spectrum block.

OK technically 2 20x20 blocks.

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

    • I assume that any agreement is not perpetual and has an end date. - Trip
    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
  • Recently Browsing

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