Jump to content
EmeraldReporter

AT&T gobbles up NII Holdings: Mexican Nextel 800Mhz bearer.

Recommended Posts

IBEZ will be solved SOONER, rather than later.

 

Which is a good thing. I would have liked for SoftBank to join the fight, because EVERYONE knows that their roaming rates are going to be abysmal with Sprint customers traveling to Mexico.

 

Is this a raw deal? Your thoughts?

 

Via GigaOM:

https://gigaom.com/2015/01/26/att-to-buy-nextel-mexico-continuing-continental-expansion/

Edited by EmeraldReporter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will AT&T speed up the IBEZ issues now that they own the rights in Mexico?? Would something that helps out a competitor be a priority for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will AT&T speed up the IBEZ issues now that they own the rights in Mexico?? Would something that helps out a competitor be a priority for them?

It will also help AT&T because the sooner that is resolved, the faster they can repurpose that spectrum for LTE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will also help AT&T because the sooner that is resolved, the faster they can repurpose that spectrum for LTE.

That spectrum will be Band  26 right?  Will it provide interference issues along the border though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That spectrum will be Band  26 right?  Will it provide interference issues along the border though?

Yes it will be band 26. All spectrum along the border is subject to interference. But with cooperation some of the interference can be mitigated by tower placement, down tilt, power adjustments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IBEZ will be solved SOONER, rather than later.

 

Which is a good thing. I would have liked for SoftBank to join the fight, because EVERYONE knows that their roaming rates are going to be abysmal with Sprint customers traveling to Mexico.

 

Is this a raw deal? Your thoughts?

 

Via GigaOM:

https://gigaom.com/2015/01/26/att-to-buy-nextel-mexico-continuing-continental-expansion/

AT&T is GSM, Sprint is CDMA, different bands, different frequencies, different agreements between borders, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AT&T is GSM, Sprint is CDMA, different bands, different frequencies, different agreements between borders, etc. 

it does not matter. If Nextel Mexico/AT&T Mexico use the same spectrum band they have to coordinate with each other how to best minimize interference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it does not matter. If Nextel Mexico/AT&T Mexico use the same spectrum band they have to coordinate with each other how to best minimize interference.

I am not sure that Mexico uses the exact same frequencies since I don't know if they went through an SMR rebranding effort and therefore their in-use iDEN frequencies may extend below 814Mhz, making it potentially incompatible with B26.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that Mexico uses the exact same frequencies since I don't know if they went through an SMR rebranding effort and therefore their in-use iDEN frequencies may extend below 814Mhz, making it potentially incompatible with B26.

 

They will either need to use Band 26 or Band 27.  Or possibly both.  Band 27 is lower SMR, Band 26 is upper.  If they do not line up to either of these, then they will spend years going through the 3GPP and get a new band created.

 

If they only use Band 27, then they won't be interfering with Sprint Band 26 across the border at all.  But I think it's highly unlikely they have no upper SMR holdings at all.  So they are likely going to be using Band 26 for the upper SMR band.  The question then really is whether they will also use some lower SMR band holdings as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that Mexico uses the exact same frequencies since I don't know if they went through an SMR rebranding effort and therefore their in-use iDEN frequencies may extend below 814Mhz, making it potentially incompatible with B26.

Mexico does not use 800MHz for public safety so they did not have to reband.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will either need to use Band 26 or Band 27.  Or possibly both.  Band 27 is lower SMR, Band 26 is upper.  If they do not line up to either of these, then they will spend years going through the 3GPP and get a new band created.

 

If they only use Band 27, then they won't be interfering with Sprint Band 26 across the border at all.  But I think it's highly unlikely they have no upper SMR holdings at all.  So they are likely going to be using Band 26 for the upper SMR band.  The question then really is whether they will also use some lower SMR band holdings as well.

The difference between Band 27 and Band 26 is that Band 27 spans the entire SMR band, while Band 26 instead spans the upper SMR band and the Cellular 850 band. For AT&T, Band 27 is ideal because it screws with Sprint and allows AT&T to maintain the bifurcated band classes. Alternatively, AT&T could choose to ask SCT to exchange SMR for Band 28 (APT 700MHz FDD) spectrum, making the whole thing the government's problem instead.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's correct, Band 27 does span both upper and lower.  But that does not change my point regarding it having no bearing on interfering with Sprint either way in the IBEZ regardless of Band used in Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between Band 27 and Band 26 is that Band 27 spans the entire SMR band, while Band 26 instead spans the upper SMR band and the Cellular 850 band. For AT&T, Band 27 is ideal because it screws with Sprint and allows AT&T to maintain the bifurcated band classes. Alternatively, AT&T could choose to ask SCT to exchange SMR for Band 28 (APT 700MHz FDD) spectrum, making the whole thing the government's problem instead.

 

Come on, Neal.  AT&T is more interested in serving its own interests than in screwing with Sprint.

 

If AT&T is smart, it goes band 26.  AT&T already has band 5 LTE deployed in many locations in the US.  Using MFBI, that band 5 can also be band 26.  And that would go a long way toward AT&T economy of scale -- both in handsets and infrastructure -- between the US and Mexico.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on, Neal. AT&T is more interested in serving its own interests than in screwing Sprint.

 

If AT&T is smart, it goes band 26. AT&T already has band 5 LTE deployed in many locations in the US. Using MFBI, that band 5 can also be band 26. And that would go a long way toward AT&T economy of scale -- both in handsets and infrastructure -- between the US and Mexico.

 

AJ

Why not do the b28 trade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not do the b28 trade

 

Sorry, maximus, that is not my concern.  Plus, I have reached my 20 question quota with you this month.

 

AJ

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, maximus, that is not my concern. Plus, I have reached my 20 question quota with you this month.

 

AJ

Don't understand why the b27 question is your concern but not the b28.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't understand why the b27 question is your concern but not the b28.

 

That a third world country has so much vacant spectrum it can pick and swap among various bands is not my concern.  I simply do not care.  Neal can be the international guy.  But what the rest of the world does in spectrum policy has essentially no bearing on what the US does.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's correct, Band 27 does span both upper and lower.  But that does not change my point regarding it having no bearing on interfering with Sprint either way in the IBEZ regardless of Band used in Mexico.

Sort of. If AT&T controls the SMR band, they'll slow down the relocation process as much as possible. Because AT&T controls Iusacell, they have no impending need for the SMR frequencies due to its control of most of the Cellular 850 licenses that it needs. NII Holdings had a very strong need to get it done quickly in order to become competitive. Under AT&T, that's not necessary.

 

But you are right in that the band class AT&T ultimately chooses has no bearing on the IBEZ question.

 

That a third world country has so much vacant spectrum it can pick and swap among various bands is not my concern.  I simply do not care.  Neal can be the international guy.  But what the rest of the world does in spectrum policy has essentially no bearing on what the US does.

 

AJ

 

As much as you wish that to be true, it's not. Especially with border regions. You inherently know this (and to a certain degree, accept this) because otherwise the IBEZ situation wouldn't exist. Spectrum and telecommunications is all about harmonization and scale, be it domestically or transnationally. You don't have to like it, but you can't ignore it.

 

Secondly, "third world" is an old term to use. We're not in the Cold War. "First world" relating to US/NATO allies, "second world" relating to Soviet Union/CIS allies, and "third world" for unaligned countries. It doesn't actually represent the state of the country, only a political affiliation that no longer applies in any significant manner.

 

The UMS is a fairly well-developed country (with a high HDI and industrialization recently completed), though admittedly it has some major crime problems and polarized wealth distribution. But then again, so does the USA.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public Safety here in Yuma has a time line of March to move to 700mhz, they are itchy to get Sprint money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondly, "third world" is an old term to use. We're not in the Cold War. "First world" relating to US/NATO allies, "second world" relating to Soviet Union/CIS allies, and "third world" for unaligned countries. It doesn't actually represent the state of the country, only a political affiliation that no longer applies in any significant manner.

 

The UMS is a fairly well-developed country (with a high HDI and industrialization recently completed), though admittedly it has some major crime problems and polarized wealth distribution. But then again, so does the USA.

 

Remember, I am a geographer.  I know the original meaning of "Third World."  In fact, it came up in conversation with my girlfriend recently, and I defined the Cold War nation categorization you describe above.

 

But many years later, that "Third World" definition has been deprecated.  The lowercase "third world" has taken precedence.  It now means a "developing country" -- if you want a politically correct term.  Or a "banana republic" -- if, like me, you do not mind poking a little fun at a country in the tropics that has a few developed cities, an undeveloped countryside, a huge wealth/poverty disparity, and a massive crime/corruption problem.

 

Mexico qualifies.  Any comparisons to the US are specious.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think AT&T may intentionally slow down IBEZ resolution to gut Sprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see the move that AT&T can make to slow it down.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think AT&T may intentionally slow down IBEZ resolution to gut Sprint.

 

And everyone is just waiting on pins and needles to hear what you think.

 

;)

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sort of. If AT&T controls the SMR band, they'll slow down the relocation process as much as possible. Because AT&T controls Iusacell, they have no impending need for the SMR frequencies due to its control of most of the Cellular 850 licenses that it needs. NII Holdings had a very strong need to get it done quickly in order to become competitive. Under AT&T, that's not necessary.

 

 

AT&T has 850MHz in the south of the country only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AT&T has 850MHz in the south of the country only.

Yes, but the Southern half of the country is where most of the population is already. So AT&T can afford to have a skeleton network there until it absolutely wants to. Plus, if the Telmex assets (which will include cellular and fixed assets) being sold off are in the parts that Iusacell doesn't operate 850MHz networks today, AT&T can just get those and use them instead. AT&T has a ton of alternatives to just paying for rebanding and using SMR for LTE.

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Similar Content

    • By Abdual Rodriguez
      Ill make my comments brief, in hopes that it creates dialog abbot our future. The synergy and blending of the 2 company's from the network perspective is a complete disaster already! If you are a Sprint Network Employee and feel everything is so far, so good. You have not yet been tortured by the superior leader. Its coming. 
      T-mobile either has a leadership directive to force out Sprint employees, or the local markets and regions are overwhelmed by the extensive knowledge Sprint folks bring and that intimidation is causing them to try and force you out. To be fair, Sprint had layers of dead weight also and most need to be bounced. 
      From the brief time I have seen their processes and procedures combined with the lack of experience, rest assured you are all in for a wild ride.
      How about unionizing? 
    • By vanko987
      I'm new to this forum, and I've seen people mention cell sites with specific ID's (for example, SF33XC664). Is there any significance to these ID's, and is there a way to decode them? Also, how do I figure out what the cell site ID's are for towers near me?
      Thanks! I'm excited to start talking on this site more 😀
    • By Paynefanbro
      I figured since Verizon's 5G-NR network officially launched it would make sense for there to be a thread for it.
    • By Paynefanbro
      I recently went on an 8 day cruise from NYC to the Caribbean that stopped in Turks and Caicos, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic. My first stop was Grand Turk and there I opted for the free roaming. My S9+ automatically connected to Flow's (Cable & Wireless) LTE network where I received speeds of around 120kbps on average with boosts of up to 150kbps. Something worth noting is that on speed tests, the server prefers to default to Sprint's Miami server as opposed to local servers. Speeds were more than adequate for any amount of web browsing and honestly felt much faster than in reality. It helps that using Chrome will save you data by not loading pictures on certain sites unless you click them.
      In Puerto Rico, I connected to Band 13 on the way into the port in San Juan but once I was in the city, my phone never left Band 41. While the phone was usable, speeds remained significantly lower than what I've come to expect from 3xCA in the mainland U.S. Data speeds peaked at around 25-30Mbos but on average were in the 5-10 Mbps range even on LTE+. Signal remained strong everywhere though. 
      Finally in the Dominican Republic, I entered in Amber Cover which is in Puerto Plata. My phone latched onto a weak Band 2 LTE signal in the port from Altice (called Orange Dominicana in SignalCheck). I had trouble loading pages though. Once off of the ship and out in the open, I had a much stronger signal which allowed me to browse the internet without a hitch. Because it was the last day of my trip, while at the beach I decided to purchase the 24 hour high speed pass for $5. My speeds went from 120kbps to 65Mbps in less than 5 seconds. In some areas speeds were slower, particularly at the port where it struggled to break 2Mbps. Now, back on the boat my phone is flipping between weak Band 4 LTE and overloaded Band 5 HSPA+ from Claro (called Verizon Dominicana in SignalCheck Pro). Here is the difference in speed from before and after purchasing the high speed pass. 
    • By legion125
      by Jeff Foster
      Sprint 4G Rollout Updates
      Friday, April 20, 2012 - 11:31 AM MDT
       
      Is there a "spectrum shortage?" Those two words send shivers down the spines of wireless industry executives. New services demand ever more spectrum, and, the story goes, there simply isn't enough spectrum available. An Internet search engine will easily find hundreds of thousands of links to the term "spectrum shortage." Many claim that it will be the downfall of America.
      The dwindling availability of a finite resource that can't be seen or touched threatens to possibly disrupt the mobile lifestyle that virtually every American has embraced. Dropped cellphone calls, delayed text messages and choppy video streams could become more frequent occurrences because the airwaves on which that data travel are nearing capacity at a time when mobile usage shows no signs of slowing.
      Federal regulators and industry players are searching for ways to fend off the supply-and-demand collision. Dish Network recently acquired a large block of vacant wireless spectrum that pending regulatory approval could be used for mobile broadband services.
       
      Short-Term Plan

      AT&T tried to merge with T-Mobile to solve its own capacity problem. It wanted to get its hands on T-Mobile spectrum. Still, that would have been only a temporary fix at best. Remember all the terrible stories about the quality of AT&T's wireless data network over the last few years? They say they simply don't have enough.
      The reason is that during the last few years, smartphones like the Apple iPhone and the many devices running Android emerged, and wireless data traffic grew like crazy. This problem jumped up and bit AT&T in the rear end. Suddenly, so many people were sucking so much data that the network could not handle it, due to spectrum shortage. Spectrum is like the size of the hose, and a wider hose is needed to carry more data for more customers.
      A couple good things are suddenly happening that may give carriers a little time to solve this increasing problem. Perhaps Verizon starting to sell the iPhone last spring has something to do with it. If so, then now with Sprint selling the iPhone, AT&T will have more breathing room, at least temporarily. That's the good news. However, that reprieve will only last a short while before the exploding smartphone and wireless data growth catches up. Then the other carriers will be faced with the same problem that's confronting AT&T.
      In the first quarter of 2011, the amount of data the average smartphone user consumed each month grew by 89 percent to 435 megabytes from 230 MB during the same quarter in 2010, according to Nielsen research. That's up from about 90 MB in 2009. For reference, the average size of an MP3 music file is about 4 MB.
      "Texting has always been traditionally viewed as a lightweight consumer of bandwidth, but if I start adding videos and pictures to my texts, that also starts consuming more bandwidth," said Tom Cullen, an executive vice president with Dish. But the primary growth driver will be video. Consumers can go through 5 gigabytes a month simply by streaming 10 minutes of standard definition video daily, he said.
       
      Data use is skyrocketing
      Data from the FCC indicate that more Americans are looking at their phones rather than talking on them. In 2009, 67 percent of available spectrum was utilized for voice and 33 percent for Internet data. Those percentages are now at 75 percent for data and 25 percent for voice. With each new iPhone release, data consumption grows. The iPhone 4S eats up twice as much data as the iPhone 4 and three times as much as the iPhone 3G, according to a study by network services firm Arieso. The new iPhone features Siri, a bandwidth-heavy voice recognition feature.
      The FCC estimates the U.S. will face a spectrum deficit of 90 MHz in 2013 and 275 MHz in 2014. To address the crunch, the federal government hopes to unleash 500 MHz of spectrum currently used for other purposes for wireless broadband by 2020. To put that figure in perspective, there is currently 547 MHz of spectrum allocated for mobile services, and AT&T and Verizon each own about 90 MHz.
      The government plans to hold so-called incentive auctions, which will try to lure spectrum owners such as TV broadcasters to sell their licenses. Verizon Wireless has agreed to purchase spectrum from a group of cable-TV companies. Sprint has expressed interest in working with Dish, which acquired the bulk of its 45 MHz of spectrum through two deals for bankrupt satellite technology companies. Dish chairman Charlie Ergen has said that the satellite-TV provider would prefer to partner with an existing wireless carrier on a high speed, 4G network. In response to recent comments by Sprint Chief Financial Officer Joe Euteneuer about the company's interest in working with Dish, Cullen said other wireless carriers are in the same situation. After failing to acquire T-Mobile, analysts expect AT&T to make a play for Dish, a long-rumored merger partner.
      As for T-Mobile, perhaps the most logical buyer is CenturyLink. T-Mobile's German-based parent company has indicated that it might exit the U.S. market. CenturyLink, which acquired Denver-based Qwest last year, is the third-largest landline phone company but does not own a wireless service, unlike the top two, AT&T and Verizon.
      Carriers are trying to offload as much traffic as they can to Wi-Fi networks, which ride on unlicensed spectrum. In some areas, they're installing picocells, which are smaller cell sites that can help boost capacity in dense areas.
      Finally, they're spending billions of dollars on LTE networks that use the airwaves more efficiently. Verizon and AT&T already have 4G LTE networks in place, and Sprint is moving to the technology. Dish says it hopes to enter the mobile broadband market with advanced LTE technology by late 2014 or early 2015. If Dish were to also offer voice service, it would come through VoLTE, which is similar to Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VOIP) phone services. Dish still needs the FCC to drop a condition tied to its spectrum that requires devices to have the ability to communicate with satellites, not just ground-based cell sites. The rule-making process that will likely remove the requirement is underway and could be completed by summer's end.
       
      Is there really a shortage problem?
      The problem, analysts argue, is that the operators that control the greatest amount of unused spectrum may be under-capitalized or unwilling to build out networks to use the spectrum. "We do not believe the U.S. faces a spectrum shortage," Jason Bazinet and Michael Rollins wrote in their Citigroup report. "Too much spectrum is controlled by companies that are not planning on rolling out services or face business and financial challenges. And of the spectrum that is being used, 90 percent of it has been allocated to existing 2G, 3G, and 3.5G wireless services by larger wireless carriers, such as AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel, and T-Mobile USA.
      In total, U.S. operators have licenses for about 538MHz of wireless spectrum. Only about 192MHz of that spectrum is currently being used. Most of the unused wireless spectrum is owned by companies such as Clearwire, LightSquared, and Dish Network. But so far, LightSquared has been stopped and the other companies have been slow to build networks using their available spectrum.
      "There is definitely a mismatch when it comes to spectrum in the wireless industry," said Paul Gallant, an analyst with MF Global in Washington, D.C. "There are some companies that have spectrum, but they're struggling financially. Or they aren't quite sure what to do with the spectrum. And others that have the money and business model, but need the spectrum." The move to 4G is very important for these operators because it offers them a more efficient way to deliver service. 4G LTE uses the available spectrum roughly 700 percent more efficiently than the 3G wireless technology EV-DO. Carriers will soon be refarming 3G spectrum to 4G LTE in several years.
      A key factor in encouraging efficient use of spectrum has been largely overlooked in carrier boardroom discussions. Wireless providers can add capacity, without obtaining more spectrum, by adding more and more cell sites. Additional cell sites in spectrum constrained areas allow the same spectrum to be used by even more consumers, as well as adding picocells and microcells to denser population areas. So far, the carriers have not expressed too much interest in this method due to additional capital expenditures and overhead. Their strategy is like what Microsoft, Apple and Google have used. It's just cheaper to buy what you need than to invest the time and energy to do the actual work.
      So what can the wireless companies do? To some extent, re-farming their existing networks will help. But so will finding ways to use other spectrum. For example, only T-Mobile lets users make phone calls using Wi-Fi, yet most of the mobile devices available from carriers have this capability; the carriers just don't enable it.
      Allowing Wi-Fi calling could unload millions of voice and data users on to alternative networks and ease the spectrum crunch, at least to some extent. Encouraging VoIP use would also help for two reasons. VoIP doesn't require a lot of bandwidth, and it means that the phone in question uses only the data spectrum, not both voice and data while this is going on.
      These points illustrate that the carriers do have options beyond just buying up spectrum. They can offload more wireless traffic than they do now, build more cell sites into their networks and they can allow the use of other types of communications. While the spectrum crunch isn't going away, that doesn't mean that the process can't be slowed.
       
      Sensational graphic extolling the dire spectrum crisis. Maybe a tad exaggerated???
       
       
      Images courtesy: Spectrum Bridge, iqmetrix.com
       
      Source: FierceWireless.com, Denver Post, Ecommercetimes.com, CNET
  • Posts

    • Does your android allow you to connect to wifi and mobile ? By default my android cuts the mobile when I'm on wifi to save data so you need to make sure both can be on at the same time.
    • By the time you get your S20, it'll probably be preloaded with the update that defaults you to T-Mobile bands. Interestingly enough, the IP network part of the connection is still Sprint...but you get VoLTE across the board. With that said, you can install Samsung Band Selection and pick which combination of bands (LTE and NR, though n71 will only work if you also have B2/66 enabled as well, and n41 for the most part doesn't exist) you'll let your phone on. T-Mobile band priority still applies to whatever you let through, so if you accept B2/4/66 you'll get those (probably even 12/71) but if you lock your phone down to Sprint bands that's what you'll get. As an example, I've tended to select B41-only on my S20 if I'm in an area I know to have solid B41 (AKA where I live and nearby). That gets me significantly higher speeds than the default, which tends to sit on B66+n71. I got one roaming warning from this but latency and speeds are as if I was on the native network. Then if I head out I'll either turn everything on or select 25/26/41 as the radio in this phone is strong enough to sustain a Zoom video call where previously (Essential Phone) the only thing reliable was 1x. The system isn't perfect, and sometime the phone will fail to lock on a signal at all after enough band selection changes, but a reboot fixes that. I have the band selection app as one of my quick apps on the screen edge app selector, so swapping things around takes maybe 15 seconds and a few taps.
    • It works now. It can take up to 3 weeks to enable it though after changing over, but usually it's within a week. It used to be a fully manually process, with someone having to turn it on, but it seems more automated now. You will lose VoLTE if your internet cuts out. Used take a few days to get it back (again, maybe a manual process?). But when I tested this weekend I got it back within an hour. Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
    • You can email the developers and ask for an enthusiast's license. Usually good for 6 months at a time.
    • No I really don't. Anyone with experience or info on my question above? Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...