Jump to content

Sprint Organic Network Expansion Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

I think the 20,000 number that the Fierce source references includes Clearwire sites that Sprint is keeping and not decommissioning. An inadvertent double up of numbers. I was solely focusing on new site adds to the network. S4GRU already counts all the existing unique Clearwire sites in our totals. So I just see the Fierce article as further corroboration to our story.

 

I was actually given exact numbers of sites, but rounded the numbers to protect my source. Since the numbers are always in flux, by a few sites here and a few sites there, if I used the exact numbers it would clue Sprint on exactly the date the info was provided, allowing for easier discoverability of who provided the info. But it is right around 9,000 total.

 

Not to say Sprint couldn't expand it further. By my estimate, 9,000 new macro sites would be around $2B-$3B. Since ~3,000 of them are gong to be small cells, that number could be even lower. I have no idea how much small cell sites cost each.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the 20,000 number that the Fierce source references includes Clearwire sites that Sprint is keeping and not decommissioning. An inadvertent double up of numbers. I was solely focusing on new site adds to the network. S4GRU already counts all the existing unique Clearwire sites in our totals. So I just see the Fierce article as further corroboration to our story.

 

I was actually given exact numbers of sites, but rounded the numbers to protect my source. Since the numbers are always in flux, by a few sites here and a few sites there, if I used the exact numbers it would clue Sprint on exactly the date the info was provided, allowing for easier discoverability of who provided the info. But it is right around 9,000 total.

 

Not to say Sprint couldn't expand it further. By my estimate, 9,000 new macro sites would be around $2B-$3B. Since ~3,000 of them are gong to be small cells, that number could be even lower. I have no idea how much small cell sites cost each.

Small cells cost $2-3k a pop each but because they're so compact and low profile you don't have to drag it through city zoning or permitting and etc or need people with extensive training to install it as they're plug and play.

 

In comparison,a typical network vision antenna or 2.5 antenna cost $3000-$5000 each alone.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small cells cost $2-3k a pop each but because they're so compact and low profile you don't have to drag it through city zoning or permitting and etc or need people with extensive training to install it as they're plug and play.

 

In comparison,a typical network vision antenna or 2.5 antenna cost $3000-$5000 each alone.

No permits needed? Really? That's good to hear for sf.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No permits needed? Really? That's good to hear for sf.

 

Look up at your light poles and gaze upon the hundreds of small cells deployed by cable co for public wifi and verizon that was never discovered in building permits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Small cells cost $2-3k a pop each but because they're so compact and low profile you don't have to drag it through city zoning or permitting and etc or need people with extensive training to install it as they're plug and play.

 

In comparison,a typical network vision antenna or 2.5 antenna cost $3000-$5000 each alone.

In a macro site (at an existing tower/site), equipment cost is about 1/4 of the total cost of a new site. Then other 3/4 is install labor, design/planning and backhaul. So if we take $4,000 and quadruple it, we come out to around $16,000. Which is a steal to a macro site which runs $100-$250k depending on types and locations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look up at your light poles and gaze upon the hundreds of small cells deployed by cable co for public wifi and verizon that was never discovered in building permits.

Yeah I att has a ton of small cells here in sf. And Verizon just announced they are launching a ton of them. I thought they all had permits. http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/21/verizon-small-cell-san-francisco/

 

Bring it on Sprint bring it on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to know what Sprint plans to do with Clear sites in cities like Las Vegas, where the old Motorola equipemt was not used in a dual network conversion. B41 was build on new 8T8R radios only. Will Sprint retain all towers or select the best and let the rest go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to know what Sprint plans to do with Clear sites in cities like Las Vegas, where the old Motorola equipemt was not used in a dual network conversion. B41 was build on new 8T8R radios only. Will Sprint retain all towers or select the best and let the rest go?

 

This I know the answer to this.  ALU will switch out Motorola equipment to their own at most non-colocated sites.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to know what Sprint plans to do with Clear sites in cities like Las Vegas, where the old Motorola equipemt was not used in a dual network conversion. B41 was build on new 8T8R radios only. Will Sprint retain all towers or select the best and let the rest go?

 

 

This I know the answer to this.  ALU will switch out Motorola equipment to their own at most non-colocated sites.

 

ALU has already filed for a Clearwire conversion to a full build Sprint site in Las Vegas. The first one is on top of The Westin on East Flamingo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This I know the answer to this.  ALU will switch out Motorola equipment to their own at most non-colocated sites.

 

That would be nice because I know of 4-5 Clearwire sites that are very close to current Sprint sites.

 

ALU has already filed for a Clearwire conversion to a full build Sprint site in Las Vegas. The first one is on top of The Westin on East Flamingo.

 

Clear was never very good around the strip but it should help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be nice because I know of 4-5 Clearwire sites that are very close to current Sprint sites.

 

 

Clear was never very good around the strip but it should help.

 

As I'm looking, I'm finding a lot of Clear sites that could be converted to Sprint sites for massive fill in in the Las Vegas Valley.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dang they're gonna surpass TMO with num sites

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Possibly, but unlikely. All carriers are adding small cells with pretty good fury. AT&T will have added close to 40,000 small cells during 2014-2015. Verizon just started adding them at a rapid clip, and T-Mobile has said they are going gung-ho on small cells this year too.

 

If 5,000 of the 9,000 are small cells, that's only 4,000 incremental macros...which isn't going to allow Sprint to surpass T-Mobile's 50k+ macros (and counting) anytime soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a macro site (at an existing tower/site), equipment cost is about 1/4 of the total cost of a new site. Then other 3/4 is install labor, design/planning and backhaul. So if we take $4,000 and quadruple it, we come out to around $16,000. Which is a steal to a macro site which runs $100-$250k depending on types and locations.

By that math, sounds like everyone should just use small cells going forward.

What's the downside?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly, but unlikely. All carriers are adding small cells with pretty good fury. AT&T will have added close to 40,000 small cells during 2014-2015. Verizon just started adding them at a rapid clip, and T-Mobile has said they are going gung-ho on small cells this year too.

 

If 5,000 of the 9,000 are small cells, that's only 4,000 incremental macros...which isn't going to allow Sprint to surpass T-Mobile's 50k+ macros (and counting) anytime soon. 

 

Link on the AT&T numbers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that but if it takes less $/acre using small cels …

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can sure as hell try but good luck having a dozen small cells try and cover multi mile radius zones when theyre designed to cover a few hundred meters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that math, sounds like everyone should just use small cells going forward.

What's the downside?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It would take dozens to cover a macro site.  Macro sites can handle more carriers and frequencies.  If the math shifts to where small cells provide a solution superior to macros, it will change.  And the technology may improve costs for macros, or small cells.  It's not currently there, though.  And it may never get there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link on the AT&T numbers?

 

Google? Haha. But, seriously, this is old news. 

 

Here's one: http://ipcarrier.blogspot.com/2013/11/at-to-deploy-40000-small-cells-as-part.html

 

AT&T said on their recent conference call they are ahead of schedule. And it's 40,000 small cells and 10,000 new macros for Project VIP (the 2014-2015 network investment)

 

The point is that Sprint's investment is very welcome--and will help a great deal---but it's not going to alter the landscape materially when their competitors are doing even more.

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

    • In the conference call they had two question on additional spectrum. One was the 800 spectrum. They are not certain what will happen, thus have not really put it into their plans either way (sale or no sale). The do have a reserve level. It is seen as great for new technologies which I presume is IOT or 5g slices.  They did not bite on use of their c-band or DOD.  mmWave rapidly approaching deadlines not mentioned at all. FWA brushes on this as it deals with underutilized spectrum on a sector by sector basis.  They are willing to take more money to allow FWA to be mobile (think RV or camping). Unsure if this represents a higher priority, for example, RVs in Walmart parking lots where mobile needs all the capacity. In terms of FWA capacity, their offload strategy is fiber through joint ventures where T-Mobile does the marketing, sales, and customer support while the fiber company does the network planning and installation.  50%-50% financial split not being consolidated into their books. I think discussion of other spectrum would have diluted the fiber joint venture discussion. They do have a fund which one use is to purchase new spectrum. Sale of the 800Mhz would go into this. It should be noted that they continue to buy 2.5Ghz spectrum from schools etc to replace leases. They will have a conference this fall  to update their overall strategies. Other notes from the call are 75% of the phones on the network are 5g. About 85% of their sites have n41, n25, and n71. 93% of traffic is on midband.  SA is also adding to their performance advantage, which they figure is still ahead of other carriers by two years. It took two weeks to put the auction 108 spectrum to use at their existing sites. Mention was also made that their site spacing was designed for midrange thus no gaps in n41 coverage, while competitors was designed for lowband thus toggles back and forth for n77.  
    • The manual network selection sounds like it isn't always scanning NR, hence Dish not showing up. Your easiest way to force Dish is going to be forcing the phone into NR-only mode (*#*#4636#*#* menu?), since rainbow sims don't support SA on T-Mobile.
    • "The company’s unique multi-layer approach to 5G, with dedicated standalone 5G deployed nationwide across 600MHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.5GHz delivers customers a consistently strong experience, with 85% of 5G traffic on sites with all three spectrum bands deployed." Meanwhile they are very close to a construction deadline in June for 850Mhz of mmWave in most of Ohio iirc. No reported sightings.
    • T-Mobile Delivers Industry-Leading Customer, Service Revenue and Profitability Growth in Q1 2024, and Raises 2024 Guidance https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-q1-2024-earnings — — — — — I find it funny that when they talk about their spectrum layers they're saying n71, n25, and n41. They're completely avoiding talking about mmWave.
    • Was true in my market. Likely means a higher percentage of 5g phones in your market.
  • Recently Browsing

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