Jump to content

Nokia moves to purchase Alcatel-Lucent


EvanA

Recommended Posts

Will be troubling times for existing Alcatel-Lucent markets in the short term but an exciting time for the future as the weakest NV vendor regions get cannibalized by Samsung, Ericson, and Nokia.

 

Lots of question marks will be have have over the existing deployments from both Nokia and alu territory.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will be troubling times for existing Alcatel-Lucent markets in the short term but an exciting time for the future as the weakest NV vendor regions get cannibalized by Samsung, Ericson, and Nokia.

 

Lots of question marks will be have have over the existing deployments from both Nokia and alu territory.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

:td:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not so sure how I feel about this right now.  I mean Nokia seems to be doing pretty well with its network equipment but I just don't know how much impact this has on LTE deployment especially in markets that use their equipment for B25/B26/B41 LTE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why this is a bad thing. Did another source indicate they were immediately shutting down equipment manufacturing for the Alcatel side of the house? My assumption (while probably incorrect) is that nothing will change in the near term other than AP/AR header information saying Nokia now instead of Alcatel - and the back office updates to make that happen. Did I miss something that indicated Alcatel was going to be effectively shut down?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not so sure how I feel about this right now.  I mean Nokia seems to be doing pretty well with its network equipment but I just don't know how much impact this has on LTE deployment especially in markets that use their equipment for B25/B26/B41 LTE.

 

I don't imagine it would have any impact in the short term. Legacy equipment will remain for as long as they are in their useful lives. I imagine that interoperability between ALU and Nokia equipment will be improved over time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why this is a bad thing. Did another source indicate they were immediately shutting down equipment manufacturing for the Alcatel side of the house? My assumption (while probably incorrect) is that nothing will change in the near term other than AP/AR header information saying Nokia now instead of Alcatel - and the back office updates to make that happen. Did I miss something that indicated Alcatel was going to be effectively shut down?

I seriously doubt that. Also they can't just shutdown equipment, they deployed it and it is run by whomever and ALU simply supports it. Sprint could ALU equipment forever as long as they keep paying for support. It will be ALU equipment regardless of who owns them, its just who you call for support that will change.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldnt it be better for output? 2x the people making the same thing, rather than 2 different pieces.

These mergers rarely come without layoffs, especially when major overlap in products/services exists.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://online.barrons.com/articles/sprint-may-have-spurred-nokia-alcatel-lucent-deal-1429282538

 

 

Speculation of a Nokia-Alcatel-Lucent wireless-asset merger first surfaced about one and a half years ago but receded. We think the latest round of talks was spurred on by Sprint ( S)which wanted to see the wireless assets combine so that it could rely on the new entity as its primary or even sole wireless equipment vendor going forward. 

 

Interesting speculation

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have heard internal rumors that Sprint (via Masa) was considering a move to just two network vendors from here forward.  For a good year or so.  Dumping Ericsson.  But not feeling good about ALU as the only other partner with Samsung.  But going to two vendors with Samsung and Nokia (via an ALU buyout) may not be so bad.  So Sprint being part of the catalyst for this marriage is plausible when put into context with the rumors I've heard.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard internal rumors that Sprint (via Masa) was considering a move to just two network vendors from here forward. For a good year or so. Dumping Ericsson. But not feeling good about ALU as the only other partner with Samsung. But going to two vendors with Samsung and Nokia (via an ALU buyout) may not be so bad. So Sprint being part of the catalyst for this marriage is plausible when put into context with the rumors I've heard.

The cdma portfolio from Alcatel-Lucent may be all that Nokia needs. Their cdma offerings are far inferior as it currently exists.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

 

 

The transaction is expected to close in the first half of 2016.

 

Faster Nokia, faster!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

s6gru.com is still open!

 

Let the sex guru jokes commence...

 

AJ

  • 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.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • https://ir.echostar.com/news-releases/news-release-details/echostar-corporation-announces-successful-completion-various They have pushed off debt for at least 6 years, except for 139 million. It is secured by spectrum.  They want to put this money towards completing their build out.  Hopefully this includes some midrange capacity.
    • Just revisiting the RCS issue and discussing another point I find odd.  Yeah, my family and close friends and most coworkers still mostly use whats app in our chats due to the odd RCS issues.   Some have Apple phones, some Samsung.  But using Facebook Messenger or Whats App handily eliminates those issues.   But the other thing I find odd is how all the information out there states that to use the Smart View app to mirror your phone to your TV that your TV and your phone have to be on the same wifi network.  That is 100 percent untrue.  I've historically not had wifi at home and only use it in our common areas in our community or occasionally at work.  But primarily I just use my phone for everything and do not have wifi at home.  It's because I haven't needed it.  I've been using all my Samsung phones for the better part of a decade now as my entertainment center because it's simple, effective, portable and absolutely does not require a wifi connection for my TV in order to cast all the content from my phone.  I'm not sure why it is stated that it is required.  The two devices - as we all no doubt know - create a wifi direct connection between the two devices in order for smart view to work, however, no general wifi network is required at all.  Again, I've been enjoying the feature for close to a decade but I find it odd that they say that you need wifi at home to use it.  Samsung television sets, Roku TV sets, LG TV sets (I cast to all of them at work regularly, again, sans wifi) and TCL TVs are all compatible.  There are likely more but these are the ones that I regularly screen mirror to, again, without the two devices being on the same network (this is separate from the notion of creating a wifi direct connection between the 2 in order to enable the service). This is the sole reason I only buy Samsung phones.   I tried a Pixel device before the Pixel 8 (which was the first to allow display out via wired connection for streaming) but it simply did not offer the same feature.   I wonder why they say this.  It's interesting if nothing else.  
    • Yeah, I probably see it through a Washington/Oregon market lens. And maybe a little Nebraska too.  These are the only places I have monitored Tmo overlay of USC closely. Tmo has already added service on 80% of the same towers that were unique to USC just 5 years ago around here.  The 20% left are either too close to an existing Tmo site, or, probably already on Tmo's plans to collocation.  But there is one USC site on the beach where our family likes to go that I am dying for Tmo to add service.  There won't be a lot of new coverage added here. But I have not done really any review in other USC areas.  But I definitely think it's a good move. Robert
    • Found Ericsson C-band+DoD in Brooklyn. What tipped me off was when I mapped a new eNB in this area on Halloween but I didn't see any permits for a new site in the area and the sectors I mapped matched the existing site that was there. Drove by it today and sure enough it's an Ericsson C-band + DoD site, likely one of the first in the city.  This is eNB 110340, formerly eNB 115257. — — — — — Also a T-Mobile new build in Queens. The permit for this one was submitted last year as a replacement for another monopole that got demolished nearby. It must've only recently got installed because it was offline when I drove by it.
  • Recently Browsing

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