Sprint not participating in the 600 MHz auction (report)

[Trip]

What will this news do to the broadcasters that are on the fence about giving up their spectrum? Only 1 of the national cell phone companies has committed and one just said they are out. Could this change how much spectrum becomes available? I am asking because I stopped following this month's back when Sprint first said they were evaluating the auction.

 

Sent from my HTC M9

 

 

I don't think it changes how many stations show up, just how many of them may get bought out.  I think they'll largely keep their buy-out prices the same and so if there is less competition and thus less revenue with which to pay broadcasters, less spectrum will be available and fewer stations will be bought.

 

It does make the chance of the auction going through more than one stage more likely, I suspect.

 

- Trip

[utiz4321]

If they sold out more shares equals more cash if they can get a good price per share.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6

Only if the price they get would be higher than the price they paid for the shares. There have been reports that SoftBank already shopped sprint around and couldn't find a buyer for the price they where asking. In light of that buying more shares doesn't make much sense in the plan is to sell the company.

[MtnSierraSprint]

I would expect this announcement to cause shares of Sprint,  S , to drop. They pumped up the price with talk of becoming the number one or two wireless providor and Softbank's announcement that they were buying back shares. Announcing that they are not going to participate in the 600 MHZ auction does not support their claims of becoming one of leading carriers, so I would expect shares to sell off, which at some point is advantageous to Softbank if they continue to buy back shares.

[Maverick]

Looks like Sprint won't be participating in next year's wireless spectrum auction.

 

Linkhttp://www.kansascity.com/news/business/technology/article36686247.html

[MtnSierraSprint]

Regarding the stock price, it will be interesting if it actually goes up. Anyway I do not own Sprint although I came close when it was 3.25 It is a little too speculative for my risk tolerance.

[IamMrFamous07]

I think this a good decision. Yes sprint can benefit the additional low band spectrum but sprint already has so much on its plate now. It will benefit sprint in the long term to use its cash for building out its "Next Gen Network" than to spend its money on this auction.

[Terrell352]

I don't know. There is going to be places where only 800 can get thru regardless of how dense 2500 is that's just physics and if that's the case 800 could easily become congested. It would depend on how well they know where small cells need to be.

[cortney]

Preciously. It's very good to see Sprint is confident they can use what they have. Let the people blinded by the media bs get all frustrated over this. 

 

Err, I think I was going for precisely. 

[anthony.spina97]

I'm confused as to why everyone thinks that Sprint sitting out this auction spells their doom. I swear that we have had a conversation on this site before how the only way Sprint can truly excel is to densify densify densify. Having low band can really help out with coverage, yes, but so can having more macro sites and small cells. Having low band can certainly help with capacity and indoor coverage, but so can more macro sites and small cells.

 

Spending billions on new sites that you can deploy, now, and get up and running, now, seems like a much better decision than spending money, now, on (basically) a piece of paper that says that "you can broadcast in this specific range of radio spectrum after these specific broadcasters have cleared out, and after this company standardizes an LTE band, and then these companies create equipment that can broadcast it, and then you spend MORE millions/billions on the equipment that those companies designed and produced, and these many millions on testing this equipment, and these many millions on people to deploy it, and then these companies create devices that can connect to this equipment.

 

I just don't see how jumping through all these hoops for a technology that won't be available for use for half a decade is a better decision than densifying your network that would net you the same amount of coverage as jumping through the hoops to densify and expand your network now.

 

Maybe it's just because I'm just some 18 year old who doesn't know any better. But logically, in my head, it doesn't make sense to go through the trouble of 600 MHz when you currently have the assets to make a competitive network, just sitting around waiting to be deployed.

 

Just my two cents.

 

-Anthony

[MtnSierraSprint]

Speaking for myself, I guess I would sum it up this way. Locking in some 600 MHZ would put this valuable spectrum in the bank, and eventually take away the advantage that ATT and Verizon have with indoor propagation and coverage in difficult terrain. I concede I am not an expert as far as in depth knowledge of Sprint's existing spectrum and how effectively it can be deployed to match the coverage indoors or in hilly terrrain for example. I am still waiting to test Sprint's coverage, but the feedback I have been getting from people around me is that coverage is often spotty and that goes for TMobile too and it would seem the key difference is the amount of low band spectrum that ATT and Verizon are able to deploy. If ATT and Verizon which outspend Sprint by 200% - 300% annnually have difficulty providing coverage in areas with their larger networks and more low band spectrum. I wonder how Sprint can compete on B41 alone. I want to beleive they can, but I can tell you just from walking a couple of mile radius around where I live ATT has the most cell sites, with Verizon second in number although best in terms of location.

 

"Sprint has more spectrum than any of its competitors.” Claure agreed noting that the company has a big advantage over Verizon.  "We have half their customers and twice the amount of spectrum,” - Tower-Pro.com

 

This is true and needs to be taken into account when looking at differences in capex between the carriers, but I wonder how Sprint can fill in  areas that seem to require low band spectrum. I am in one such area, although TMobile can reach the basement without low band spectrum with an antenna about 250 meters or 1/7 of a mile away. I am skeptical that Sprint is going to be able to deploy B41 close enough to everyone that needs close proximity to be able to use it. That might be a good way to reduce people's concerns regarding sitting out the 600 MHZ auction and that is examples where Sprint has deployed B41 effectively and how dense that deployment is so we can have a sense of what needs to be done in areas where that doesn not exist yet. I spoke to this reagarding nextgencpu's comments regarding NYC. Although residential neighborhoods are not as convenient as commercial buildings when it come to deploying small cells. In fact I was just reading about Verizon's effort to get small cells deployed for Lollapooloza in Chicago - "obtaining the rights for small cells can take 12 to 18 months" and Verizon is spending way more than twice than Sprint even though Sprint may have half the customers.

 

I'll stop here and welcome some discussion.

[S4GRU]

That is a hell of a bet. If the dems capture the White House again and sprint or T-Mobile become free cash flow positive they'll like run into the same regulatory problems as they did before.

And Sprint's strategy can change too. They are not bound by law because they once said they plan one thing, but the political world changed from what was expected, and now have to adapt.

 

No matter what, in all this, Sprint is leaking their plan deliberately now. It is not an accidental slip of the tongue. Is it because they plan to buy out the company and take it private? Is it because they plan to buy out someone else with low band spectrum out the wazoo? Is it to help put pressure on the FCC to postpone the auction when Sprint has more money? Is it something else?

 

It has to be something. Marcelo and Masa are not stupid, and they don't just love to hear themselves speak. But this is intentional. Marcelo even said about a week ago they would soon announce what their 600 plans are. They want us to know they are not bidding on 600. Why? The more time I've had to digest, my guess is they are joining the VZW/ATT argument and say they have plenty of spectrum and not really interested right now. This feels like an attempt to delay the auction.

 

If only Tmo actively is saying they are gung ho for the auction and everyone else acts ho-hum, and the purpose of this auction is to raise money, well, delaying until there is active interest seems like a rational thing for the FCC to consider. At least that's what three out of four national carriers would like them to deduct.

 

If the FCC refuses to budge, I wouldn't be shocked if down the road Sprint says they will do a selective 600 bidding, focusing on markets that are under densified, markets with no or little EBS/BRS (Quad Cities/Yuma), markets where they struggle with SMR capacity, and markets where they have little SMR (Puerto Rico). And possibly some rural/tertiary markets where they can pick up cheap licenses.

 

No matter what, this release is intentional. That's the only thing I'm sure about.

 

Using Tapatalk on BlackBerry Z30

[NYC126]

Now only Verizon has to say we will not participate in next year auction,and watch the FCC comes with an excuse to delay it.

[S4GRU]

Now only Verizon has to say we will not participate in next year auction,and watch the FCC comes with an excuse to delay it.

Verizon has said that they have ample spectrum and not really interested in 600. So, they kind of already have. Sprint is only the last to join the chorus. They just are being more clear.

 

Using Tapatalk on BlackBerry Z30

[mittenmitten]

that's a pretty good analysis / strategy; if the only carrier interested is T-Mobile, and they're only buying what is / would have been spectrum protected from open bidding, why the hell even have the auction. it's really up to those occupying 600mhz whether or not they want to sell isn't it? why would they sell knowing the only bidder is going to low ball. that's some intense strategy if that's really Sprint's intention.

[JosefTor]

I am selling all my sprint stock and dropped their service after over 13 years. This shows they are not trying to be number 1 and it shows just how crappy their existing advisors/employees are to convince management to be so foolish. In Orange County, even double the amount of macro towers would not be satisfactory as I roam in must buildings and get LTE in less buildings then I have fingers. Perhaps in other states sprint is different, but even B26 will not fix no signal and roaming.

[Arysyn]

I really doubt this theory of Sprint trying to delay the auction by declining to participate in it. I understand people who are mentioning it as a possibility really like Sprint and want it to do well, maybe thinking this as some brilliant business plan, but there already is a history of Sprint saying it won't participate in a few auctions in the past. They declined to participate in the AWS-3 auction, for example.

 

It is pretty clear Sprint's reasoning is to focus on NGN and improving the network, not in attempting to stall the auction. Sprint pretty much already declined back when its former CFO mentioned it months ago. There likely are some regional carriers participating in this auction, not just T-Mobile. So, it likely will happen regardless of Sprint's, AT&T's, and Verizon's participation. Besides, this auction already seems like it has been more catered to smaller carriers, and T-Mobile since it was announced.

[smooth25]

Something is going on with the recent comments by Marcelo about merging with a cable company and not participating in the auction. Whatever it is I think he should announce something soon that will bring confidence to consumers because it doesn't look very confident right now.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Something is going on with the recent comments by Marcelo about merging with a cable company and not participating in the auction. Whatever it is I think he should announce something soon that will bring confidence to consumers because it doesn't look very confident right now.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

If Sprint is going with Comcast, Sprint is doomed in getting any customer confidence returning to it. I think Marcelo is just hoping that one day they will be able to work with a cable company. Although, if he is serious about a cable merger, then that makes Softbank's interest in Sprint look pretty bad. It just doesn't seem like a good time for Sprint right now. I say that, despite hoping this isn't the case.

[smooth25]

There are several possible motives for the recent actions by Sprint, including the hope that Verizon and AT&T also back out for now and delay the auction giving Sprint time to improve its network like originally planned. Don't forget they have plenty of lowband and both have made big acquisitions recently including the last AWS auction.

 

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[IamMrFamous07]

I am selling all my sprint stock and dropped their service after over 13 years. This shows they are not trying to be number 1 and it shows just how crappy their existing advisors/employees are to convince management to be so foolish. In Orange County, even double the amount of macro towers would not be satisfactory as I roam in must buildings and get LTE in less buildings then I have fingers. Perhaps in other states sprint is different, but even B26 will not fix no signal and roaming.

So you want sprint to spend billions of dollars on a frequency they cannot deploy in 5-7 years than Sprint to spends billions of dollars into frequencies they already have by building more macro sites, small cells, optimization etc.

 

This actually proves Sprint wants to be #1. They are investing their money into something they have 100% in control of (their existing network) instead of something that might not see the light of day.

 

I personally would love for Sprint to bid in the auction but I prefer for sprint to manage on what they have in front of them first before they invest into something else.

[utiz4321]

So you want sprint to spend billions of dollars on a frequency they cannot deploy in 5-7 years than Sprint to spends billions of dollars into frequencies they already have by building more macro sites, small cells, optimization etc.

 

This actually proves Sprint wants to be #1. They are investing their money into something they have 100% in control of (their existing network) instead of something that might not see the light of day.

 

.

I don't think it does. The billions sprint is spending on NGN is largely self financed. To the extent they are receiving any additional capital from SoftBank it comes in the form of the leasing facilities they are setting up, which in the in is nothing more than a low interest loan. If sprint had made the decision to participate in the 600 auction it would have been a clear and unambiguous sign that SoftBank believed in a sprint turn around with or with out T-Mobile as it would have required an additional capital investment in sprint by SoftBank (probably would have had to tap the Japanese bond market). So this is not a good sign and points to doubts on softbanks part. At the same time SoftBank increasing their position in sprint points the other way. I think the most likely play SoftBank is aiming for is trying to make sprint more attractive to a potential buyer by improving its competitiveness (this plays niecely with marcelo's recent comments about sprint and a cable company tie up) while waiting on events in the US regulatory environment to change in favor of the T-Mobile merger.

 

In the in I think SoftBank will either stay with sprint or not depending on weather or not they believe they can merge with T-Mobile, but that is just a guess.

[cletus]

I don't think this is a big issue. I really think Sprint SHOULD sit this out if the cost of the last licenses sold is any indication. 

 

However, I would really like to see Sprint pick up some cheaper rural licenses or stuff on highways etc so they can improve native coverage and also save money in roaming.

[bigmachine]

Question for anyone who knows more about the FCC auction rules:

 

Is it possible to lease out the spectrum won in auction, or does it have to be deployed by the actual winner?

[Jones]

I am selling all my sprint stock and dropped their service after over 13 years. This shows they are not trying to be number 1 and it shows just how crappy their existing advisors/employees are to convince management to be so foolish. In Orange County, even double the amount of macro towers would not be satisfactory as I roam in must buildings and get LTE in less buildings then I have fingers. Perhaps in other states sprint is different, but even B26 will not fix no signal and roaming.

LOL you're rage quitting over something that hasn't even happened yet?

I hope no one depends on you 

[Ascertion]

LOL you're rage quitting over something that hasn't even happened yet?

I hope no one depends on you

Well, it's hard for Sprint as they don't have the funds, but by sitting out, they're further enabling the competition. The Densification plan will inevitably fix their coverage/performance woes, the question is how long is the wait?

 

Sent from my M8