Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Charter is not interested in becoming a full fledged carrier

Recommended Posts

Already offloads 75% of data load to WiFi so it does not make financial sense to invest in a macro network.  Said that they might be interested in bidding in the CBRS and C-Band auctions.


I wonder if they are interested in hosting both of those bands in post and strand mounted small cells as a neutral host. I have no idea why Comcast bid in the 600MHz auction other than to lease it to a carrier and get roaming on the cheap. Right now they are leasing it to T-Mobile and I am assuming that that would be the play going forward.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2020 at 12:47 PM, bigsnake49 said:

I have no idea why Comcast bid in the 600MHz auction other than to lease it to a carrier and get roaming on the cheap. 

This is what I assumed, if they never were planning to build out a network.  And they never seemed serious to do that.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Roaming agreements.  Possibly target hotspots.

I also think that if they can put 3.5GHz in their modem's, they could improve coverage/handoff significantly over 2.4/5GHz WiFi. Further increase the amount of data offloaded onto their network.

But in CBRS, they don't NEED a license.  They have  80MHz of unlicensed spectrum to work with.  So I'd think picking up licenses is more so that they can swap for better MVNO deals.

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.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • A full deployment has never been T-Mobile's strategy, and that's why they've never been the best in Seattle. Despite having the best site density (by a lot), their network experience falls far short of AT&T, Sprint and even Verizon now, who I would have claimed was in last place a year ago.  The trend for the last 4 years has been that AT&T and Verizon never climb a tower without deploying every LTE technology available at that time. Even today, the same cannot be said for T-Mobile.  I would estimate that more than 35% of T-Mobile sites in Seattle are still midband only. And some are still B2-only whereas others are B4-only. That makes coverage/capacity inconsistent between sites and handovers at the edge of cell sloppy, to say the least. To really compete with the big two, they're going to have to rethink the way they're deploying their RAN and stop deploying the minimum needed to get by. Hopefully we see those changes going forward, because they definitely have the economies of scale necessary to do so now. 
    • Factory reset it and make sure it has a good GPS signal. After a factory reset it should get it within a couple weeks assuming that it has a good GPS lock. Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
    • Don't forget that the US Government paid AT&T $6.5 billion to deploy B14 FirstNet spectrum.  AT&T took advantage of those subsidized tower climbs to upgrade its own infrastructure to 5G-ready, and add all of its spectrum holdings.  Smart move. T-Mobile doesn't have that subsidy, but I agree that any tower they're going to touch from here on out should be fully upgraded, and I think we'll see that with the Sprint "keep" sites for sure, plus anywhere they add NR equipment.
    • I know on mine anytime I make a call it switches to 1x for the duration of the call and then goes back to LTE when the call is over.  I am able to VOLTE when out in town though.  Maybe soon.
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...