WiWavelength

Have you checked with your other split personalities, ScottSouth, SarahSouth, and MohammadSouth? AJ

It is a spectrum deal -- at least, it would be for Sprint. For some discussion of this, see my article, which should be posted on The Wall within the next hour. It is a maximum of 10 million prepaid subs. I project that a significant percentage of those subs will get poached by other prepaid brands and MVNOs -- no matter who acquires MetroPCS. The transition will not be seamless, and the non contract subs have no commitment to stay. AJ

Estimates of cell site coverage radius often distinguish the easterners from the westerners. Here, west of the Mississippi, 10+ miles coverage from a single PCS 1900 MHz cell site is not uncommon. AJ

I am working on an article about how Sprint could still benefit from the T-Mobile-MetroPCS merger. It should be up on The Wall within the next day. In the meantime, here is a sneak peek at part of the included graph: AJ

This is the syndicated version. To give friend of S4GRU Kevin Fitchard due credit, please read his original article at GigaOM: http://gigaom.com/mobile/is-sprint-going-to-start-a-bidding-war-over-metropcs/ AJ

by Andrew J. Shepherd Sprint 4G Rollout Updates Friday, October 5, 2012 - 8:00 AM MDT Unless you have been under a telecom rock the past 48 hours -- or stuck in the boonies with only a GSM device (I kid, I kid) -- you have read that T-Mobile USA and MetroPCS have agreed in principle to a complicated reverse merger arrangement that would create a combined carrier, at least provisionally called NewCo. Now, Sprint has jumped back into the fray, this after Sprint's executive leadership had readied a bid for MetroPCS earlier this year but was vetoed by the board of directors. Sprint's motivations for pursuing a counter bid could be multifold. Sprint could actually be trying to acquire MetroPCS, feeling a sense of urgency that it did not this spring. Plus, Sprint's perception on Wall Street has improved dramatically during the past few months, making a merger a more financially palatable prospect. Sprint could be attempting to force T-Mobile to sweeten its offer for MetroPCS, potentially costing competitor T-Mobile additional financial resources. Sprint could be trying to gain some concessions in order to allow the merger to proceed. That last possibility is what this article will explore, namely, that NewCo would agglomerate an egregious amount of PCS 1900 MHz spectrum in several markets in which Sprint also happens to be a bit PCS spectrum shy. By throwing its own hat into the ring, Sprint should pressure NewCo to divest excess PCS spectrum to Sprint voluntarily. Alternatively, Sprint could lobby the FCC, oppose the merger and its transfer of spectrum licenses, and try to get some mandated divestitures that way. To illustrate, MetroPCS currently operates in at least some PCS spectrum in 10 major markets. The linked spreadsheet below compares NewCo's potential PCS A-F block spectrum holdings to Sprint's current PCS A-F block spectrum holdings in those 10 markets. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArY31Mr219-ydE1tRVdJS19ocjBZXzVibk01Wm5wLWc&usp=sharing In those 10 markets, Sprint holds 20-30 MHz of PCS A-F block spectrum, while NewCo would have 35-60 MHz of PCS A-F block spectrum, including 50-60 MHz in four of the markets. Considering that 60 MHz represents fully half of the total 120 MHz bandwidth of the traditional PCS band, that is an outrageous amount of PCS spectrum -- especially for a carrier that is hitching its LTE wagon to AWS, not PCS. Even AT&T would blush at acquiring that much spectrum within a given band. Keep in mind, too, that this analysis does not take into account the 40-60 MHz of AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum that NewCo would hold in those same 10 markets, including 50-60 MHz in all but Atlanta. And that 50-60 MHz would be even more than half of the total 90 MHz bandwidth of the AWS band. Furthermore, T-Mobile has made it known that it intends to pare down its exclusively PCS GSM/GPRS/EDGE spectrum utilization to 10 MHz per market, refarming its remaining PCS spectrum to W-CDMA/HSPA+ in a desperate attempt to attract unsubsidized iPhone users. The Dallas Region Case Study graphic from the NewCo investor presentation corroborates this plan. Moreover, the graphic shows how NewCo plans to operate DC-HSPA+ (20 MHz) for at least the next three years in parallel on both PCS and AWS plus 15-20 MHz FDD LTE on AWS -- an unnecessarily redundant, inefficient strategy. In short, NewCo does not need as much PCS spectrum as it is set to acquire. Otherwise, it is just as much a spectrum glutton as are VZW and AT&T. So, here is the solution. In Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Sacramento, and San Francisco, NewCo should preemptively choose to or be required to divest 10 MHz of its accumulated PCS spectrum. Sprint would be the obvious buyer, as that would increase its PCS A-F block assets to 30 MHz in those markets. Meanwhile, NewCo would still retain 35-50 MHz of PCS in those same markets, plenty of spectrum for 10 MHz of GSM, 10 MHz of HSPA+ or even 20 MHz of DC-HSPA+, and 10 MHz of CDMA1X/EV-DO for MetroPCS legacy. Sources: FCC, MetroPCS

iDunno? AJ

Why in the world would Sprint ever commit to a "great expansion into rural areas"? Robber barons VZW and AT&T bought out basically everything. The cellular frontier is closed. AJ

...as long as it is not a fried chicken suit. With Robert lurking around every corner in The Forums, that could be dangerous. AJ

Those plans typically reflect best case scenarios. Tell you what, if the merger comes to fruition and NewCo shuts down MetroPCS' CDMA2000 assets in under the stated timeline, I will wear a chicken suit. AJ

While I hope that Sprint does not get into a bidding war over MetroPCS, I do think that a few interesting spectrum outcomes could emerge. T-Mobile really does seem to want MetroPCS' CDMA1X prepaid subs to bolster its own flagging numbers, so that will be a point at issue. But T-Mobile should not want or need MetroPCS' PCS 1900 MHz spectrum, only its AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum. And Sprint should be just the reverse; it should not want anything to do with MetroPCS' AWS spectrum but could gain from its PCS spectrum. Atlanta, the Bay Area, and Miami are three very large markets in which Sprint holds not a full 30 MHz but 20 MHz of PCS A/D block spectrum. In those same three markets, MetroPCS holds PCS C block spectrum: 20 MHz in Atlanta, 20 MHz in the Bay Area, and 30 MHz in Miami. A bidding war could force T-Mobile to consent to divest at least 10 MHz of PCS spectrum to Sprint in those three markets. T-Mobile already holds 30 MHz of PCS spectrum in Atlanta, 30 MHz in the Bay Area, and 20 MHz in Miami. T-Mobile does not need much, if any additional PCS spectrum in those markets, maybe an added 10 MHz in Miami. But T-Mobile, as a whole, is aligning itself more and more with AWS, not PCS, while Sprint is firmly a PCS carrier. So, it would make sense -- for both T-Mobile and Sprint -- to divest some of MetroPCS' PCS spectrum. AJ

Paul Saleh, who was Sprint's CFO in 2005, apparently agrees with me that a tie up between incompatible network technologies is easier said than done. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ex-sprint-man-says-merging-wireless-tech-not-easy-2012-10-04?link=MW_latest_news AJ

Ian, I saw that slide in the investor presentation yesterday and intended to write a post about it, but I am glad that you beat me to the punch. I like the eventual spectrum outlook for T-Mobile (or, more accurately, NewCo), which is talking a great game right now. But did Sprint and Nextel not do the same seven years ago? Sprint-Nextel made themselves out to be the greatest combination since peanut butter and tunafish (I kid, I kid). NewCo may think that it has learned from the Sprint-Nextel merger how to avoid harmonization challenges. But the integration process will almost never go as smoothly as planned. So, we should not just give NewCo the benefit of the doubt and assume that the transition will follow the professed timeline. Even it does, the timeline is, as you say, quite "telling." In 2015, NewCo will still be running GSM, CDMA1X/EV-DO, and W-CDMA underneath LTE. To that I say, good luck. NewCo, you have your work cut out for you. AJ

As I understand LTE, the total capacity difference between four 5 MHz FDD carriers and one 20 MHz FDD carrier is essentially zero. Resource Blocks scale linearly: a 5 MHz FDD carrier = 25 RBs, a 20 MHz FDD carrier = 100 RBs. So, put the same number of subs, all using data at the same time, on four 5 MHz FDD carriers, then on one 20 MHz FDD carrier, and they will all end up with the same average data rates. The advantage that the 20 MHz FDD carrier has is much higher peak data rates when the carrier is not heavily loaded. AJ

Guys, two things. One, we really did not need another thread to discuss this issue, since we already have at least one T-Mobile-MetroPCS thread. Two, USCC's footprint is not as big as you probably think it is. As much as it might benefit me, would Sprint really benefit that much from acquiring USCC's rural coverage in Nebraska, Iowa, etc.? http://www.uscellula...sccLicensed.gif AJ

Hey, they gotta pay David Hasselhoff somehow. AJ

Look at it this way. As long as people do not act like heroin junkies addicted to wireless data, Sprint has ample spectrum in most markets because, in most markets, Sprint holds a full PCS A/B block 30 MHz license -- in addition to the PCS G block 10 MHz license that Sprint holds in all markets. Those PCS A/B 30 MHz markets are basically set. (And for sake of argument, this is leaving Clearwire BRS/EBS 2600 MHz spectrum completely out of the equation.) The markets (e.g. Chicago, the Bay Area, Houston, Atlanta, Miami, Cleveland, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Memphis, etc.) in which Sprint has 20 MHz or even just 10 MHz of PCS A/B/C/D/E/F block spectrum are the only markets that are any cause for concern. Of those less than 30 MHz markets, acquiring MetroPCS would help Sprint boost its PCS holdings in only Florida, Atlanta, and the Bay Area. Would those gains be worth the price for MetroPCS? AJ

I have said it before, and I will say it again. Do not pay to acquire non contract subs. They are not worth any premium. And their cheap, non contract plans are an albatross around the neck of any major carrier that acquires them. If you keep the cheap, non contract plans, you piss off your core contract subs, who then want the same cheap rates. Or if you discontinue the cheap, non contract plans, you piss off the subs you just acquired. The FCC may not even allow that in any merger consent agreement; if it does, the cheap, non contract subs you just paid billions to acquire may then leave for MVNOs. AJ

Really? T-Mobile is a PCS 1900 MHz and AWS 2100+1700 MHz carrier, and MetroPCS is a PCS 1900 MHz and AWS 2100+1700 MHz carrier. So, there you go. AJ

That's what she said...or so you hope. AJ

Are we moving the annual retreat from Jackson Hole to Whitefish? AJ

...or a "D" for desperation. AJ

Here is the simple scoop. If the device's ESN is not associated with Sprint, then Sprint will not activate it. AJ

If multipath makes sense, then just know that Rayleigh fading is the result of multipath. It is the reason why signal strength can vary by 5-10 dB over just a few feet, even inches in some cases. And MIMO relies on multipath to some extent to produce a strong signal at one antenna, a weak signal at the other antenna, and vice versa. AJ

You can certainly argue that it is a clumsy approach, but consider the open Wi-Fi default settings as the carrier's way of saying, "We really need you to Wi-Fi offload if at all possible, so we are going to help that along." AJ