ericdabbs

I think this is a smart move by Sprint PR. Instead of just launching 2 markets by end of June and then launching a few more in July, combine them with the July markets except for Baltimore. This gives all the LTE launch markets another 2.5 weeks to get their act together and get as many NV towers up as they can. I am too curious why Baltimore is not part of the initial LTE launch markets.

+1 on this. Sprint should not be in any rush to buy out Clearwire. Let Clearwire do their thing and finalize the TDD-LTE standard with the Global TDD alliance and build out the LTE network while Sprint focuses on Network Vision and improving balance sheet. Until Sprint can acquire just a bit more PCS spectrum (ahem H block), I think they will be sitting pretty. My concern right now is when Clearwire LTE is available, what would Sprint devices's priority be in terms of LTE discovery? Is it 2500 MHz -> 1900 MHz -> 800 MHz OR is it 1900 MHz -> 800 MHz -> 2500 MHz? After all Sprint doesn't own the Clearwire LTE so they will have to be paying by the GB which means if they put 2500 MHz as highest priority and with 20 MHz channels, GB's of data will add up quick and Sprint will shell out more money but will provide capacity relief.

Agreed. Just can't wait to hear Sprint officially announce hopefully the first 2 LTE markets before the end of June. It will just make me smile when Sprint starts announcing officially new LTE markets and they are in the same order as how Robert has posted in his NV running thread.

Ah I see. I thought you were just posting update articles on how progress is doing for all the first round and second round markets. I didn't know that the articles were also being released based on anticipated order of launch date as well.

Are the first round markets articles going to be wrapped up first before the second round market articles begin?

What the FCC should really do is reduce the build out requirements dramatically to the point where basically once a wireless carrier obtains the spectrum licenses they have to deploy immediately or have to give it up. This will deter the amount of spectrum hoarding by wireless carriers.

Totally agree with everyone here. It would be great if Sprint was able to complete a few NV sites in Vegas along the strip for CES as an exception just to remind everyone in the tech industry that Sprint is dedicated to the Network Vision project in deploying LTE nationwide. I think it would be a great test to see how their Network Vision tower capacity will hold up at such a huge conference just like how Tmobile was deploying 1900 MHz HSPA+ for the Apple WWDC to see how that will hold up.

So I noticed that the Running List got updated again today and I noticed more Second Round market changes. I take it that the Second Round market list ordering is now updated with the latest information? I noticed San Diego, New Orleans and PR/VI markets got bumped up pretty high.

My fault...=( I was mistaking AT&T with Verizon. Verizon did say they plan to deploy LTE on its PCS spectrum some time in the future. http://www.fiercewir...mand/2012-06-07 I did however remember that AT&T was beginning to refarm its 2G spectrum in the PCS band in NYC to bolster their HSPA+ network. Either way I don't think AT&T should get a pass to obtain more spectrum just because they use HSPA+ which is more bandwidth intensive. The truth is that the majority carriers worldwide are moving to some form of LTE whether its FDD or TDD. If AT&T decides that it is in their best interest to support a full HSPA+ and LTE network then they must deal with the consequences of not having enough spectrum to support both. I believe that is the major reason why Sprint decided to forgo EVDO Rev B since it was just too bandwidth intensive when the obvious trend is towards LTE. Either way AT&T needs to start pushing hard towards LTE phones only.

Well to be fair, I believe that AT&T still has a ton of spectrum to work with. You are ignoring the fact that they still have the 850 MHz cellular band of 25 MHz AND also have PCS spectrum which AT&T already says that they plan on deploying LTE in the future. I understand that GSM/HSPA+ is currently deployed in these bands but lets be honest at some point AT&T and the rest of the carriers will have to go all in on LTE once VoLTE becomes standard. Its not like AT&T needs to have 2-3 LTE carriers at this point to support the huge capacity when they are still trying to fill up one LTE carrier. Even Verizon which has had LTE deployed for about 1.5 years the 10x10 MHz LTE carrier is still not full. Not to mention that AT&T hasn't talked about using further techniques like wifi offloading, cell splitting, small cells (picocells and femtocells) to deal with extending capacity on a LTE carrier like all carriers should be thinking of doing. Sprint has made that known about deploying small cells and wifi offloading to deal with capacity.

Hmm I am a bit concerned that Sprint is not going to cover the Hacienda/Rowland Heights area by September which to be fair is near the edge of the LA Metro market. However there are so few towers in the area, I would have expected to see those markets covered by September and then work inwards towards the middle of the LA Metro market.

Call me a geek but the reason why I knew about the change in the 2nd round market ordering is because I made a copy of the list of the 2nd round market ordering right after the last 2nd round market was announced back in March or so and I knew Miami was not on the top of the 2nd round list. Then I just analyzed the differences between the 2 lists and noticed all the Florida markets got bumped up to the top. I'll be interested to see what the updated list order is for the 2nd round markets in the upcoming weeks.

Samsung better be ahead of schedule in Chicago since this is their only Network Vision market so far. They gotta start deploying crews out at San Francisco and start that market.

Wow, looks like Robert updated the Running List thread to include estimation dates for Chicago and LA of September 2012 without the update articles yet. Appears that those 2 markets will be next for Network Vision update articles. Can't wait to read those. Also noticed the Second Round markets order has been shifted around where the Florida markets are on the top of the list now and some other markets got pushed up and down. Detroit folks should be pretty happy since they got bumped up from the 19th to the 6th spot while San Diego folks will be sad that they got bumped down from the 11th spot to the 17th spot.

Sprint will have about 14 MHz of 800 MHz spectrum which is good for up to a 5x5 LTE carrier and a CDMA carrier. When Sprint pulls those 2 things off especially 800 MHz LTE for building penetration to compete with Verizon and AT&T.

Instead of selling the WCS spectrum to AT&T, how about Sprint and AT&T spectrum swap the WCS spectrum for PCS spectrum. I would rather have that then cash. Its not like the small amount of spectrum is going to yield much cash anyways.

Also the reason for deploying 1x Advanced for the time being is that VoLTE is still not ready for widespread deployment. Verizon has announced plans to do VoLTE trials later on this year and plans to start deploying areas with VoLTE in 2013. Either way there are probably going to be bugs and kinks that need to be worked out just like how Verizon was the main test subject for LTE deployment with all those outages. Iyad Tarazi from Sprint did mention that they would begin trial testing of VoLTE in 2013/2014 but no timeline of when VoLTE would be in full deployment. The only reason for VoLTE deployment over 1x Advanced for voice in the future is to simplify the base station system to not have as much equipment to deployed to carry voice and data separately when LTE can easily account for both. For now Sprint needs to rely on 1x Advanced since it can dramatically reduce the number of 1x voice carriers it has today and save that spectrum to be used for LTE deployment since Sprint has so little spectrum.

Sprint's WCS spectrum is crap and they only have a small amount in the Texas, Louisiana area. Unless its nationwide coverage, there is no purpose of deploying LTE on that spectrum. If Sprint had to enter into a new LTE band, I would rather see Sprint enter the AWS band since that band continues to grow and there are Band classes already available for LTE deployment. There are even talks right now of making some spectrum available in the 1700 MHz range to extend the AWS band range as part of the 300 MHz of spectrum that is suppose to be made available in the next few years.

Not sure. I was always under the impression that Ericcson provided the hardware for Clearwire to deploy their Wimax network. I assume they would be contracted again to provide the LTE hardware for the TD-LTE network.

Yes all NV towers will be upgraded with 1x Advanced hardware. Remember that for HD voice both sides needs to be using a handset that supports HD voice to truly experience the difference. So far only the HTC EVO 4G LTE phone supports HD voice.

Forget the G block for a second. I know Sprint has 30 MHz without the G block in some markets like LA, San Diego, NYC, Washington DC, Dallas etc but those cities actually need the 30 MHz spectrum because they are high population areas. They are still a lot of major cities like Chicago, Bay Area (SF and SJ), Atlanta, Houston, etc that only have 20 MHz of PCS spectrum which is clearly not enough. The mentality for Sprint shouldn't be a zero sum game where Sprint should be trading 10 MHz of spectrum in its 30 MHz markets thereby depleting those markets to 20 MHz while the 20 MHz markets now gain 10 MHz through spectrum swap putting them at 30 MHz. This solution doesn't solve anything because it only fixes one problem but breaks another because now those former 30 MHz markets like LA, NYC, San Diego, etc are now stuck with 20 MHz which need more spectrum since they are high population cities. The true fix is if Sprint can not get the nationwide licenses for the 'H' block then the priority should be that the major markets who currently have only 20 MHz of PCS spectrum that those 10 MHz H block licenses be bought up to now put those 20 MHz markets with 30 MHz of spectrum. Remember I am discounting the 10 MHz G block nationwide for now because we are talking about future expansion not what Sprint is already deploying for LTE.

They don't have any spectrum to swap. What spectrum could Sprint possibly trade? Sprint needs to acquire the 'H' block and just continue to build on the PCS band. That should be the path forward but we'll have to see what Sprint is going to do. The problem right now is that in some Sprint markets they don't even have 20 MHz of PCS spectrum if you don't count the 'G' block. Acquiring more PCS spectrum should be their number one priority.

I hope that the FCC delays the PCS H block auction until 2015 so that by that time Sprint will be in better financial shape to make a decision on the PCS H Block auction. I really do hope that Sprint is aggressive in trying to obtain the H block because it fits so nicely next to the G block and deploy a 10x10 carrier which Sprint desperately needs. To be honest, I do NOT trust Clearwire in its TDD-LTE build out to supply all the necessary capacity it needs for years and years to come and would much rather have Sprint take control of its own future than relying on Clearwire. Sprint can show this by being aggressive with the H block spectrum.

Glad to see that Sprint is ramping up its coverage maps on its website to account for LTE. Also Sprint was smart to isolate coverage maps between 4G LTE and 4G WiMax instead of bundling them together as 4G.

But isn't what you are saying only 1 part of what Clearwire is planning to do with its TD-LTE network. I understand that Clearwire and Sprint are collaborating to select specific towers to add TD-LTE capacity but I thought that was a separate task that is asked specifically by Sprint. What about Clearwire's natural footprint? Isn't the second part of what Clearwire is doing is overlaying specific Wimax towers with TD-LTE on its natural footprint since Clearwire leased its own towers? I am just curious because what about Clearwire's other LTE wholesale customers? If Clearwire built TD-LTE coverage on only co-located Sprint towers, I doubt Sprint is going to allow all the other Clearwire LTE wholesale customers to leech off of their colocated towers which should be reserved for Sprint customers.