ericdabbs

The timing of the attempted MetroPCS purchase was just not right. I am not sure if Sprint has the luxury of exploring possible acquisitions at this point and diverting focus from Network Vision and possible additional funding of Clearwire.

Either way I think a purchase of Leap Wireless would make more sense than MetroPCS.

I would think that Sprint will switch to a combination of fiber/microwave backhaul after NV is complete. There is no purpose of keeping T1 lines when fiber/microwave backhaul is present.

they could just use LTE-Advanced and combined whatever carriers they can.

 

10x10 + 10x10 or 10x10 + 5x5, etc

 

The big question here: is dish going to piggyback off lightsquared's failure and just slip into network vision? That's the play here.

If they have exactly 40 Mhz, how can they deploy two 10x10 LTE configurations? Don't they need some guard band on both sides for the adjacent PCS and AWS spectrum blocks? The most I can see them do is a 10x10, 5x5 and a 3x3 if they wanted to max out their spectrum or just a 10x10 and 5x5.

I really hope that Dish can get approval by the FCC to build out LTE without GPS interference because if it gets denied, it becomes another 40 Mhz of wasted spectrum. I really hope that if Dish gets FCC approval that they work with Sprint on a network hosting deal to bring Sprint more revenue. It just makes too much sense not to go that route.

Interesting article that provides more details of Tmobile's LTE plans with some nice pictures of their antennas with integrated radios.

http://www.extremete...market-by-storm

Recall that Sprint was a partner with Comcast, Time Warner, and Cox in SpectrumCo, which won nearly nationwide AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum at the AWS-1 auction in 2006. A few years ago, however, Sprint cashed out of the partnership. And now the cable companies are selling the spectrum to VZW. If Sprint had wanted to add AWS to its portfolio, then Sprint should have stuck with SpectrumCo.

 

Furthermore, MetroPCS would bring more than just PCS and AWS spectrum to the table. MetroPCS also controls some Lower 700 MHz spectrum. So, those would add two more to Sprint's growing list of band classes: PCS 1900 MHz, SMR 800 MHz, BRS/EBS 2600 MHz. And, honestly, Sprint has its hands full with its current bands, two of which are essentially unique to Sprint. So, Sprint would be unwise to fragment its spectrum holdings even further.

 

For those interested in MetroPCS' spectrum holdings, I just so happened to compile the top 100 markets a few weeks ago and produced this graph:

 

 

 

AJ

Definitely times have changed in the wireless world where data demand has surged tremendously because of the smartphone and carriers are in huge need for spectrum. I am not sure which year Sprint cashed out of SpectrumCo but at the time I am sure Sprint was thinking that they didn't anticipate that they would ever have a need for AWS spectrum since their operations are in the PCS band and their cell towers at the time were ancient that they knew it could not handle it. Heck I don't even think that the current Sprint towers before NV would be able to handle CDMA at 800 Mhz. However I believe that once NV was announced and the fact that one of the key benefits of its multimodal towers is the ability to host different spectrum bands which includes hosting AWS spectrum. Of course Sprint has been in dire straits financially for the last couple years and couldn't afford to buy out the AWS spectrum from Spectrum Co. I would have to think that looking back in hindsight that Sprint regrets selling its partnership stake in Spectrum Co knowing now that having additional spectrum is so key for the wireless industry and the fact that they will need to hunt for additional spectrum in 2014. It would have been nice to have AWS spectrum as the ace in the sleeve. This is just my opinion.

I didn't know that MetroPCS had 700 Mhz spectrum but from looking at the chart its pretty useless since its only in 4 markets and don't really care for 700 Mhz that much. It wouldn't have been worth the time for Sprint to try to integrate 700 Mhz if the merger went through. I really like the spectrum chart that you have put up comparing MetroPCS and Leap. After looking at the chart, I think I am glad the MetroPCS deal did not go through. Leap Wireless seems to have better spectrum holdings in both the PCS and AWS spectrum than MetroPCS. I think Sprint should try to go for a Leap Wireless merger sometime in the future.

Dish's S band spectrum is fully 20 MHz x 20 MHz, but it has some adjacent services issues (though nothing remotely as bad as the LightSquared-GPS debacle). So, Dish will not likely be able to utilize the full 20 MHz in each link allocation. Moreover, Dish's band class 23 is spec'd only to 10 MHz x 10 MHz LTE; it does not currently allow 15 MHz x 15 MHz nor 20 MHz x 20 MHz LTE options.

 

AJ

That kinda sucks. I was hoping it could do at least a 15 Mhz x 15 Mhz configuration. Could they do a 10 Mhz x 10 Mhz carrier and a 5 Mhz x 5 Mhz secondary carrier?

Deal is reportedly dead. I am not so sure this was in the best interest of Sprint shareholders. The only thing I care about is what spectrum holdings does MetroPCS have? I believe they have some AWS spectrum which would have been a nice introduction for Sprint to get into that spectrum band.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/sprint-deal-for-metropcs-said-to-have-collapsed/

Any article relating to NYC? Would like to know more details on it. Also where can I find the details about the live chat on Sunday?

Sprint should deploy DO-Advanced as part of NV upgrades since they should be taking advantage of any software upgrades that can help with network load balancing.

Sounds like a good plan. Only time will tell what they will do. If Sprint doesn't need that much voice then I am all for Option 1.

+ericdabbs.. I like the 3 possible options you proposed. But do you really think that they need that much spectrum designated to voice... especially considering voice can still fall back to the 1900mhz spectrum? Well, I guess the same could be said for 800mhz LTE falling back to 1900. Maybe its just because I use data more, but I think I'd rather see the "One 5x5 LTE carrier and one 1xAdvanced carrier." Guess I am just more of a data user than a voice user, which probably makes me bias.

Well lets not forget that Sprint is cell phone carrier so first and foremost, voice has to be number 1 priority. Since VoLTE is not out yet, I want to make sure that Sprint has enough voice capacity to handle the calls. Initially I was like you and wanted Option 1 but the more I thought about it, maybe Option 3 for the time being wouldn't be so bad.

Remember that 1xA can be configured for either 4x the amount of users than 1xCDMA2000 or extend coverage by up to 70%. With the three 1xA carriers at 800 Mhz opting for 4x capacity users, you can pretty much eliminate most of the 1xCDMA2000 carriers at the PCS band with each carrier taking up 1.25 Mhz. Sprint can then refarm and launch larger 10x10 LTE configurations in the PCS band at 1900 Mhz.

Maybe instead of three 1xA carriers for voice, they could have two 1xA voice and one EVDO carrier to help with 3G data speeds with better in building penetration.

The best thing for Sprint to do is to take advantage of the 4x capacity with 1x Advanced at 800 Mhz. 800 Mhz already has good propagation characteristics. The more voice capacity Sprint can cram in fewer 1x Advanced carriers the better since they can reduce the number of 1xCDMA 2000 carriers at the PCS band and refarm that spectrum for additional LTE capacity.

The bigger question is how does Sprint plan to chop up the 14 Mhz at 800 Mhz. I propose 3 options but I like option 3 since it gives Sprint plenty of 1x voice capacity with some support of LTE at least for the time being until CDMA phases out in favor of VoLTE.

Does Sprint do

1) One 5x5 LTE carrier and one 1xAdvanced carrier

Sample configuration

816-817: 1 Mhz required guard band based on FCC requirement. Can be used as the CDMA/SMR guard band which is 625 KHz.

817-818.25: a single 1xA CDMA carrier

818.25-818.425:minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band

818.425-823.425: LTE 5 MHz uplink

823.425-824: minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band but has remaining 575 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band to be used between LTE and CDMA Celluar A band

2) One 3x3 LTE carrier and two 1xAdvanced carriers

Sample configuration

816-817: 1 Mhz required guard band based on FCC requirement. Can be used as the CDMA/SMR guard band which is 625 Khz.

817-818.25: a single 1xA CDMA carrier

818.25-819.5: a single 1xA CDMA carrier

818.5-818.625: minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band

818.625-821.625: LTE 3 MHz uplink

821.625-824: minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band but has 2.375 Mhz LTE/CDMA guard band to be used between LTE and CDMA Celluar A band

3) One 3x3 LTE carrier and three 1xAdvanced carriers

Sample configuration

816-817: 1 Mhz required guard band based on FCC requirement. Can be used as the CDMA/SMR guard band which is 625 Khz.

817-818.25: a single 1xA CDMA carrier

818.25-819.5: a single 1xA CDMA carrier

819.5-820.75: a single 1xA CDMA carrier or EVDO

820.75-820.925: minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band

820.925-823.925: LTE 3 MHz uplink

823.925-824.1: minimum 175 KHz LTE/CDMA guard band but is short by about 10 KHz which overflows into the Cellular A band. I wish Sprint is somehow able to get a this 10 Khz portion of this spectrum.

Reference to guard band information can be found at the link below on slide 12

http://www.atis.org/...20Migration.pdf

T-Mobile was also looking at other options besides trying to stop the Verizon deal. Now that DT is event giving them some money, I wonder if T-Mo will seek alliance with DISH or if DISH will go with Sprint for network hosting? I don't think DISH is really excited about doing anything with AT&T.

I am sure DISH is not too thrilled with AT&T trying to force DISH to a spectrum sale since it wouldn't be ready to build out its LTE network yet. I hope that Sprint and DISH do partner up for spectrum hosting because its gives Sprint a new source of revenue. Sprint has given its blessing to DISH to build a LTE network as good will. In addition the timeline fits in that by the time Sprint is finished putting up NV towers nationwide, it will have the tower infrastructure to easily add DISH's equipment to support their network. I see a Sprint and DISH spectrum hosting deal as a no brainer but I am just not sure if Sprint is even thinking about that right now unless they are awaiting the FCC approval of Dish's spectrum first before proposing any deals.

I am glad that Tmobile is finally converting to LTE. I think they realize that HSPA+ is not their 4G future and they need to convert to the true 4G standard in LTE. I just like to see the entire wireless industry convert to the same 4G standard and not have a 3G GSM/CDMA battle.

Since Tmobile plans to launch LTE in AWS spectrum, I guess this pokes the hole in a potential Sprint/Tmobile LTE network sharing agreement. Also the press release doesn't really tell how much spectrum they plan to use to launch their LTE network. I assume they will start off with a 5x5 configuration and slowly refarm spectrum from there.

I was in the sprint store today, and although I know their reps know little to none about release dates etc. The rep told me that it would probably be until summer.

Haha another example of a rep that doesn't know what he's talking about. If the initial LTE markets are to be launched before end of June then the phones have to be launched by or before then. I honestly don't think the sprint reps at the store know when the LTE phones will be released. I am not sure how many sprint reps know much about Network Vision and LTE until they are trained up on it.

The reason why it is being discussed is two fold...

1. They anticipate there could be a huge reduction of WiMax customers by the time TD-LTE has devices operating on the network. One carrier could possibly carry all the remaining WiMax traffic at that point in Mid 2013. WiMax subscriber numbers are anticipated to be static next quarter. Then the next quarter when Sprint LTE devices start to sell in a big way, WiMax subscribers are expected to begin a significant and steady decline that will never end until WiMax is decommissioned.
   
2. WiMax carriers were typically deployed in the choicest spectrum Clearwire has. They are on the frequency sets that they have generally nationwide, in 80%+ of their markets. The remaining unused spectrum is more fractured, especially in EBS. 10MHz, 10MHz there. The big contiguous 20MHz pieces are not as typical to be found on the same frequency set nationwide. However, where two carriers of WiMax now currently sit are a big contiguous 20MHz piece that runs nearly nationwide. And for the long term, the choicest piece of spectrum real estate you have would be better served for a 20MHz TD-LTE carrier, instead of two WiMax carriers.
   

So I guess it's possible that they could relocate these two WiMax carriers to other frequencies. But I've been told that Clearwire is now thinking about just scratching these two WiMax carriers altogether. But the determination has yet to be made, AFAIK. And if WiMax performance suffers, they will just probably encourage people to upgrade to a LTE device.

 

EBS spectrum is highly variable. Schools kept chunks for themselves, for their use. And often they were right smack in the middle of the EBS band, with Clearwire getting disjointed chunks on either side. Some schools kept 20MHz, some schools kept more. Some schools divided up chunks with other schools in their network. It's messy and creates some weird spectrum resources in some places. That's what makes the 20MHz chunk that two of the WiMax carriers sit on now so valuable. They are the closest thing that Clearwire has to a nationwide 20MHz chunk. In some other markets, they have a good 20MHz chunk, but then the markets they have that in are less plentiful.

 

Sometimes we get hung up on spectrum resources just as an aggregate number. It is a very important part of the discussion to know exactly where that spectrum is and how it can be used. Managing spectrum and network is very difficult. But if you're Clearwire, it's even more difficult.

If that is the case then yeah it makes sense to reduce the number of Wimax carriers so that they have enough contigous spectrum to launch 20 Mhz LTE carrier chunks since LTE is now the top priority. I was fearful that reducing 2 Wimax carriers would provide subpar performance since Wimax isn't that great to begin with already.

Definitely I expect to see a steep drop in Wimax usage for people who are coming off of the EVO contracts in June to get LTE phones from this point forward. I am curious to see how much this impacts Clearwire in the interim with such a steep drop in Sprint customers using Wimax and less revenue to be made from them. It won't be for another year from June 2012 until Clearwire lights up their LTE service which is an awfully long time to lose all that revenue from Sprint. Clearwire will need to find another major customers like a MetroPCS or Leap Wireless to help fill the gap.

In most markets, Clearwire is only using 30MHz for WiMax of an average 150MHz of spectrum holdings. Clearwire has plenty of spectrum to just add TD-LTE carriers to WiMax sites. However, one source from Clearwire told me that they may remove two WiMax carriers and only leave one in places where they deploy TD-LTE. That this is currently under consideration.

What I don't get is why does Clearwire need to remove any Wimax carriers at all at this point. They should have enough spectrum to leave the 3 Wimax carriers and also launch two 20 Mhz TD-LTE carriers. Right now Wimax is still used a lot and to reduce the number of Wimax carriers by 66% is such a bad move IMO especially with recent deals for 4G Wimax support that it doesn't make any sense. 1 Wimax carrier would not be able to handle the Sprint Wimax and wholesale customers.

Now if we are talking about in 2014, then I get it and agree that since Wimax would be pretty dead by then, reducing the number of Wimax carriers to 1 and refarming that spectrum for another TD-LTE carrier makes sense.

Been with Sprint since June 2007. I hopped onto Sprint from Tmobile because of the SERO plan and couldn't imagine at the time of using a smartphone which was bulky to carry around and using internet on my phone.

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 30 January 2012

I hope this does not happen. I would love to have Sprint have some sort of network hosting revenue deal to take advantage of its new towers now that LS2 is most likely out of the picture. I would hate to have ATT benefit from getting additional spectrum. Their actions with the proposed Tmobile merger have rubbed me the wrong way and the fact that ATT was the first carrier to go to tiered data plans and eliminate all texting options except for $20 unlimited texting for single lines.