bigsnake49

That's why I think they are also a candidate for being owners or at least MVNOs of cellular networks and sell hardware as well as service. They have gobs of cash and can make some major moves. So far they have been buying some rinky dink companies. Google's and Amazon's moves arenot going to hurt just Apple but Samsung and other handset makers. I would not be surprised to see Apple make some major investments in Toshiba, Micron, Sharp, LG, TSMC, etc. in order to lower their costs.

Yeah, I don't know about bgr.com anymore. They (Dish) might be have their spectrum reclassification approved for cellular broadband use by the middle of 2013, but a network will take a lot longer, even if riding on Sprint or T-Mobile's coat tails.

Sure Google can sell their Nexus products for a loss if they can sell ads/search results/customer profiles. Same Thing with Amazon and their content. Apple on the other hand might be forced to augment their income stream with service revenues in order to compete with Google or Amazon.

Yeah, but you are ignoring company overhead plus profit. Even at really well run large companies you have a 2.5-3 multiplier. So if you're selling the phone for the manufacturing costs you are losing money. It does not take into account R&D, building rent/mortgage, worker salaries, 401K contributions, taxes and FICA, etc, etc. Forget about the profit.

I don't see the current top of the line handsets as cheap. Even at somebody like Voyager Mobile, the GS III costs $549, which is not exactly cheap. Unlocked iPhone is $649. So, I don't know where you're drawing the line between cheap and expensive.

Yeah, but Apple will need to do something to maintain their high margins. The reason phones are getting cheaper is because Google is not making any money on their Nexus phones and is hoping to make it up by search/ads income. The same way that Amazon is making it up by forcing you to use their "content".

That's why they are rumored to have bought $900M of Clearwire's debt. Exchange it for some of Clearwire's spectrum. Couple the 20+20 of spectrum they have with some 10+10 from the upcoming TV spectrum auction and all of a sudden they're pretty credible as far as handset oriented cellular is concerned. Ultimately, if they want to implement VOD they will need Clearwire's spectrum.

Also, T-Mobile's CEO Alling, thinks that eventually there will be only 3 US carriers: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-16/t-mobile-usa-sees-three-national-networks-over-long-term.html Does the entry of Dish in the cellular service arena allow the FCC and DOJ to approve a Sprint/T-Mobile merger without loss of competition?

For a very interesting perspective on Dish's machinations re Clearwire and Sprint read Tim Farrar's blog: http://blog.tmfassociates.com/

I don't know that they are that smart:). It does not hurt to lend another voice. Sprint wants to be able to bid on band H without having to worry about potential interference from Dish's spectrum. If Dish's application goes through untouched without power restrictions or shifting it up by 5MHz, then PCS H will become unusable serving as just a guard band. Is it a dire prospect for Sprint if they could not bid on PCS H? No, but it would be nice to be given the opportunity to do so.

I can see both Google and Apple eventually becoming wireless MVNO's. At some point, the traditional carriers will not be able to subsidize handsets to the degree that they are now and the handset manufacturers will have to earn their money some other way. While Google has ads/search, Apple does not.

I really don't think that we really need a 5th provider of handset centric cellular service. They could address a different market such as tablets and laptops. Having both, I'm flabbergasted at how expensive the plans are. I also want somebody to address radio streaming/video streaming/internet gaming while in the car but unencumbered by the battery concerns of a handset. Security cameras/alarm monitoring/smart grid, etc could be another niche.

That's an excellent idea. Why don't you leave a comment on the FCC's webpage concerning Dish's application.

I think that they could offer fixed solutions to all of their customers, but one of the main things is that they can offer OTT/VOD solutions to people that are not their customers without going over their competitors wires.

3GPP Approves DISH Wireless Spectrum Standards DISH calls on FCC to resist Sprint's effort to delay wireless competition, billions in investment, tens of thousands of U.S. jobs ENGLEWOOD, Colo., Nov. 14, 2012 – The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) working group yesterday approved the technical specifications that govern 40 MHz of broadband-ready wireless spectrum controlled by DISH (called Band 23), despite the objections of Sprint Nextel Corporation over the last 12 months. DISH urges the FCC to do the same. Without 3GPP approval, wireless companies do not have the required technical blueprints needed to design and build everything from cellphone chipsets to broadband networks. With 3GPP's standards now approved, DISH is poised to enter the wireless business as rapidly as possible, assuming favorable FCC approval of rules that will allow DISH to use the spectrum (which is already approved for satellite and terrestrial service) more efficiently for terrestrial wireless services for smartphones, tablets and computers. "We applaud 3GPP for rightly concluding the Band 23 question," said Jeff Blum, DISH Senior Vice-President and Deputy General Counsel. "Now we call on the FCC to reject Sprint's proposals for AWS-4 rules that would re-open Band 23 and jeopardize DISH's ability bring its spectrum to market, and provide much needed wireless competition." Over the past several months, Sprint, which is in the process of being acquired by Japanese-controlled wireless carrier Softbank, has petitioned the FCC to drastically reduce the power levels of DISH's spectrum to further Sprint's desire to acquire the neighboring H Block spectrum, which today is essentially a vacant lot with no current licensees or users. Sprint's request would re-open DISH's 3GPP specifications, causing further delay to a process that DISH started more than 20 months ago – and further delaying billions of dollars of investment and the creation of tens of thousands of jobs. "Sprint's position on the H Block would render useless 25 percent of DISH's uplink spectrum -- so that Sprint is positioned to merely gain the exact same amount of spectrum," said Blum. "This is a zero-sum approach that does not result in a net spectrum gain for the American consumer and creates no new jobs. "Worse yet, it takes 5 MHz of spectrum out of the hands of a new market entrant and puts it in the hands of an incumbent that already has more than 200 MHz of wireless spectrum," said Blum. "This makes no sense at a time when the nation is enduring a spectrum crunch and would benefit from more wireless competition. "Our nation is in a spectrum crisis; we are running out of the very resource our wireless economy needs to sustain its incredible growth," said Blum. "Sprint's plan does not deliver new spectrum nor create U.S. jobs; it take usable spectrum from a new entrant – DISH -- and conveniently positions an entrenched incumbent, Sprint, as the beneficiary. "Sprint, through its actions at the FCC, is delaying wireless competition, billions of dollars of investment and tens of thousands of jobs that our economy needs. Said Blum: "DISH's position is consistent with more than 20 years of FCC precedent. The AWS-4 rulemaking should be completed with the power levels that were recommended by the FCC in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and supported by all commenters (other than Sprint), and which would not require DISH to effectively surrender 25 percent of its uplink capacity. The H Block should be subject to the same auction and rule making processes that have applied to other spectrum bands for decades. This approach will ultimately free up the H Block for its highest-and-best use based upon input from all interested parties, and will lead to more investment, more jobs, more competition and more spectrum for wireless consumers."

BTW, Dish's spectrum just got approved by the 3GPP.

Read more: Globalstar urges FCC to let it use satellite spectrum for LTE, TLPS networks - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewir...4#ixzz2CIaROU2Y Will Sprint be the one they will partner with? Clearwire, since their downlink band is adjacent to the 2.5GHz band?

The macro site it is getting signal from has already been upgraded. Cool!

Well, the best play right now is to launch a counterbid to MetroPCS if only to gracefully withdraw if/when offered some PCS spectrum. The best bet for Leap is to let Sprint host their network and they become an MVNO, while Sprint gets access to Leap 1900MHz spectrum for LTE.

They also need to thicken their coverage. There are places where you can get 3G but not LTE even thought they're implementing LTE on 700MHz. So I hope they put LTE wherever they have 3G. If nothing else it will give AT&T and Sprint a target to shoot for.

There is no market for Clearwire's spectrum. They have tried and failed to attract any interest. AT&T has WCS spectrum and will also benefit from 700MHz B band sales from Verizon. Verizon has scores of AWS spectrum. T-Mobile and Metro also have no need for spectrum. Sprint, through PCS spectrum purchases like the one with USCC and possibly TMobile/Metro, is trying to strengthen their PCS spectrum position, will bid for PCS H, and has SMR for propagation. Clearwire's spectrum is extremely ancillary to Sprint and might be hurting their efforts to acquire lower frequency spectrum. Clearwire's spectrum might be of interest to Dish and Direct TV for an VOD and OTT play. I have yet to see a business case for a conventional nationwide cellular network on their spectrum. I don't know what these guys are smoking, but whatever it is, it's good stuff.

Direct Talk can be incorporated into any phone since it uses the 900MHz ISM band. The problem is that the number of people that need phones to have that functionality is pretty small, namely first responders and utility people. They already have radios that have that functionality built in.

It's a little more complicated than that. The partnership agreement is a little more convoluted. The company whose share they purchased seeat at the board of directors went to Clearwire instead of to Sprint. Additionally all of the directors of Clearwire, including those appointed by Sprint are supposed to be independent because of anti-trust concerns. So I don't hink that Sprint can get control of Clearwire until they buy 100% control.

When did they do that? They just increased their holdings from about 48% to 50.8%, I thought.

I think USCC will not offer service in the areas they sold to Sprint. Are you guys reading it differently?