bigsnake49

They don't need to have coverage nationwide, just in places that Sprint needs it. Between their "G" block, other possible 1900PCS blocks and 800MHz they will not need additional capacity for a little while.

Wider channels have the advantage of not needing guard bands except at the endpoints.

I don't think they will go for a nationwide license. They seem to have an aversion to Wyoming and Montana...

I like for Sprint to get a substantial chunk of the PCS H block for another reason. If they do, then Dish spectrum is very close (only 5MHz separation between Dish's spectrum and PCS H block) so it stands to reason that at some point or another if Dish and Sprint cooperate that 5MHz sliver might just get thrown in for chits and giggles. Now that would be some impressive block of spectrum!

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6017094139 It seems they really want the FCC to hurry up and auction this band. The only problem I see is if the FCC allowed the big two to bid. They would probably try to jack up the price for Sprint out of spite. The only way to prevent that is to put strict buildout requirements, let's say two years or less on deployment.

AJ could they just devote, let's say a 20MHz band for sprint and then use a different different 20MHz band for everybody else? It might be a pretty expensive way of doing it. The other way is for Clearwire to contract with Sprint to be the uplink provider for all of Clearwire's wholesale customers.

I think the best solution for Clearwire/Sprint is to use the 2600Mhz spectrum strictly as downlink and pump up the power somewhat. Using it strictly as downlink also takes care of the loss of coverage you get with going TDD vs FDD (interference).

He's proposing using WiMax for backhaul for WiFi hotspots. The cable cos are deploying strand mounted WiFi, so that business model is not going to fly in the US. However, they can use it for backhaul to small cells.

I don't know if you have been to Richardson, because I used to live there, but that would probably not be the best example in that it would require a hell of a lot of 2600MHz sites to cover all the housing developments. Now if you're trying to say that they might try to cover the malls and office buildings with 2600MHz sites, I agree with you, but it just ain't going to help you in the huge housing developments. Not unless they do some intelligent network planning and assign video to 2600MHz, turn up the power and use it strictly for downlink.

Which makes my point above even more strongly. I don't think that the FCC will allow them to have 40MHz in the areas you listed. Maybe 30?

They will have 20MHz (10+10) of near nationwide AWS if they're allowed to purchase cablecos spectrum. They will not have nationwide 20+20 AWS even if they're allowed to keep their own. They have nothing on the Western US. Actually, pre failed merger attempt, AT&T's AWS holdings were a perfect compliment to Verizon's.

Thank you, ian for doing all the legwork on the WCS for PCS spectrum swaps. I think it is in the best interest of both carriers to do the swap. I think the FCC will impose other conditions other than the sale of the 700Mhz A&B blocks. I think that they will also force them to sell their own AWS spectrum holdings concentrated in the eastern half of the country, at least in the large metro areas and Florida. Now Sprint also wants them to impose nondiscriminatory WiFi roaming on the cable cos rapidly expanding WiFi networks as well as backhaul: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=222163&site=lr_cable&

He's not trying to argue with anybody. He just reiterated what his friend told him. No more, no less.

Thanks bq. If you see him again, tell him to come to the Melboune, FL area. So far we have been bypassed by the Big 2. It would be very funny if Sprint deployed LTE in our area before they did.

Throwing wider/more channels is not so that the carriers can increase their peak speeds to a single user it's about more users have a "good" data experience. That's is also why for carriers at least it helps to have higher order MIMO at the base station. Personally, if I can pull in 64K consistently for my internet radio streaming, I'm very happy.

Additional low frequency bands will not be available anytime soon, so Sprint is stuck with the 7+7MHz in the 800Mhz SMR band. I think most people should wait until both the 800MHz and the 2600Mhz bands are supported in a handset. I know that Sprint and some of the enthusiasts don't like that advice, but between the fact that Sprint's network won't be widespread before the end of 2013 and the fact that all current phones wont support the 800 and 2600MHz band, it makes perfect sense for ordinary people.

Just remember also that the big two have twice as many customers as Sprint, so they're probably in the same boat as far as total spectrum is concerned. Now, I do believe that Sprint should find at least another 10 Mhz of lower frequency somewhere. Would that be in the 900Mhz band where they own close to 3+3Mhz already or in the 600Mhz band to be freed through voluntary auctions? I don't have all the answers. If it was me, I would try to buy out the rest of the license holders in the 900Mhz band.

I like Windows Phone. It is very fast and can be run on much lower MHz hardware than Android requires. It is also a different UI paradigm than iOS and Android. WebOS is also a different UI paradigm so I appreciate that as well. Android, although popular, does not bring anything different to the table. Sorry if I am insulting your sensibilities, Android fans, but there's not a lot of differences between iOS and Android, whereas WebOS and Windows phone bring something different and fresh to the table. RIM and Nokia made a big mistake not buying Palm. On the other hand a sloth of a company like HP should have never bought Palm.

You had to spoil my dream didn't you? Yeah I was hoping they would swap with C block spectrum folks. I think Metro has a lot of those, so does Verizon, so does AT&T.

PCS spectrum with PCS spectrum, probably with MetroPCS, Leap Wireless, AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile. Did I leave anybody out?

Make that an orange mocha frappaccino and you have yourself a deal .

Th sarcasm quotient was very high in my previous post .

I wasn't even trying to imply that they should deploy anything on it. They can either sell it or trade it for some PCS spectrum.

AT&T (NYSE:T) and Sirius XM made a joint proposal to the FCC regarding the 2.3 GHz Wireless Communication Service (WCS) band that would open up a portion of it for LTE use, giving AT&T another band for its 4G efforts. The proposal would change the rules governing WCS spectrum while protecting Sirius XM from interference. AT&T is the largest holder of WCS spectrum, followed by spectrum holding company NextWave Wireless. The proposed changes could give AT&T the ability to deploy LTE covering roughly 40 percent of the country. In May 2010 the FCC voted unanimously to approve an order that changes rules governing the 2.3 GHz WCS band. The FCC said the spectrum can be made available for mobile broadband use, and mandated that rules be put in place to avoid interference issues. However, AT&T and many others took issues with the new rules. Read more: AT&T proposes deploying LTE in WCS 2.3 GHz band - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/att-proposes-deploying-lte-wcs-23-ghz-band/2012-06-19#ixzz1yFteJl3l Doesn't Sprint also have some WCS spectrum?

They will select their LTE vendors in the third quarter of 2012. http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/clearwire-announce-lte-vendors-q3-timeframe/2012-05-16