LTE Speed Titles

AT&T has already taken the LTE speed mantle for 2013.  I think that speed will continue to be an important marketing differentiation.  Sprint Spark, based on 2.5 GHz spectrum as that opportunity to break Sprint out of its downward slide.  

My article in RCR Wireless entitled LTE Speed Crowns and Network Dependencies lays out some of my thoughts.  A key piece in increasing speed is when carrier aggregation kicks in. In a nutshell,   it's the ability to piece together disparate pieces of a carrier's spectrum portfolio to make a 'fatter pipe' in order to deliver to the user, a faster speed (and lower latency) experience. Of course there are a lot of hardware dependencies that go into it.

While speed is exciting, what looks to be a Sprint win may be a marketing and revenue loss in the non-metropolitan areas.  That is due to 2.5 GHz's poor propagation characteristics.  It just cannot reach out there and Sprint's problem is that thought it has a lot of the frequency, in order to make it effective nationally, they would have to expend a LOT more money to blanket the U.S. geography. This is a similar argument that you don't see a fully geographic national PCS network.  Verizon Wireless and AT&T will have that advantage with their sub-1GHz portfolio. When these larger carriers piece their deep cellular bands with their 700 spectrum, they will have the ability to deliver greater speed than Sprint outside of the metropolitan areas.  This won't happen for a couple more years late 2015-2017, perhaps.   

Sprint will need to execute on its 2.5 GHz Spark buildout to have a shot at the standard speed surveys that Root Metrics (various metro updates over the course of the year) and PC Magazine (May) performs. It may be that Sprint will win some important metros but may not get the 2014 title until those survey cities are 'Sparked.'  Throwing a monkey wrench in 2014 will be Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile tapping their deep AWS assets. T-Mobile has already been reported to have a 20 X 20 (20 MHz down/20 MHz uplink) in the Dallas area while Verizon Wireless has turned on  20 X 20 in New York.

When Spark reaches some critical market threshold, I fully expect Sprint to turn up the marketing to push speed and unlimited.(And introduce a deep Tri-band device portfolio). It should definitely appeal to the technology forward users.  I'm also thinking that the tech blogs should help the cause. Of course, it depends on getting that network going. 

2014 will be an interesting speed year.  

Read More

Sprint and Clearwire - It had to be - Network Future?

Now that Sprint will acquire the remaining 50% of Clearwire that it already did not own, what does this say about the near term and future?  While there are many stories about the financial side, most industry insiders knew that the Clearwire acquisition was a strategic imperative. Back in October when Sprint moved to take more control, I offered some thoughts  on why Sprint's long term control of Clearwire made sense. Much of the logic is rooted in the long term network strategy.

Network Vision

Sprint's network strategy hasn't changed since 2010 with the introduction of its Network Vision.  Many analysts derided the price tag and its hosting positioning but today, Sprint's bet seems to have turned out well.

When Sprint announced Network Vision in 2010, it seemed a bit presumptuous that 2.5 GHz was included into the spectrum chart especially since Clearwire had not committed to the effort and especially Sprint did not control any of that spectrum.  Clearwire had its own separate network deployment strategy with capital already sunk in specific markets using WiMAX to power Sprint's 4G data play. 

In order to expand markets, it was logical that Clearwire take advantage of Network Vision but that didn't happen. Executive tensions (between Sprint and Clearwire), the need for Clearwire corporate independence and lack of capital to expand contributed to stalling the grand Network Vision execution.  With the urgency to stay in the LTE game against wireless competitors, Sprint worked with Clearwire on specific markets to deploy the TD-LTE flavor in specific 'high data tonnage' markets.  It was clear, Clearwire would provide the complement to Sprint's near term PCS-based LTE strategy.  

Fast forward to 2012, what has changed?  The answer - Softbank.  Though the Softbank-Sprint acquisition approval is scheduled for mid-2013, Softbank's $3.1B bond purchase in October freed Sprint to make specific strategic moves beyond Clearwire in the form of US Cellular subscriber and spectrum acquisition in November. 

Back to the 'new' Sprint network,  surprisingly, the network slide hasn't changed.  To Sprint's credit, they're executing on their vision.

But what has changed is a bit more detail specific to LTE.  Today's 800 MHz band primary is envisioned for voice. With better in-building penetration properties, having voice is still the 'bread and butter' revenue bearing service.  800 also hosts the soon to be discontinued iDEN platform. Eventually 800 will also run LTE with VoLTE.  However, 800 LTE is more than 2-3 years away. The near term LTE solution is in the PCS band. But with only a 5 X 5 deployment and also running 3G, the analyst community questioned whether this could handle increasingly high-data usage especially in light of an unlimited data service proposition. 

Enter TD-LTE and Clearwire

To address high data use, Sprint engaged Clearwire in a data offload arrangement.  Rather than a national TD-LTE view, Sprint would identify specific high-data tonnage markets for Clearwire to buildout its TD-LTE. The concept: with plenty of 2.5 GHz spectrum, Clearwire (and Sprint) could address subscriber [retail and wholesale (think data MVNOs)] capacity and still offer a speed differentiation. Yet with an independent Clearwire, Sprint clearly had no control of its future. Therefore, it was a strategic imperative for Sprint to take over Clearwire.   Sprint also had to act as the financial community was advocating Clearwire sell "excess" 2.5 spectrum to raise cash.  This flies in the face of any network planner as history has shown that spectrum always appreciates and the overused 'spectrum is the lifeblood of a network' adage still holds.

Two "2.5 GHz Dollar" Questions 

Assuming that the Clearwire acquisition goes through, will Sprint expand or accelerate the original Clearwire deployment plan?  I say yes, they have to eventually.  Whatever the TD-LTE markets previously agreed upon, it only address specific high density markets.  To offer a broader coverage story that rivals competitors, Sprint will need to show a bigger TD-LTE footprint.  It's taken for granted that a data-offload (of PCS LTE) strategy is still in play.  

There are two questions in my mind that Sprint need to address.  First, a broader future question is when Sprint will exploit the national 2.5 GHz coverage.  With a national footprint, Sprint ensures a richer wholesale platform and deeper capacity.  Sprint strategy guys have likely played this scenario out.  With less than ideal propagation (relative to 800 (and 700)), small cells and associated backhaul will play a prominent role (read more capital).  The second is more of a technical question.  When will Sprint take advantage of its potential speed advantage. With aggregating spectrum, Sprint can position speed and unlimited as a marketing differentiator much like Verizon Wireless' coverage.  Of course the answer is when the TD-LTE ecosystem commercially supports this on the infrastructure and device side.

Stay tuned for more Sprint moves in 2013. 

Read More

DISH Has Terrestrial Approval - now what?!

Now that the FCC has approved terrestrial use of DISH's 40 MHz of spectrum (2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz), what are its options?

1. Build it out - it's capitally intensive to build out a national network so a wireless carrier partner is necessary.  Why a carrier? It's in their core competency to implement and run networks.  Sprint is in the best position to meet DISH's wireless buildout goal with its Network Vision (spectrum hosting capability) strategy.  Stating the obvious - having a carrier such as Sprint host allows DISH to bring services up quickly and minimize a huge self-built price tag.

2. Sell the spectrum - getting money in the short term is always desirable.  But as the industry has seen, spectrum will always appreciate.  Yet there's been precedence for this. Spectrum Co (cable companies) sold its AWS spectrum to Verizon Wireless. They realized an appreciation in the base price from when they bought it in 2006.  More important aside from the money, cable companies (Cox, Comcast, Bright House and Time Warner) has strategic wireline and wireless possibilities with Verizon/Verizon Wireless.  With this in mind, DISH could cut a sale deal and wholesale at favored rates from the buyer. Presumably, the spectrum buyer will be a wireless carrier. Sprint would make the most sense.

BUT........
 

Don't forget the devices that will run on the DISH spectrum. Device and chip makers haven't exactly created product yet to meet this need. There is a ramp up time to incorporate it into the product portfolios. It doesn't happen overnight - look at the time in which Sprint/Clearwire announced TD-LTE 2.5 GHz support to when devices will have that band and technology incorporated.  This is a factor in both the above scenarios.

Let's see what DISH does......... 

Read More

Why Sprint + DISH Makes Sense

Today's Bloomberg report  suggesting a possible deal where Sprint hosts DISH's spectrum is logical. While DISH has held this spectrum for some time, they have yet to throw services on it. DISH needs a mobile component as all their fixed line rivals (e.g., AT&T, Verizon and Cable Cos) have or will have mobile capability.  The media and industry speculation with Google in mid-November has yet to materialize.

Keeping Up with Competitors

From a fixed line view, these competitors are pushing for subscribers being able to access content in any device (i.e., smartphones, tablets, PCs, TVs, cars?). Of course the service provider will love to upsell an alternate access medium to customers. While DISH is a capable satellite provider, it has little experience in the terrestrial side. A national buildout of their MSS spectrum would be capital intensive and outside of their core competency. 

Enter Sprint

Sprint's big bet in their 2010 Network Vision strategy that hosting spectrum would be an element of its wholesale strategy. There was much promise as then cable company (SpectrumCo)  partners had a near national AWS footprint and Clearwire needed a platform to expand to new markets. So far, only the nearly defunct LightSquared was the only shortlived spectrum hosting deal. Therefore, any spectrum holder who needed to bring up service is fair wholesale game.  With the Softbank cash infusion,  Sprint has publicly stated that it has the flexibility to do more things.  Aggressively courting DISH and hosting MSS spectrum should be a no-brainer despite any previous tension on MSS spectrum interference with with Sprint PCS operation.

Possibilities

It's an inevitability that MSS will run LTE. If MSS bands were to increase Sprint's LTE capability beyond their 5X5 channel implementation, a wider LTE band helps Sprint LTE capacity allowing Sprint's Unlimited data proposition to extend. Speed is another factor in which channels can be aggregated to provide a fatter LTE pipe.  

A DISH deal allows for a long term alternative (and a lever) to being locked in with Clearwire's TD-LTE. At a minimum, a DISH+Sprint PCS/MSS LTE pipe complements  any data offload.

Read More

A Clearwire Graphic

While looking for some Clearwire Q3 Earnings material, this graphic nicely popped up.  It's clear that Clearwire is punctuating its vast national spectrum versus the tier one carriers.

For those who are curious:

• Operator A is Verizon Wireless
• Operator B is AT&T
• Operator C is T-Mobile 
• Operator D is Sprint

Looking ahead for roaming:

• AWS LTE stands to be a major roaming frequency with Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile in control.
• PCS LTE roaming should eventually happen. Sprint is the early adopter out of the gate.
• Cellular 800/850 LTE - big question mark on what will be when AT&T and Verizon Wireless refarms.

Read More

Why the Surprise over Sprint Controlling Clearwire?

There are people in the media and the industry who are astounded that Sprint would enter into control of Clearwire, especially with the history of friction at the executive levels.  To be sure, Clearwire and Sprint have been on their respective rollercoasters but the relationship is symbiotic and beneficial in the long term.  

 

Clearwire's value proposition is its spectrum depth. Though it seemed to be handicapped with the funky non-standard 2.5 GHz band and more TDD than the standard FDD, this has turned around for the better.  What's good?

• The spectrum depth allows Sprint to continue to offer an unlimited proposition. It does so now using WiMAX technology under a flat-rate contract with Clearwire. When TD-LTE comes, the current thinking is to address 'high tonnage' markets for data offloading from the Sprint 5 X 5 channel PCS LTE network.
• Having TDD spectrum can be advantageous. You can devote more channels to the downlink. Most of the data consumption is on the downlink anyway whether it's mobile or fixed.  Under a FDD scenario, the bands are usually the same 'width.'  If there isn't a lot of uplink traffic, it feels like it's less efficient.  
• That funky band (sometimes a little variation - 2.6 GHz (close)) is now positioned to be a global LTE roaming band with presence in Asia and Europe.

If purchasing Clearwire wasn't an overt condition of the SoftBank deal, it should have been logical given the speed ambitions of Mr. Son. Allowing a non-fully controlled Clearwire can upset that plan.  The Clearwire takeover scenario would never have come into play with out the SoftBank acquisition. Sprint was in no financial position to further outright fund Clearwire as it was busy with its own turnaround execution.  

Network Vision Looks Better

Bob Azzi (Sprint's public face for Network Vision) must be relieved.  When Network Vision was conceived, it was pre-built with spectrum hosting/network sharing in mind.  Although LightSquared signed on, their business model went south due to GPS interference.  The Sprint conceived 2010 Network Vision graphic below kind of blatantly put the 2.5 GHz band out there even though Sprint didn't own the band.

Meanwhile Clearwire was expanding on its own WiMAX network in specific markets with expansion encumbered by CapEx and customers to help with that pesky revenue thing.  Throughout Network Vision, analysts including me, expected that Clearwire would jump on board. But they didn't.  Some point to money, some point to independence but the end result is that Clearwire was not on the Sprint Network Vision bandwagon.  This may have changed as Clearwire and Sprint worked out their TD-LTE deployment priorities. Sprint desires specific markets that Clearwire had no network, the Sprint Network Vision platform would be the natural choice rather than spending the CapEx on a parallel network.

What Could Be: If there is enough money (thanks SoftBank), Sprint and Clearwire can be more aggressive in TD-LTE expansion, going to more geographic markets than planned (constrained). Sprint's slim PCS-based LTE won't have that spectre of capacity challenged.  Moreover, more channels (and maybe hardware and backhaul and....) can be thrown to not only address capacity but also speed, addressing Mr. Son's fast mobile speed experience expectation. 

Read More

SoftBank & Sprint Deal - Speed Expectations & Implications

In the October 15, 2012 Japanese Strategic Partnership announcement, SoftBank's CEO Masayoshi Son cited slow US network speed compared to Japan.  Though the chart reflects 2011 data and may change as the US builds out LTE in the coming years, the point is that Japan leads the way. Conspicuously absent, by the way, are know speed-forward countries South Korea and Singapore.

Reading between the lines, SoftBank has lofty speed ambitions based on the Japanese market. While LTE will be the great speed equalizer in the US market stands now, competitors cannot claim overall speed dominance.  Sure AT&T and Verizon Wireless go back and forth citing 3rd parties (here and here), the reality is that carriers cannot officially state that their LTE is faster than competitors.  Part of the speed equation is capacity.  While speed brings in the early adopter speed geeks, the bigger carrier thrust is to make the data service available to everyone.  This means having sufficient capacity within spectrum constraints.

US carriers have been providing operating expectations though. Some more specific than others.

Verizon Wireless' latest LTE market expansion announcement alludes to speed ranges:

"In real-world, fully loaded network environments, 4G LTE users should experience average data rates of 5 to 12 megabits per second (Mbps) on the downlink and 2 to 5 Mbps on the uplink. When customers travel outside of 4G LTE coverage areas, devices automatically connect to the Verizon Wireless 3G network, where available, enabling customers to stay connected from coast to coast."

AT&T positions its LTE speed in comparison to 3G in its latest LTE market expansion in Dallas-Fort Worth release. 

" Faster speeds. LTE technology is capable of delivering mobile Internet speeds up to 10 times faster than 3G. Customers can stream, download, upload and game faster than ever before."

Interestingly, rather than stating a range, it pits it has superior LTE speed against Verizon Wireless citing a PC World comparison (here). 

Now back to Sprint.  As it builds out its Network Vision strategy, its LTE implementation is a rather small 5X5 MHz channel implementation. Smaller channels and balancing capacity may yield slower speeds but that doesn't stop its marketing.

Looking ahead when Clearwire comes into the picture with their TD-LTE technology, the current Sprint view is for data offload in 'heavy data tonnage' markets. This suggests a capacity approach given Sprint's unlimited data proposition.  Yet Clearwire's spectrum depth also allows Sprint to add the additional speed component, thereby realizing Son's vision of blowing the doors off competitors (in Japan and the US).  If speed (along with unlimited) is going to be a market differentiation, Clearwire and network expansion and tweaks will be necessary in the coming years.  This means more capital is necessary for Clearwire to do so.  Direction and commitment will be necessary from the 'new' Sprint.

Read More