Senate Looks Askance at Verizon's Spectrum Dealings
Why?
SublimeDavid said:
bc by buying the aws spectrum they effectively stop tmobile from buying it and rolling out LTE, this was delibertly done to stop competition from T-Mobile when it became clear that the ATT deal would fall apart.
Interesting analysis. Little consipracy theory-ish but not too far fetched when you think about it actually.
Isn't Echostar's 700MHz spectrum still up for grabs though? They got pretty much the whole country covered except for two key markets. NYC and LA. There were rumours of a possible deal with T-Mobile. If T-Mobile could get a hold of that spectrum it would really be great for them. Coverage would be outstanding especially with VoLTE.
Isn't Echostar's 700MHz spectrum still up for grabs though? They got pretty much the whole country covered except for two key markets. NYC and LA. There were rumours of a possible deal with T-Mobile. If T-Mobile could get a hold of that spectrum it would really be great for them. Coverage would be outstanding especially with VoLTE.
Dish Network's 700 MHz spectrum is nearly nationwide (absent New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco), but it is exclusively Lower 700 MHz E block 6 MHz license, which is unpaired spectrum. Basically, it can be used for only LTE Advanced carrier aggregation supplemental downlink. So, it would not be that great for T-Mobile.
AJ
WiWavelength said:
Dish Network's 700 MHz spectrum is nearly nationwide (absent New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco), but it is exclusively Lower 700 MHz E block 6 MHz license, which is unpaired spectrum. Basically, it can be used for only LTE Advanced carrier aggregation supplemental downlink. So, it would not be that great for T-Mobile.
AJ
Oops I forgot about that. So I guess it will not be that great for them after all.
Look at the maps:
https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99 ... »
Verizon bought up a bunch of AWS spectrum east of the Mississippi in the initial auction. SpectrumCo bought up licenses in every market west of the Mississippi that matters.
When I say, "spectrum that matters" I mean every market that has the potential to overgrow the 700 MHz LTE bands. Verizon doesn't need AWS in Montana or the Dakotas because the population density is low enough that they'll probably never outgrow the 700 MHz holdings they already have in those markets. At least not in the next 20 years.
But, WITHOUT the SpectrumCo AWS holdings, it is economically impractica...
(continues)
That is what I said. Is there some reason you posted a paragraph just to agree with me?
"Verizon is already hoarding AWS spectrum it has no intention of using and sells no phones with the 1700/2100 frequencies".
This implies no other possible motive than "hoarding" spectrum from the competition. CellStudent pointed out the reason that they have do not currently have phones with those frequencies by stating it would be pointless if they could only be used east of the Mississipi and that they will not build out/purpose towers to those frequencies unless they have sufficient national coverage to do so. If Verizon Wireless could get AWS spectrum in (enough)markets where it does not have any then it could efficiently make use of that spectrum. Verizon is a "national" carrier ...
(continues)
This forum is closed.