1) Europe is a factor. That is why AT&T Wireless and Cingular switched to GSM. That is also a reason why Cingular is holding off on UMTS — the European equipment needs 2100 MHz spectrum we don’t have yet in the US and they don’t want to pay a premium to get unique equipment.
2) WiBro equipment will most likely be fully WiMax compliant, yet it will be available in quantity long before anything equivalent.
3) I agree it would be hard to put together full coverage at 2.5, but so what. There are parts of the country that Cingular and Verizon still don’t cover despite having paid aggregate hundreds of millions to get all the licenses. You would be surprised at what is available in large markets. McCaw knows this and ClearWire is making good use of this “worthless” spectrum (again see Nextel and SMR, if a PITA can save you $5B it is often worth it). Huge swaths of 2.3 GHz are owned by non-carrier speculators who are just waiting for the right price.

As for 700 MHz: If you are a start-up carrier why invest in a low density national network when you would be better served building a competative regional network (see ClearWire)? 700 MHz is excellent for rural coverage, but in areas of higher population density you will run into the issue of having to split cells for capacity and this will aleviate the coverage gains. It is these high population areas where you will be paying $10/pop/MHz instead of $1, since the FCC will be going after the money and not auctioning national licenses. That’s the thing, regional licenses benefit the FCC more than anyone and that is why they are there. It is the same reason there are spectrum auctions instead of beauty contests (which would better serve public interest). Finally, you seem to be missing the simple point: “better” frequencies cost more money. When 2.3 was auctioned it went for pennies a POP because no one new what to do with it. 2.5 GHz has generally been given awayA 2.3 network is going to need more equipment, but the spectrum will be a lot cheaper than 700 MHz. In the end you will end up spending a similar ammount of money to get a fully built out network. Would you rather spend it upfront on spectrum, or as you grow on equipment?

Sprint is full of crap. Nothing I’ve said has anything to do with them and their 2.5 holdings other than to point out that they could be doing something with them right now if they chose, as opposed to sometime in the next 4 years.

Again, Charlie, it is not that your thoughts are wrong (I hope not because I agree with most of them) it is that they do not cover the whole picture. I’ll go back to the well one more time and point out that Nextel showed with SMR that a whole lot can be accomplished with spectrum most people considered “junk.”

Not questioning your sources, but just curious as to why this isn’t exploding everywhere given the implications of a “Google-Net”. Have you heard anything else?

Google 在一統江湖的路上��進了一步。

今天在 IT 界最大的消æ?¯æ‡‰è©²æ˜¯ Google 推出了 Google Secure Access çš„æœ?務；雖然說是為了è¦?讓 Wi-Fi 的使用者更安全，ä¸?é?Žå…¶å¯¦å°±ç®—是一般網路也å?¯ä»¥ä½¿ç”¨å•¦…

Points:
1) I don’t care much about Europe.
2) Asia is the center of innovation mostly because the countries are small, with high pop density and the mfg’s are THERE. Thus marketing experimentation (aka test marketing for readers in Rio Linda) is much easier. Btw, they still put the pants on one leg at a time (Om can you please verify this?). So BFD.
3) Earth to Jesse, Sextel owns the vast majority of these spectrum bands and they’re not selling (just stockpiling!!!, so its IMPOSSIBLE TO SWOOP IN), thus anybody looking to enter via the leftovers in the bands will have to use other bands to achieve national coverage. Which equals a huge PITA factor.

Frankly I’d not be surprised to see national licenses in the 700mhz range on the block. Regional licenses only benefit the incumbents, not the new entrants.

At 700mhz I get 4x-plus coverage per $$$ capex vs. 2.3ghz. And lets not forget that coverage is more important that signal density for a startup carrier.

So I stand (alone?), in saying that all the Sextel machinations are all show, and no go.

PS. If I can’t think for myself, then who is sending me these thoughts….
VBG.

2.3 and 2.5 is all show and no go.

The bands are useless for the reasons DG stated, etc. Furthermore Sprint nor TMobile are not using these bands, and NEVER will.

Starting next year we’ll see a mishmash of spectrum auctions. From 700, 1.4, 1.6/1.7, etc.

All of which basically make 2.3 and 2.5 worthless due to the extra capex and lower pop densities.

PLUS, PLUS, PLUS, none of the big three carriers is using more than 35% of their 850 and 1900 inventory.

Om,

I think Google has been raising capital, etc. and will be a bidder in next year’s spectrum auctions. Furthermore I predict that Google will attempt to get the big 3 barred from the new auctions precisely because the big 3 already have so much fallow inventory. Ah, damn those boys are smart.

So the question is, will Google be able to out do Craig McCaw’s Clearwire, and build the nation’s first new national wireless network?

Are the MSO’s paying attention…. Who are the dumbass consultants who said it would be toooo expensive?

Moore’s law tells that over time the capacity of a block of spectrum grows and grows. With a very modest nationwide 20mhz block, GoogleNet would bankrupt every RBOC, and Sextel. It would make the airline industry seem rational!!!

When it happens, please remember I said it first (and have been saying it here for quite some time). “Overcapitalization”, gosh I love the sound of that word, and as a wireless subscriber, I can only say to the carriers, “Payback is a bitch.”