Why Isn't AT&T Using Cash to Build Out LTE? 19 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
However, what about the impact of the upgrade to LTE? That's going to have a dramatic impact on capacity. Moreover, one has to ask is Verizon's (VZ) subscriber base as skewed as AT&T is? Most probably this is the "IPhone effect". As more phones are launched competitively with the IPhone, will the distribution of data usage spread out?
He also spent a lot of time arguing that there is a spectrum shortage and even if this spectrum was reallocated quickly, they couldn't put it into use quickly (most probably truthful).
The big sandbag comment? "We have to manage the network so the few do not crowd out the many". It's the pretext for an argument that AT&T should be able to charge for tiered data.
That's a good point, but if we had a competitive wireless market with 2 more robust entrants it wouldn't be so easy for AT&T to under-invest in its data network. AT&T and Verizon have been slow rolling the capex build on its network for years, most due to retarding the phones it allows on its network. How about diverting a little bit of that massive cash flow to building out LTE?
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 19 comments:
Verizon has a different but equally daunting challenge. Their CDMA based EVDO network will NEVER handle web-friendly devices so they have no choice but to build out LTE. The stumbling block is fail-over when their subscribers are out of LTE areas. The only possible solution I see in 2010 would be a comprehensive roaming agreement with T-Mobile which would allow the next generation of multi-band (LTE-GSM-EDGE) handsets to fail over to T-Mobile while Verizon's builds out their LTE network.
www.atis.org/lte/docum...
news.vzw.com/news/2007...
Customers care little about efficiency, but investors do......
LTE delivers far more data per dollar, it is much cheaper from that perspective (~85% cheaper than HSPA+, if i remember correctly). the fiber towers, however, are about 3X as expensive as copper towers, but coming down fast as demand increases. backhaul must be completed first, the pipe running from the tower to the carrier cannot handle multi Tb capacity; the equipment on the edge and most of the metro cores cannot handle the traffic needed either. right now, carriers are band-aiding by bundling Tb cables, strictly temporary
T, VZ etc have budgeted billions over the next five years to build out LTE. RIGHT NOW the software to run LTE equipment is not even completely ready, that is why neither T nor VZ are agressively building it out; they are working with their networking vendors to sort out the software. STAR and MOT are building out LTE in japan, they def have a head start.
what percentage of people want a 70-100/mo data bill, esp when they already have BB at home? 30%? i do not know, but long term IMO that is where we are headed. my guess is that the data will be ready before the demand and those stocks will be soft for a few years, but watch the data stats. (long T, MOT, STAR)
Better look it up because that's going to compete with LTE and before you make any assessments of "how fast" LTE is going to be, you should understand WiMAX and how it is used.
As to some of your questioning about speed and downloads - it's ALL ABOUT SPEED when it comes to downloading video apps.
We are now at a point where more and more who have smartphones are downloading not one or two gigabytes of info a month - it's more like 20, 30 even 40 gigabytes a month.
As to why put in highspeed wireless - that's what other countries are doing and some have much more sophisticated networks than we do. Check out South Korea. It's all about the infrastructure (which includes network infrastructure) supporting economic development.
This is the "GIgabyte Generation" and if you are thinking about "picking stocks", better read up on the whole industry and not just throw around terms and acronyms.
Look at wireless going from 100Mbps to 1Gbps to the end-user. If a carrier isn't talking about that type of speed, they don't have a handle on the emerging market.
WiMAX is based on an IEEE standard 802.16e and is actually more ahead in actual implementation than LTE. It's also OPEN architecture because it's a "standard" and NOT proprietary.
It's already implemented in countries around the world. What that means is that it will be able to roll out faster than LTE here in the US and that is a serious issue with those backing LTE.
rf44g - you are WAY OFF the mark when you say WiMAX can't compete. It's already up-and-running. It is the threat of WiMAX opening up in the US market that is accelerating work on LTE which is farther behind in actual implementation.
AND - your comment
"I don't think there is any urgent need for the big service providers to build out 4g network other than maybe bragging rites."
is ludicrous - if WiMAX is going into one of their US markets, you can be sure they are trying to rush LTE because as of now. WIMAX is way ahead as far as implementation and a 4G network is SUPERIOR as to downloading video by a factor of at least 4 to 1. (if you read my previous post)
rf44g - it might be helpful if you went to one of the conferences like 4G World where you could actually see all this technology at work and hear what developers -- for BOTH LTE & WiMAX devices are saying. I don't understand how you formed your opinion.
ALSO for some of the other commenters - WiMAX was designed originally as a backhaul system so it has more than adequate bandwidth capabilities.
Where are all of you getting your facts??? If you could call them that.
And "LTE provides more data per dollar"????
The big push is video apps and the ability to handle large downloads - I mentioned before we are looking at users downloading 20, 30 and 40 gigabytes per month and that is just going to grow.
Both approaches are viable but I would NOT be discounting WiMAX out at all especially when it is up-and-running in other countries and starting to roll out in the US. (with CLEARWIRE)
It is ahead of LTE as being a new choice for consumers (LTE is still on the drawing board in some respects and the threat of WIMAX has actually hastened those pushing LTE to get it done.)
If WiMAX hits a US market first, it will eat the lunch of an incumbent carrier who can't roll out LTE for another one or two years. Believe me - they are SCRAMBLING to get LTE up.
Another big plus is that WiMAX is an open standard which means more people can develop applications and therefore create a more feature-rich environment.
If you have an iPhone you may understand that. Look at all the developers who have created special apps for the iPhone that you can buy for a couple of bucks. Think of that same approach -only on the network side (as well as the device side) With LTE, no offerings are available unless the carrier offers it - which is the way they like it.
CLEARWIRE's WiMAX build-out plans for 2009 including San Antonio, TX; Austin, TX, Milledgeville, Georgia, Raleigh, NC; Greensborough, NC, and Salem, OR. Let's see what happens to the competition in those markets.
And before you put a thumbs-down on THIS comment, do a google search on LTE vs. WiMAX comparison 2009 and read some of the articles that pop up or just go to wimax.com to get some insights.
Hopefully, you will walk away with a much broader perspective which helps everyone.
WiMax is widely deployed already, it is not being adopted quickly; Europe, Japan and Korea have widely deployed WiMax, as well as some cities in the US, what has it done for carrier profits? not much.
for those of you new to wireless investing, remember that there was a boom in 2004-5, investors allocated billions in networking to wire up cities and we all took a deep cold bath a couple years later: the bandwidth was there and people just did not use it, period. those of you expecting a spontaneous revolution (rather than steady gowth) must look at Europe and APAC, it is simply not happening.
On Oct 08 06:50 PM RLLH wrote:
> The obvious solution is to charge based on data usage. Imagine if
> customers paid a flat rate for electricity. Want to imagine what
> the effect would be on tghe size of system needed?
You are being misinformed is all I can say. LTE is BEHIND WiMAX as far as a technology that can be turned up right now.
WiMAX is complimentary??? (I think you mean complementary) That is NOT true. Where are you getting your facts???
As for WiFI (what you point out to as 2004-2005) that was technology that was NEVER designed to handle major cities. If you talked with people that REALLY knew the technology they would have told you that. The bandwidth was NOT there with that technology.
If you read all my articles going back to those years, I always said it was never the right fit.
70 bucks for only 5 gbytes a month....!!! holy bat shit!
I am not crazy about Apple's proprietary monopolistic practices either but they did the right thing going with a international GSM type of network... and thanks for insight on the hardware/tower/software side of things esp. Carlini!! more open is good imho.