In an unattributed story, Sprint-Clearwire alliance on the cards, forcing an RBOC wireless response dated February 24, 2005, Rethink Research Associates' Wireless Watch made this very interesting statement:
We have it from at least three reliable sources that Sprint and Clearwire are in negotiations with a view to a network sharing agreement in 2.5GHz spectrum. This would enable Clearwire to create its national system more rapidly and start generating revenue, while leaving Sprint-Nextel to attend to their parallel EV-DO projects and to making a success of their merger. Most importantly, the resulting WiMAX network would mount a serious challenge to Sprints chief rivals. In the first instance, it would create an alternative source of broadband services to the Regional Bell Operators (RBOCs BellSouth, SBC, Verizon and Qwest). These might be under the Clearwire brand or that of a third party, but either way, a single assault on the Bells by MMDS spectrum holders would be more devastating than a divided challenge from separate Sprint and Clearwire efforts.
In a February 14, 2005 posting here - WiMAX Networking News, Near Miss On Sprint BWIA Analysis, I made much the same point, (though I was careful to label my prediction as a "guess" and Wireless Watch claims sources. Hmmm... perhaps I'm a "source".)
My admiration for the depth of knowledge in Wireless Watch rose when I read this telling point - quite correct, but glossed over by everyone else:
One issue is that most of the spectrum held by the RBOCs is in 2.3GHz, rather than 2.5GHz. The latter is, at this stage, the only sub-3GHz band for which there will be an official WiMAX profile with certified equipment. This could well change, and a 2.3GHz profile rise up the agenda at the WiMAX Forum, should the RBOCs show sufficient interest, but in the mean time, the telcos would be stuck with proprietary equipment or WiMAX gear that had been tweaked for the 2.3GHz band so losing the benefits of pricing and vendor choice that comes with certified standards.
This was one of the factors I alluded to in my article that would discourage the 2.3 GHz licensees from making use of their spectrum. I agree with the author - if Sprint/Nextel/Clearwire happens, the owners of 2.3 GHz spectrum will exert enormous pressure on the WiMAX Forum for quick creation of a fourth WiMAX "Profile" to be 2.3 GHz (with provisions for the patchwork US 2.3 GHz bandplan). The promised 700 MHz WiMAX Profile will likely be pushed into Priority #5.
As I kept reading, my admiration increased:
However, in a fight to defend the kingdom against Sprint and Clearwire, equipment pricing would be less important than the ability to deliver services effectively, and here 2.3GHz would be very interesting. Verizon and BellSouth acquired this spectrum, also known as WCS (Wireless Communications Service), in auctions in 1997 and have extensive holdings in their own territories. SBC also gains a large amount through its acquisition of WCS holder AT&T, with the fourth major owner being Metricom.
Right on again! (I certainly don't mean for my comments to sound condescending.) Verizon (telco Verizon, not Verizon Wireless if memory serves) has extensive 2.3 GHz spectrum which they originally intended to potentially suplement problematic DSL deployment. Ditto BellSouth and SBC (partners in Cingular Wireless). In fourth place for amount of 2.3 GHz licenses... Metricom. Metricom?!?!?! As in radios-mounted-on-street lights, long-out-of-business Metricom?!?!? Yes.
The assets of Metricom's Ricochet service are now owned by Terabeam Wireless, and Ricochet service has been revived in two markets - without the use of the Metricom 2.3 GHz spectrum. As I understand the story, the Metricom creditors have kept Metricom on corporate life support solely to retain the 2.3 GHz licenses in hopes that 2.3 GHz licenses would ultimately be worth a lot more than during the Metricom bankruptcy hearings. Maybe their faith will be rewarded (to at least some extent).
(My Thanks to Sam Churchill of www.dailywireless.org for alerting me to the Wireless Watch story.
By Steve Stroh
This article Copyright © 2005 by Steve Stroh (except for indicated excerpts from Rethink Research Associates Wireless Watch)
Comments