that is the stupidest statement you have made yet...
OK...... So you disagree with my comments. Seems fair enough.. After all, everyone is entitled to their opinions... But, I don't think you need to get BITTER about it? I mean, over the years.. I have read some of your comments and thought to myself.. "This guy is a Loon!".. But, I usually just roll my eyes and let it pass by with nary a comment. But, like I said. Hey you are welcome to your opinion.. And I respect that...
If you mean that your going to build out a $10B+ infrastructure and network just so you can refuse to play nice, then your wrong.
Well, I think you lack the basic understanding the purpose of a vendor specific Private Label Network, and have provided an outrageous cost figure at the expense of theatrics.
Here is the coverage map of a current Private Label Network called MediaFlo. I think you will find the coverage consistent with that of what I view as a typical future Private Label Network coverage area. Private Label networks are not intended to replace nationwide CMRS providers.. More so to augment them.
But, if you say I am wrong.. Then I am quite comfortable with your Opinion.
flotv.com
Unfortunatley, the spectrum sales the way we do it leads to hoarding and corporate greed factors.
I have no problem with that statement. They attempted to diversify away from highest bidder wins concept in Auction 5 with Entrepreneur’s Blocks with the kicker of Treasury Financing. But, that didn't turn out so good.. So, it is what it is... and That's the way it is. Not much you can do about it. So we move on...
All the carriers need to trim about 50% of their work force, but they do not because they have such high profits. Sprint could cut 80% and rehire people who are hungary and save $B'ns.
Ummm Yeah... Sounds good.. Maybe they can work on that for you???
Here is a thought. 50 years ago, wireline was King and wireless did not exist. Everyone was working on how to make wireline more competitive, so they broke up the monolploy and made 7 operating companies. but today, more and more are turning to cellphone only and no wireline, so wireline is dying and going BK (look at Hawaiian Tel). But back then perhaps you would be one of those that were touting that we would have video wireline phones (1980), or that we could wire the nation with copper(1950).
Uhhhh.. ¿¿¿¿¿¿ Yeah.. OK.. Ummm Not sure where we are here... It seems to me we are wondering a bit. But, I'm along for the ride... So OK.. Yeah!! Sounds Good.. Video wireline phones and all!!
I agree that in the future, there are going to be an exponential rise in teh number of wireless things. I just do not see it being possible to do it wiht more specturm, but rather with more infrastructure and more backhaul.
Lost me on that one. I think we are good on the exponential rise concept. I think you are trying to say that you don't think more spectrum is required, but more infrastructure and backhaul??? Hopefully, I deciphered that correctly??? (My apologies in advance if I mucked up that interpretation.)
Well, in my opinion. The problem we saw at the Apple WWDC was not a lack of infrastructure/or backhaul. After all, I believe it was claimed there were over 50 wifi hotspots operating in the auditorium. So if all of the major CMRS providers were represented with mobile hotspots, then that means that Sprints, Verizons, ATT's, and TMobiles, (maybe some MetroPCS) backhaul was available from that location. I doubt Apple was relying on a wifi connection to ATT's network, so I would assume they had their own dedicated backhaul over wire out of the auditorium. So the problem may have been that there were too many devices operating in too little spectrum, and creating interference with each other.
If they really want to get to this nirvana, then invest all that money in tiny BTS and not in spectrum.
So the problem could not be resolved by more Pico Cells in the auditorium since the problem was not a lack of backhaul on licensed spectrum. But, more so a lack of interference on the forward and reverse links of the user terminals employing unlicensed spectrum which creates a sort of "Wirelesss Free-for-all. Which is why Jobs was asking everyone to turn off their laptops and place them under their chairs. He was spectrum clearing in the unlicensed WiFi Band. Thus, my suggestion that the solution was additional interference free spectrum. The kind you usually have to plunk down instruments of monetary symbolism in order to get "exclusive access" to. The kind you get via licensed spectrum from a regulatory body. Like the ITU or FCC.
Billions of more devices coming on board as we move forward in time. I think the spectacle we saw at the WWDC was too many devices on too little spectrum, you seem to think it was not a spectrum issue, but more so, a lack of backhaul.
Personally, I tend to believe that a Private Label Network like MediaFlo underlines my views, where dedicated licensed spectrum was required to make it a reality, versus additional back haul and infrastructure on an existing CMRS spectrum.
So we have differing opinions.. I am good with that......
Best Regards,
PCSTEL |
