Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : CellularVision (CVUS): 2-way LMDS wireless cable. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steven Bowen who wrote (798)	12/31/1997 3:08:00 AM
From: JW@KSC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2063

Not your Channel answer, but interesting. I've read where a "baseline" asymmetrical configuration could provide 224 digital video channels and 16,000 telephone channels per residential node, or 192 T-1 circuits and up to 4608 DS-0 circuits per business node. JW@KSC

To: Steven Bowen who wrote (798)	12/31/1997 2:25:00 PM
From: Bernard Levy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2063

Here is a rough answer to your question. For line of sight communication, the power attenuation between the transmitter and receiver is proportional to the square distance between the transmitter and receiver and to the square of the transmission frequency. Because TGNT operates at 24GHz and WCII at 38GHZ, the attenuation is therefore (1.5)^2 greater for the WCII channel. This means that for identical channels, WCII would need to have cells with a radius 66% smaller than TGNT. To compensate for the larger attenuation at higher frequencies, the FCC has made the bandwidth per license larger at 38Ghz (100MHZ) than at 24GHz (80 MHz). How the larger bandwidth is exploited depends on the choice of modulation format, but for wideband FM (the simplest case of all) the signal to noise ratio gain at the receiver output (with respect to the receiver input) is proportional to the square of the channel bandwidth. In other words, the wider the bandwidth, the easier it is to reject the noise. For FM, this would give a (1.25)^2 gain advantage to the 100MHZ licenses of WCII versus the 80MHz licenses of TGNT. However, this is a very rough analysis. I suspect that TGNT and WCII must be using a digital modulaton technique, such as QPSK. Then the wider bandwidth can be exploited by applying some form of forward error correction. The analysis becomes compicated. The bottom line is that the FCC is less incompetent than it may appear. They have obviously equalized the licenses to take into account the spectrum location. Going back to CVUS, because its license is at 28GHz, a 100MHZ channel for WCII must be equivalent to a 85MHz channel for CVUS, so the 1.15GHz CVUS bandwidth would give them approximately 13 channels (instead of 11.5 in the earlier estimate by Brian Coakley).

To: Steven Bowen who wrote (798)	1/5/1998 2:10:00 PM
From: Brian Coakley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2063

Steven, I was unaware of the differences in mhz sizes from one frequency to the next. Obviously, it makes my (rough) calculations incorrect. My intent is to find an approximate method to compare WCII's spectrum value with LMDS after the Feb 18 auction. Back in May at the Boston "switch party" for WCII I spoke to Dave Schmeig SVP at Winstar and when I asked him what he thought their licenses were worth he said that the LMDS auctions would give a very good indication, since the capabilities of the two frequencies were so similiar. My guess would be that WCII investor relations will let us all know what they think the licenses are worth sometime soon after 2/18, especially if the bidding gets expensive. It's just one more reason to own WCII in '98. No offense to the members of this board since I think CVUS is also undervalued, just not as well run or as well positioned. Thanks for your comments, Brian