EE Launches Beta of LTE-Advanced, Supporting 300 Mbps

U.K. mobile service provider EE has activated what it calls “the fastest 4G mobile network in the world” in a portion of London in a beta format, with commercial launch expected in mid-2014.

The network runs the LTE-Advanced air interface, capable of reaching 300 Mbps, initially covering London’s Tech City, and is the first live activation of new LTE spectrum acquired by EE during the recent LTE spectrum auction.

The EE 300 Mbps 4G network will be rolled out across London throughout 2014, but initially will provide Wi-Fi style access, as devices supporting LTE-Advanced will not be available until mid-2014.

Routers and dongles are expected to be first to market, with LTE-A-enabled smart phones following a few months after.

SFR, France's second largest mobile carrier, also is testing LTE-A, and has reported real-world download speeds in the region of 175 Mbps and, like EE, it's using carrier aggregation with the 1800 Mhz and 2.6 Ghz bands.

As part of the beta launch, some firms in Tech City will use CAT6 Huawei routers to support mobile Wi-Fi connections.

LTE-Advanced works by bonding channels. In this case, EE uses 20 MHz of 1800 MHz spectrum and 20 MHz of 2.6 GHz spectrum.

Spanish Firm Building Private Wi-Fi Offload Network in New York City

Another Spanish firm wants to build new networks from Wi-Fi networks, both private and public, and will test the idea in New York, N.Y.

Gowex, which says it already provides Wi-Fi networks in more than 80 cities globally, wants to combine public Wi-Fi and private access Wi-Fi services from mobile operators and businesses to create seamless mobile data coverage for consumers.

Called We-2, the new service will launch in December in New York with an initial network of more than 2000 Wi-Fi hotspots across New York,  with plans to further expand aggressively across the busiest corridors of Manhattan, Queens and The Bronx.

The company also hopes to create We-2 Wi-Fi hotspot networks in more than 300 cities by 2020.

The business model is what makes the initiative different from Fon.

Apparently, We-2 will be a network created and sold to mobile service providers who want Wi-Fi offload capabilities.

“We are giving operators the chance to improve mobile data access for the customers and offload traffic from congested networks,” said Carlos Gomez Vendrell, CEO We-2.

The idea is not new. Cable operators in both the United States and United Kingdom have considered creating wholesale Wi-Fi networks whose customers would be mobile service providers, not end users.

A Business Model for Licensed Wi-Fi Spectrum? Globalstar Thinks There is One

Is there a business model for repurposed satellite spectrum that was purchased by a firm that entered bankruptcy? Globalstar aims to find out, and has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to repurpose its mobile satellite spectrum for Wi-Fi.

The twist is that Globalstar wants to create a capability for private Wi-Fi services it could monetize, such as supporting the Amazon “Whispernet” delivery of Kindle content.

Amazon presently uses the AT&T mobile network for such purposes, and Amazon probably rightly assumes it could save money if there were an alternative supplier eager to create such a network for a single enterprise customer.

By using a privately-managed network, Amazon presumably would gain more control over quality of service, for example.

That would seem to be the thinking behind Globalstar’s interest in terrestrial “low-power” service (TLPS), an air interface it could use to support such a private Wi-Fi network.

Precisely what “low power” means is a question, since a terrestrial network would still have to be built.

Globalstar argues that the typically lightly-used or unused adjacent unlicensed spectrum would mean a new TLPS network could be created using existing mobile cell tower sites, far outstripping the actual “low power” coverage area of standard Wi-Fi.

Specifically,  Globalstar wants to use its former satellite spectrum to support “low-power” Internet access services using its licensed spectrum at 2483.5-2495 MHz, as well as adjacent unlicensed spectrum (which can be used for Bluetooth or Wi-Fi) in the 2473-2483.5 MHz band, pursuant to the applicable technical rules for unlicensed operations in that band.

To put it mildly, nobody ever has using licensed spectrum for Wi-Fi services.

Separately, Globalstar has asked for permission to build a Long Term Evolution network in both the S band (2483.5-2495 MHz) and L band (1610-1617.775 MHz) “over the longer term.”

As part of the proposal, Globalstar says it will provide 20,000 free access points to public and non-profit schools, community colleges and hospitals in the United States.

Globalstar also says it will provide mobile satellite services free of charge to customers in federally declared disaster areas following natural or man-made disasters for the duration of the disaster.

Presumably the backhaul network would use Globalstar’s satellite capacity, and the ground stations might be co-located with existing mobile tower networks.

Time Warner Cable in Play?

Charter Communications Inc is weighing a bid for Time Warner Cable that could occur before the end of 2013, Reuters reports. That move would have been entirely improbable a decade ago, when Time Warner Cable still was considered among the best-managed cable TV companies and Charter was debt-burdened and unprofitable.

Beyond the immediate performance issues, some believe structural changes lie ahead for the cable TV business, which might well be eclipsed or transformed by streaming delivery.

“Ultimately over the long term I think that the whole video product is eventually going to go to the Internet,” Cablevision Systems Corp. CEO James Dolan has said.

That doesn't mean cable TV companies will get out of the access business. Quite to the contrary, the revenue driver will shift to providing Internet access. 

But the economics of the subscription video business could well change. And though the conventional wisdom among consumers is that prices will drop, that might not happen. In principle, the costs of building and operating an access network are included in current costs of video service. 

But many other costs, including sales, marketing and fulfillment, would remain, if it altered form. If the costs of the network are mostly shifted to the voice and data services, cable operators would, in principle, have some room to alter pricing. But content acquisition costs would still be an issue.

It is not clear that content suppliers would willingly cut prices for their product, simply because the delivery method changed. Some might argue that content owners would prefer to deliver content direct to end users, but others would argue the content companies simply are not well set up to do so, as their current revenue models are "business to business," not "business to consumer."

That still suggests a vital role for distributors. Perhaps the bigger issues are whether current bundling methods would change, or at least be made available. Some might argue that the bigger innovation is not over the top delivery, but unbundled delivery (ability to buy a single TV episode or a TV series or a single channel on a subscription basis).

Android Surges to 81%b Global Market Share, and That is Not the Big Story

Android has managed to gain 81 percent share of the global smart phone operating system market, according to Strategy Analytics.

But some would say that is not the big story. 

Rather, some would say, the important news is that Windows Phone has been shipped on more than 10 million smart phones globally in a single quarter.

That is the first time that has ever happened, and represents Microsoft Windows Phone doubling its market share to become the world's fastest growing smart phone operating system.

Microsoft has doubled its global smart phone market share from two percent to four percent in the past year.

Microsoft grew its smart phone shipments by 178 percent annually in the third quarter of 2013.

Global smart phone shipments reached 251 million units in the third quarter of 2013, Strategy Analystics says.

Global smart phone shipments grew 45 percent annually from 172.8 million units in the third quarter of 2012 to 251.4 million in the third quarter of 2013.

Android’s gain came mainly at the expense of BlackBerry, which saw its global smart phone share dip from four percent to one percent in the past year.

Microsoft’s growth is almost entirely due to Nokia and its steadily improving Lumia portfolio across Europe, Asia and the United States.

OECD Mobile Broadband Users Paying 4% Less for Speeds Up 123%

Mobile Internet access users in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development areas are paying less for access to faster connections, the most recent mobile broadband price benchmarking results from Strategy Analytics shows.

The average monthly cost for a tablet user needing 2 GB per month has fallen four percent since the same period last year, to USD PPP 17.79, while average advertised speed for the same basket has risen by 123 percent, to 26 Mbps.

For a laptop user requiring 5 GB per month, the cost has fallen by nine percent, and currently averages USD PPP 25.24, while the speed has risen by 35 percent over the year, and now stands at just under 24 Mbps.

The data was generated by a survey of 3,549 SIM-only, modem, laptop and tablet plans from 107 mobile network operators in 34 OECD countries.

SIM-only plans account for around 25 percent of all plans covered as part of the survey, suggesting those accounts are used by consumers in addition to their primary service.

Some 51 percent of all plans have an advertised maximum download speed of 20 Mbps and above. About 31 percent of all plans are 4G Long Term Evolution tariffs, an increase of about three percent since June 2013.

Also, some 29 percent of all offerings include WiFi or public hotspot access.

AT&T to Deploy 40,000 Small Cells as Part of Move to "Heterogeneous Network"

As part of Project VIP, AT&T’s network upgrade program, AT&T also plans to deploy more than 40,000 small cells by the end of 2015, creating a denser mobile network better able to handle data traffic demand in dense or urban areas.

Project Velocity IP (or Project VIP) is a three year, $14 billion investment plan to enhance AT&T’s mobile and fixed network IP broadband networks.

Between 2007 and 2012, mobile data traffic on AT&T’s network has increased more than 30,000 percent, AT&T says.

AT&T furthermore is working on the next generation of small cell technology, such as multi-standard “metrocells” that will support 3G, 4G LTE and Wi-Fi air interfaces.

Most observers would agree that end user demand for mobile network capacity is going to grow exponentially over the next decade, while even Long Term Evolution provides only incremental bandwidth gains.

Many would suggest several simultaneous solutions must be embraced, ranging from new spectrum to better coding, more efficient air interfaces, new spectrum, shared spectrum, small cell and virtualized architectures and use of unlicensed spectrum and Wi-Fi. In all likelihood, all will play a part in creating new networks.

Mobile analyst Monica Paolini, Senza Fili Consulting principal, argues for an “all of the above” definition of “heterogeneous networks.” Paolini says all air interfaces (GSM, CDMA, UMTS, HSPA, HSPA+, 4G: LTE, LTE-Advanced and Wi-Fi will be parts of the heterogeneous network, though not all will be used by every network.

Radio architectures will include macrocells as well as small cells (pico, femto, Wi-Fi or personal area), as well as distributed antenna systems.

Heterogeneous networks will span Indoor and outdoor locations; public, enterprise and residential locations.

All of that explains why many observers now say a future “fifth generation network” will not be distinguished from 4G strictly by air interface, bandwidth or frequency, but by the integration of many different architectures, protocols, networks, air interfaces and network ownership patterns.

In essence, network access for end user devices will be assembled dynamically, which explains the interest in “self organizing networks” able to provide access to any available network, in real time, often using the best available network.

Paolini says most of the adaptation will be an overlay of sorts, with mobile service providers incorporating new small cells, carrier Wi-Fi or other techniques first in dense urban areas where data demand is greatest.

By definition, frequency planning and interference control issues will grow as smaller cells are activated. Also, by definition, call control, data access and handoff chores will become more complex as users move into and out of small cell coverage areas and across access networks.

“Different radio technologies manage interference differently, and so the same small-cell

location may work for an LTE-Advanced small cell with sophisticated interference

mitigation techniques and not for a 3G small cell,” says Paolini.

In fact, the limited ability to manage interference in 3G environments is often cited as a cause for mobile operators’ hesitance to deploy 3G small cells.

Also, for the first time, frequency planning and interference avoidance will have to account for cells that are separately vertically, not just horizontally. So floor location within a single building now matters.

Use of Wi-Fi networks owned by third parties is the best example of how mobile networks are becoming heterogeneous. But small cells represent a next step, as well. Radio sites supporting multiple air interfaces are another example.

BlackBerry Cancels Sale Process, Will Remain Independent

In an unexpected development, BlackBerry, which had been seeking buyers, has abandoned its plan to sell itself. Until Nov. 4, 2013, talks had been proceeding with a Canadian investor group lead by Fairfax Financial Holdings.

Apparently, Fairfax Financial Holdings was unable to raise the money it needed to make the bid, and BlackBerry now will try to raise funds by selling bonds. But it appears Fairfax will be among the entities buying some of the new bonds.

Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited will acquire U.S. $250 million worth of the convertible bonds. The transaction is expected to be completed within the next two weeks.

The bonds are convertible into common shares of BlackBerry at a price of U.S. $10.00 per common share.

At closing, John S. Chen will be appointed executive chairman of BlackBerry's Board of Directors. Prem Watsa, chairman and CEO of Fairfax, will be appointed lead director and chair of the compensation, nomination and governance committee. Current CEO Thorsten Heins and board member David Kerr will resign from the board.

Those moves suggest either that the board became sharply divided about BlackBerry strategy, and not simply that the Fairfax Financial Holdings bid was deemed insufficient. In that case, the board would likely have solicited additional bids.

Others might suggest that the inability to raise funds for the $4.7 billion bid simply suggests there is not support among investors for that type of a deal.

Yet others might argue that the bond deal is a stopgap measure, and that a future sale, though not for the $4.7 billion purchase price, still is envisioned.

Other potential buyers were said to include Cerberus Capital Management, Qualcomm, Lenovo and BlackBerry co-founders Mike Lazaridis and Doug Fregin.

The move is a blow to BlackBerry bankers J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Perella Weinberg Partners, which were retained to manage the sale process. The bankers reportedly had spoken to Facebook, and had sought indications of interest from other firms including Microsoft, LinkedIn and Oracle.

0.07 Percent of Startups Reach $1 Billion Valuations?

Software-based startup firms eventually valued at over $1 billion by public or private market investors represent a rather miniscule 0.07 percent of venture-backed consumer and enterprise software startups, a study by Cowboy Ventures finds. 

To be sure, the survey only studied software-based startups started since 2003.

Takeaway: it’s really hard, and highly unlikely, to build or invest in a billion dollar company. 

The odds of creating a $1 billion valuation company is "somewhere between catching a foul ball at an MLB game and being struck by lightning in one’s lifetime."

Tech Sector Is In A Bubble

"We're in a new tech bubble, heading for a crash, just like the dot com bust of 1999," some now argue. After two bubble burses in the first decade of the 21st century (Internet in 2000, housing in 2008), we might be headed for the first bubble burst of the second decade of the 21st century. 


So the question is "what will it mean for the telecom industry?" At the very least, a significant deflation of equity values, which will mean less ability for firms to make acquisitions, raise capital for network investment and otherwise invest in their operations, right at the point that Long Term Evolution network builds are underway. 


That could delay network modernization for a few years, and slow down consumer demand as well. 

The best case scenario is that the tech bubble remains just that: a tech bubble that does not disrupt other market segments too adversely. 

The worse case scenario is that other sectors facing bubble conditions burst synchronously. U.S.farmland is among the sectors ripe for a major crash, for example. 


Some speculate that a massive default wave on student loans could set up the next financial bubble. 

To be sure, most would argue that telecom is relatively immune from bubbles. But telecom is not fully immune. 

The problem with bubbles is that one never knows one is in a bubble until it is over. 

Why is Time Warner Cable Losing Customers?

Time Warner Cable in the coming year that about 40 percent of the cable company’s service area will be overlapped by AT&T U-verse and Verizon FiOS.

In 2013, Time Warner Cable faced AT&T in about 27 percent of the Time Warner Cable service territory. Time Warner Cable likewise faced Verizon FiOS networks in about 13 percent of its coverage area. As the competition with video-capable networks grows to 40 percent, another one million homes also passed by the Time Warner Cable networks will face potential encroachment from either AT&T or Verizon.

That underscores a key background factor for telco TV success. Up to this point, few cable TV operators actually have had to face a telco TV competitor. In fact, cable TV operator market share losses to telco TV, which have been steady, if unspectacular, are mostly an artifact of low telco TV availability, not marketing prowess or consumer preferences.

Consider that Time Warner Cable, which has seen significant customer defections in video and voice take rates in its consumer customer segment, also seems to be facing escalating availability of rival services from both AT&T and Verizon communications. Though the company blames third quarter 2013 performance on a CBS contract dispute, others might doubt that is such a material factor.

Some would argue it is the growing availability of a product substitute (U-verse TV or FiOS TV) that explains the weakness.

Though high speed Internet access was a bright spot, at least 24,000 Time Warner Cable broadband customers also departed.

Analysts had expected the company to gain more than 46,000 broadband customers during the quarter.

To be sure, revenue grew, despite the subscriber losses.

Coverage is a major factor enhancing or limiting video service provider market share. Cable TV companies operate in virtually every city and town in the United States. Satellite providers likewise cover nearly 100 percent of the surface area of the entire country.

Because telco TV is not ubiquitously offered, U.S. phone companies have about 10 percent  market share, where cable TV companies have about 55 percent share, and satellite firms have close to 30 percent share.

The issue is coverage. By 2015, AT&T, for example, will be able to market to only about 33 million locations.

Verizon’s FiOS covers about 17.8 million homes, so the two telcos will pass about 51 million U.S. homes, by 2015, out of perhaps 145 million U.S. homes by 2015. That implies coverage of about 35 percent of U.S. homes. Other telcos will sell telco TV as well, but collectively could only theoretically reach about 14.5 million homes, or so, by 2015, best case.

Even under the best of circumstances, it is unlikely U.S. telcos will be able to pass even 45 percent of U.S. homes by 2015, using their own facilities.

That is one reason why over the top streaming appeals to telco TV executives: it could enable universal coverage without requiring huge capital investments in access networks “out of region.”

Is the U.S. Ahead, Behind or at Par, in Terms of Broadband Speed, Price? Answer: Don't Blink

Whether the United States is ahead, behind or about par in the area of fixed network broadband speeds and prices seems always to be contentious. In fact, you can find, without looking too hard, analyses that claim the U.S. market is “behind” others.

It isn’t hard to do. A few nations, typically including South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong and often Japan, are cited as the world leaders in typical, average or minimum speeds, year in and year out. That much is not in dispute.

The latest version of the “U.S. is lagging” analysis comes from the New America Foundation, which argues that “in comparison to their international peers, Americans in major cities such as New York, Los Angeles, and Washington, DC are paying higher prices for slower Internet service.”

Furthermore, the report emphasizes that “our data also shows that the most affordable and

fast connections are available in markets where consumers can choose between at least three

competitive service providers (fixed network only, as there also are satellite and mobile ISPs in virtually every market).

“Methodology is destiny,” one might argue, and so it always is important to specify what is being measured, how it is being measured and perhaps why something is being measured.

Suffice it to say, some studies show U.S. typical speeds are higher than is common in Europe, for example. Other studies show that more than 80 percent of American households live in areas that offer access to broadband networks capable of delivering data with speeds in excess of 100 megabits per second.

A study by the International Telecommunications Union argues that U.S. broadband actually is more affordable than in most other countries.

To be sure, never tends to rank much better than eighth on any survey of global teledensity or Internet access speeds. There are reasons for that, such as the continental-sized land mass, longer loop lengths, lower population densities and even consumer preferences.

Small countries, with shorter loops, higher population densities and different financing mechanisms often do score higher than the United States does.

In the end, what matters is that the U.S. market is highly dynamic. In many of the cities cited by the New America study, there are municipal broadband networks whose prices for gigabit service recently were reduced from about $300 a month to about $70 to $80 a month. That’s progress, you might argue, but the bigger story is the amount of dynamism in the market.

It isn’t just Google Fiber launching gigabit service for $70 a month. It is the upgrades other ISPs are undertaking, the significant and growing role played by mobile Internet access, and expectations that speeds will continue to grow at a healthy clip. Snapshots are fine, but the U.S. Internet access market never stands still.

In fact, U.S. Internet access speeds double about every five years. And it is reasonable to project speed increases of two orders of magnitude within a decade.

Though it is an argument some might continue to make for some time, Internet access speeds and prices really are not going to be a significant problem in the U.S. market for long, even if some believe that is the case right now.

Patent War Erupts Again: Time to Stop It

On Oct. 31, 2013, a consortium of Google rivals, including Microsoft, Apple, RIM, Ericsson, and Sony, filed 15 lawsuits against Samsung, Huawei, HTC, LG Electronics and other manufacturers that make Android smartphones, using a trove of patents the complanies acquired from the bankrupt Nortel. 

Enough already. Intellectual property protection is a good thing. But such "patent trolling," sometimes aptly called "privateering," might aptly be called extortion of a new sort. 

In 2011 and 2012, the number of lawsuits brought by patent trolls has nearly tripled, and account for 62 percent of all patent lawsuits in America, according to a study on patent trolls.

The victims of patent trolls paid $29 billion in 2011, a 400 percent increase from 2005.

Intellectual property protection is one thing. An out of control patents system, and the new use of litigation as a weapon of business competition, has to stop. It is going to damage innovation. 

Between $15 billion and $20 billion was spent on patent litigation and patent purchases in the smart phone industry from 2010 to 2012. 

In 2011, spending by Apple and Google on patent litigation and patent acquisitions exceeded spending on research and development of new products.

Google’s $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola, according to its own statements, was undertaken in large part to prevent patent suits from competitors.

If you have ever read patent applications, you know that some "patented processes" seem to defy logic. Where patents once were intended to protect the specific implementation of a process or device, now people and companies try to patent, in an overly-broad way, entire processes. It's dumb. It should not be allowed.