5 ms·

LightSquared: new national 4G network under construction, no telcos involved

106 points by necubi 16y ago

Geee 16y ago
This was biggest single deal of Nokia Siemens ever. This made me thinking if Nokia plans to bring carrier-free phones on the network. That's what I'd do. And.. LTE (or LTE-A) is all-ip anyway, so who needs carriers?
- signa11 16y ago
  > And.. LTE (or LTE-A) is all-ip anyway, so who needs carriers? you do realize that, cell-phones or any other access side equipment that you use, passes all data via the epc-core which is provided by the operator right ?
  - Maven911 16y ago
    and btw for those who don't know, epc stands for evolved packet core, that's the part of the network for setting up the data call session before the packets can be routed to the isp
  - Geee 16y ago
    Yes, but as they said in the article, anybody can set up a virtual operator on the network, be that Nokia or anybody else. My point is that this would make it easy for Nokia to deploy on the US markets which has traditionally been the playground of the operators; i.e. them deciding which devices to support. (They want to be on top of the value chain) Anyway, LTE provides ground for any VoIP solution which means that traditional carriers might have hard time providing added value with their voice and SMS services compared to just providing data.
    - wmf 16y ago
      You're just not thinking evil enough. They could set data prices such that a VoIP call costs as much as a voice call. Or they could use IMS to impose billing on SMS and VoIP.
mdasen 16y ago
So, there was an AP story about this that I think did a better job detailing the challenges for LightSquared (http://hosted2.ap.org/txdam/7d2a091809034418bf02b94fe7a8c4b9/Article_2010-07-20-US-TEC-Wireless-Broadband/id-88dba65beffd4e908d1881cedbd6eb5a http://hosted2.ap.org/txdam/7d2a091809034418bf02b94fe7a8c4b9...). Specifically, there are a couple of things I'd point out: 1. They have to put at least 1 satellite into service. That's a huge cost for something that you have no intention of making an important part of your service. 2. They're banking on the FCC changing rules surrounding their "satellite" spectrum. Current rules say that it can be used to create a terrestrial network to back up the satellite service, but every device they sell has to be able to communicate with the satellite. That would make it prohibatively expensive to provision customers with devices against companies who don't have that restruction. The $7B contract to build and maintain the network also seems a bit light. Carriers like Verizon and AT&T spend around $7B annually to improve and maintain their networks and they aren't starting from scratch. $7B over 8 years comes out to under $900M per year. Granted, 4G should be cheaper to deploy since the equipment takes up less space and there's no need for a lot of expensive and large things to support legacy phone stuff. Still, Clearwire (who is rolling out 4G WiMAX) had capital expenditure of $690M in the first quarter of this year alone. Although that probably includes more than just network expenditure, Clearwire has yet to cover most people. If they're able to pull it off, it'll be great! If a company can reduce the cost of rolling out a network, it usually means lower prices for consumers (assuming adequate competition). So, hopefully we'll see a great nationwide LTE network from LightSquared in a few years!
- signa11 16y ago
  > They have to put at least 1 satellite into service. That's a huge cost for something that you have no intention of making an important part of your service. apparently the cost of putting a satellite is only 8k ;)
  - zitterbewegung 16y ago
    I see your joke but a communications satellite is a much larger cost than the 8k satellite. We are talking millions of dollars for one simple satellite.
sliverstorm 16y ago
How are they going to get much money? There are very few 4G devices in existence, are they betting everything on 4G becoming big in the next few years?
- muhfuhkuh 16y ago
  I remember when 802.11b was just taking off. Everyone thought because of 802.11a devices in the wild, both standards would cancel each other out and no one would buy it (like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD war). If the price is right (in both device and service plan), people will come.
- detst 16y ago
  > are they betting everything on 4G becoming big in the next few years? I'm not sure that's much of a bet as it is inevitable. Sprint already has a phone on the market, Verizon will have a large deployment later this year and AT&T plans to deploy next year. That's just the US; I think there's already a small deployment of LTE somewhere in Europe.
  - yurylifshits 16y ago
    Russian company Yota (currently a WiMax provider) has announced big plans and full switch to LTE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yota http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yota
  - signa11 16y ago
    > That's just the US; I think there's already a small deployment of LTE somewhere in Europe. yes, lot's of places e.g. telenor (norway), vodafone (germany, maybe uk), magtel, boygues (france), d2 (germany) etc. etc.
  - masklinn 16y ago
    > Sprint already has a phone on the market Sprint and the Evo 4G are using WiMax though, not LTE, I believe. And though there is no 4G standard yet (LTE is 3.9G, the candidate for 4G is LTE-Advanced) WiMax definitely isn't it.
ssp 16y ago
An interesting prospect is that random startups could become cell carriers by buying bandwidth from this company. See also this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1233712 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1233712

106 points by necubi 16y ago

Geee 16y ago

This was biggest single deal of Nokia Siemens ever. This made me thinking if Nokia plans to bring carrier-free phones on the network. That's what I'd do. And.. LTE (or LTE-A) is all-ip anyway, so who needs carriers?

signa11 16y ago
> And.. LTE (or LTE-A) is all-ip anyway, so who needs carriers? you do realize that, cell-phones or any other access side equipment that you use, passes all data via the epc-core which is provided by the operator right ?
- Maven911 16y ago
  and btw for those who don't know, epc stands for evolved packet core, that's the part of the network for setting up the data call session before the packets can be routed to the isp
- Geee 16y ago
  Yes, but as they said in the article, anybody can set up a virtual operator on the network, be that Nokia or anybody else. My point is that this would make it easy for Nokia to deploy on the US markets which has traditionally been the playground of the operators; i.e. them deciding which devices to support. (They want to be on top of the value chain) Anyway, LTE provides ground for any VoIP solution which means that traditional carriers might have hard time providing added value with their voice and SMS services compared to just providing data.
  - wmf 16y ago
    You're just not thinking evil enough. They could set data prices such that a VoIP call costs as much as a voice call. Or they could use IMS to impose billing on SMS and VoIP.

mdasen 16y ago

So, there was an AP story about this that I think did a better job detailing the challenges for LightSquared (http://hosted2.ap.org/txdam/7d2a091809034418bf02b94fe7a8c4b9/Article_2010-07-20-US-TEC-Wireless-Broadband/id-88dba65beffd4e908d1881cedbd6eb5a http://hosted2.ap.org/txdam/7d2a091809034418bf02b94fe7a8c4b9...). Specifically, there are a couple of things I'd point out: 1. They have to put at least 1 satellite into service. That's a huge cost for something that you have no intention of making an important part of your service. 2. They're banking on the FCC changing rules surrounding their "satellite" spectrum. Current rules say that it can be used to create a terrestrial network to back up the satellite service, but every device they sell has to be able to communicate with the satellite. That would make it prohibatively expensive to provision customers with devices against companies who don't have that restruction. The $7B contract to build and maintain the network also seems a bit light. Carriers like Verizon and AT&T spend around $7B annually to improve and maintain their networks and they aren't starting from scratch. $7B over 8 years comes out to under $900M per year. Granted, 4G should be cheaper to deploy since the equipment takes up less space and there's no need for a lot of expensive and large things to support legacy phone stuff. Still, Clearwire (who is rolling out 4G WiMAX) had capital expenditure of $690M in the first quarter of this year alone. Although that probably includes more than just network expenditure, Clearwire has yet to cover most people. If they're able to pull it off, it'll be great! If a company can reduce the cost of rolling out a network, it usually means lower prices for consumers (assuming adequate competition). So, hopefully we'll see a great nationwide LTE network from LightSquared in a few years!

signa11 16y ago
> They have to put at least 1 satellite into service. That's a huge cost for something that you have no intention of making an important part of your service. apparently the cost of putting a satellite is only 8k ;)
- zitterbewegung 16y ago
  I see your joke but a communications satellite is a much larger cost than the 8k satellite. We are talking millions of dollars for one simple satellite.

sliverstorm 16y ago

How are they going to get much money? There are very few 4G devices in existence, are they betting everything on 4G becoming big in the next few years?

muhfuhkuh 16y ago
I remember when 802.11b was just taking off. Everyone thought because of 802.11a devices in the wild, both standards would cancel each other out and no one would buy it (like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD war). If the price is right (in both device and service plan), people will come.
detst 16y ago
> are they betting everything on 4G becoming big in the next few years? I'm not sure that's much of a bet as it is inevitable. Sprint already has a phone on the market, Verizon will have a large deployment later this year and AT&T plans to deploy next year. That's just the US; I think there's already a small deployment of LTE somewhere in Europe.
- yurylifshits 16y ago
  Russian company Yota (currently a WiMax provider) has announced big plans and full switch to LTE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yota http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yota
- signa11 16y ago
  > That's just the US; I think there's already a small deployment of LTE somewhere in Europe. yes, lot's of places e.g. telenor (norway), vodafone (germany, maybe uk), magtel, boygues (france), d2 (germany) etc. etc.
- masklinn 16y ago
  > Sprint already has a phone on the market Sprint and the Evo 4G are using WiMax though, not LTE, I believe. And though there is no 4G standard yet (LTE is 3.9G, the candidate for 4G is LTE-Advanced) WiMax definitely isn't it.

ssp 16y ago

An interesting prospect is that random startups could become cell carriers by buying bandwidth from this company. See also this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1233712 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1233712