Comments on: Do the math… https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2016/05/11/do-the-math/ Satellites, spectrum and other stuff Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:36:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: msa620001 https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2016/05/11/do-the-math/comment-page-1/#comment-81904 msa620001 Thu, 26 May 2016 20:55:38 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=5766#comment-81904 "by making the cell radius smaller in areas of higher population density". Isn't this why mid-band spectrum (even Dish's) is more valuable today than low-band (some of which I hear went for a steep price in Chicago this week, even with just a single possible buyer)? “by making the cell radius smaller in areas of higher population density”.

Isn’t this why mid-band spectrum (even Dish’s) is more valuable today than low-band (some of which I hear went for a steep price in Chicago this week, even with just a single possible buyer)?

]]> By: timfarrar https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2016/05/11/do-the-math/comment-page-1/#comment-81782 timfarrar Fri, 13 May 2016 16:34:50 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=5766#comment-81782 Verizon should (and does) try to balance the number of subscribers per cellsite where possible, by making the cell radius smaller in areas of higher population density. My main problem with the Citi analysis was that they kept the area the same when changing the population density. There are certainly hotspots where this is very challenging or impossible using conventional cellsites, for example in Times Square. But then you look at other measures (offload is just one) to improve the performance. If its possible to deal with Superbowl levels of traffic through capital investment rather than new spectrum, then it clearly isn't mandatory to buy additional spectrum. The most remarkable statistic from this year's Superbowl was that cellular traffic exceeded that on the stadium's free WiFi network, when you would expect the opposite if there was a shortage of spectrum/capacity. Verizon should (and does) try to balance the number of subscribers per cellsite where possible, by making the cell radius smaller in areas of higher population density. My main problem with the Citi analysis was that they kept the area the same when changing the population density.

There are certainly hotspots where this is very challenging or impossible using conventional cellsites, for example in Times Square. But then you look at other measures (offload is just one) to improve the performance. If its possible to deal with Superbowl levels of traffic through capital investment rather than new spectrum, then it clearly isn’t mandatory to buy additional spectrum. The most remarkable statistic from this year’s Superbowl was that cellular traffic exceeded that on the stadium’s free WiFi network, when you would expect the opposite if there was a shortage of spectrum/capacity.

]]> By: msa620001 https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2016/05/11/do-the-math/comment-page-1/#comment-81778 msa620001 Fri, 13 May 2016 14:26:39 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=5766#comment-81778 How many of Verizon's 49 thousand cell sites actually serve the average number (2,965) of subscribers per cell site across the country? Isn't the problem that while many sites have a far smaller load, many (you know, like in Manhattan), service a much larger number of subscribers? From what I hear, Verizon is, in fact, under spectrum pressure in NYC (not so much in New Albany, OH). Applying a busy hour concept to an average sub per cell site nationwide is capturing only half the issue, no? How many of Verizon’s 49 thousand cell sites actually serve the average number (2,965) of subscribers per cell site across the country? Isn’t the problem that while many sites have a far smaller load, many (you know, like in Manhattan), service a much larger number of subscribers? From what I hear, Verizon is, in fact, under spectrum pressure in NYC (not so much in New Albany, OH). Applying a busy hour concept to an average sub per cell site nationwide is capturing only half the issue, no?

]]>