Comments on: MIMO is like fracking… https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/ Satellites, spectrum and other stuff Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:36:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: TMF Associates blog » Tilting the playing field… https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-96670 TMF Associates blog » Tilting the playing field… Wed, 29 Nov 2017 22:42:38 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-96670 [...] of new competition for fixed providers. I dismissed that possibility 6 years ago, but now I’m increasingly convinced that the enormous efficiency gains coming from MIMO will provide wireless operators with more [...] [...] of new competition for fixed providers. I dismissed that possibility 6 years ago, but now I’m increasingly convinced that the enormous efficiency gains coming from MIMO will provide wireless operators with more [...]

]]> By: Steve https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-92240 Steve Fri, 14 Apr 2017 15:15:32 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-92240 I too have analyzed the FCC and Brattle reports for my client. I thought a major shortcoming was not considering the increase is spectral efficiency with 5G. In addition, I found a math error in the Brattle report. In its forecast in table 5, the spectral efficiency of 1.40 shown in row 8 for 2019 is the 2018 value - they picked up the wrong number from their earlier table. The correct number for 2019 is 1.48; running through the math reduces the calculated deficit to 310 MHz. I too have analyzed the FCC and Brattle reports for my client. I thought a major shortcoming was not considering the increase is spectral efficiency with 5G. In addition, I found a math error in the Brattle report. In its forecast in table 5, the spectral efficiency of 1.40 shown in row 8 for 2019 is the 2018 value – they picked up the wrong number from their earlier table. The correct number for 2019 is 1.48; running through the math reduces the calculated deficit to 310 MHz.

]]> By: lte4g https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-91018 lte4g Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:09:55 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-91018 Thanks for clarifying. Very interesting! Thanks for clarifying. Very interesting!

]]> By: timfarrar https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-90980 timfarrar Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:14:38 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-90980 No, I meant Verizon (although Sprint didn't participate either). No-one has been able to identify any auction deposit made by Verizon, which would have shown up in their 2016Q3 balance sheet if it were material. No, I meant Verizon (although Sprint didn’t participate either). No-one has been able to identify any auction deposit made by Verizon, which would have shown up in their 2016Q3 balance sheet if it were material.

]]> By: lte4g https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-90977 lte4g Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:34:12 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-90977 Great blog, but did you mean to say "...Sprint declined to participate...", not Verizon. Thanks. Great blog, but did you mean to say “…Sprint declined to participate…”, not Verizon. Thanks.

]]> By: mjmarcus https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/03/16/mimo-is-like-fracking/comment-page-1/#comment-90758 mjmarcus Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:49:43 +0000 http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=6068#comment-90758 deja vu all over again! In the early 1980s, Motorola was the "patron saint" (and near monopolist equipment provider) of Part 90 and decided that Part 90 was running out of spectrum. Cellular existed then but no one thought it would over be more important than Part 90- Motorola's main product. So Moto pushed the Part 90 user groups, which they had great influence over, to demand more Part 90 spectrum. They did a similar study to the cellular case and extrapolated demand and efficiency growth and came up for a big shortfall which they wanted to meet through more TV/land mobile sharing. NAB hated the idea and this was what motivated for them to suddenly bring from Japan early analog HDTV technology and said the future of the US depended on it! All this is described in Joel Brinkley's "Defining Vision: How Broadcasters Lured the Government into Inciting a Revolution in Television" Part 90 never got more spectrum but modest increase in technology and crosselastic growth in cellular made the problem go away. Ironically analog HDTV was never implemented as DTV replaced it in the planning cycle. DTV allowed more intense use of TV spectrum so cellular intruded into TV spectrum NOT Part 90! After all, if growth is 10-50%/year you just can't meet it with new spectrum. While some could argue exactly how much cellular capacity would increase with a 50% increase in available spectrum the numbers are in the range of 40-200% increase, not a 5000% increase. Large compound growth rates can not be met with spectrum, but rather with infrastructure and new technology as the main factors. deja vu all over again!

In the early 1980s, Motorola was the “patron saint” (and near monopolist equipment provider) of Part 90 and decided that Part 90 was running out of spectrum. Cellular existed then but no one thought it would over be more important than Part 90- Motorola’s main product.

So Moto pushed the Part 90 user groups, which they had great influence over, to demand more Part 90 spectrum. They did a similar study to the cellular case and extrapolated demand and efficiency growth and came up for a big shortfall which they wanted to meet through more TV/land mobile sharing. NAB hated the idea and this was what motivated for them to suddenly bring from Japan early analog HDTV technology and said the future of the US depended on it! All this is described in Joel Brinkley’s “Defining Vision: How Broadcasters Lured the Government into Inciting a Revolution in Television”

Part 90 never got more spectrum but modest increase in technology and crosselastic growth in cellular made the problem go away. Ironically analog HDTV was never implemented as DTV replaced it in the planning cycle. DTV allowed more intense use of TV spectrum so cellular intruded into TV spectrum NOT Part 90!

After all, if growth is 10-50%/year you just can’t meet it with new spectrum. While some could argue exactly how much cellular capacity would increase with a 50% increase in available spectrum the numbers are in the range of 40-200% increase, not a 5000% increase. Large compound growth rates can not be met with spectrum, but rather with infrastructure and new technology as the main factors.

]]>