Home - , - T-Mobile to Start Deploying AWS-3 Spectrum Later This Year

T-Mobile to Start Deploying AWS-3 Spectrum Later This Year

t-mobile-aws-3-spectrum-map
A few weeks ago, T-Mobile revealed a list of cities where it planned to offer 700MHz coverage by the end of the year. Additionally, the carrier is working at deploying AWS-3 spectrum some time soon. This was expressed on a meeting recently held with analysts.

T-Mobile's Head of Investor Relations, Nils Paellmann, talked about the company's plans to deploy AWS-3 spectrum within 2016. As explained by Paellmann discussed how T-Mo was working hard to deploy this technology while plans to reform the PCS/1900 spectrum in order to expand LTE builds would take between 2-3 years. The executive also shares that the 700MHz spectrum is continually being deployed by the carrier as it has received a significant churn reduction in markets where they have recently deployed. 

Back in January 2015, the FCC hosted an auction for the AWS-3 spectrum. T-Mo spent almost $1.8 billion for the technology before obtaining its licenses in April of the same year. The entire process has taken T-Mobile a short span of time before it further advances to deploying its AWS-3 spectrum. To compare, AT&T announced at the end of the AWS-3 auction that they intend to deploy the spectrum within 2017 and 2018.

With today's announcement from T-Mo, it's only a matter of time before the technology will be deployed and handsets will start supporting it. If you wish to check out the markets wherein T-Mobile was able to acquire licenses for its AWS-3 spectrum, you may click on this link.


Source: TMONews

Tags: ,

28 comments:

Comment Page :
  1. Nice. I am a harsh critic of T-mobile.

    This shows a real effort, real progress. Good for them. The uncarrier may yet be a carrier in my lifetime!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Does that mean older phone versions will be unable to use this spectrum? customers will have to buy new handsets that support it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as the phone supports aws (band 4) right now then no

      Delete
    2. thank you. That's good because I just upgraded to an Iphone 6S in order to get lte band 12 and when I read that I was bummed thinking I will have to get another phone.

      Delete
    3. Actually band 4 is AWS-1. AWS-3 is band 66 which as far as I know, no current phone supports AWS-3.

      See LTE frequency band for a list of all LTE bands and the frequencies involved.

      See Figures 1 and 2 on FCC Auctions: Factsheet: Auction 97 for a pictoral representation on where AWS 3 is in relation to AWS-1.

      See Reddit -Difference between AWS-1 and AWS-3 for a discussion of the differences and speculation that a new band number combining AWS-1 and AWS-3 will be created.

      Delete
    4. I guess it was too good to be true...so new phones will be needed. Maybe the iPhone 7S will be compatible...who knows...

      Delete
    5. New phones will always be needed to keep up with the times. Prior to the consumer digital age, advanced moved at a glacial pace. Today, things change quite a bit faster, and you already know this. You can choose to be comfortable where you are (and, uh, complain about it?), or sell your old sh*t and move on up.

      Delete
    6. "You can choose to be comfortable where you are (and, uh, complain about it?"
      I didn't see anyone complain about it, just someone ask a question. Where did you get that? anyway to each their own.

      Delete
    7. I can't believe that anyone is worried about having to buy a new phone to support a band that won't be in use for another year or two. I have a hard time keeping the same phone for more than a year. I usually drop them or break them some other way or the battery goes out but even if they last, there's the fact that newer phones, even the cheap ones, have faster CPUs, better cameras, a newer OS and sometimes even a longer lasting battery. If you hold on to the same phone for too long they start to feel slow with outdated software and a weak camera. Its always fun to get a new phone and these days you don't need to spend $600 for a new phone. Just remember, they all break.

      Delete
    8. Some people may be able to afford new/better phones every two years but not everyone can afford them and try to stay with the one they have as long as they can. They also use prepaid services to save money they don't have so to me, it is a valid concern that some people have.
      I myself got me a brand new phone just a few days ago and most likely will get another one in a year and a half or so but just because I can doesn't mean everyone can and we have to be considerate of how changes although for the better might affect those consumers. Just my two cents.

      Delete
  3. Hopefully Rochester mn will be on the list as needs work as no 700 and lot of coverage issues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Goodhue is as close to Rochester as it gets which won't help much. Hope people aren't all upset when Tmo raises prices as that is likely to happen.

      Delete
  4. I studied the whole map. A lot of the coverage areas are isolated pockets out in the middle of nowhere. Don't know why they would waste their money on some of the areas, especially out west.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because the more coverage the better, and Americans live in and travel through these areas.

      AT&T and Verizon are together 4 times as successful as T-Mobile in large part because they "just cover it."

      Pointlessly deciding areas aren't worth it and ignoring them is small, regional carrier thinking.

      It's not a waste of money at all. Good for T-Mobile!

      Delete
    2. "A lot of the coverage areas are isolated pockets out in the middle of nowhere."

      I don't know if you've noticed, but the chief complaint among T-Mobile haters is just that, that T-Mobile isn't available in the middle of nowhere. Even though it isn't worth the investment to serve the ten farmers and their six relatives that visit every few years, T-Mobile is trying to be there for them. To the tune of a billion dollars. I personally wouldn't waste the cash, but the Obama administration made internet access a priority for rural areas, so there you go. They're getting it. (Yes, thank you, President Obama. I think.)

      Delete
    3. I've never seen a T-Mobile "hater" complain that the network isn't available in "the middle of no-where". The legitimate complaint is that they ignore a large proportion of the US populated area: an area where 330,000,000 million Americans live and/or work and/or play and/or tracel through.

      The "middle of nowhere" description is purely T-Mobile shill speak. As you appear to be, describing this vast area where Americans live, work, and play as not being worth covering.

      Thankfully, T-Mobile appears now to disagree with you and is building a true nationwide network like the bigger two have. This is how T-Mobile will gain huge numbers of customers and profits.

      The bigger two networks cover this half of America that you hate, and they get much more profit and 4 times the customers (compared to T-Mobile) doing so.

      Perhaps your "10 farmers" claim is false, and T-Mobile knows what they are doing. Not perhaps... Most certainly.

      Coverage matters. Having a real nationwide network is money well spent.

      Delete
  5. Anyone who thinks T-Mobile coverage is inadequate is a "hater" now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. T-Mobile only covers roughly half of the country (the 48). That's a fact, not hate. It is certainly a lot less adequate than AT&T and Verizon at this time.

      Personally, I don't think a carrier that won't let me use data in such a vast amount if territory is "adequate". One that lacks coverage everywhere I go while others cover it.

      Since I am not a hater, I applaud T-Mobile for the efforts, described in this post, to become an "adequate" truly nationwide network.

      Delete
    2. "Anyone who thinks T-Mobile coverage is inadequate is a "hater" now"

      The statement was meant to be sarcastic...

      Delete
    3. Sarcastic? A lot of T-Mobile "fanboys" say that sort of thing.

      Delete
    4. I don't know what a fanboy is but doesn't sound good. Let me make it clear to you...this IS what I meant...

      If anyone says anything negative about T-Mobile, they are considered "haters" more as a criticism than an actual statement. I personally think both T-mobile and Sprint are not adequate as far as coverage. So if anything, Im a "hater"...

      Delete
  6. More spectrum is useless if you already have adequate coverage.

    What they really need right now is competitive pricing comparable to Cricket's phones and plans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buying spectrum where you do't have any increases coverage.
      Buying spectrum where you have some already increases capacity and data speed. Both increase a carrier's competitiveness and ability to add more users.

      Delete
    2. "More spectrum is useless if you already have adequate coverage."

      T-Mobile still has sub par, inadequate coverage. Because of this they are at a major disadvantage compared to Cricket independent of pricing.

      Delete
  7. This is why T-Mobile is doing their hardest to remain competitive. Their price-point is their main foundation.
    Sub-Par coverage has still a bit to go so they concentrate on their prices and quality of network where it is already.
    And what Dennis mentioned with the AWS-3 being LTE band 66, by they time that is mainly deployed, most customers will have upgraded their phones by then.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, closing the gap is a big deal. I can't understand the guy above complaining about TMO improving coverage.

      Delete
    2. I applaud T-Mobile for wanting to improve their network. I think they have a ways to go but any improvement is better than none, especially for their millions of costumers who will benefit from such improvements.
      It is hard to keep up with the big guys but in this business, if you blink you lose.

      Delete
    3. This is the first news story in memory that makes me believe that T-Mobile could actually become a viable alternative to Verizon and AT&T.

      It's very good for T-Mobile's existing customers. It's also very good for those considering switching to it. It shows that they really mean business.

      Delete
Comment Page :