AIRCOM

Tip of the Week: The Multi-Network Dilemma for Tier 2 and Tier 3 Operators

Last week, we discussed creative spectrum re-farming strategies that operators can employ to help move to LTE.  But what about tier 2 and 3 service providers that do not have not enough spectrum to even get creative with reallocation?

Because of limited spectrum availability, tier 2 and 3 operators must choose whether to have a GSM or UMTS or LTE network.  They must choose one, because they cannot afford to run multiple technologies.

Generally, when an operator re-farms spectrum, it is a good thing because it phases out technology.  When operators buy new spectrum, it can add trouble to a network, not due to the addition of a new technology as much as the requirement to manage another network, thereby increasing OPEX and demands on human resources to manage multiple networks.

Since tier 2 and 3 operators cannot sustain GSM, 3G, and LTE technologies over the next five to ten years, they will be compelled to make difficult decisions about phasing out one of them (probably 3G before GSM).  Also, like it or not, tier 2 and 3 operators will be forced to consider network-sharing options to perform medium- to large-scale LTE deployments.

AIRCOM's consultancy services can help operators evaluate their networks to determine the right strategy.

Tip of the week: A New Strategy to Re-farm Spectrum to Help Operators Move to LTE

 

 

Let’s start with a couple of base assumptions: 1) the maximum gain in capacity from LTE comes when you deploy at 10-20MHz and 2) if an operator tries to deploy LTE at 5MHz, its peak-performance rates will be comparable to an HSPA+ 21Mbps network.

 

Problem is, most operators have limited spectrum availability and would struggle to re-farm more than 5MHz.  In this case, HSPA+ could be an attractive proposition.

 

One interesting possibility lies with CDMA operators that cannot re-farm 5MHz, but could re-farm 1.5MHz.  (If GSM operators cannot do 5MHz and move to 1.5MHZ reallocation, then LTE is a natural fit.)  But, for CDMA operators, they cannot deploy HSPA or UMTS in 1.5MHz; those technologies do not scale.  Re-farming 1.5MHz for CDMA operators makes LTE or TD-LTE very interesting, because it gives them more capacity than EDGE or EV-DO at 1.2MHz.

 

The scalability that LTE offers when operators re-farm at 1.xMHz makes the technology very compelling where spectrum is extremely limited.

 

AIRCOM offers a number of spectrum refarming services. Contact us for more information.

 

 

Tip of the week: When Will Operators Know It’s Time to Move to LTE? What's the Tipping Point?

 

One of the questions that AIRCOM  is asked is “when will operators know that it is time to move their current network to LTE?” What are the milestones or red flags to look for?  What is the tipping point where a move is mandated?

 

The question for operators really boils down to “should we expand the network capacity or move into a new technology?” 

 

For example, if an operator deploys HSPA+ at 21Mbps and it is running out of capacity, what are the options?  It can upgrade the network to 28Mbps or 42Mbps, or deploy a second carrier on HSPA+ (another one for 21Mbps).  In this case, the operator will need 10MHz of spectrum and a second carrier.  Well, if the operator goes to this trouble, it may as well move to LTE now, because the work, CAPEX, and OPEX will be similar to migrating to LTE.

 

Years ago, we saw this dynamic play out with EDGE.  A lot of people argued that EDGE could deliver similar throughputs as 3G, and you wouldn’t have to upgrade.  However, the breaking point was when we were able to justify that expanding the EDGE capacity was more expensive than deploying UMTS.  A similar dynamic will occur with LTE.  What is more expensive: deploying LTE or expanding my HSPA network?  When the answer is LTE, operators will migrate.

 

Now, if an operator is running UMTS or HSPA, does it move to HSPA+ or LTE?  Unless that operator is experiencing a tenfold increase in traffic every day, it will be okay with HSPA+.  They can delay CAPEX investments, which -- of course -- means the ROI on the network upgrade is faster than if the operator went straight into LTE.

 

And in these cost-concious times, that's a pretty compelling argument.

Tip of the week: HSPA+ May Defer More Than $1 Billion in CAPEX Compared to LTE Migration

At the end of May, AIRCOM released expert data that highlights why HSPA+ may make more short-term commercial sense than LTE to a wide range of 3GPP operators contemplating their mobile broadband network migration strategies.

Delivering up to 21Mbps download speeds and the capability to sustain projected user demands for the next 2-4 years, deferring LTE and selecting HSPA+ in the interim could save global operators billions of dollars in CAPEX in the next 12-24 months.  In fact, U.S. operators could save $1.19 billion by evolving their network to HSPA+ before deploying LTE.  AIRCOM also provided related CAPEX savings for the UK ($500M), Gulf countries ($225M), and Asia/Pacific ($155M).

More and more global operators that are headed to LTE see the value of HSPA+ at a price point that delivers strong return on investment and re-uses existing spectrum (e.g. AT&T Mobility’s recent plans for HSPA+ in 2010).

Like the rest of the mobile industry, AIRCOM believes that LTE will become the de-facto next generation mobile broadband technology globally – delivering unprecedented data speeds and user experience.   However, in the short term, the business case for HSPA+ in the short to medium term is, for some, extremely compelling.    

 

 

Tip of the week: How the U.S. LTE Build-Outs May Delay European Operators Moving to LTE

In the U.S., LTE networks will be deployed in the 700MHz band.  The benefit of being one of the first and largest LTE deployments is that equipment manufacturers are cranking out 700MHz products to support the network build-outs.  However, there is a negative consequence to this type of mass production.

In Europe, spectrum availability for most operators to deploy LTE will be in the 2.6GHz band.  Some may consider 2.1GHz or 900MHz.  Problem is, with so much 700MHz product being built for the U.S. market, the economics of building a 2.6GHz or any other non-700Mhz network in the next 12-18 months is completely unrealistic.  Even if an operator wanted to refarm spectrum to 900MHz, 2.1GHz, or 2.6GHz, there is simply not enough available equipment to support the transition.

So, what is going to happen?  Whether or not they have publicly announced intentions to move to LTE, many European operators are managing their costs by moving to HSPA+ in the near term as a stepping stone to LTE.  They can use the same frequencies that they have from UMTS, including GSM 900.  As a result, pervasive LTE deployments in Europe may be delayed by as much as a year behind the U.S.

In this scenario, we may see an ironic replaying of what occurred with UTMS, whereby GSM operators in the U.S. migrated to EDGE, then to UMTS.  In Europe, operators went straight from GSM/GPRS to UMTS, then deployed EDGE a few years later.  We may see a similar trend where the U.S. operators jump into LTE, then go back to HSPA+ to finish their deployments.  In Europe, operators will go straight from HSPA to LTE.

 

Do you agree? Share your opinions in the comments section.

Tip of the week: Not All HSPA+ Is Created Equal - Choose Your Peak Data Rates Carefully

 

Hypothetical real-world scenario: an operator with a WCDMA or HSPA network needs to upgrade to meet rising customer demand and has ruled out an LTE migration in the short term for various reasons (e.g., immature technology, CAPEX, etc.).  The solution is a move to HSPA+ for the next two years that enables an eventual migration to LTE down the line.

Now, there are multiple flavors of HSPA+, including 21, 28, and 42 Mbit/second.  Which one does the operator choose?  It’s not as easy as merely selecting the fastest one.

Upgrading from deployments of 3.2, 7.2, and 14.4 Mbit/second to 21 Mbit/second is fairly straight forward.  However, moving to 28 or 42 Mbit/second entails the same steps that are involved when moving to LTE, such as installing of new antennae and securing the necessary spectrum.  In this case, if operators are going to perform a holistic upgrade of their radio access network, they might as well move to LTE.

In the end, compared the cost of deploying 28 or 42 Mbit/second or even LTE, 21 Mbit/second HSPA+ is a very economical solution to this hypothetical situation.

If you are interested in finding out more, please visit the consultancy services section of the AIRCOM website.

Tip of the week: Forecasting Network Usage for Data - Can It Be Done?

Occasionally, we are asked by a customer to help them understand why voice traffic on the network is “settling down” and data traffic is going to exponentially grow.  The answers can be tricky.

With voice, it is easy to forecast the traffic accurately.  As operators gain more voice customers, the average traffic per subscriber goes down because they capture a lower and lower market on voice.  In other words, as operators expand their market, the people who are in need of voice service are using it less and less, causing the average traffic per subscriber to go down.

The trouble with forecasting data is that applications are changing and driving much higher network consumption.  In the past, it was email, then it became (and remains) social media, and now people are loading images and HD video.  The amount of data traffic can escalate 100 times just by changing the application.

Operators can track how much data crosses their network in a given day.  They can detect that it is HTTP-based and coming from the Internet.  But they cannot tell which applications are generating the traffic.  As a result, if an application suddenly comes out with HD support, traffic loads can shoot through the roof overnight.  In this scenario, operators did not acquire any new customers to help them forecast.  A new application just sprung up and is now helping to cause congestion on the network.

Add machine-to-machine (M2M) data to the mix, and three to four years from now, operators could face significant challenges in maintaining strong network performance levels.

So, can data usage be forecast?  Fortunately, tracking factors such as growth in smartphone sales and smartphone proliferation as well as the number of HD-enabled apps, coupled with historical trending, can give operators some perspective into data growth.  But this understanding does not negate the need for “creative” network planning that includes options like software-defined capacity to enable on‑the-fly capacity scaling.

Tip of the Week: New-Age Operator Planning Philosophy - “Pay As I Grow”

 
 
 

At a recent trade show, we heard some industry types theorizing that – due to the tremendous data demand that will hit the their networks – operators cannot afford to look five or more years into the future network planning and now have to evaluate their network capacity in a 12- to 18-month window.  Absolutely not true.  We have recently worked with several operators on three- to five-year network planning cycles.

 

Yes, no operator or industry analyst can accurately forecast just how high the data demand will be, and – with new bandwidth-hungry applications coming online every day – it will be high.  For this reason, operators are beginning to adopt a new philosophy with regard to their network planning: the “pay as I grow” method of capacity building.

 

Because operators do not have a great deal of visibility into how network traffic will grow and behave 9‑12 months down the line, they may wait on CAPEX spends for new equipment or technology that they may have to swap out.  They want a cost-effective way to expand their network without adding new equipment, which is why many operators are turning to software-defined capacity and radios.

 

With software-defined capacity, the network “boxes” support 3Gb-per-second, but operators hold a license for up to 9Gb-per-second and can quickly and easily scale, if needed.  With software-defined radios (SDRs), operators can deploy HSPA+ now, then migrate to LTE without purchasing new antennae equipment.

 

AIRCOM's range of consultancy services can ensure operators deploy the right strategy for their own unique environments. Find out more here.

Tip of the week: Is Marketing LTE Keeping Operators from Doing What Is Best - Migrating to HSPA+?

As markets across the world become hyper-competitive, more and more operators are engaged in a sort of “mobile arms race” over coverage and/or becoming a 4G player.  In some cases, operators seem to be prioritizing marketing over what may be best for its network, that being migrating to HSPA+.

These operators possess the spectrum to keep their 2G/3G networks operating as they deploy a new network, and they have the radio access network (RAN) resources to support a migration to HSPA+.  In short, they don’t have to move to LTE in the near term.

If HSPA+ delivers up to 21Mbps data rates and is the most cost-efficient next stage of network development, then why don’t these competitive operators invest heavily in HSPA+ build‑outs until the kinks get worked out of LTE?  Such a move would save CAPEX dollars or – at least – enable them to better manage their CAPEX.  Quality of service (QoS) wouldn’t suffer and may actually be better in the near term.

The answer is marketing, which is interesting since the jury is still out on whether marketing 4G network capabilities actually helps gain new subscribers.

 

Tip of the week: Is 2010 the “Year of Optimization?”

Is it just us, or does there seem to be a whole lot of talk about optimization as it portends to current 3G and upcoming 4G networks?  From the core through backhaul through the radio access network and out to the mobile device itself, a lot of news cycles are consumed with ways that operators can optimize their operations to run more efficiently.

 

Mobile service assurance players are registering the customer experience with their mobile devices and reporting measurements back to an operator on KPIs (key performance indicators).  Our AIRCOM IQ product performs this function.

 

Even mobile apps are getting optimized as operators look to application developers and content providers to help reduce network clutter, especially with mobile video.  And, if they don’t, the operators will simply block content that is not optimized (e.g. AT&T with certain iPhone apps).

 

As WiMAX continues its global rollouts and LTE moves from trials toward initial deployments, it’s as though the industry as a whole is beginning to fully realize the depths of CAPEX and OPEX costs that 4G migration entails and that the well-publicized data crunch on the operators’ networks is very real.  It may be early in the annals of 4G, but Clearwire already has reported that its average users consume 7 GB of data per month.

 

All of this optimization talk is music to our ears.  We have been in network optimization game for two decades.  So, as 2010 shapes up to be the “year of optimization,” we will continue to help our customers with proven products that address each area of the network.

 

Find out more about AIRCOM's network optimization services here.