Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

In alt.cellular.attws John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> Yep. CDMA has been in serious decline, and this will tend to accelerate
> the process, leaving Verizon increasingly isolated on a shrinking CDMA
> island, probably why Verizon shares dropped much more than AT&T shares.
> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
> the U.S. market.
>

Alltel is making some pretty good inroads and may largely pick up the slack
from Sprint ... especially if they start selling assets.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

Wishing without work is like fishing without bait.
-- Frank Tyger

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> In alt.cellular.attws John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> Yep. CDMA has been in serious decline, and this will tend to accelerate
>> the process, leaving Verizon increasingly isolated on a shrinking CDMA
>> island, probably why Verizon shares dropped much more than AT&T shares.
>> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
>> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
>> the U.S. market.
>>
>
> Alltel is making some pretty good inroads and may largely pick up the slack
> from Sprint ... especially if they start selling assets.

In my world travels, I see more and more CDMA networks across Asia, in
countries where there are already established GSM networks. In
percentage terms, CDMA has been increasing its worldwide market share.
However if and when Australia allows CDMA to replaced by NextG, that
will be a blow to CDMA.

On 2008-02-01, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> In alt.cellular.attws John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> Yep. CDMA has been in serious decline, and this will tend to accelerate
>>> the process, leaving Verizon increasingly isolated on a shrinking CDMA
>>> island, probably why Verizon shares dropped much more than AT&T shares.
>>> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
>>> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
>>> the U.S. market.
>>>
>>
>> Alltel is making some pretty good inroads and may largely pick up the slack
>> from Sprint ... especially if they start selling assets.
>
> In my world travels, I see more and more CDMA networks across Asia, in
> countries where there are already established GSM networks. In
> percentage terms, CDMA has been increasing its worldwide market share.

Who are they taking that market share from? If I look at the GSM Association
and CDMA Development Group numbers, at the beginning of 2001 there were
420 million GSM/3GSM (that's what they call it) and 85 million
CDMAOne/CDMA2000 subscribers. In the fall of 2007 there were 2.57 billion
xGSM subscribers and 425 million CDMAx subscribers (with a total world
mobile market of 3.3 billion; 8% use something else). I can't find the
total world market for 2001, but while CDMAx might be gaining in share
of the overall market they're falling behind GSM in market share.

> However if and when Australia allows CDMA to replaced by NextG, that
> will be a blow to CDMA.

I think it isn't the only one. Telefonica in Mexico shut down their
CDMA network last year, and while the Hong Kong CDMA operator (first
in the world) still runs their network they're down to offering exactly
one phone model which they never actually have in their stores (a Nokia
2112 at that, a blast from the past) so I think they're keeping the
network up mostly for roaming. This doesn't matter so much since
the huge bulk of the growth in subscribers these days is in developing
countries and CDMA is growing there (but not as fast as GSM).

Dennis Ferguson

On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Dennis Ferguson posted:
> If I look at the GSM Association
> and CDMA Development Group numbers, at the beginning of 2001 there were
> 420 million GSM/3GSM (that's what they call it) and 85 million
> CDMAOne/CDMA2000 subscribers. In the fall of 2007 there were 2.57 billion
> xGSM subscribers and 425 million CDMAx subscribers (with a total world
> mobile market of 3.3 billion; 8% use something else).

Put another way, CDMA has a comparative market share of 16% of the
combined GSM+UMTS+CDMA market in 2007 vs. 20% in 2001.

Although UMTS is a 3G GSM successor rather than a CDMA successor, the fact
remains that it uses CDMA technology (hence the other name, W-CDMA).

I think that it is still entirely too soon to declare CDMA dead. Far more
likely is a what Verizon and Vodafone have already announced; a fusion of
effort towards LTE in 4G as opposed to UMB, and thus rendering the
question moot.

> I think it isn't the only one. Telefonica in Mexico shut down their
> CDMA network last year

There are still three other CDMA carriers in Mexico. Telefonica only had
a 2G network.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

How will that be a blow to CDMA? Your response doesn't make sense to me.

> In my world travels, I see more and more CDMA networks across Asia, in
> countries where there are already established GSM networks. In percentage
> terms, CDMA has been increasing its worldwide market share. However if and
> when Australia allows CDMA to replaced by NextG, that will be a blow to
> CDMA.

Jar-Jar Binks wrote:
> How will that be a blow to CDMA? Your response doesn't make sense to me.
>
>> In my world travels, I see more and more CDMA networks across Asia, in
>> countries where there are already established GSM networks. In percentage
>> terms, CDMA has been increasing its worldwide market share. However if and
>> when Australia allows CDMA to replaced by NextG, that will be a blow to
>> CDMA.

Yeah, I was referring to CDMA 2000. Of course NextG is also CDMA.

On 2008-02-02, Mark Crispin <MRC@Washington.EDU> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Dennis Ferguson posted:
>> I think it isn't the only one. Telefonica in Mexico shut down their
>> CDMA network last year
>
> There are still three other CDMA carriers in Mexico. Telefonica only had
> a 2G network.

Not really. Iusacell and Unefon merged, but the merged company still
totals less than 4 million subscribers compared to 14 million for
Telefonica Movistar and approaching 50 million for Telcel. The Telmex
thing doesn't exist yet.

Note also that it may only be the leading edge. Telefonica also owns
(bought) CDMA networks in at least Guatemala, Colombia, Venezuela,
Peru, Chile and Argentina, and I think they've stopped selling the CDMA
in favor of GSM everywhere.

The Telmex 450 MHz CDMA network is a good idea, actually. Mexico has
huge uncovered rural areas and I don't think anyone could afford
enough GSM towers to make a dent in that. The 450 MHz CDMA networks
give them maximum coverage with minimum investment.

Dennis Ferguson

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:13:13 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <47a32854$0$84205$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> In alt.cellular.attws John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> Yep. CDMA has been in serious decline, and this will tend to accelerate
>>> the process, leaving Verizon increasingly isolated on a shrinking CDMA
>>> island, probably why Verizon shares dropped much more than AT&T shares.
>>> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
>>> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
>>> the U.S. market.
>>
>> Alltel is making some pretty good inroads and may largely pick up the slack
>> from Sprint ... especially if they start selling assets.
>
>In my world travels, I see more and more CDMA networks across Asia, in
>countries where there are already established GSM networks. In
>percentage terms, CDMA has been increasing its worldwide market share.
>However if and when Australia allows CDMA to replaced by NextG, that
>will be a blow to CDMA.

Actually just the opposite, as I've proven in past posts.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <47a3e62b$0$84241$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I was referring to CDMA 2000. Of course NextG is also CDMA.

Next G is HSDPA.

--
Charles

Charles wrote:
> In article <47a3e62b$0$84241$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I was referring to CDMA 2000. Of course NextG is also CDMA.
>
> Next G is HSDPA.

Which is W-CDMA.

In article <47a4725f$0$84198$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Charles wrote:
> > In article <47a3e62b$0$84241$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
> > <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I was referring to CDMA 2000. Of course NextG is also CDMA.
> >
> > Next G is HSDPA.
>
> Which is W-CDMA.

Why do you insist on pretending that CDMA and W-CDMA are the same?

You could also say that all cell phones are the same since they are
radios. (to most people that would be true and good enough since they
don't care if a phone uses CDMA, W-CDMA, HSDPA, TDMA, GSM, LTE, etc,
they just want it to work)

Next G is HSDPA. Telstra plans to turn off it's CDMA network.

--
Charles

In alt.cellular.sprintpcs Charles <fort514@mac.com> wrote:
>
> Why do you insist on pretending that CDMA and W-CDMA are the same?
>

There is a reason the they both have the acronym CDMA in their name! Further,
Qualcomm does hold patents on some of the intellectual property used in
W-CDMA, so every W-CDMA phone out there is purchased with some of it going to
Qualcomm. Qualcomm is the sole holder of CDMA (and I believe CDMA-2000)
patents, so clearly, there is a trend towards opening the technology to be
truly open, like GSM, but so far, it is still based enough on Qualcomm's CDMA
technology that they continue to reap the benefits of this in W-CDMA sales.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

Wishing without work is like fishing without bait.
-- Frank Tyger

On 4 Feb 2008 17:44:51 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com>
wrote in <60p18jF1rrm2lU2@mid.individual.net>:

>In alt.cellular.sprintpcs Charles <fort514@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why do you insist on pretending that CDMA and W-CDMA are the same?
>
>There is a reason the they both have the acronym CDMA in their name! Further,
>Qualcomm does hold patents on some of the intellectual property used in
>W-CDMA, so every W-CDMA phone out there is purchased with some of it going to
>Qualcomm. Qualcomm is the sole holder of CDMA (and I believe CDMA-2000)
>patents, so clearly, there is a trend towards opening the technology to be
>truly open, like GSM, but so far, it is still based enough on Qualcomm's CDMA
>technology that they continue to reap the benefits of this in W-CDMA sales.

There are a host of patents on UMTS (W-CDMA), most of which aren't held
by Qualcomm, as reported in the raging patent disputes,in which Qualcomm
hasn't been doing very well.

<http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3695011>
Nokia Takes Qualcomm Patent Beef to ITC
August 17, 2007

Qualcomm's legal problems continued to pile up today as bitter legal
foe Nokia is seeking an International Trade Commission (ITC) ban on
the U.S. import of certain Qualcomm mobile chips, chipsets and
handsets.

According to Nokia, Qualcomm infringes on five Nokia patents in its
CDMA and WCDMA/GSM chipsets. The Finnish handset maker claims
Qualcomm engages in unfair trade practices by importing or selling
products that allegedly infringe on Nokia's patents.

...

The San Diego-based Qualcomm is already facing an ITC order banning
the import of Qualcomm future 3G mobile broadband handset models and
cell phones in a separate legal action by rival Broadcom.

...

In the ITC case brought by Broadcom, the trade agency determined that
Qualcomm infringed on Broadcom patents related to power-saving
technology.

The ITC banned Qualcomm chips and chipsets used in handheld wireless
communications devices, including cellular telephone handsets that
operate on EV-DO and WCDMA networks used by Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and
T-Mobile USA. Police, fire and other first responders also use
equipment with Qualcomm chips.

<http://www.lockergnome.com/teleclick/2007/12/15/nokia-wins-preliminary-victory-in-qualcomm-patent-case/>
Nokia Wins Preliminary Victory in Qualcomm Patent Case
December 15, 2007

A judge with the U.S. International Trade Commission has issued an
initial ruling against Qualcomm, in the San Diego chipmaker’s patent
infringement complaint against Finnish handset maker, Nokia.

The judge found no intellectual property infringement or violation on
the part of Nokia, with regard to three of Qulacomm’s patents. In
addition to this, Qualcomm patent #473 was found to be invalid.

The judge’s initial determination will now be reviewed by the
International Trade Commission, which intends to issue a final ruling
by April 14, 2008.


Apology accepted.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <60p18jF1rrm2lU2@mid.individual.net>, Thomas T. Veldhouse
<veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs Charles <fort514@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > Why do you insist on pretending that CDMA and W-CDMA are the same?
> >
>
> There is a reason the they both have the acronym CDMA in their name!

The important thing is that they are not compatible, they are
incompatible, not that they have similar names. You can't use a CDMA
phone on a W-CDMA network or vice versa. It is silly to say they are
the same when you can't use one on a network that uses the other.

--
Charles