Why T-Mobile Needs Sprint to Increase Business Revenue

On Sunday, April 29, 2018, T-Mobile and Sprint announced their intent to merge creating a $146B transaction to hopefully close in 1H19.  During the call, CEOs John Legere and Marcelo Claure talked up the consumer benefits of a combined company and that with this new company, the US would take back 5G leadership from the Asians.

There are so many areas to address in this proposed merger from regulatory hurdles, consumer benefits, job growth (or layoffs), the ‘mother of all networks,’ the winning brand, which executives came out ahead, etc.  I’ll start with the business service side because I’ve been asking this question to T-Mobile since the Un-carrier 9.0 announcement in March 2015 (Un-carrier for Business). The offering helped stimulate additional subscriber growth and impinged upon competitors’ specific business segments. Beyond the discounted plan structure, the ability to use free Wi-Fi during air travel, and free 2G global roaming, sophisticated higher revenue business services have not been in the T-Mobile portfolio.  

Sure, T-Mobile’s SyncUp fleet management solution or DIGITS offer another layer but those products also compete with similar or more sophisticated services from Sprint, AT&T and Verizon. It’s probably safe to say that much of T-Mobile’s business growth are lines in the small-medium business segment.  

For those who are wondering what sophisticated business services may be, here’s a Sprint example below: 

With a strong consumer message, I continue to wonder what of the business prospects with the combined company.   To be sure, much of the T-Mobile’s and Sprint’s business revenue challenges are unique. T-Mobile either doesn't see the return on investment in creating a sophisticated business portfolio, as that wouldn't be relevant to its subscriber base or they were waiting on Sprint all along.  Sprint has the business services (wireless and wireline) but lack the network credibility of their competitors.   I'm happy they addressed my question on the merger call and followed up with this responding vague Tweet. 

The low hanging fruit from the T-Mobile business expansion standpoint (and in their Twitter response) is rural America, bringing broadband competition to wireless and wireline incumbents. But that should already be on the T-Mobile radar, merger or not.  For Sprint’s part, the company’s 2.5 GHz 5G vision would be a compelling one in upselling and retaining its incumbent business base. Yet with capital constraints and other financial challenges, the pace, breadth and full realization of that Sprint-only 5G network is questionable (i.e., lots of major regions or national). Sprint is already in LTE catch up mode against competitors. 

A far-reaching network is everything. Verizon and AT&T know this and have invested tens of billions in their networks.  Both companies have captured consumer and business marketshare as a result. A new T-Mobile with a true 5G national network, combining low (600 MHz), mid-band (2.5 GHz) and future millimeter wave assets will surely provide a formidable network competitor to the big two, and foundational to future business revenue expansion.  

Assuming the deal is done and approved by 1H19 projections, it’s logical that parents, DT and Softbank, would increase capital (and not count on OpEx synergies) to accelerate the network vision (pun intended).  T-Mobile has a solid track record in integration (MetroPCS), network expansion and great execution. I’d expect no less from the combined Sprint and T-Mobile network planning and engineering teams. T-Mobile is already on track to plant a national 5G network flag thanks to its 600 MHz (albeit with thin dedicated spectrum), when that will be supplemented by the 2.5 GHz (>300M POPs) is the big question.   If the deal isn't approved, T-Mobile will need to build up its business portfolio to truly compete.   

[[[updated May 2, 1018]]]

On T-Mobile's 1Q18 Earnings Call, CEO Mike Sievert addressed the attacking the business segment at the new T-Mobile.   He stated: " Our business plan is funded for an expansion of our enterprise team. In year one, we’re going to take advantage of this set of capabilities and get after it and we funded our plan in year one to hire aggressively to get after the business market."

Three Win-Win Wireless Network Features

Published at FierceWIreless

Ho's Perspective: 3 network win-win features Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint are using 

October 22, 2015 | By William Ho

The wireless network, as we bring it up in everyday conversation, is often about coverage and capacity. Much has been written about LTE networks becoming the revenue growth engine for the industry, the need to deploy complementary equipment such as Distributed Antenna Systems and small cells to meet data demand, and carriers' expanding geographic and population coverage.

Still, many companies are looking to move beyond the standard network buildouts. AT&T is moving aggressively as the industry pioneer toward Software Defined Networking and Network Functions Virtualization with benefits of scalability and flexibility both operationally and from the cost, product and service viewpoint. Verizon is also following suit and while Sprint and T-Mobile US have not formally committed themselves, it's a logical industry path. Beyond these macro network topics, there are network features that are synergistic for both provider and user.

Here are three network features that are in various states of deployment and development that I believe are ultimately win-wins for both mobile carriers and users:

1. Carrier Aggregation (CA) is an LTE Advanced feature that allows mobile carriers to meld disparate spectrum for wider channels, thereby supporting greater download speeds and network capacity. This network feature has been for the most part taken for granted as almost every carrier is "doing it." A check on the 3GPP specifications show a myriad of global carrier aggregation FDD, TDD, intra- and interband combinations. While some carriers can delay this feature by having wide contiguous spectrum (e.g., T-Mobile's 15-20 MHz band in some areas), other carriers are already implementing two times carrier aggregation (e.g., Sprint's two-carrier CA in the 2.5 GHz band, AT&T is doing 700+AWS, Verizon is doing 700+AWS). Yet in the near future, carriers will be embarking on three-carrier CA. Sprint and AT&T have both signaled that this is going to happen. Cynically, one can view it being ammunition for the speed arms race playing out in marketing messages and media coverage.

Beyond marketing, having faster download speeds addicts users so they invariably consume more data. Rarely do users complain that their mobile broadband experience is too fast. Quite the opposite, there is the sense of annoyance that network speeds aren't fast enough. Clearly, this plays in the hands of carriers offering greater data buckets and simplistically the overt path to drive service revenues. As download speeds increase beyond tens of Mbps to hundreds, carriers can potentially offer speed tier services based upon price point or brand. On the fixed wireline side, AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and others offer service based on speed tiers, so the concept is well understood by the marketplace. In the mobile space, a variety of factors prevent offering a minimum download guarantee but the industry can flip the concept in limiting a maximum speed. This is already happening in the prepaid space as AT&T's Cricket users are limited at 8 Mbps in a way to differentiate and protect the AT&T postpaid experience. Creating reliable download speed bands potentially allow for carrier plan varieties and ultimately user choice. That is, a subscriber who wants lesser speed can pay less. Moving the thinking into the wireless fixed access realm, the opportunity exists to mirror standard fixed wireline offerings. Ultimately, carrier aggregation can provide choice.    

2. "Twinning," for lack of an industry term, is the current ability to link multiple (compatible) devices to a primary mobile number. AT&T's Chris Penrose, senior vice president of Internet of Things (IoT), used the expression at several industry analyst events, including CES and the 2014 and 2015 AT&T Industry Analyst conferences. Sure enough, the formal service announcement became "NumberSync." Immediately many people pointed to Apple's Continuity feature for similarities, but while it is an Apple ecosystem benefit, NumberSync and the idea of twinning is platform agnostic as the network plays a major role. With AT&T's announcement, T-Mobile and Sprint also said they were working on something similar. Though Verizon is mum, it's likely that an offering will eventually come as it appears to be an industry no-brainer, especially when driving IoT adoption.

It makes sense that AT&T is first to pioneer the feature as its connected devices bet has spanned several years with many partners. The need to use Bluetooth or Wi-Fi to tether the device to a smartphone, especially in wearables (think watch/fitness band) has limited those devices' mass appeal as both need to be carried. Now, with the network aware that there are many connected devices to the same mobile number, this could help boost wearable interest and adoption. Though the low hanging fruit are wearables and tablet use cases, connected home and automobile are the next frontiers in the consumer space. Certainly the bill of materials in attaching a cellular modem package to a wearable may be a short-term challenge but as the industry scales, pricing invariably will drop.

From the subscriber view, it's adding a "line" or device on their data share plans without extra fee. From the carrier view, every IoT attachment increases service ARPU and customer stickiness, and loyalty increases, which positively impacts churn. Twinning is an exciting first step for more innovation in the connected device arena that will surely play out with numerous announcements at the 2016 Consumer Electronics Show.    

3. The idea of unlicensed LTE has been thrown around for several years, spearheaded by Qualcomm. Operating LTE in unlicensed spectrum (initially 5 GHz) appears to be a natural progression for the efficient mobile technology. At the heart of the matter is to increase the mobile user experience in terms of download speeds. In areas where mobile speeds may suffer (e.g, indoor malls), unlicensed band availability may help offer the user a consistent, similar, or faster mobile experience. Yet the topic is not without controversy and spawns confusion as there are several approaches in various stages of development and favored by different parties (LTE-U, LAA, LWA, MuLTEfire). On top of which, providers including cable companies with substantial Wi-Fi business model interests operating on the same unlicensed bands are wary of resource contention and ultimately being shut out. Though the controversy has played out in FCC filings and tech publications, all industry players would not want regulatory edicts, nor does the FCC want that either.

Verizon and T-Mobile have signaled their desire in seeing unlicensed LTE operation in 2016, albeit possibly with different approaches. Verizon as a founding member of the LTE-U Forum has strong interest in LTE-U whereas T-Mobile is looking at LAA. While collaboration is underway at the 3GPP and IEEE, future operations of LTE in unlicensed spectrum has united the wireless sector. EVOLVE, an industry consortium of small, larger carriers, interested manufacturers and their respective trade associations, is preparing for a lobbying and marketing push. At this stage LTE on unlicensed spectrum is fluid as all interested stakeholders attempt to influence the outcome. Though this is a global topic, the near-term battleground is in the U.S.

Despite the controversy, a solution will come about to the (expected seamless) benefit to the mobile user. Different carriers will bring different variants to market. From the carrier view, operations in unlicensed bands should be seamless and potentially obviate any negative views on coverage, speed and capacity. Moreover, data is partially offloaded from the LTE network. A seamless, fast, and consistent mobile experience is now expected by most users and will be a factor in churn.

These three network features will continue to be implemented and some will be seamless but regardless, we'll all need the latest and greatest hardware and software to enjoy these benefits. That's not so bad, right?

More U.S. Spectrum Thoughts with RCRTV

RCR followed up the previous U.S. spectrum webinar with a RCRTV session in which Dan Meyer (Editor in Chief of RCR Wireless News) , Jeff Silva (Medley Advisors) and I go into different topics. Some of these included the H-block spectrum auction/DISH strategy, unlicensed spectrum/3.5GHz, regulatory progress, Cable WiFi, etc.

Bullet Point Analysis: New AT&T Mobile Share Value Pricing - Not Only About T-Mobile

WHAT IS IT?

There were two elements in the announcement:

1. AT&T announced a no-contract option (known as Mobile Share Value) for both consumers and business customers that provides customers with plan and device discounts.     New plans go in effect on Sunday, December 8. The announcement does not provide any service plan details though the carrier has stated that every smartphone added will be a flat $25/month instead of the sliding scale depending on data tier (ranging from $30-$50) on a contract offer. Also, featurephones/quick messaging devices (QMD) are now $20/month instead of $30/month.  All other add-on pricing for tablets, internet devices, wireless home phones, and gaming devices remain the same.
2. AT&T is adding a new Next plan 18 month upgrade option coupled with the ability to spread  payments over 26 months. 

ANALYSIS

TAKEAWAY:  IT'S NOT ONLY ABOUT T-MOBILE BUT ALSO HITS VERIZON WIRELESS

The easiest conclusion when viewing this announcement is that AT&T is responding to T-Mobile's success of the Simple Choice no-contract plans. As T-Mobile has been very public about targeting AT&T customers, it makes sense. Yet when pricing is extracted, the results reveal interesting moves.

Back to the analysis - though the announcement lacks service pricing details, BGR.com seems to have an advance look and crafted a value chart (below) running one and two smartphone scenarios.  

Graphic/table via BGR.com article.  

Not surprisingly, the gist of BGR's findings is that there are indeed savings.  The most surprising discovery of the BGR chart (assuming the prices are correct) is that Contract customers also receive some savings relief, noted in the third column as New Price (Subsidized). This is made possible by leaks in other media that the contract smartphone device add-on is now a flat $40/month.  With this as a guide, the new Value service pricing can be broken out. While there seems to be an increase at the 1 and 2 GB levels, there is some logic (explained in the Verizon Wireless impact below).

Existing AT&T business/enterprise & heavy users electing for >10GB will see the most service price savings if they make the switch.   

WHAT'S IN IT FOR AT&T?

• Though AT&T scoffs at following T-Mobile's no-contract reduced service pricing lead, the disruptive competitor has shown that the marketplace likes it. The fact that T-Mobile's last two quarters had formidable postpaid net additions helped push the AT&T decision to offer a Value plan. AT&T had to counter with something while preserving its premium brand.
• The new Mobile Share Value plans give AT&T more pricing levers. The holidays are coming up and industry insiders know that the bulk of the service providers' transactions are in Q4 and Q1. AT&T cannot allow T-Mobile (and nemesis Verizon Wireless) go into the holiday selling season with any sort of momentum.
• The new Value pricing helps the fight at the important high tier plans. This is particularly important given the target segments are heavy consumer data users and enterprise accounts, which Sprint and Verizon Wireless also covet. Moreover, these are high-value (ARPU bearing) customers that AT&T cannot afford to voluntarily churn out. 
• Smartphones are where the customer and revenue growth is in the near term. By discarding the smartphone device sliding scale pricing simplifies a sales reps' ability to close a transaction. By offering a flat $40/month contract and $25/month no-contract add-on pricing, things are 'not complicated.'  
• AT&T allows its contract customers to move to the new Value plans right away with fees or penalty. Contract customers will just have to remain with the carrier for the number of billing cycles they have remaining. However, they also benefit from the reduced pricing right away. While risky, this ability offsets churn, especially for those customers who don't want/need to upgrade to the latest devices at contract end.

WHICH COMPANIES WILL FEEL THE MOST IMPACT?

• T-Mobile may not get as many AT&T switchers as in previous quarters given AT&T's new No-Contract plan option. Though dismissed as expensive, AT&T's new 26 month payment extension helps to drop the per monthly device financing cost.  In business accounts, T-Mobile can no longer tout that it is the only carrier with no-contract reduced service pricing.
• Verizon Wireless - In the 2 year contract world, Verizon Wireless now sees greater competition. At the low end AT&T still appears to be ahead at the 1 and 2 GB levels despite the price increase.  How AT&T wins at these tiers is the new $40/mo smartphone pricing that matches Verizon Wireless'. In the old contract plan, smartphone add-ons were $45/month. In a single smartphone scenario, the 1 and 2 GB options would be $85 and $95. In the new contract plan, the same result occurs and still bests Verizon Wireless' $90 and $100.  Why do it then? In order to get to a flat $40 smartphone add-on price, pricing planners needed to increase service pricing specifically at these tiers. AT&T's new 8 GB tier now allows provides price parity at the 4 GB to 10 GB range.

With the above chart it is abundantly clear that AT&T was fixing non-competitive pricing against Verizon Wireless at the 6 GB to 50 GB range. Now it is at price parity in the bread and butter 2 year contract battle. Additionally, with a No-Contract option, Verizon Wireless is vulnerable for those high-value customers who want to shift over to a lesser no-contract option but won't consider T-Mobile. 

• Sprint is likely to be impacted in business accounts where it is competing heavily against AT&T and Verizon Wireless. It can't be too soon to have its Spark program rolled out to present a service differentiation.

COMPETITIVE RESPONSE?

• T-Mobile doesn't have any more pricing levers as its Simple Choice plans are fairly aggressive. Its ARPU metrics have been on the decline already and it has said that ARPU will stabilize along with churn. Along with this stability is the margin that also comes without playing the device subsidy game. Marketing and PR positioning will likely be the most logical step, marrying the value playbook with undercurrents of bolstered speed and its growing national LTE network footprint. Of course there will be the campaigns that says AT&T is copying T-Mobile.
• T-Mobile and Sprint's family plans are not shared data plans which has its own competitive merits. T-Mobile and Sprint positions the ability to assign a lesser or more data amount per user.  Moreover, Sprint's unlimited proposition and lower price points still stand out compared to larger competitors Verizon Wireless and AT&T. 
• Given AT&T's move into the No-Contract game, Verizon Wireless is forced to go on the same path.  AT&T's no-contract $25/month smartphone add-on is fairly aggressive; Verizon Wireless would unlikely undercut this as it doesn't want to stimulate a price war. A logical and conservative scenario is to roll out a matching no-contract plan.  In all likelihood, Verizon Wireless may add its own twist.

Analysis: T-Mobile’s "Boldest" Move - JUMP and Simple Choice forFamilies

What is it?

• T-Mobile announced an equipment upgrade program known as  JUMP!™, which enables people to upgrade their phones when they want, up to twice a year as soon as six months from enrollment. The monthly outlay is $10/month with equipment warranty (theft, lost, broken, or when one wants another phone).
• The Simple Choice for Family plan (4 lines of unlimited talk, text and web(500MB) for $100/month) was also announced allowing access to discounted  plans without a credit check. The caveat is that payment must be in advance (prepaid).

• JUMP Details: 
• Enroll in JUMP for $10/month. Have to wait for 6 months until the first 'JUMP' to get a new device. 
• If in 'Good Working Order' (powers on, no screen cracks, no visible water damage), customer can get the next latest and greatest. If customer is financing it (Equipment Installment Plan (EIP)), remainder of payments are waived. Customer can enter a new EIP plan.
• If not in 'Good Working Order,' a deductible will be paid ranging from $20-$170, depending on device,
• Customer can upgrade twice a year. It could be as early as the next day. 

What it means for consumers:

• For T-Mobile consumers who are early adopters and want the latest and greatest, Jump should be very compelling.
• For T-Mobile customers who don't care for upgrading and are price-sensitive, they're not likely to enroll in JUMP as the enrollment tallies to $120 a year.  
• For credit challenged family customers who want access to discounted postpaid rates, this should spur them on.
• The JUMP plan should appeal for early adopters in other competitors. Since T-Mobile is targeting AT&T, it would be logical for T-Mobile to step up some anti-AT&T marketing as it has done so already.

 What it means for T-Mobile:

• JUMP is an interesting anti-churn tool that appeals to a segment of customer who is willing to switch to get the latest and greatest. For this reason, it comports with T-Mobile's public comments stating that 2013 is going to be a year to stabilize.
• JUMP may be an effective switching tool. If T-Mobile can convince potential switchers that the T-Mobile network is just as good as everyone else's that would help customer acquisition.  
• The long term impact of JUMP 'trade-in' devices will help its MetroPCS unit.  These turned in devices will be refurbished and pushed into the MetroPCS portfolio as refurbished. For the MetroPCS customer who normally pays full priced for a phone, access to nearly the latest and greatest smartphone at a lower cost increases service stickiness. As T-Mobile wants to transition MetroPCS customers from their CDMA phones anyway, this move can potentially help accelerate the migration to the LTE/HSPA network and refarming of MetroPCS PCS spectrum. 
• Depending upon the JUMP subscriber size, the $10 monthly fee may be a factor in lifting postpaid ARPU.
• Simple Choice for Family should also help T-Mobile acquire subscribers. The price point is compelling. This plan could draw price sensitive postpaid family subscribers from competitors as well as transition families dealing with individual prepaid plans. How much this will hit Tracfone brands like StraightTalk and Simple Mobile remains to be seen. Of note, Simple Choice is LTE accessible whereas MVNO plans are still 3G/HSPA (okay 4G-ish). 

·          

Which companies will feel the most impact?

• AT&T as the very public target should see the most marketing against its subscribers. Other competitors may experience some leakage from their early adopter community as well, especially those whose ending contracts. 
• T-Mobile warranty companies should be busy depending upon how well JUMP is embraced.
• Handset makers (likely with halo devices) will likely see more volume coming out of T-Mobile. With increased volume, T-Mobile may leverage this to attain more favorable pricing. 

Carrier WiFi Offload - Some Thoughts - Part 2

In Part 1, Verizon Wireless and AT&T were discussed. To summarize, AT&T has good depth in hotspot/hotzone assets that formulate their WiFi data offload strategy.  Verizon Wireless on the other hand does not have any assets and currently partners in a white label fashion with Boingo to offer WiFi access as a benefit for mobile broadband customers. Therefore, Verizon Wireless does not really have a WiFi offload strategy (aside from some stadium/convention center WiFi buildouts to save its cellular network).  That can change possibly with a potential CableWiFi partnership.Now onto the other Tier 1 carriers.

Sprint: Sprint currently doesn't have a WiFi offload strategy. They do not own any WiFi assets and like many carriers, encourage their subscribers to use WiFi with the smartphone WiFi feature.  Sprint got out of the WiFi game in 2007 with the sale of some airport assets to Boingo. Given that one would expect a WiFi relationship like Verizon Wireless'.

Yet Sprint's unlimited data proposition, its background Clearwire WiMAX flate-rate wholesale deal, and tenuous financial state at the time may have negated a need for a WiFi partner. Going forward, it remains to be seen if WiFi is a necessary strategy component given the pending SoftBank deal and Sprint's majority control of Clearwire (use more 2.5 GHz bandwidth for capacity and speed).  It now for the most part has owners economics in furthering the unlimited data proposition. Aside from the broader Network Vision sites, small cells and/or distributed antenna systems are likely going to be deployed to help with meeting subscriber capacity issues. Nevertheless, the wild card is Boingo and its strategic WiFi provider partnership with the Competitive Carrier Association or CCA (which Sprint is a member).

T-Mobile: Similar to AT&T, this carrier owns its share of WiFi hotspots.  Though the numbers are much smaller, they do at least provide a wholesale and direct to subscriber revenue opportunities. T-Mobile's WiFi strategy foundation was also based on supplementing the lack of cellular coverage and then building services such as Unlimited Hotspot Calling and Hotspot@Home.   

Unlimited Hotspot calling also addressed adding additional calling minutes. Not that it makes a difference today, a WiFi calling feature is a popular feature for globetrotters as a free alternative to paying for global voice roaming rates, provided there is WiFi access. 

When AT&T purchased Waypoint, it grabbed the Starbucks contract from T-Mobile. But as anyone knows who frequents that coffee chain, the WiFi is free and clear.  T-Mobile still has WiFi presence in airports and hotels. Some can argue that it provides a dual benefit. The direct to consumer WiFi allows for the company to opportunistically address the tablet/laptop user who must have a WiFi connection. With hourly, weekly or monthly plans (and global roaming), T-Mobile no doubt eeks out some revenue from this line of business.  With this and the lack of substantial WiFi hotspot assets, carrier offload is not a the core of its WiFi strategy.  As with Sprint, Boingo is a wildcard for T-Mobile (as a member of CCA) to embrace since.   

As stated, Boingo is a possible resource to tap for carriers to expand a WiFi offering but Boingo is a WiFi aggregator (cobbling smaller players like hotels, motels, RV campgrounds, independent coffee shops, etc.) with limited WiFi assets (mostly in airports). The issue for Boingo is how they can bring substantial domestic WiFi hotspots to the table without outlaying any CapEx.  

Carrier WiFi Offload - Some Thoughts - Part 1

It's well known that WiFi plays an important role in mobile data consumption.  From the consumer view, it's faster than 3G (and maybe 4G in some cases), it's usually free, and it's seemingly ubiquitous.  

From the carrier view, any subscriber getting off the cellular data network helps capacity and saves on the customer's data caps, if any.  Some carriers can argue that open WiFi is not secure and worried about possible liabilities of customers throwing their data 'in the clear' on unsecured networks.

Given the differing carrier stances, here is where I see carriers' WiFi strategies. 

AT&T: Before the company bought Wayport in 2008,  it boosted its hotspot count.  Since then, AT&T has been reinforcing its national leadership in WiFi hotspots. AT&T smartphone and mobile broadband customers get the benefit of automatically connecting into AT&T hotspots or HotZones.  Their nice (and proprietary) smartphone client does this seamlessly without the customer needing to hunt for the correct SSID.  In this instance, it's a win-win. Customers get a seamless fast experience and AT&T offloads the data traffic.  It continues to invest in this technology with more and more hotspots deployed monthly, quarterly, annually.  So AT&T's WiFi strategy is to own the assets and in directly monetize through customer subscriptions.   

Verizon Wireless/Verizon: Verizon has never really warmed up to WiFi in the cellular network. These statements were made in the 3G deployment era and have continued as the corporate position when executives are asked about their WiFi strategy.  On the surface, it appears Verizon Wireless' WiFi strategy is not to have one.  However, a little known fact is that they indeed have a relationship with Boingo albeit a white label one.  Boingo powers both Verizon fixed line as well as the wireless business unit.   Unlink AT&T, only mobile broadband and specific fixed hi-speed internet (e.g., FiOS) customers are eligible.  Smartphone customers cannot take advantage.  But that may soon change with the introduction of CableWiFi in May 2012.

Cable is my Frenemy:

Cable companies have always been aligned with Sprint but with missteps on Clearwire, cable wireless retail strategy (Pivot), the relationship ended.  In 2006, cable companies' AWS spectrum foray (a.k.a. SpectrumCo) also included Sprint. But Sprint got out of SpectrumCo in 2007 cashing out its share. Fast forward to August 2012.  The FCC approved the sale of the former SpectrumCo AWS portfolio to Verizon Wireless.  Verizon Wireless and the cable companies are friends. Verizon Communications (fixed line) are enemies. All this closeness opens up the possibility that Verizon Wireless will use CableWiFi coverage to address data offload and will be Verizon Wireless' WiFi strategy.  

If so, Boingo is left without a dance partner.  To its credit, Boingo saw the writing on the wall and going to court members of the Competitive Carrier Association in September.  In fact, Boingo became CCA's strategic WiFi partner.

 More on other companies in the next post!