AT&T to cover about 250M people with HSPA+ by year's end

[zerocool84]

AT&T has changed its story on its 3.5G / 3.75G strategy prior to rolling out LTE seemingly countless times in the past couple years, but the good news is that the latest policy shift is a decidedly positive one: it intends to cover about 250 million Americans in speedy (well, hopefully speedy) HSPA+ by the end of 2010. The remarks came today from AT&T Operations CEO John Stankey at a Reuters event, going on to say that the company intends to "double" its theoretical 7.2Mbps maximum on HSPA; it seems almost certain that the move is in response to T-Mobile's aggressive moves into 21Mbps territory recently -- not to mention commercial WiMAX availability on Sprint and the impending launch of a handful of LTE markets on Verizon -- but realistically HSPA+ on AT&T could easily run anywhere between 7.2 and 14.4Mbps depending on market, backhaul capacity, and countless other factors. Works out well for a presumed iPhone launch, doesn't it?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/14/atandt-to-cover-about-250m-people-with-hspa-by-years-end/

Very cool that they're doing this instead of making everyone wait for 4G. It'll give a nice speed boost until 4G LTE comes.

 

[TheWart]

That will be very nice if they follow through in the time frame they lay out. I wonder if this makes it more likely that the video chat on the iphone and other att phones will be 3G as well as wifi.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I'll believe it when I see it. AT&T also said they'd release 5 Android phones in the first half of the year. So far they have the Backflip, with the Dell Aero on the way. Not sure if the Nexus One counts...

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Works out well. As I said before, for the world's GSM networks, LTE isn't a MUST yet. I see it more as a 2011 (at the earliest) thing since 3G speeds have a way to go. They can easily push 21mbps or even 42mbps if they wanted to.

 

[CTrain]

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[gsaldivar]

With AT&T's track record on investing in 3G coverage, you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath for their next network upgrade...

 

[gsaldivar]

This sums it up pretty well:

http://www.crn.com/mobile/222400329;jsessionid=CUBROFDLVFGPDQE1GHRSKHWATMY32JVN

Analyst: AT&T Needs $5 Billion Investment To Keep Up

"AT&T has revenue of over $50 billion ... However, while AT&T's wireless business is its most profitable, the bulk of the company's investments are going into its wired business, including its U-verse combined television, high-speed Internet, and phone offering..."

 

[charrison]

This sums it up pretty well:

http://www.crn.com/mobile/222400329;jsessionid=CUBROFDLVFGPDQE1GHRSKHWATMY32JVN

Analyst: AT&T Needs $5 Billion Investment To Keep Up

"AT&T has revenue of over $50 billion ... However, while AT&T's wireless business is its most profitable, the bulk of the company's investments are going into its wired business, including its U-verse combined television, high-speed Internet, and phone offering..."

If you have not been paying attention, they have been throwing large piles cash at their wireless upgrades the last several years.

 

[Deeko]

Their backhaul isn't enough to support their current 3G....

If they actually invest & upgrade to make this happen, it will be a huge plus for them. Not only higher speeds, but higher speed = less time spent downloading something = less time using the network, so it will help reduce congestion. So they definitely need this, and its a good decision to do it rather than waiting until LTE.

We'll see if it happens, though.

 

[gsaldivar]

If you have not been paying attention, they have been throwing large piles cash at their wireless upgrades the last several years.

Was it 5 billion more than what they normally spend?

 

[corkyg]

All they have to do to reach that 250 million number is concentrate on high density urban areas. They probably count me as covered as well - but, at 1 bar signal strength?

 

[LikeLinus]

All they have to do to reach that 250 million number is concentrate on high density urban areas. They probably count me as covered as well - but, at 1 bar signal strength?

The US only has 307 million people. Agreed that they probably count crappy almost non-service as a covered person..lol

 

[pm]

Was it 5 billion more than what they normally spend?

It was USD$2 billion more than they normally spend. Slide 14 of their 2009 earnings conference call.
http://www.att.com/Investor/Financial/Earning_Info/docs/4Q_09_slide_c.pdf

Beyond this, they didn't break out what they spent on upgrading wireless data specifically that I could find.

They did mention in several spots that they are upgrading the backhaul to support HSPA+, which is a good sign. Slide 13 talks about the upgrade.

For what it's worth, I tend not to be a person to complain very much, but my service under AT&T lately has been bad enough that I've called them twice to complain. One day about 3 weeks ago I had 12 dropped calls... in one day. It's embarrassing and unprofessional to drop people that often and I lay the blame entirely on AT&T's wireless service because I was only calling land-line phones. My aunt got a call from her future son-in-law calling to ask if he could propose (my uncle passed away), and she got dropped 3 times in one call. Which had my future cousin-in-law sweating because he wasn't sure it wasn't because she was upset or not. The sooner AT&T upgrades their service, the happier I will be.

 

[charrison]

It was USD$2 billion more than they normally spend. Slide 14 of their 2009 earnings conference call.
http://www.att.com/Investor/Financial/Earning_Info/docs/4Q_09_slide_c.pdf

Beyond this, they didn't break out what they spent on upgrading wireless data specifically that I could find.

They did mention in several spots that they are upgrading the backhaul to support HSPA+, which is a good sign.

Yes the are throwing money at the problem. More cell towers, more fiber to the towers and 7.2 upgrade. It is happening.

 

[foghorn67]

All they have to do to reach that 250 million number is concentrate on high density urban areas. They probably count me as covered as well - but, at 1 bar signal strength?

Do they consider Tucson "urban" enough? I know VZW and what was Alltel getting decent coverage there.

 

[corkyg]

Do they consider Tucson "urban" enough? I know VZW and what was Alltel getting decent coverage there.

Well, the greater Tucson area is pushing 1 million in 2009. Sprint gets excellent coverage here. I didn't know about Altell, but did know VZF. Itried AT&T for 6 months last year - it sucked big time.

 

[ViRGE]

It's great that they're going to do this, but it leaves me wondering if they're going to slow down their LTE deployment as a result.

 

[pm]

It's great that they're going to do this, but it leaves me wondering if they're going to slow down their LTE deployment as a result.

In that conference call slideset that I linked above they say that HSPA+ lays the groundwork for LTE because they are upgrading the majority of AT&T's backhaul to fiber optic - which they were planning to do for LTE anyway.

Aggressive Backhaul Program Under Way
• Supports doubling of theoretical peak speeds
• Expect majority of AT&T’s mobile data traffic on fiber-based backhaul
by end of 2010
• Prepares network for LTE deployment: testing under way, nearing
vendor selection