Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Verizon, AT&T Announce Plans To Build and Share Hundreds of New Cell Towers (fiercewireless.com)

Posted by msmash on from the next-up dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Verizon and AT&T announced a joint venture with Tillman Infrastructure to build and share hundreds of cell towers in more in a move that is sure to be seen as a threat to more established tower companies. The companies said the new structures "will add to the overall communications infrastructure in the United States," filling gaps in current tower footprints, but will also enable the nation's two largest network operators to relocate equipment from towers they're currently using. Construction plans on the first towers will begin early next year and will come online "quickly" as they are completed.

18 of 34 comments (clear)

  1. Perhaps I'm the only one by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But it seems like this summary - and the article itself - would be more useful if it supplied additional information.

    I certainly know very little about how cellular towers are managed - until a few minutes ago, I assumed the carriers themselves owned them. Apparently that is wrong...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Perhaps I'm the only one by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      a lot of towers are owned by third party companies and lease capacity to all carriers. some of these companies are public companies themselves

  2. Re:Yes, yes, merge, my pretties! by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    A merger of AT&T and Verizon would pretty much do it.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  3. Fire sale on existing tower capacity by gtarthur · · Score: 1

    Attention Sprint, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. - fire sale on well placed existing communication towers will soon be available for your ramp up to compete with Big 2 networks. The law of unintended consequences shows no mercy.

    --
    Every change is not progress, but there is no progress without change.
    1. Re:Fire sale on existing tower capacity by Shatrat · · Score: 2

      Unlikely. AT&T and VZ are gearing up for 5G expansion which is going to require them to have denser tower footprints. They'll still need all their existing tower locations as well, and will be using those existing towers in many cases as part of their fronthaul for the new towers.

      The other carriers are going to have to solve this problem as well, which is one reason T-Mobile and Sprint were looking at getting hitched.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  4. I don't see this as a "good thing" [tm] by Grand+Facade · · Score: 1

    Many Cell towers are owned by tower companies who lease out space in the tower.
    Im sure there area certain levels of services that are contractually included, power, internet feed, etc.
    SO now the providers are trying to cut corners and deal out the middle man by putting up their own towers.
    This means that the providers will supply ancillary services that were previously contracted.
    This would it seems cause a degradation in these areas as there is no longer contractual support and the providers are known for cutting corners or trying to monetize these.
    Walled gardens or paying for tower access, over selling subscriptions or under demand capacity equipment, etc.

    Lame example - Remember when Usenet server access was an integral part of an internet account.

    "Sorry your account does not include enhanced service you are not authorized access to this tower, press #XXX for an account upgrade."
    or
    "All circuits are busy, please try another time"

    --
    Rick B.
  5. What a difference two years makes? by jonatha · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In March 2015 Verizon essentially sold off over 11000 cell towers to American Tower....

    --
    The SCO lawsuit makes me wish my company were in Utah. We need a new building.
    1. Re:What a difference two years makes? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      In March 2015 Verizon essentially sold off over 11000 cell towers to American Tower....

      Neither VZ nor ATT really cares who owns the towers, so long as the towers exist and someone is maintaining them. You can be sure that they will have kept the towers which are lucrative to operate, and dropped the ones where they have the least subscribers.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. Re:Anti-Trust Action, Please! by Darkk · · Score: 2

    I fail to see why this would be an anti-trust issue? If anything it FORCES Sprint to improve their network and compete for their customers.

  7. We definitely need them here. by gsilver0 · · Score: 2

    At my office (30 miles south of Salt Lake City, Utah, just off a major freeway, and in a county of over half a million) my reception is so bad on Verizon to be practically unusable. I tried to do a speedtest, and the first one resulted in: 816ms ping 0.00 mbps down 0.25 mbps up Subsequent runs either failed to complete or failed to run.

    1. Re:We definitely need them here. by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

      You live in Utah...I'm sorry.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  8. Re:Anti-Trust Action, Please! by swb · · Score: 1

    Agreed.

    To me this is kind of like a statement that what we really need is just one common cellular network, and that "competition" between carriers mostly just results in duplication of facilities and underutilized spectrum.

  9. hipwful by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Im sitting here roght now on att without lte. I want a better carrier

  10. This is to be expected by williamyf · · Score: 1

    The cost of building and maintaining ever faster telecoms networls (celullar and otherwise), paired with smaller cell sizes, and NIMB syndrome were communities reject cell towers (but demand service nonetheless) for aesthetic or "health" reasons (in the case of celullar), lead to this.

    Fisrt came the sharing of the long range towers (think microwave repetition and concentration points), then came the sharing of rural cell towers, then urban cell towers.

    The next step is RAN Sharing. And is being baked in 5G standards (and backported to 4G).

    [Carefull, PDF]
    https://www.gsma.com/publicpol...

    For more info on the topic, and in particular, specific provider cases, google is your friend.

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
    1. Re:This is to be expected by williamyf · · Score: 1

      Not In My Backyard

      --
      *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  11. in more in a move by trevc · · Score: 1

    Lost me there..

  12. Re:Anti-Trust Action, Please! by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

    why aren't existing tower companies building in these places where AT&T and Verizon plan to build?

    How dare cell carriers improve their product

  13. New Vendor improve price competition by spinitch · · Score: 1

    ATT & Verizon will partner with a smaller private Partner Tillman Towers since apparently the main existing suppliers terms are beatable by the new vendor. Bringing in a new vendor hopefully helps drive down costs across industry. Low balling typically a short term market capture tactic but hard to sustain if poor margins/cash flow. Maybe Carriers can hop around getting prices leaving the investors at Tower Coâ(TM)s With lower returns. Interesting since SoftBank and LendLease also Entering market. Wonder if other carriers beside Sprint will patronize. Guess depends on pricing. This should also increase price competition. The big 3 public traded Tower Coâ(TM)s have fairly high PE ratios. Will see how long lasts. Curious how more competition helps prices on towers but scale often the case for consolidation and less providers on services side;)