Jonathan Kramer on Wireless Tower Siting

LightSquared files for Bankrupcy (Chapter 11)

Jonathan Kramer — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:36:52 +0000

To the surprise of very few, LightSquared has filed for Bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11.

Given that the firm has virtually no path forward to use its frequencies to provide 4G-type services in light (no pun intended) of the apparently unresolvable GPS interference issues, Chapter 11 gives LightSquared a way to step back and see what it can salvage of their operations.

In a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding, in most cases, the debtor remains in control of its business and operations as a “debtor in possession.” The day-to-day operations are subject to the oversight and jurisdiction of the federal court (and typically the trustee). The goals of a Chapter 11 proceeding is for the company to find the cash to emerge from bankruptcy having paid its creditors some portion of the amount due, cancelling or renegotiating some contracts, and then resuming normal operations after completing the bankruptcy.

It seems pretty clear to me that the $9B contract LightSquared entered into with Sprint will be a target for cancellation. That will place even more pressure on Sprint to fund its Network Vision project.

A Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding is is very different from Chapter 7 proceeding.

In a Chapter 7 bankruptcy action the business ceases its regular operations. The court-appointed trustee sells off all of the business’s assets and distributes the sale proceeds to the creditors. If there’s any money leftover after all the creditors are paid, that balance is returned to the owners/shareholders of the bankrupt company, and the company ceases to exist.

Sometimes a firm starting out on a Chapter 11 bankruptcy path can still end up shutting down. It would not surprise me if that’s the case with LightSquared, especially if they are forced to sell off their licensed frequencies.

Time will tell.

Cell Tower Deaths on PBS Frontline 5/22/12

Jonathan Kramer — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:31:42 +0000

PBS Frontline in conjunction with ProPublica will present “Cell Tower Deaths” premiering on May 22, 2012 on PBS stations. No, this story is NOT about radio frequency emissions concerns. Rather, it focuses on the risk of building and servicing cell towers. Those risks are significant.

According to PBS:

The smartphone revolution comes with a hidden cost. A joint investigation by FRONTLINE and ProPublica explores the hazardous work of independent contractors who are building and servicing America’s expanding cellular infrastructure. While some tower climbers say they are under pressure to cut corners, layers of subcontracting make it difficult for safety inspectors to determine fault when a tower worker is killed or injured.

Why are tower workers 10-times more likely to die than regular construction workers (as claimed by PBS)?

You’ll see one reason in my February 2012 post titled, “Is Tower Building a Dirty Job?”

Take a look at the clip. About 36 second in to the Dirty Jobs clip you’ll see the owner of a tower construction company attach his safety belt hook to a tower section not yet bolted to the rest of the tower.

In my opinion, what you see at that moment is an amazing deadly lack of judgment, especially for the owner of a tower construction company. Even if he’s double tied-off to the tower, were the free-floating tower section were to fly off or drop, he would be split in two (metaphorically, if not in reality). I wonder if his poor judgment is a model for his employees? I certainly hope not. I’ll bet his Workers Comp insurance carrier hopes not, as well.

My T-Mobile Headliner Slides

Jonathan Kramer — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:16:00 +0000

Attached to this posting are the slides I used today during my portion of the T-Mobile External Affairs Headliner Series presentation. I’ve also attached John Pestle’s slides.

We hope you find them useful.

Kramer’s T-Mobile Headliner Series Slides
Pestle’s T-Mobile Headliner Series Slides

If the Tower Doesn’t Grow, Can Municipalities Say No?

Jonathan Kramer — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 01:48:45 +0000

John Pestle of Varnum and I have been invited to speak on this month’s T-Mobile’s National External Affairs Headliner Speaker Series. This is a monthly conference call/webinar with hundreds of internal and external T-Mobile executives, managers, line-level staff, and outside contractors.

The title of our lecture, thought up by T-Mobile, is “If the Tower Doesn’t Grow, Can Municipalities Say No?”

The conference call is scheduled for Wednesday, April 25th at 11am PST/2pm EST.

If you’re invited, you should already have the call-in information. If not, you’ll have to contact External Affairs to get it.

This should be fun! I have lots of slides to share.

Heck, I’ve always wanted to be a headliner!

(Added 4/23 at 8:50 a.m. PDT: I’ve received several questions asking if non-T-Mobiler’s can sit in on the call. The answer is that I wish I could say yes. This is a closed webinar, so you’ll have to ask your contact at T-Mobile External Affairs whether you can join in. -jlk)

Kramer’s 6409 Webinar: Cal Bar Grants 1 hour of MCLE Credit

Jonathan Kramer — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:15:30 +0000

The State Bar of California has granted 1.0 hours of MCLE credit for attorneys attending Jonathan’s Sec. 6409 Webinar on April 5th. This follows the American Planning Association’s approval of Certification Maintenance credit of 1.0 hours for LAW.

If you are a government attorney outside of California, you may still be able to receive CLE credit in your jurisdiction using the Uniform Certificate of Attendance which will be issued after the webinar.

If you are with a government and wish to attend the Webinar at no charge (MCLE and CM credits are also at no charge), please visit http://Bit.ly/sec6409 for more information and to sign up. About 70% of the available webinar ports have now been taken, so please don’t delay.

APA Members: 1 Hour of Law CM credit for KTLF Sec. 6409 Webinar

Jonathan Kramer — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:55:42 +0000

The American Planning Association has approved 1 hour of LAW CM credit APA members participating on KTLF’s 4/5/12 Webinar regarding the new wireless collocation rules (Sec. 6409). California MCLE credit is pending. Open only to governments; No charge for governments.

More information and sign up: http://bit.ly/sec6409.

Might Apple buy Sprint?

Jonathan Kramer — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:03:37 +0000

Okay, it sounds wild, but let’s look at this for a bit…

Sprint has committed $15B to Apple in connection with securing rights to market the iPhone to Sprint’s subscribers (let’s not talk about the newest Apple product, the iHeatingPad). That’s a lot of cash, and I’ll bet that Apple’s contract leave virtually no room for Sprint to get out from under the weight of an 800 pound Apple.

At the same time, the $9B Sprint was expecting from LightSquared seems to drifted away. This raises very serious questions about the future of Sprint’s touted Network Vision upgrade. As a result, Sprint’s plans to shutter some 30,000 cell sites, relying on the Network Vision project to make it possible…must have dropped to ‘maybe’ status, too.

Clearwire. That word has turned into a blackhole of cash for Sprint, and Google just helped further devalue Sprint’s, ah, majority investment by dumping the Google-held shares at a 90% write off. WiMax is not Sprint’s path forward–LTE is. Clearwire may be too late to Sprint’s party.

Sprint’s Board of Directors last month vetoed Dan Hesse’s plan to buy MetroPCS (for a 30% premium, no less). That puts Dan Hesse’s future outlook at Sprint at a 30% deficit (others say that number is even worse). Will there be new blood on the head of the pin, much less new confusions over the direction the pin is pointing? Hey, how about T-Mobile buying MetroPCS?

This month, Sprint seems to have tried…and failed…to get a network sharing agreement with T-Mobile, according to the Wall Street Journal. I guess that shots a hole in my idea about a SprinT-Mobile merger.

Let’s not forget the grandest of Sprint’s Grand Experiments: Nextel. Oh, you want to forget about that? Likely Sprint does, too.

With research firm Sanford Bernstein dropping its rating on Sprint, citing that Sprint might visit BK land, the Bad News Band keeps marching on. For a thoughtful look at this particular issue, see the SeekingAlpha story of March 20th by clicking here.

Now let’s consider Apple.

Apple has attained the status of a ‘mythical creature’ that can seemingly devour all that blocks it path.

Apple has been fanatical about controlling, to the n-th degree, every element of its users experiences with all of the Apple devices. It controls the look and feel of the user experience, and via the App Store all of the applications on iPhones that have not been subject to a jailbreak, as well as iPads of various operating temperatures.

It must peeve Apple that it decided to confine its iPhone and iPad devices originally on an exclusive basis to AT&T to run on that carrier’s less-than-robust and less-than-adequate-capacity network, and one that actually gave up spectrum in the failed T-Mobile love affair.

Now, at least, Verizon subscribers have a better chance at being able to enjoy close to 3G speeds with their iSomethings.

Oh, yes, there’s that cash reserve thing for Apple. It’s sitting on more cash than the U.S. Treasury, and since last Summer it has been the most valuable company you’ll find in the U.S., and maybe anywhere in the entire galaxy.

If Apple thinks about it, it can have its cake and eat it, too: Buy Sprint, fund and complete Network Vision, deploy 4G at real 4G speed, and dump all of the Sprint phones save for Apple iSomethings. Using the software defined radios of Network Vision, Apple can actually build a wireless network that is optimized for data (but still including the voice app that defines LTE). Siri may be the first step to Skynet, albeit with a programmed sense of humor. (How much wood can a woodchuck chuck? See here.)

For Apple, a Sprint purchase would yield it monthly cash flow that can be put back into expanding and optimizing the “Apple Wireless” Network Vision. And given Sprint’s majority ownership in Clearwire (and the 106ish MHz Clearwire controls in the U.S.), Apple would have a real playground to expand data capacity and speeds.

Maybe Apple might make apply the principles of the iTunes Store to Sprint to shift the marketing of Sprint services to the faceless online monolith. Buy a phone and activate service online. Forget about pins dropping.

It just seems right for Apple to continue its quest to control everything its users see and do with the iSomethings now and in the future by controlling its own data delivery network. At the same time, it can keep feeding iSomethings to Verizon, AT&T, and any other carrier that can’t afford to be left in Apple’s iDust.

With the passing of Steve Jobs, the direct minutia-level control he seemed to exert on Apple (at least according to Isaacson) has also passed. This may free up the current management of Apple to take the leap (no, not Leap Wireless) to controlling even more of the user experience, but from a new distance, all without asking “WWSD?”

Of course, Apple might buy T-Mobile instead–or as well–and do more or less the same thing, but that’s a thought best left for a future post.

Why not WiMax, Sprint? Oh, it’s LTE. Got it.

Christy O'Berry, Esq., LL.M., P.E. — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 01:16:46 +0000

Sprint, whose original “4G” network was to be built on a WiMax platform, is moving to deploy an LTE network in place of WiMax. This means that Sprint is currently running 2 types of “4G” technology on its network, LTE and WiMax.

The problem with WiMax is that its availability is limited and its performance, when compared to LTE, is not lighting fast. It’s just DSL fast and we all know that isn’t really that fast. Another limitation of WiMax is the farther you get from the node the slower the network speed. Who wants slower speed?

Is Sprint ditching its WiMax partner? It appears so.

The big push to deploy LTE seems to be a result of pressure from Sprint’s consumers rather than a big difference in the technology. I mean, all the other big time providers are deploying LTE, why can’t Sprint’s customers have LTE?

WiMax might still have viability in other platforms like broadband internet access as a landline bypass, as cable or satellite TV bypass, or for providing some limited backhaul services.

One thing that seems almost certain, is that WiMax viability as a mobile telephone provider is waning as LTE is becoming the next go to technology for high speed mobile data.

Quote from PCIA’s Webinar on Sec. 6409

Jonathan Kramer — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:06:34 +0000

I had a chance to legitimately listen in on the PCIA’s webinar last week providing their membership with the industry’s view of how the new rules are to be used, and taught to local governments.

I won’t go into much detail now about the PCIA’s webinar now, other than to say three things:

1. It was informative to hear the PCIA’s view of the strengths and weakenesses of the new law; and

2. Far more teaching than boasting occured (to the PCIA’s credit); and

3. The ‘quote of the meeting’ (relating to a local government’s limited ability to deny a Sec. 6409 project) was:

“If the tower doesn’t grow, they can’t say no!”

I’ll be sharing more from the PCIA’s webinar when I conduct mine (for local government attorneys/agencies) on April 5th. If you qualify, please sign up at http://bit.ly/sec6409.

About half the slots are now reserved, so please don’t wait until the last moment to sign up. One hour of MCLE credit has been applied for.

Wireless Siting Professionals: A Vanishing Breed?

Jonathan Kramer — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 01:14:46 +0000

I’ve been talking with a number of my friends who are in the wireless siting business as contractors. These are the people, mostly independent contractors, who show up at the planning counter to file siting projects representing the wireless carriers. They perform important functions in the wireless permitting process. I have great respect for the work they do, and the way the do their work with the grace and skill that comes from experience and professionalism. Their work starts long before a wireless project ever hit the planning counter.

Some years ago…say 10…it was common for these siting professionals to have the opportunity to develop significant experience doing what they do. They had that chance because of what’s called “Pay Points.” In days gone by, these professionals were not paid on an hourly basis, but rather at the time some event along the process happened, hence the name.

Once the siting professional received the project package (generally the search ring, a blank lease, and other carrier parameters), they’d go out and spot potential properties, research land records, find willing owners, get lease options signed, attend the A&E meetings, and submit the project to the local government for approval. Then they’d stay with the project through the government planning phase, and attend the hearings representing the carrier client. Each major events was a pay point, and each pay point was the incentive to get the work done and stick with the project.

Because there was fairly significant money involved (I’ve been told $10,000 to $15,000 per project was not uncommon), the professionals could afford to stick with the projects that didn’t ultimately pan out because they got the earlier pay points, and had other projects generating different pay points.

But, alas, lots of people got into the siting business, and then the squeeze on pay point amounts came down from the carriers and their master contractors. Essentially, the siting professional were offered more work with fewer dollars. The result is that a core of professionals remain in the siting business today, but they are also looking for every way to cut costs. Some of these professionals have shut down their physical offices and main telephone numbers turning to become virtual firms (read: working from home with cell phones and computers).

One of the more undesirable results of the squeeze today is that lots of much less experienced people are entering the siting business. It shows.

My staff and I see and deal with the greenhorns when we’re negotiating leases on behalf of our wireless landlord clients, and when we’re dealing with project packages tendered for our review through our government planning agency clients. The quality of the work product coming in is declining, as is the fundamental understanding of the processes. All of this leads to longer negotiations and increased review times. It also leads to more of the real professionals leaving the business to find more profitable lines of work in other areas of project management.

Now comes Section 6409. Generally the siting professionals are very excited about the passage of Section 6409, but some (including yours truly) think there’s a fairly significant cloud surrounding a thin silver lining. I suspect Sec. 6409 is going to turn into a real cloud burst casting off even more rain on the quality people in the business of wireless siting.

As 6409 seems to grant broad collocation (really, Co-Siting) authority to the wireless firms, and the approvals appear to occur in some or many cases by right, I expect the large master contractors who work directly for the carriers (i.e., Bechtel, ALU, Ericsson, B&V, etc.) to look to shave their subcontractors costs even more to benefit their own bottom lines. My gut says the master contractors will assign the Sec. 6409 work to in-house employees for the engineering work, and low level permit runners who are paid a relatively modest hourly fee for their work to file the projects with the local governments.

In major markets like Southern California, this will be a huge and increasing amount of the main siting work. Since the Verizon and AT&T LTE projects and the Sprint Network Vision work will apparently fall under Sec. 6409, there goes that slice of the pie from the mouths of the core of professionals.

And since Sec. 6409 will drive carriers to less desirable sites (that term depends on who’s uttering it…but I digress) but with must faster expected approval times, I think that new siting will slow down for a while as carriers look to do their capacity upgrades at the new low hanging 6409 sites.

As I said at the top of this story, I have many friends who are truly professionals in the wireless siting business. Sadly, I expect that a significant number of them will not be in that line of work come a year from now. I hope I’m wrong, but money talks louder than respect for professionalism and experience.