Category Archives: Wireless

Midco sells tower portfolio to K2 Towers and will rent access to keep CAFII commitments

Posted on by
Reply

Fierce Telecom reports…

Midco is a midwestern service provider that offers broadband via hybrid fiber coax (HFC) cable, fiber-to-the-home, and fixed wireless access (FWA). It serves 490,000 homes and businesses in 400 communities in Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

This week, Midco announced that it sold its tower portfolio to K2 Towers. The two companies did not reveal the monetary amount of the transaction nor how many towers were involved.

Sounds like Midco wants to focus on broadband service…

Bruch said, “We want to make sure that we, as a company, focus on our core business which is broadband, providing the best broadband experience and video and phone. And towers were adjacent to that.”

Midco also sold the towers for financial reasons. The sale allows it to reduce its general debt, which is attractive given the currently high interest rates.

But the towers are still important in their CAFII commitments…

Instead of owning the towers, Midco will lease them from K2 Towers, a company based out of Ohio. The towers are located in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Midco still needs access to the towers to provide FWA [fixed wireless access] service — part of its commitments when it won $39 million in Connect America Funds (CAF II) from the government in 2018.

FCC broadband maps might not capture reality of cellular fixed wireless access degradation

Posted on by
Reply

Borrowing from my smart friend Doug Dawson as he writes about cellular fixed wireless access (FWA) networks. The super quick version is that cellular FWA broadband speeds degrade much like the old DSL technology does. The farther you are from the tower, the greater degradation. The FCC doesn’t reflect the degradation accurately, which could have a unintended consequences when maps are used to distribute federal funding…

The map below shows a lot of speed tests from Verizon tower in a suburban county. The yellow dots on the map are the locations of actual speed tests. The colored circles on the map show the distance from a cell tower – with purple showing locations within a mile of the tower, red showing locations between 1 and 2 miles, blue/greed showing speed tests within 2 and 3 miles, and the surrounding white areas at more than 3 miles. I didn’t cherry-pick this particular tower as the best example – there are more than a dozen other Verizon towers in the same county that show similar speed test results. I must note that speed tests are not a prefect indicator of broadband performance, and there might be explanations behind some of the slower readings. But I have to think that seeing this same speed pattern around multiple tower sites is a good indication that this is how the technology works.

This map demonstrates what the farmer told me to a tee. There are some locations close to the tower getting 300 Mbps. Customers just over a mile from the tower are getting slower speeds, with the highlighted ones around 75 Mbps. By the third mile band, speeds have dropped a lot closer to 25 Mbps download, and outside the three-mile circle, speeds drop significantly. There is no easy way to tell if the customers with slower speeds are buying FWA wireless, which uses the spectrum that Verizon labels as 5G, or the older Verizon hotspots that use traditional LTE spectrum.

On the FCC map in this county, Verizon reports two speeds – 300 Mbps or 50 Mbps. It’s not easy to understand how Verizon makes the distinction, but it seems like locations for a fairly good distance around towers are claimed at 300 Mbps.

Somebody who doesn’t understand the FCC mapping rules might think that Verizon is breaking the rules by reporting 300 Mbps speeds in places where actual speeds are a lot lower. But the FCC allows ISPs to report marketing speeds for the FCC maps as long as Verizon is advertising the claimed speeds. But that doesn’t mean that the Verizon FCC reporting is ethical. Customers who might refer to the FCC map when looking for an ISP, or customers that see Verizon advertising are hoping to get something close to the 300 Mbps speed – and many will not.

I have some major concerns about cellular FWA technology related to the upcoming BEAD grants. First, any state broadband grant offices that accept the claimed Verizon speeds in the FCC mapping might not award any grants where a fast FWA speed is claimed. That would be a travesty if folks who can’t get speeds of at least 100/20 Mbps with FWA are denied another broadband option.

MinnPost looks deep into Le Sueur’s broadband to see how policies matter

Posted on by
Reply

Turns out I wasn’t the only one driving a long distance for the Le Sueur County Fair over the weekend, Walker Orenstein from MinnPost was there too and he used the opportunity to take a deep dive into the broadband situation in Le Sueur County.

Le Sueur has been working on getting better broadband for many years. They have had some successes and some roadblocks. Walker outlines the current barriers. It demonstrates the importance of good maps and engaged communities.

There is opportunity…

As the federal government prepares to hand out an unprecedented flood of cash in Minnesota for improving access to broadband – including a whopping $652 million from the 2021 infrastructure bill – decisions on how to direct money to connect rural areas might be influenced by small conversations like these.

There are challenges…

The fair is one way to spread information to people in Le Sueur County, like what internet providers serve certain areas. It’s also a way for county officials to gather intel, especially as they prepare to contest the service claims of a controversial telecom company in hopes of getting a share of broadband money.

And now is a good time to look for challenges in your community…

As those programs get up and running – state officials are still devising a plan with the federal government for using the $652 million – it’s too soon to say which providers and what parts of the state could get money.

But maps of existing coverage published by the FCC are a critical starting point, and have sparked jockeying among telecom and broadband advocates for a slice of the pie. A look at those maps shows wide coverage by LTD Broadband in southern Minnesota, at download and upload speeds of 250 megabits per second (mbps).

That is fast enough to exceed state and federal standards, which considers 100/20 mbps service – which also can match or beat typical speeds in big urban areas – to be adequate.

Critics, however, argue the FCC maps aren’t accurate. And they hope to erase at least parts of LTD’s territory from the map. One survey of 120 LTD customers in Le Sueur County found average speeds of 9/1 mbps, according to a letter sent to state regulators by county officials.

(I have been following the situation with LTD Broadband and the MN PUC. Concerns for losing the opportunity to get better broadband in places like Le Sueur fuels the organizations that have filed the original issue with the MN PUC.)

Another issue is the definition of broadband…

The money from the infrastructure bill is a bit more complicated. It appears that federal regulators overseeing that particular pot of cash don’t count technology used by LTD Broadband. That means the LTD coverage area would still be considered “unserved,” opening the door for grants that would subsidize other providers.

LTD mainly offers what’s known as “fixed wireless,” which distributes a signal from a transmitter placed on a tall structure like a water tower. The feds prefer fiber cable to the home for the infrastructure program. Minnesota officials also believe fiber is faster and more reliable. The performance of fiber compared to fixed wireless has long been a source of debate in the industry.

Hauer [LTD Broadband SEO] told MinnPost he doesn’t think their existing services would block anyone from the cash earmarked for broadband in the infrastructure bill. And he hopes to actually compete for grants from the infrastructure money through building fiber.

What can the communities do? Find a local champion, such as Barbara Dröher Kline, and get people engaged…

For a county-wide challenge, Dröher Kline said she hopes to gather more specific information than from the county’s survey. And she needs enough people to make a case.

That means finding residents who have service from LTD Broadband and running speed tests. It also means working with people to sign up for internet and ask the company for speeds advertised to the FCC to see if the company can deliver them.

The fair booth had detailed maps showing what parts of the county have coverage from any broadband provider. Raffle winners got coffee mugs advertising the county’s broadband initiative. Free coffee was available to all. “But I interrogate them about who their broadband provider is,” Dröher Kline said.

AT&T Announces New Internet Service Available Today in Minneapolis-St. Paul

Posted on by
Reply

An announcement from AT&T for folks in the Twin Cities…

We’re excited to announce our newest service, AT&T Internet Air, is available beginning today in parts of Minneapolis and St. Paul. This is a new fixed wireless home internet service – home Wi-Fi delivered over the reliable AT&T wireless network.

After signing up (online or in-store) and the equipment arriving at your door, customers can self-install AT&T Internet Air in five steps and be up and running in less than 15 minutes. It just takes a smartphone camera and a QR code to set it up.

AT&T Internet Air is also eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). The ACP is a federal government program that provides a benefit for eligible households toward their internet or wireless service of up to $30 a month (up to $75 a month on qualifying Tribal lands5) to reduce the cost of broadband service.

More information about the service is available here:

Comcast offers storm-ready WiFi

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

A new device from Comcast, dubbed Storm-Ready, combines LTE-based cellular backup and a four-hour rechargeable battery to keep broadband connectivity alive during storms. The WiFi 6-capable device doubles as a line extender when the sun is shining.

Comcast says that Storm-Ready WiFi is easy to set up and has no activation fees. It automatically integrates with the Xfinity Gateway and the Xfinity 10G Network. When the network goes down and the connectivity switches to cellular, customers get a notification and reassurance that they have not lost connectivity, Comcast said.

Goodhue County to invest ARPA funds on broadband in Welch Township

Posted on by
Reply

The Republican Eagle reports…

The Goodhue County Board of Commissioners approved the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for broadband and website development.

During the July 18 meeting, the commissioners heard from Outreach and Communications Specialist Briggs Tople about how the website needed improvements to comply with ADA.

“Our website is our biggest communication tool, it receives roughly 400,000 hits per year and it is an extremely important tool for us,” Tople said. “As of right now it has a couple of faults, some of which staff can control, some we are going to need additional resources to address.”

More on the broadband…

During the same meeting the board approved a proposal for project from Southeast MN Wifi LLC in Welch Township.

“The project would serve 18 unserved passings, and they are requesting $112,138 from the county, or 48% of the total project which is $236,080,” County Finance Director Brian Anderson said.

According to agenda materials, Goodhue County Board had earmarked $1,600,000 for the expansion of broadband service to unserved or underserved communities within the county.

“The funds initially came from the Federal program American Rescue Plan Act and Goodhue County established this Broadband program to be used by established companies through the use of qualifying grants,” the agenda packet stated. “At this time four grants have been approved for a total amount of $986,329, leaving $613,671 remaining to be distributed.”

The board unanimously approved the proposal for the broadband project in Welch Township.

Free apartment wifi could help spread affordable broadband

Posted on by
Reply

The Education Superhighway reports…

The IIJA designates the installation of Free Apartment Wi-Fi networks in substantially unserved affordable multifamily housing as a priority broadband deployment. This creates an unprecedented opportunity to bring affordable high-speed internet to historically marginalized communities and those living on lower incomes. Improvements in Wi-Fi technology have made it possible to connect affordable MDUs to reliable broadband service simply by deploying Wi-Fi access points throughout the property and then connecting the Wi-Fi network to a fiber connection to the building.4 Free Apartment Wi-Fi is modeled after the way Wi-Fi is delivered in most hotels today (see Appendix 1). Rather than buy a separate internet connection for each room, the hotel buys a single internet connection for the building and then installs a building-wide Wi-Fi network. The hotel then makes it easy for guests to use the Wi-Fi by giving them the network name (SSID) and password when they check in. There are no complicated forms to fill out, and the demand from guests has now made Wi-Fi a standard, free amenity in virtually every hotel.

In Minnesota there are 72,000 who could be connected through apartment wifi.

Cell coverage can be at least as bad as broadband in rural areas

Posted on by
Reply

Doug Dawson reports…

Over the last few years, I have helped dozens of counties get ready for the upcoming giant broadband grants. We’ve been very successful in helping counties identify the places in their County that don’t have broadband today – which is often drastically different than what is shown by the FCC maps. We then help county governments reach out to the ISPs in the region and open up a dialog with the goal of making sure that all rural locations get better broadband. This takes a lot of work – but it’s satisfying to see counties that are on the way to finding a total broadband solution.

In working with these counties, one thing has become clear to me. Some of these counties have a bigger cellular coverage problem than they do a broadband problem. There are often a much larger number of homes in a county that don’t have adequate cellular coverage than those who can’t buy broadband.

I remember doing work in Western Minnesota, where often my dad would drive me to a meeting. He learned to park on the top of any hill (a tough find in parts of MN) or come right to the location of the meeting around the time he though I’d be done because he got no service in the area. So no way for me to contact him. Sometimes I got no service even from my meeting, which was likely in the courthouse.

Apparently there is a way to challenge the cell maps, but Doug doesn’t seem too optimistic about them…

Now the cellular carriers are required to produce maps every six months at the same time as ISPs report broadband coverage. If you haven’t noticed, you can see claimed cellular coverage on the same dashboard that shows the broadband map results. I haven’t spent much time digesting the new cellular maps since all of my clients are so focused on broadband. But I checked the maps in the region around where I live, and the maps still seem to exaggerate coverage. This is supposed to get better when wireless carriers are supposed to file heat maps for the coverage around each transmitter – we’ll have to see what that does to the coverage. It’s going to get harder for a wireless carrier to claim to cover large swaths of a county when it’s only on a tiny handful of towers.

There is a supposed way for folks to help fix the cellular maps. The FCC has a challenge process that requires taking a speed test using the FCC cellular speed test app. Unfortunately, this app requires a lot of speed tests in a given neighborhood before the FCC will even consider the results. I’m doubtful that most rural folks know of this app or are motivated enough to stop along the side of the road and repeatedly take the speed tests. And frankly, who knows if it will make any real difference even if they do?

The big cellular companies have clearly not invested in many new rural cell towers over the last decade because they’d rather have the FCC fork out the funding. I haven’t the slightest idea if $9 billion is enough money to solve the problem or even put a dent in it. No doubt, the FCC will saddle the program with rules that will add to the cost and result in fewer towers being built. But whatever is going to happen, it needs to start happening soon. We are not a mobile society, and it’s outrageous that a lot of people can’t make a call to 911, let alone use all of the features that are now controlled by our cell phones.

If your summer holiday plans include a road trip, you can check cell coverage yourself. Just track how many times your call drops of the kids in the back seat complain about service.

5G rollout deadline of July 1 remains despite safety concerns from airlines

Posted on by
Reply

As someone who is very afraid to fly, I keep my eye on stuff like this (as reported by the BBC)…

The US will not delay a deadline for airlines to refit planes with new sensors to address possible 5G interference, despite concerns the cut-off date could cause travel disruption.

Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg said on Tuesday that airlines were told the 1 July deadline would remain in place.

Airlines have warned that they will not be able to meet the deadline and may be forced to ground some planes.

Telecoms firms have previously delayed 5G rollout to allow airlines to adapt.

This doesn’t help…

In a separate development, the FAA on Tuesday proposed new rules for many Boeing aircraft due to the possibility of new 5G interference.

The proposed rules affect nearly 20,000 planes worldwide. They require revised flight manuals, bans on some landings, and new operating procedures for landings and approaches when dealing with 5G interference.

Report estimates cost for nationwide ubiquitous broadband at $230 billion – that’s not what’s being invested

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

The cost to the federal government to bring fiber broadband to every U.S. household that NTIA considers “unserved” or “underserved” would be approximately $230 billion, according to a study from fixed wireless equipment provider Tarana Wireless, which gave Telecompetitor an exclusive first look at the study. That’s more than five times the funding that the government has earmarked for broadband deployments in the BEAD and RDOF programs, the study notes.

The $230 billion estimate is the amount of funding needing after factoring in the 25% matching funds that network operators are required to contribute to project costs, Tarana said.

Part of a librarian’s bibliographic instruction 101 is looking at who wrote it and why. Here the author is a fixed wireless equipment provider. They are trying to make the case that it’s too expensive to pull fiber to everyone but that wireless is a viable solution…

Guidelines for the BEAD program established by the NTIA require funding recipients to deploy fiber unless the cost per location exceeds the extremely high cost per location threshold or for “other valid reasons.”

Tarana and other fixed wireless stakeholders are hoping that states will seek waivers of the requirement to deploy fiber broadband so that they can direct funding to less costly fixed wireless builds, thereby reaching more people.

In the absence of those waivers, “we will run out of money and will not be [addressing] the Digital Divide today because of how long it takes to lay all that fiber,” said Carl Guardino, vice president of government affairs for Tarana, in an interview with Telecompetitor.

They aren’t wrong. Fiber is more expensive, but it is more reliable. Wireless is impacted by capacity, weather and line of sight issues. So… Do we reach the most people we can? Or do we reach the areas with the hardest business case to make for investment? Or judge by terrain? And if there is a demarcation of where to deploy fiber and wireless – are we creating future broadband ghettos? Yes, a person without broadband now will happily take a wireless connection – but will new people or businesses move into those areas?

The future is both wired and wireless. Communities, residents and businesses that have both are better poised for success. Maybe we ask for more money.

There’s room for fiber providers and WISPs in a rural market

Posted on by
Reply

Doug Dawson has a great way of making things easy, such as his recent article on WISPs versus fiber providers, because Doug remembers that it’s not always about the technology.  It is usually about the customers.

The whole article is worth a read but here’s a snippet where we learn that sometimes customer service trumps bandwidth, cooperatives are often able to charge less (and that matters too) but not all coops have good customer service and big national providers have a reputation that precedes them and will make it easier for WISPs to compete. Also – there’s room for choice…

I know WISP operators who are some of the best ISPs in the country. When I rate them as best, I’m talking about how they deliver products their customers are happy with and how they provide great customer service and timely repairs. They are the kind of ISP that builds customer loyalty. I fully expect high-quality WISPs to be able to compete against fiber networks. While the industry lately seems to be fixated on broadband speeds, there are customers that value other aspects of being an ISP, such as trust and reliability.

I’ve never built a business plan that assumes that any fiber ISP will sweep the market and get every customer, so there will always be room for other ISPs. There is some portion of customers in any market that will switch immediately to fiber. There has been so much hype about fiber that many folks accept it as the gold standard. But the penetration rate of a new fiber network builder is going to depend on who builds and operates the network.

I think WISPs (and every other ISP) will have a hard time competing against a cooperative that builds fiber, particularly one that sets low prices like $50 or $60 for a gigabit. But not all coops will have affordable rates, and not all coops are loved by their members.

WISPs will have a much easier time competing against big telcos that win broadband grants.

Delta Airlines will soon offer free WiFi on flights

Posted on by
Reply

MPR News reports…

Delta Air Lines will provide free Wi-Fi service on most of its U.S. flights starting in February.

The airline said Thursday that by the end of the year it will outfit more than 700 planes with high-speed, satellite-based broadband service from T-Mobile and plans to expand free Wi-Fi to international and Delta Connection flights by the end of 2024.

The service will use equipment from Viasat, a U.S.-based satellite broadband provider.

MVTV is a rural wireless provider with staying power in MN

Posted on by
Reply

West Central Tribune reports…

While millions of dollars in federal and state grants are helping bring fiber optic cable for broadband service to ever more rural locations, a wireless internet provider serving them remains confident of its future.

MVTV Wireless Internet has continued to grow its customer base ever since it began offering wireless internet service in 1999. It anticipates seeing continued, albeit slow, growth as it continues to reinvest in equipment and new technology to remain a state-of-the-art provider, representatives of the company told the Yellow Medicine County Board of Commissioners on Dec. 27.

Tim Johnson, operations manager, told the commissioners that the company continues to add new members. “(We’re) not growing by leaps and bounds, but (we) are growing hundreds of customers every year,” he said.

Johnson and Pam Rosenau, the company’s marketing director, said MVTV continues to serve and add customers in some rural areas where new fiber optic cable has been installed for broadband services. Costs remain an important factor for customers deciding to link to fiber optic, and some rural areas are seeing new residential development after fiber was installed to existing sites, they pointed out.

Fiber is the ultimate goal for every community, but not for every customer. MVTV has and ethos that demonstrates that understanding…

MVTV is a nonprofit organization owned by its members who subscribe to its wireless internet services. Headquartered in Granite Falls, its licensed, basic trade area includes Yellow Medicine, Chippewa, Renville, Lincoln and Lyon counties. It is the dominant rural provider in this area, with 25 to 30% of the rural households, according to Johnson.

New FirstNet Cell Site Launches in Grand Rapids to Support First Responders (Itasca County)

Posted on by
Reply

News from AT&T…

What’s the news? First responders in Northern Minnesota are getting a major boost in their wireless communications thanks to the FirstNet® network expansion currently underway by AT&T*. We’ve added a new, purpose-built cell site cell site to provide coverage for the Grand Rapids area.

This FirstNet site will provide coverage when traveling along U.S. Highways 2 and 169 in Grand Rapids. This new site is giving first responders on FirstNet – America’s public safety network – access to always-on, 24-hours-a-day priority and preemption across voice and data.

Why is this important? We consider FirstNet the most important wireless network in the country because it’s serving our first responders. And unlike commercial networks, FirstNet provides dedicated mobile broadband. To ensure AT&T and the FirstNet Authority are putting coverage and capacity where first responders need it most, the FirstNet build is being done with direct feedback from state and local public safety officials. This helps ensure Minnesota first responders connect to the critical information they need – every day and in every emergency.

FirstNet sites already launched in communities across Minnesota including Angle Inlet, Bagley, Baudette, Blackduck, Cloquet, Deer River, Ely (Echo Trail, Meander Lake), Ely (Echo Trail, Twin Lakes), Faribault, Finlayson, Gary, Graceville, Grand Marais (Gunflint Trail), Grygla, Hokah, Hovland, Isabella, Kellogg, Lewiston, Orr (Kjostad Lake), Peterson, Tofte (Lichen Lake), Togo and Williams.

Will BEAD fund unlicensed spectrum? Good question and it will matter in Minnesota!

Posted on by
Reply

So many posts about the FCC maps and funding and details because the details will impact how much money communities will receive for broadband in the next few years. The issue this post – unlicensed spectrum versus licensed spectrum. Telecompetitor reports…

The BEAD program is designed to cover some of the costs of deploying broadband to unserved rural areas. In establishing rules for the program, NTIA omitted fixed wireless service that relies totally on unlicensed spectrum for last mile connectivity from its definition of reliable service – a decision that impacts the BEAD program in two ways.

It makes FWA deployments using unlicensed spectrum ineligible for funding. And it makes areas that have high-speed broadband eligible for overbuilds if the only high-speed broadband available is FWA that relies on unlicensed spectrum.

But some folks want that changed…

Seven U.S. senators sent a letter to Alan Davidson, head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, today urging NTIA to revise its definition of reliable broadband for the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program.

So what’s the difference between licensed and unlicensed spectrums?

Here’s a definition from IotaComm. I was hoping for a less commercial perspective but also high level enough to take in easily.

Most of the radio spectrum is licensed by the FCC to certain users, for example, television and radio broadcasters. Individual companies pay a licensing fee for the exclusive right to transmit on an assigned frequency within a certain geographical area. In exchange, those users can be assured that nothing will interfere with their transmission.

Alternatively, organizations can still use the airwaves to transmit communications without getting permission from the FCC, but they must transmit within those parts of the spectrum that are designated for unlicensed users. The amount of spectrum that is available for public and unlicensed use is very small—only a few bands. Both the size of the area and the lack of exclusivity mean there’s greater potential for interference from other users located nearby. (It’s like the “wild west” of radio communication.)

The Telecompetitor article touches on it a little…

NTIA hasn’t said much about why it defined reliable broadband as it did. But David Zumwalt, CEO of the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA) told Telecompetitor a few months ago that NTIA’s primary concern was the future availability of unlicensed spectrum.

WISPA is particularly concerned about whether areas that already have unlicensed high-speed FWA will be eligible for overbuilding through the BEAD program, as many WISPA members already have made high-speed FWA deployments that rely on unlicensed spectrum.

Folks in Minnesota may have a special interest in this issue. According to the FCC map, LTD Broadband is serving a large portion Southern Minnesota with unlicensed spectrum, as the map below indicates.