Sidecut Reports

They’re whoopin’ it up at Sprint headquarters, as the Xohm WiMax folks there celebrate hitting an internal infrastructure deployment date well ahead of schedule. A confident and happy Xohm president Barry West spoke with us by phone Thursday afternoon for an update on the inaugural Xohm launch in Baltimore in September, as well as device, bandwidth and spectrum issues for both Sprint’s solo launches in 2008 and the expected merged operations in the New Clearwire for 2009.

According to West, the celebratory mood was due to the ops team getting its 1,000th WiMax base station “on the air” one full month before its internal target date. In addition to the Baltimore network, West said the number of live sites (now at 1,066) includes buildouts in Sprint’s two other previously announced 2008 launch markets of Chicago and Washington, D.C., as well as equipment being installed in Boston, Philadelphia and Dallas/Fort Worth.

While West did not divulge a launch timeframe for the new cities, he did confirm that Baltimore, D.C. and Chicago will all go live as most recently promised, with average download speeds of 3 to 5 Mbps in the network coverage areas. West also said that Sprint will have a small assortment of devices ready for the Baltimore launch, including modems from Zyxel and ZTE, as well as two devices for laptops, one a USB-attached device from ZTE and the other a PC card from Samsung. Nokia’s already announced Xohm-ready WiMax tablet, West said, should be available shortly after the Baltimore launch.

According to West, Sprint has solved just about all the problems it had faced earlier in getting the right amount of backhaul services to WiMax towers, in part by adopting some of the microwave-backhaul techniques of its imminent marriage partner Clearwire.

“It was one of those logistics things where when you get the funnel working, it really works for you,” said West about the backhaul backlog. West said Sprint’s tech teams recently added 25 live sites in a single day, supporting his belief that there will be no further delays in bringing WiMax to market.

We will have a more in-depth post covering our full conversation with Mr. West live in the next few days. In the meantime if you need to learn more about WiMax, you can order our Sidecut Report on WiMax, which provides an in-depth look at the technology and the “new” Clearwire deal.

We’re not sure yet if the Intel sport-utes will be in the house, but we have confirmed that Clearwire will have a live, working Mobile WiMax demo during the upcoming CTIA Wireless I.T. and Entertainment show in San Francisco, Sept. 10-12.

The mini-WiMax network demo should help kick off a big month for WiMax in the U.S., with the promised launch of Sprint’s Xohm services in Baltimore and the big WiMax World show in Chicago at the end of the month. With any luck we’ll get some harder delivery dates and pricing news for both the new services as well as all the new WiMax-enabled laptops and handheld devices, some of which were unveiled at the recent Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco.

As we said in our previous Sidecut Report on WiMax, there’s no better way to market WiMax than to show folks its capabilities working live. (Such a demo sure convinced Comcast’s Brian Roberts to part with a billion investment bucks.) Side-by-side tests with an iPhone 3G, anyone?

Coming in at 67 pages, the full report on the Comcast-BitTorrent order will take some time to read. We’ll offer our take later, but if you want to give it a go yourself, here is the link to the PDF on the FCC’s site.

Public Knowledge wins the race in getting the first “we approve” email message out today, though we are sure others will follow close behind. If you want something shorter to read in the meantime, check out our Top 10 list of net neutrality influencers, which is without a doubt more fun than the FCC’s order.

Since we couldn’t make it to Aspen this year to participate in the expected discourse on one of our favorite topics — network neutrality — we here at Sidecut Reports humbly offer our “Top 10″ list of net neutrality influencers, the people leading the debate into 2009, what we are calling Phase II of the net neutrality deliberations.

With no further ado, the drumroll please:

SIDECUT REPORTS PRESENTS
THE NET NEUTRALITY TOP 10 INFLUENCERS

The movers and shakers in the net neutrality debate, as of August 2008:

1. Jim Cicconi, AT&T — Still the man with the most pawns and the best grasp of the board.

2. Kevin Martin, FCC Chairman — A lame duck, but with a few big quacks left.

3. Rick Whitt, Google — Looks like Phil Mickelson, and his company plays policy like Phil — sometimes a champion, sometimes hitting from behind the concession stand and off a tree. Capable of major victories, but still not Tiger-solid.

4. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. — Driving the House Bus. A big bus but not a tank.

5. Joe Waz, Comcast — I get knocked down, then I get up again… just like another famous fighter from Philadelphia?

6. Ben Scott, Free Press — Riding the big wave of momentum. How long can the Silver Surfer stay afloat?

7. Lawrence Lessig, Stanford – Always effective as the lone voice storming the castle; can he compromise if he is on the other side of the ruling walls?

8. Tom Tauke, Verizon – Maybe not even the real source of power at Verizon but a former congressman who knows which strings to pull. Can pull hard with Ivan Seidenberg behind him.

9. Blair Levin, Stifel, Nicolaus — If not the next FCC commissioner, he will know who it is before anyone else (and will explain why to Wall Street).

10. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. — First he has to win. Then Reed Hundt’s troops can take over.

Honorable Mention: Tim Wu, Columbia Law School; Kyle McSlarrow, NCTA; Eric Schmidt, Google; Walter McCormick, USTA; Chris Libertelli, eBay/Skype; Gigi Sohn, Public Knowledge; Jessica Rosenworcel, Senate Commerce Committee; Jonathan Adelstein, FCC; Phil Weiser, University of Colorado; Preston Padden, Disney.

Need to know more about net neutrality, or why such leading influencers think that 2009 will be a big year for possible passage of net neutrality legislation? Then order our Sidecut Report on Net Neutrality, which contains complete analysis of the recent FCC decision, as well as a net neutrality timeline and interviews with all the top players in the debate.

Just got back from a quick afternoon stop at the Intel Developer Forum, where I caught Dadi Perlmutter’s mobility keynote. Biggest news on the WiMax front was the announcement that Dell and Sony have joined the list of Asus, Acer, Toshiba, Lenovo and Panasonic as OEMs who say they will ship laptops with Intel WiMax chips embedded inside.

No hard ship dates yet, but Dadi did say something about Q1 availability, which was about what we expected when the chip-ship dates slipped a bit earlier this summer. There were also some cool MIDs (mobile Internet devices) hanging out, though no WiMax connectivity for testing purposes (can you say missed marketing opportunity?).

No new WiMax network updates, though Clearwire CTO John Saw (who we interviewed for our QuickCut Report on WiMax Spectrum) did address the audience via a VoIP-teleconference-over-Mobile-WiMax link. In terms of a live demo the call went fine, with no detectable jitter or latency from the cheap seats at Moscone West. Saw did use his small bit of time to take a dig at the ongoing iPhone 3G congestion issues, saying that you knew he was using something faster than 3G since there were no “buffering” messages and you could watch him wave his hand in real time.

Still, after putting a billion-six into Clearwire, you think Intel would have put together a live WiMax demo for the developer crowd, who would love geeking out in the trucks… guess we will have to wait until CES for the big WiMax marketing push. More thoughts and info later…

Google is upping the ante in the ongoing White Spaces issue, announcing today a public advocacy campaign designed to put pressure on the FCC and Washington lawmakers to free up the so-called “white spaces” of wireless spectrum that exists between broadcast TV channels. While the jury is still out on whether this idea can work technically to everyone’s satisfaction, there’s little doubt that finding more spectrum for broadband communications here in the U.S. is a good idea.

While some folks like Om Malik are pointing a cynical eye at Google’s real intentions, I can’t see how opening the debate on this and other matters broadband is anything but good. If we simply listened to incumbent possessors of spectrum on why it’s too risky to try anything new, we might never have had the Wi-Fi revolution happen the way it did. And sure, Google’s Free the Airwaves idea might produce a lot more silly home-cooked video, but if it ultimately opens up another broadband pipe in this country of duopoly providers, it’s worth the effort.

And if you’re a veteran of D.C. telecom lobbying battles, you know that Google’s new group is light-years different from the telecom “front” organizations that hide their real intentions and backers; on the Google public policy blog product manager Minnie Ingersoll is pretty straightforward when it comes to Google’s motivations:

Google has a clear business interest in expanding access to the web. There’s no doubt that if these airwaves are opened up to unlicensed use, more people will be using the Internet. That’s certainly good for Google (not to mention many of our industry peers) but we also think that it’s good for consumers.

Before any of the next-generation ideas in the white spaces can take place, however, the spectrum needs to be freed up. As we noted in our recent QuickCut Report on WiMax Spectrum, there isn’t a lot of spectrum available right now at the 700 MHz frequency, which is where AT&T and Verizon are planning to launch their so-called 4G networks. So why not free up the white spaces, or at least ask more questions why not? Sure it may mean more money for Google, but in these times of pending metered broadband that seems like a weak reason to oppose the idea.

Ever since we put together our first Sidecut Report on WiMax and its comprehensive look at the impact of the New Clearwire deal on the U.S. market, we have been intrigued by the prospect of the 2.5 GHz spectrum holdings that Sprint and the old Clearwire brought to the table.

So instead of just wondering about it, we spent some time asking questions and came up with a new product, something we are calling a Sidecut QuickCut — in this case a 12-page look at the New Clearwire’s spectrum depth, and how it gives WiMax an unquestionable boost over other wireless data operations coming to the U.S. market.

Titled “Deep and Wide: Why New Clearwire’s Spectrum Holdings Give WiMax a Boost in the U.S. Wireless Market 4G Deployment Race,” our “QuickCut” report takes a focused look at the role spectrum holdings play in wireless data services deployment for both Clearwire and its competitors in the so-called “4G” marketplace. Though the shorter form factor makes for a quicker read than our definitive 34-page full Sidecut Report on WiMax, there is still room to learn:

– Why having more spectrum depth means faster wireless services that are easier to deploy

– Why the 2.5 GHz frequency may be better at delivering wireless data than the highly touted 700 MHz band, especially in urban deployments

– Why the big telcos, AT&T and Verizon, are concerned about Clearwire’s spectrum holdings

– How New Clearwire’s spectrum holdings increase the chances for WiMax’s successful entry into the U.S. broadband services marketplace

The QuickCut WiMax Spectrum Report now even has its own spiffy button in our rapidly growing list on the right hand side of this page. If you are reading this via RSS, you can order via immediate download by clicking on this link. More about this report soon, after we recover from launching two reports in a single week while staying up all night watching the Olympics.

As you can tell from our spiffy new button to the right, our promised report on net neutrality — Net Neutrality Phase II: The Battle of 2009 — is now live and ready for ordering via instant download. By combining our long background of reporting and analysis of the issue with interviews of leading legislators, top policy execs from the biggest companies, as well as representatives of the leading public-interest groups, we have produced a definitive in-depth look at the network neutrality issue, which by all accounts is headed for a big year in 2009.

While I’ll get to some of the report highlights in a bit, I want to point out first that here at Sidecut Reports we have no agenda and no skin in the network neutrality game, something that makes us much different from many players in the debate. By trying to stay as objective as possible, our goal was to produce an agenda-free look at network neutrality, which we consider a vital issue in any discussion about the future of broadband, networks, and the digital economy.

So what’s in the 34-page report? Starting with the FCC’s recent order punishing Comcast for its blocking of peer-to-peer applications, our report examines all technical and political parts of the debate, and how proponents and their opponents will position themselves following the November elections. Highlights of the report include:

• Why the FCC’s recent Comcast order isn’t much more than a starting point for the “next phase” of the net neutrality debate
• Why some close observers put the odds of Congress passing some kind of net neutrality legislation “better than even” in 2009, especially if Barack Obama wins the Presidential election
• What the big telcos, AT&T and Verizon, are planning to do and say to prevent passage of any new net neutrality legislation
• How Google and consumer groups Free Press and Public Knowledge are teaming up to educate the public and regulators on why they think there is a need for baseline net neutrality rules
• How any and all outcomes might affect the investment outlook for companies from startups to large service providers
• Why the debate is getting less rhetorical and moving toward more collaboration between opposing sides

The report also contains a network neutrality historical timeline, as well as the Sidecut Reports ranking of the “top ten” individuals influencing the network neutrality debate. The new report is available for immediate download.

In case you are new to Sidecut Reports, a little background: We are an independent editorial research company that provides business professionals with deep background, up-to-the minute information, and decision-making analysis on pertinent topics that goes far beyond blogs at a price far less than that charged by traditional analyst operations. Led by longtime industry journalist Paul Kapustka, Sidecut Reports provides in-depth looks into topics at the intersection of telecommunications, the Internet and public policy. The net neutrality report is our second report, following the release earlier this year of our Sidecut report on WiMax, which looks at the current market for WiMax wireless services in the U.S.

As we finish up the editing chores on our coming (now live!) Sidecut Report on net neutrality, we wanted to share with you now an email Q-and-A with Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, while last week’s FCC Comcast ruling was still fresh in everyone’s mind.

Sidecut Reports: You have been a passionate advocate for network neutrality for quite some time now. Can you describe what motivated your interest in the topic, and why it became a priority for your office?

Rep. Edward J. Markey: When I was chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet back in the late 1980s, I successfully beat back an FCC proposal that aimed to levy per-minute access charges on enhanced services, such as Prodigy, Compuserve and others. My argument was that rather than subjecting the emerging “information industry” to such fees, policymakers should instead seek ways of nurturing access to such information. Winning that fight is the reason we have flat-rate Internet pricing today and this has helped to make the Internet wildly successful with consumers across the country.

Making sure we get policy questions right helps to allow the geniuses at the edges of the network innovate. Network neutrality is in many ways simply a battle against the certain incumbents’ latest attempts to levy new fees or otherwise constrain innovative new competitors. I’ve spent years actively exploring the future of new media technologies. I’ve been an outspoken advocate of promoting choice and innovation, including minority ownership, diversity and localism, in all areas of telecommunication policy.

I believe that an open, non-discriminatory experience on the Internet continues to be vital for consumers and innovators to reap the benefits of this wildly successful medium. The Internet’s role as an economic and cultural phenomenon must be protected by ensuring that the American people are free from unreasonable discrimination by broadband network providers.

Sidecut Reports: Given the distractions for elected officials in a Presidential election year, why did you decide to introduce legislation this year? Might such legislation have a better chance of passing or have a better chance of reasonable debate at a later time?

Rep. Markey: I offered my legislation, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008 (H.R. 5353), now because preserving the openness of the Internet and protecting our global competitiveness is an issue that I believe needs to be front and center in any telecommunications debate, and it obviously helps to educate the public about the issue even as we look to next year for more progress.

Sidecut Reports: While policy and communications are inevitably intertwined, at what level of priority should communications legislation be for voters, given other pressing social and economic issues?

Rep. Markey: Telecommunications policy is critically linked to social and economic issues. The World Wide Web has become indispensable to companies large and small, regardless of whether their commercial aspirations are locally-oriented or of global proportions. Voters recognize that the Internet has no peer in its ability to foster innovation and provide low barriers to entry for new ideas and businesses.

Sidecut Reports: You seem to be in the Congressional lead for using social media tools like YouTube to increase communication between Washington D.C. and the rest of the country. What is the level of technological acceptance among your peers, and how does that affect the debate of issues like network neutrality?

Rep. Markey: For me, the use of new technologies, like YouTube, has enabled me to communicate with my constituents in new and exciting ways. Congress as a whole is increasingly embracing new technologies (beyond just the requisite Blackberry) from Twitter to Second Life. My goal in the Subcommittee is hold hearings to further highlight the benefits of these technologies and important policy questions that need to be resolved.

Rep. Markey’s responses will be part of our upcoming report, along with excerpts from a long string of interviews with top policy execs from AT&T, Google, Verizon and Comcast, along with leaders of top public-policy consumer groups like Free Press and Public Knowledge. For an email note when the report is ready, drop me a line to kaps at sidecutreports.com.

Readers of our Sidecut Report on WiMax weren’t surprised to read in USA Today that the big telco likes WiMax, despite a strategic direction tilted in favor of Long Term Evolution (LTE) for its main 4G strategy.

In our report, we offered some details of AT&T’s current WiMax deployments, which include one in Alaska and one in Pahrump, Nev. In our post “Five Things You Didn’t Know About the Clearwire WiMax Deal,” we added more analysis, saying that “AT&T may be hedging its bets by keeping its toes wet in matters WiMax. This may be more important in the future, when WiMax standards at the 700 MHz level emerge.”

In the USA Today story (a sidebar to a longer interview with CEO Randall Stephenson) new AT&T CTO John Donovan talks about how WiMax is appealing in rural deployments, especially where AT&T may not have copper assets. The USA Today story also says that WiMax is “cheap to install and maintain,” an idea that our readers know about (and we highlighted in a report excerpt about the WiMax TCO Advantage.)

If nothing else, Donovan’s affinity for WiMax should give cheer to WiMax gear manufacturers, who may sell their equipment side-by-side with all that LTE stuff Ma Bell plans to deploy. And maybe they can stop believing those LTE will kill WiMax stories whose sources are suspect.

Need to know more about WiMax? Order our recently updated WiMax report, with full analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal and the motivations for investors Comcast, Google, Intel and others.