Nokia Siemens Networks

In conversation: Alan Hadden talks about LTE and more

Also, download your free LTE white paper now: LTE will meet the promise of global broadband

***

unite talks with the president of the Global mobile Suppliers Association about UMTS900, LTE, and the future of mobile communications

Alan Hadden has been President of the Global mobile Suppliers Association (GSA) since its formation in 1998.

Previously he was on the senior management team of a PCN/GSM 1800 operator (today called T-Mobile UK), involved in start-up, launch, and expansion phases. He assisted with discussions with key stakeholders and overseas regulators to establish 1800 MHz as a mainstream band for cellular and new mobile businesses.

Alan’s 2nd book, Mobile Broadband with HSPA, LTE and Beyond: Services, Markets and Business Opportunities, will be published in 2009.

The editors of unite caught up with Mr Hadden in a telephone interview conducted in November, 2008.

                                                       * * * * *

Alan, you have been in the industry more than twenty years, first as a regulator, then on the operator side, and now as president of the GSA. What major trends can you identify for our readers? Can you talk a little about these trends?

Well, you can look at it as a kind of journey. In the beginning the business was about making voice mobile, but now we’re at the phase of the journey where we’re making the internet mobile.

On that journey we have seen the ability to support many millions of customers. Ten years ago there were a hundred million mobile subscribers worldwide, and now GSM adds a hundred million people every few weeks.

We have been hearing a lot about UMTS900 and its ability to help operators to extend voice, data and mobile broadband services coverage at the same time reducing operating costs. Can you tell us a little about UMTS900 and how it fits into this journey you described?

UMTS900 – a lower RF frequency solution – has two main advantages over its higher frequency (2100MHz) counterpart: indoor coverage is improved in urban areas, and UMTS900 is much less expensive to deploy in rural areas.

How does it work?

It all comes down to simple physics. The lower the frequency the further the signal travels. So if an operator requires four base stations to cover a certain area with 2100MHz, they might just need one or two base stations with 900 MHz.

These lower frequency networks make good sense in rural areas, and urban areas too because the 900MHz signal typically penetrates buildings better, giving end-users the seamless coverage they now demand. This is particularly important given that laptops enabled with mobile broadband connectivity are typically used in indoor static situations. 

And fewer base stations … this is the reason operators see such dramatic reductions in OPEX and CAPEX: you need so many fewer base station sites so the network is much less expensive to build and to operate. We worked with Elisa on a UMTS900 case study and learned that Elisa could save 50 – 70% on its build out costs by deploying UMTS900 compared to achieving the same coverage using 2100 MHz. With better coverage and lower costs it’s a win-win situation for everybody – operators and end-users. I would stress however that it’s not an either-or situation. We are not saying that UMTS900 should be used instead of 2100 MHz. UMTS900 and 2100 MHz systems are complementary. Deployments in the 2100 MHz band in the cities provides a capacity layer where it’s needed, whereas UMTS900 deployed in rural and suburban environments significantly reduces expenditures and extends voice and mobile broadband more quickly as existing GSM sites are re-used.

And the availability of UMTS900-compatible devices is improving. Over 70 devices have now been launched, supporting data speeds comparable with 2100 MHz devices, and the 900/2100MHz combination for WCDMA-HSPA is expected to become much more commonplace.

And LTE? Can operators justify a transition to 900MHz and then LTE after that?

It’s apples and oranges, really. They both have different strengths. UMTS900 for the coverage, and LTE for capacity, lightning-fast data transfer speeds, and lowest cost per byte delivered. In proof of concept tests carried out recently, we saw transfer speeds up to 250 Mbps in the downlink direction and 50 Mbps in the uplink shown by NTT DoCoMo with LTE, which is startling. That’s so much faster than anything we are using now, and confirms that LTE is on track and should meet or even exceed expectations.

LTE provides operators with several important benefits, including significantly increased peak data rates, increased cell performance, reduced latency, ability to be deployed in scalable bandwidths, co-existence with GSM/EDGE/UMTS-HSPA systems, & reduced CAPEX/OPEX.

And because LTE is backwards-compatible I think you will see a lot of operators deploying LTE according to what makes sense to them, in particular with regard to existing systems, which will typically include 2G/GSM, GPRS/EDGE, WCDMA-HSPA, HSPA+ as well as LTE. There is also the question of which frequencies will be used for LTE deployments. Existing spectrum might be possible, although it is crucial not to impact existing customers, so careful re-farming techniques must be employed. Using new, clean contiguous spectrum may be preferred for LTE, especially where the greatest data throughput speeds are needed, though being new, there may be significant costs of acquiring such spectrum, and it may take some time. In the US for example, we have heard how Verizon Wireless plans to deploy LTE in its recently acquired 700 MHz spectrum. Elsewhere the 2.6 GHz band will be preferred. We’re seeing the demand for data increasing all the time, so it’s natural that this new LTE infrastructure holds great appeal for operators. Fast data transfer rates are what people demand today, with their smartphones, and mobile TV, etc., and again according to this journey we talked about earlier the demand for data is only going to increase. Network speeds and device capabilities are rapidly increasing but it is not clear right now how much data speed will be required by individual users in the future over and above what is experienced today, which is very good. With LTE, operators might not necessarily assign the headline throughput capabilities to individual users, but instead use it to support even greater numbers of customers. With HSPA we have seen network speeds evolving to the point at which today over 70% of commercial HSDPA networks support 3.6 Mbps peak, and over a third support 7.2 Mbps peak. 

What are the biggest challenges to operators, getting them to accept LTE?

I think that everybody understands that LTE is good and necessary, and will be beneficial to end-users, who are demanding access to mobile broadband for the best experience within the context of the mass market. What operators aren’t sure of is how much the licences for new spectrum are going to cost, and timing is an issue – when will governments start to auction off the spectrum? Nobody knows how much they’re going to have to pay, so they are waiting to see what happens with the licences before preparing their infrastructure.

And looking even more forward what do we see?

Looking forward we see continued data growth – as I mentioned data transfer rates are growing very quickly. Some operators see their network data traffic growing exponentially every year, and this staggering growth rate will continue.

We’ve also seen user devices appear in many forms, and these too will continue to drive this demand for data, which LTE has been designed to accommodate. There are now around 1,100 HSPA broadband user devices launched in the market, and LTE functionality is already beginning to be added to chipset designs.

We’ll also see LTE connectivity pushing into laptops, into personal media players, smaller PCs. Some cameras now have HSPA connectivity. We’re seeing routers appear in the home and offices, so that instead of connecting to traditional fixed-line operators you’re connecting to mobile operators instead. So what we have is the blurring of competition between mobile operators and fixed operators, with each becoming more of an all-service operator.

So looking forward this is where LTE will help. The ability to support convergent services will be interesting, where you can reliably stream or download video, which you might have done to your big screen at home, you can now download anywhere, on the user’s choice of device – laptop or mobile. So I think we’ll see much more convergent solutions, convergent offerings, enabled by LTE.

I think another thing we can look forward to is the mobile network, the LTE network, being used for many more things than it is used for today.  So the motorcar will become a terminal, as will household appliances. We’ll see mobile connectivity in most if not all aspects of our lives.

If you make the device simple, make the interface intuitive, keep the billing simple, and target the lowest cost of ownership, then people will embrace these products and services. And coverage is a big piece of the puzzle as well…

All of this will come into play as we move towards this ubiquitous broadband network.

Can I ask how you think Nokia Siemens Networks has been performing with respect to the rollout of LTE? Are they helping or hindering the process?

They’re a huge player, enabler and influencer, and because of their global presence they are in a good position to show the business opportunities and help with efforts to secure new spectrum, and maximize use of existing resources as far as possible. On a practical level as well they are also helping enormously with showing proof of concept, undertaking trials of LTE in various markets among other things.

I think what they’re doing is helping all the stakeholders understand the important issues, with their marketing communications talking to operators and everybody else about the value of LTE, explaining these questions about timing, and though I am not privy to those conversations I assume they are working with operators on an individual basis to help get the timing right for their specific needs, helping them plan their own individual rollout with maximum coverage and minimum cost.

Alan, thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule to speak with us today.

Thank you.