|
|
How Many "Towers" Are Needed to Achieve Coverage? There's a new book out by James Murray called Wireless Nation: The Frenzied Launch of the Cellular Revolution in America. The book was released in June 2001, but didn't catch our eye until September, so the book is still new. PlanWireless found the good part of the book on page 315: The nearly 100,000 towers spread across the United States today are only a fraction of what's needed: some estimates suggest we'll need some 200,000 more tower sites just in the first five years of the new century. More sobering still are estimates that the new 3G networks will require four to sixteen times as many towers to get the same coverage as PCS. That's a very heavy projection. It appears to be flip; but, assuming he's serious, PlanWireless has put numbers on Mr. Murray's two sentences as follows: · First, PlanWireless' numbers show that, in early 2001 when Mr. Murray was writing his book, the number of personal wireless service facilities was much higher than the 100,000 Mr. Murray reports. At least 50,000 more were legal co-locations on the same "towers" as one of the 100,000 he mentions. Another 50,000 were "bootlegged" or built without required permits and were either illegally co-located or built as freestanding base stations. · Second, 200,000 "towers" by the year 2005 would mean many more personal wireless service facilities since most jurisdictions think "co-location" is a good idea. That means each "tower" is representative of at least two personal wireless service facilities. · Third, and here we congratulate Mr. Murray on his robust prediction, the range of four times to sixteen times is quite large. How can one use such a statistic (if indeed it is a "statistic")? Mr. Murray counts dollars better than PlanWireless ever could, but let's try some "tower" numbers: · His first point yields 100,000 (Murray's number) and 200,000 (PlanWireless' number).· His second point yields 200,000 added (Murray's number), while PlanWireless would double that to 400,000 added (PlanWireless' number). · Conservatively, then, the lowest number is 300,000 (Murray's number) while the highest number is 600,000 (PlanWireless' highest case). Of course, these are not all "towers." In California, over 50% of all personal wireless service facilities that local governments approve are less than 50 feet above ground level. And with "bootlegs," even more of them are short, co-located or cleverly concealed. But when considering 3G (Third Generation) networks, we must be careful: · Murray's least case would be four times 300,000 (1,200,000), which is close to what PlanWireless has been saying all along. · PlanWireless' least case would be four times 600,000 (2,400,000) … a scary number to be sure. · Murray's highest case would be sixteen times 300,000 (4,800,000) … towers everywhere, if indeed they were all "towers." · PlanWireless' highest case would be sixteen times 600,000 (9,600,000). Why not just call it 10 million and then faint away in disbelief? The fact is that no one knows for sure. All we do know is there will be many, many, many more personal wireless service facilities and they can't continue to be "towers." One of three scenarios is assured: · Local governments will start planning for this trend and they will make personal wireless service facility sites shorter and start getting more revenue from them (the PlanWireless way). · The wireless industry will "bootleg" more and more facilities and they will be less visible but they will not have the permits required by local governments, which will lose both control and revenue. · Tower builders will add more and more on to existing top-heavy structures, while building more and more towers as "infill" sites required by "tower ordinances." This is the dangerous scenario that most cities and counties are embarked on today. All three scenarios are already underway. If your local government would like to know the revenue implications to your city or county, you should contact Kreines & Kreines, Inc. We can conduct a workshop in your jurisdiction, after which you will not think of "towers" and "coverage" in the same way again. |
|
To learn more, subscribe to the PlanWireless newsletter...
Kreines & Kreines, Inc. |