LIFTOFF! Internet Service Providers Take Flight with Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid Networks - The Carmel Group
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
LIFTOFF! I n te r n e t Se r vice Provid ers Ta ke F l i g h t with Fixed -Wireless a n d H yb r i d Netwo r ks T H E 2 0 2 1 F I X E D -W I R E L E S S A N D H Y B R I D I S P I N D U ST RY R E P O R T
Table of Contents
About This Report 2
Executive Summary 4
What Are Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid Networks? 6
Current Industry Snapshot 11
Problem: Broadband Gaps. Solution: Fixed Wireless. 13
Case Studies 14
Growth Forecasts 16
Growth Drivers 18
Significant Challenges Remain 27
Conclusion 28
Appendices 29
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: Typical Network Architecture of Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISPs 6
FIGURE 2: Frequencies Most Used by Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISPs 8
FIGURE 3: FCC Broadband Speeds Guide 10
FIGURE 4: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Availability 11
FIGURE 5: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Subscriber Growth, 2012-2025 16
FIGURE 6: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Revenues, 2012-2025 17
FIGURE 7: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Average Revenue Per User, 2012-2025 17
FIGURE 8: Comparative Economics of U.S. Internet Access Solutions 19
FIGURE 9: U.S. Fixed-Wireless Select Vendors, Key Data Points, 2020-2025 24
FIGURE 10: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Residential Subscriber Growth, 2019-2020 29
FIGURE 11: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Residential SAC, 2019-2020 30
FIGURE 12: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Residential ARPU, 2019-20 30
FIGURE 13: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Residential Subscriber Churn 31
FIGURE 14: U.S. Fixed-Wireless Vendors’ Revenue Growth, 2019-2020 32
FIGURE 15: U.S. Fixed-Wireless Vendors’ Product/Service Makeup, 2020 32
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 2
About This Report
The purpose of this report is to provide an hundreds of respondents each in two groups:
independent, comprehensive, informational one of hybrid fiber-wireless operators and an-
resource describing competitive U.S. internet other of fixed-wireless vendors.
service providers (ISPs) that deliver their ser-
vices via fixed-wireless or hybrid fiber-wire- AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
less infrastructures. This report updates the
data and analysis contained in The Carmel The primary author of this report is Jimmy
Group’s 2017 report.1 Schaeffler of The Carmel Group, who thanks
the following individuals for their assistance:
The audience for this report includes ISP
industry actors, equipment and software ven- • Dale Curtis of Dale Curtis Communica-
dors, service providers, policy makers, finan- tions, for editorial support;
cial institutions, legal and strategic advisors, • Tammie Langdon of The Carmel Group,
industry analysts, and anyone with an interest for research and administrative support;
in the broadband industry. The report should • Gerard F. Hallaren, CFA, for research and
be especially interesting to anyone – from ex- analysis; and
perts to laypersons – interested in closing the • Deborah Sauri of iSpy Creative, for
digital divisions that crisscross the American graphic design.
economy. The aim is to provide objective data
and insights to help readers make informed CAUTIONARY LANGUAGE CONCERNING FOR-
business, investment, and policy decisions, WARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND DISCLAIMER
particularly as they affect this industry.
Information set forth in the following materi-
als contains financial estimates and other for-
Our 2017 report was entitled, “Ready for
ward-looking statements that are subject to
Takeoff” because the industry was poised for
risks and uncertainties, and actual results may
accelerated growth. The title of this report,
vary materially. The Carmel Group disclaims
“Liftoff,” reflects the strong growth and im-
any obligation to update or revise statements
proving conditions in the industry since then.
contained in the report and any accompany-
ing news release based on new information or
METHODOLOGY
otherwise. The report is based on information
that The Carmel Group believes to be reliable,
This report is based on the author’s inde-
but no guarantee is made as to its accuracy.
pendent, long-term research, supplemented
Those using this report should verify the data
with original primary and secondary research
and should not make any business decisions
conducted during the first three quarters of
without proper verification and consultation
2020. The recent examination included thirty
with proper legal, industry, and financial ad-
90-minute interviews with representatives of
visers. The information in this report is not in
fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless ISPs,
any way a recommendation to purchase or
their vendors, government agency officials,
sell any security.
and others in the industry. Additionally, two
in-depth surveys were conducted, involving
The Carmel Group, Ready for Takeoff: Broadband Wireless Access Providers Prepare to Soar with Fixed Wireless:
1
The BWA Industry Report: 2017, https://carmelgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TCG_2017_BWA_Full_Report.pdf
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 2
SPONSORS GOLD
The Wireless Internet Service Providers Asso- @LINK SERVICES: Serving Americans with evo-
ciation (WISPA), which represents hundreds lutionary broadband solutions, @Link proudly
of fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless sponsors this report by The Carmel Group.
ISPs, as well as vendors and other industry Learn more at atlinkservices.com.
interests, is the primary sponsor of this 2021
report. The following sponsors provided addi- CAMBIUM NETWORKS: Cambium Networks
tional support: delivers multi-gigabit wireless communi-
cations that work for businesses, commu-
PLATINUM nities and cities worldwide. Learn more at
cambiumnetworks.com.
GOOGLE: Google’s Wireless Connectivity team
is helping the U.S. CBRS ecosystem bring bet- MICROSOFT: Partnerships with wireless
ter wireless internet to more people in more internet service providers (WISPs) are a cor-
places. The fixed-wireless broadband industry nerstone of the Microsoft Airband Initiative.
is an important CBRS constituent, efficiently We are proud to sponsor The Carmel Group’s
bringing high-speed internet to underserved report to accelerate our collective work to
communities. We are proud to support their close the broadband gap. Learn more at
work by sponsoring this 2021 report by The microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsi-
Carmel Group. Learn more about our team at bility/airband.
g.co/sharedspectrum.
RISE BROADBAND: A recognized leader in the
NEXTLINK INTERNET: Nextlink Internet is a WISP community, Rise Broadband is the na-
rural-focused provider of advanced inter- tion’s largest, privately held, fixed-wireless
net and phone services in Texas, Oklahoma, broadband service provider, serving Ameri-
Kansas, Illinois, Iowa, and Nebraska. The cans with evolutionary broadband solutions
company is a fully IP-based, carrier-class across 16 states. Rise Broadband is proud
network from core to edge, with 70,000 to support and sponsor this report by The
customers, more than 600 team members, Carmel Group. risebroadband.com
and extensive fiber and wireless infrastruc-
ture. As an active participant in the Federal WATCH COMMUNICATIONS: Watch Commu-
Communications Commission’s programs to nications is a leading ISP providing broad-
close the digital divide, Nextlink is working band internet to rural communities in the
to rapidly connect hundreds of thousands Midwest, helping to close the digital divide.
of additional homes, schools, libraries and watchcomm.net.
businesses in small communities across
America’s heartland. For more information: SILVER
nextlinkinternet.com.
CAL.NET: The Carmel Group thanks
WISPER ISP: Wisper Internet provides fast, re- Cal.net for its generous support of this report.
liable internet services that connect families cal.net.
across the Midwest. Serving rural communi-
ties where other providers won’t is our pas- FRIEND
sion. It’s essential work, which we’re proud to
be part of. This report by The Carmel Group HUDSON VALLEY WIRELESS: The Carmel
represents an important advance in telling Group thanks Hudson Valley Wireless for its
the WISP story to the world, and we’re glad generous support of this follow-up to the
to have supported this tremendous effort. For pioneering 2017 report. hvwisp.com.
more information: wisperisp.com.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 3
Executive
Summary
In the United States at the start of 2021, The Carmel Group estimates
that a minimum of 2,800 fixed-wireless-centric operators comprise this
rapidly growing and evolving industry.
• Robust Growth and Maturation: Fixed-wireless-centric ISPs are continuing to experience
robust growth and maturation in the United States.
The number of subscribers is projected to rise from 6.9 million at the end of 2020 to 12.7
million by the end of 2025.
Core industry revenues are projected to grow from an estimated $4.4 billion annually at
the end of 2020 to $10.9 billion by the end of 2025.
• Multiple Growth Drivers: There are at least five powerful growth drivers propelling fixed-
wireless-centric ISPs to new heights, making them particulary attractive to investors:
Favorable
economics and speed: The economics of fixed-wireless technology enable
rapid, reliable, flexible network deployments at a fraction of the cost of other technology
platforms. Return on investment (ROI) occurs much more quickly, and consumer and
industry demand are addressed more rapidly.
Strong
consumer demand: Demand for broadband connectivity and associated
applications has been surging for years and shows no sign of slowing. The COVID-19
pandemic made at-home connectivity more essential than ever. Indeed, today’s
“work-from-home” trend will persist long after the pandemic. Meanwhile, millions of
Americans live in rural and even some urban areas that remain unserved, under-served,
or poorly served, creating a large pool of latent demand.
Favorable
policy: Congress and the regulatory agencies have begun to show greater
awareness of fixed wireless’s role in closing America’s broadband gaps. The regulation
of spectrum has grown much more favorable for WISPs in recent years, and the positive
trends appear likely to continue. Closing those gaps has become a top government pri-
ority at nearly every level: federal, state, and local.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 4
Executive
Summary
Improving technologies and more competition: New and maturing standards-based
technologies in network and antenna hardware, customer premises equipment (CPE),
and wireless telecoms software and services are contributing to greater efficiencies and
choices for ISPs. The number of technology vendors is growing rapidly, driving competi-
tion, innovation, and lower costs.
unding flows: Unprecedented funding flows from private and public sources are driv-
F
ing more investment.
• Hybrid Network Trend: An increasing number of fixed-wireless-centric ISPs are also invest-
ing in fiber and other technologies for parts of their networks. Where it makes economic
sense, these “hybrid” networks blend the favorable characteristics of fixed wireless with the
additional contributions of fiber.
• Diversification of Operators: Reflecting the industry’s entrepreneurial roots, the majority
of fixed-wireless-centric ISPs are relatively small companies with established roots in their
local communities. However, a growing number are merging with and acquiring other provid-
ers to form larger companies with multi-state service areas. Another subset is developing in
under-served urban markets to offer value-oriented competition to established incumbents.
Larger telecom and cable companies are also beginning to make significant strategic invest-
ments in fixed-wireless infrastructure.
Strong Business and Policy •
The business and policy case for enhanced support of Case: The combination of the
five growth drivers – favorable
fixed-wireless and hybrid ISPs is strong for policymakers economics, significant con-
and investors striving to rapidly build future-proof and sumer and industry demand,
helpful governmental policies,
sustainable services to fill America’s broadband gaps.
technology developments, and
funding trends – along with
persistent broadband gaps and the lack of ISP choices in many rural and urban areas – point
to a clear conclusion. The business and policy case for greater support of fixed-wireless and
hybrid networks is compelling. Not only does fixed wireless serve U.S. policy goals of rapidly
connecting Americans; it also makes good business sense in many communities that are un-
served, under-served, or poorly served.
• Challenges Remain: Although current and projected growth trends are robust, challenges
remain, including obstacles to and from private and public funding; the physical limits of
some spectrum bands; competition for spectrum access; powerful and entrenched competi-
tors; and the government’s traditional tilt toward incumbents.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 5What Are Fixed-Wireless
and Hybrid Networks?
ISPs use a variety of network technologies to are attached to the customers’ premises. This
deliver broadband internet services to cus- point-to-point (P2P) or point-to-multipoint
tomers. The ISPs studied in this report are (P2MP) architecture allows for strong, stable,
those using “fixed-wireless” and “hybrid fi- two-way connections, providing customers
ber-wireless” networks. with reliable access to the internet.
What most people think of as “wireless” net- Fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless net-
works are those built to serve mobile custom- works are also called by several other names,
ers, e.g., to send radio signals from towers to including Broadband Wireless Access (BWA),
customers on the move. On the other hand, Fixed Wireless Access (FWA), Fixed Wire-
“fixed” wireless refers to the fact that both less Hybrid (FWH), Competitive Broadband
the senders and receivers of wireless data Provider (CBP), and/or Wireless Local Loop
streams are in fixed locations. For example, (WLL). Perhaps the most common acronym
the radio transmitters may be on towers or or nickname is WISP, for Wireless Internet
other vertical structures, and the receivers Service Provider.
FIGURE 1: Typical Network Architecture of Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISPs
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 6The majority of residential and business in- is also being used to distribute high-band-
ternet customers in the United States are width service directly to certain residential
served by companies that originated as and non-residential customers. This hybrid
telephone and/or cable TV providers using fiber-wireless model and trend are making
ground-based wire or fiber-centric networks. “future-proof” networks a reality in low-densi-
These are collectively called “wireline” net- ty markets. Hybrid fiber-wireless field teams
works. Most internet customer premises are can use the best mix of technologies to suit
still physically wired to the telephone or cable unique local conditions.
company.
Although fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wire-
The term “hybrid” refers to the fact that many less ISP networks serve a relatively small
fixed-wireless-centric ISPs may also have share of U.S. internet consumers, their fa-
network elements composed of fiber-optic vorable economics are driving rapid growth
cables. For instance, fiber often serves as the in operators, subscribers, and vendors. This
“trunk” or “backhaul” that delivers data from expansion is especially notable in small towns
network access points to a provider’s P2MP and rural areas that are relatively expensive to
equipment placed on a tower or other verti- serve with wireline solutions. It is also occur-
cal structure. The data is then transmitted ring in underserved urban locales. (See, “Case
over the air to the customer premises. Where Studies” and “Growth Drivers” below.)
it makes economic sense, “last-mile” fiber
COMMONLY USED FREQUENCIES
Wireless signals are radio signals, and most spectrum bands are “licensed-by-rule,” mean-
fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless ISPs ing the license does not grant exclusive rights
use a mix of radio signal frequencies (also or ownership, but does impose certain notice,
called “spectrum bands”) to deliver internet usage, or other requirements. For example,
service over the air. the Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS)
band (3.55 – 3.7 GHz) is managed through an
Some of these spectrum bands are “licensed” FCC regulatory regime that mitigates inter-
by the Federal Communications Commission ference and allows multiple users to co-ex-
(FCC), which means entities are granted ex- ist in the band through Spectrum Access
clusive rights to use a particular spectrum Systems (SAS). And a third set of bands are
band, subject to various requirements. Other “unlicensed,” meaning they are available to
everyone, subject only to FCC device cer-
tification, interference mitigation systems,
Spectrum bands may be: and other requirements. Some unlicensed
bands are used for products like baby moni-
• Licensed tors, garage door openers, and Wi-Fi, creating
• Licensed-by-rule the potential for signal interference in some
locations.
• Unlicensed
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 7FIGURE 2: Frequencies Most Used by Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISPs
5.15 -
24.05-
470-600 902- 928 3.55 – 3.7 5.35 GHz, 5.925-
FREQUENCY 2.4 GHz 2.5 GHz 24.25 57-71 GHz
MHz MHz GHz 5.47 – 7.125 GHz
GHz
5.85 GHz
EBS/
TVWS CBRS,
BRS, U-NII-5,
BAND NAME (White ISM ISM 3GPP U-NII 24 GHz 60 GHz
3GPP U-NII-7
Space) Band 48
Band 41
GAA
Exempt Exempt
Licensed; exempt
(1); Exempt Exempt Exempt (requires Exempt Exempt
LICENSE usually (SAS
database (1) (1) (1) AFC (1) (1)
mobile control)
query control)
or PAL (1)
Uncer- Medium;
OPERATOR
Low; Low; Medium; tain/ point- Low;
UTILIZATION Medium Medium High
niche leased growing pending to-point growing
LEVEL (2)
(2021) only
AVAILABLE Varies By Up to 580 Up to 850 200
26 MHz 83.5 MHz 186 MHz 150 MHz 14 GHz
BAND SIZE Location MHz MHz MHz
NON-LINE
OF SIGHT Excellent Excellent Fair Good Fair Poor Pending None None
PERFORMANCE
802.11
Propri- 802.11 ad,
Mixed: variants;
etary 802.11ay
Propri- Propri- TDD-LTE, propri-
PRIMARY 802.11 TDD, Propri- variants,
etary etary TDD-LTE Propri- etary
TECHNOLOGY variants some etary including
TDD TDD etary TDD,
LTE-U, Terra-
non-LTE some
LAA graph
LTE-U
(1) “Exempt” includes unlicensed and licensed by rule.
(2) Clear cell coloration in this row indicates “uncertain/pending” operator utilization levels; light coloration suggests “low” or “medium” levels; dark suggests “high.”
Sources: Rise Broadband, Interisle Consulting Group, FCC, and fixed wireless industry data.
Copyright 2021. Property of The Carmel Group. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized distribution, publication, or use is strictly prohibited.
Unlicensed spectrum is essentially free infra- Other unlicensed bands include the vacant
structure, and in less densely populated areas “white spaces” between TV broadcasting
it is lightly used. This made it a key part of bands (roughly 470 – 608 MHz), which were
the business model for the early fixed-wire- occupied by TV broadcasters prior to the fed-
less ISPs. For much of the industry’s history, eral mandate to change from analog to digital
fixed-wireless providers have used primarily transmission; and the 24 GHz and 60 GHz
unlicensed spectrum such as 900 Megahertz “millimeter wave” (mmWave) bands. As of
(MHz), 2.4 Gigahertz (GHz), and the 5 GHz this writing, an additional 45 MHz of the 5.9
bands to deliver their services to homes and GHz band, plus 850 MHz of standard-power
businesses. outdoor and 1200 MHz of low-power indoor
spectrum in the 6 GHz band, are expected
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 8to become available for commercial use by Similarly, because unlicensed spectrum may
fixed-wireless providers. be employed by anyone with a certified device,
fixed-wireless providers must resolve poten-
Important caveats accompany the use of any tial interference through network changes or
spectrum. Radio airwaves are subject to their coordination with other users. Combinations
physical properties, which translate into a of advanced technologies, best practices, and
number of tradeoffs. Lower bands have bet- network designs can prevent or mitigate most
ter signal penetration through buildings and unlicensed interference.
trees and can generally reach users without
direct lines of sight (LoS). Higher bands travel
shorter distances but can handle more band-
width; they generally require LoS.
COMPETITIVE DATA SPEEDS
Data transmission speeds are a significant What do these numbers mean for consumers
network performance measure, determining in the real world? In a 25/3 configuration, the
how fast or slow one can upload or download total bandwidth of that package is 28 Mbps.
data files. The FCC’s current definition of “ad- General web surfing, email, and social media
vanced telecommunications capability” is 25 only require about 1 Mbps bi-directionally; on-
Megabits per second (Mbps) for downloads line gaming about 3-4 Mbps bi-directionally;
and 3 Mbps for uploads, often referred to as video conferencing 1-4 Mbps bi-directionally;
“25/3.” The upload/download allocation is and high-definition video streaming about 5-8
based on typical consumer demand and us- Mbps (primarily download). One can multiply
age patterns; most networks dedicate more these figures by the number of users on the
capacity to downloads than uploads. broadband connection simultaneously during
peak hours to determine how much speed
However, the present definition of “advanced” that location needs. Thus, a two- to four-per-
internet is not set in stone. From time-to-time, son household may need 20 to 40 Mbps of
the FCC updates the definition as required by total bandwidth to cover its needs; while a
the Communications Act and as warranted 10-person office could require 80 Mbps or
by technological progress. As of this writing, more, depending upon the technology needed
policymakers are discussing when to raise the to run its business. (See Figure 3.)
standard and by how much.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 9FIGURE 3: FCC Broadband Speeds Guide
ACTIVITY MINIMUM DOWNLOAD SPEED (MBPS)
GENERAL USAGE
General Browsing and Email 1
Streaming Online Radio Less than 0.5
VoIP Calls Less than 0.5
Student 5 - 25
Telecommuting 5 - 25
File Downloading 10
Social Media 1
WATCHING VIDEO
Streaming Standard Definition Video 3-4
Streaming High Definition (HD) Video 5-8
Streaming Ultra HD 4K Video 25
VIDEO CONFERENCING
Standard Personal Video Call (e.g., Skype) 1
HD Personal Video Call (e.g., Skype) 1.5
HD Video Teleconferencing 6
GAMING
Game Console Connecting to the Internet 3
Online Multiplayer 4
Source: Broadband Speed Guide | Federal Communications Commission (fcc.gov/consumers/guides/broadband-speed-guide)
Today, most fixed-wireless and hybrid fi- At the upper end, fixed-wireless technology
ber-wireless ISPs offer several tiers of data can provide download and upload speeds at
packages, with varying speeds and features. up to 10 Gigabits per second (Gbps) in P2P
Common packages offer unlimited data with service links, and 1 Gbps in P2MP deploy-
download speeds in the range of 25 Mbps to ments. This capacity is valuable to some cus-
100 Mbps, although much higher-speed pack- tomers, but it is far beyond what most homes,
ages may be available. The average speed is businesses, and schools need for typical daily
constantly rising as technology improves and online activities. Even where 1 Gbps service is
the cost of advanced equipment falls. available, most customers generally opt for
more cost-effective speed plans, such as 25/3
and 50/5.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 10Current Industry Snapshot
In the United States at the start of 2021, The nies deliver internet services to an estimated
Carmel Group estimates there are at least 6.9 million subscribers, a five-year increase
2,800 fixed-wireless-centric operators of of more than 70 percent above The Carmel
varied descriptions comprising this rapidly Group’s 2016 estimate of 4.0 million sub-
growing and evolving industry. These compa- scribers.
FIGURE 4: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Availability
Source: FCC, Fixed Broadband Deployment (interactive
online map),; click on Area Summary, then under Broad-
band, filter for Technology (Fixed Wireless), and Speed
(> 10/1 to capture all IPSs including lower-speed services
that could be upgraded.)
The map shown in Figure 4 indicates that Services and/or content delivered by fixed-
fixed-wireless broadband services are avail- wireless operators include data, voice-over-in-
able in portions of every U.S. state, as well ternet-protocol (VOIP), streaming video, two-
as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and way video, gaming, security (such as cameras
the Virgin Islands. The largest concentration and alarms), and other ancillary products and
of fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless services. The burgeoning Internet of Things
ISPs are in the rural Midwest, Northwest, and (IoT) and especially the Industrial Internet
Southwest regions of the United States. of Things (IIoT), tying together an expanding
web of self-regulating and interconnected
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 11machines, is creating even more demand. The Telecommunications have long been based in
IoT trend is especially prevalent in business, wireline technology. But as demand continues
industry, and “smart city” applications. to grow, and higher-cost technologies such as
copper lines are being phased out, lower-cost
Another useful application for fixed wire- alternatives with greater efficiency and future
less is providing back-up and redundancy flexibility are being deployed. Each year, a
for businesses that require 24/7 connectiv- growing portion of what was once a pure wire-
ity. The portability, efficiency, and stability of line network is being transitioned to wireless,
fixed-wireless infrastructure accentuate this fiber, and mixed mode networks.
feature.
Size-wise, many U.S. fixed-wireless ISPs are
small- and medium-sized businesses. Among
the larger privately held operators is Rise
Broadband, with a subscriber base well into
the six-figure range. Yet Rise Broadband is
moderate in size compared to the telecom
industry’s large incumbents. Other fixed-wire-
less providers, such as @Link, Cal.net, Midco,
and Nextlink Internet, have subscribers in the
five-figure range, and a significant number
have localized operations with customers in
the four-figure range.
The combination of flexibility and local pres-
ence gives many fixed-wireless-centric opera-
tors a distinct market advantage in customer
service and community loyalty.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 12Problem: Broadband Gaps.
Solution: Fixed Wireless.
Because so much of the United States is char- internet at broadband speeds.5
acterized by rugged terrain and low population
density, and because traditional wireline infra- Bottom line: While the digital divide is shrink-
structure is relatively expensive in low-density ing in a respectable number of the hardest-to-
areas, many rural, small-town, and exurban serve areas of the country, tens of millions of
Americans still lack basic ac-
cess to online services.
Bringing broadband to under-served markets is a difficult
Another aspect of the broad-
challenge. At this time, BWA providers using wireless band gap is a lack of service
technologies are the most cost-effective solution in vast choices in too many areas.
The FCC estimates that 7%
areas of the United States and the world.
of U.S. households have only
one choice or no choice in
areas lack high-speed internet service beyond fixed broadband providers.6
a few local hot spots. Inadequate or non-exis-
tent internet services are proven to be a se- The combination of persistent broadband
rious hindrance to economic opportunity and gaps in high-cost, low-density areas; the lack
quality of life in the modern economy.2 of ISP choices in too many rural and even
some urban areas; and the cost-effectiveness
As of year-end 2019, an estimated 14.5 million and speedy deployment and ROI of fixed-wire-
Americans lacked access to broadband ser- less-centric networks points clearly to one
vice at the FCC’s benchmark speed of 25/3 conclusion: fixed-wireless broadband must
Mbps. This leaves approximately 20% of rural be among the top solutions in any strategy
Americans and 25% of those living in Tribal aimed at closing America’s broadband gaps.
Lands without FCC-defined broadband.3
Fixed wireless is robust, cost-effective, rapid
However, it is widely acknowledged that the to build and deploy, and constantly evolving in
FCC over-counts the number of Americans an incremental and competitive fashion. Not
with access to 25/3 service. A 2020 study only does fixed wireless serve U.S. policy goals
by the online service BroadbandNow esti- of helping all Americans connect to the inter-
mated the number of unserved Americans is net, wherever they live. It also makes good
roughly 42 million, more than double the offi- business sense in most communities that are
cial count.4 Data gathered by Microsoft from unserved, under-served, or poorly served.
users of its online services indicated that 157.3
million Americans do not routinely use the
2
U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Broadband,” web page, https://www.usda.gov/broadband; Deloitte, “The Economic Impact of Disruptions to Internet Connectivity,”
October 2016, https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/the-economic-impact-of-disruptions-to-internet-con-
nectivity-report-for-facebook.html.
3
Federal Communications Commission, “2019 Broadband Deployment Data Show Digital Divide Is Closing,” Press Release, November 12, 2020. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/
attachments/DOC-368112A1.pdf
4
BroadbandNow Research, “FCC Reports Broadband Unavailable to 21.3 Million Americans, BroadbandNow Study Indicates 42 Million Do Not Have Access,” February 3,
2020, https://broadbandnow.com/research/fcc-underestimates-unserved-by-50-percent
5
Shelley McKinley, Microsoft on the Issues Blog, “Microsoft Airband: An Annual Update on Connecting Rural America,” March 5, 2020, https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-
issues/2020/03/05/update-connecting-rural-america/
6
U.S. Telecom, “U.S. Telecom Industry Metrics & Trends 2020,” Presentation, April 2020, slide 8. https://www.ustelecom.org/research/ustelecom-industry-met-
rics-and-trends-2020-update/
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 13Case Studies
Affordable, robust internet service makes an tomers. Aided by the enhanced connectivity,
enormous difference in a community’s qual- his wife has taken on the metal-cutting busi-
ity of life and its ability to participate in the ness, growing it into a full-time venture. “Like
broader economy. Without such services, en- most of our neighbors, we were struggling to
trepreneurs cannot run a modern business; live a 21st century life with limited connectiv-
doctors and patients are unable to come to- ity,” he recalls. “Fixed wireless was the simple
gether via telemedicine; students are unable answer.”
to take online classes; and farmers are cut off
from precision agriculture techniques. The URBAN WISP OFFERS ENHANCED
dramatic increase in demand tied to remote CHOICES IN NEIGHBORHOODS
learning and working from home during the
COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and acceler- While most fixed-wireless-centric ISPs are fo-
ated the need for ubiquitous, advanced broad- cused on rural areas, small towns, and urban
band services. fringes, a growing subset are finding niches
in urban markets. One of these is DC Access,
The following are a few examples of how which has been providing broadband services
fixed-wireless-centric ISPs are making mean- in Washington, D.C. for more than 15 years.
ingful differences in their communities. The company serves about 2,000 subscribers
in the neighborhoods of Adams Morgan and
A RURAL ENTREPRENEUR RAISES Capitol Hill, including dozens of multifamily
QUALITY OF LIFE properties. “Our niche market is customers
who feel like the big guys aren’t providing them
In 2015, Cam McCurdy of Marion, Illinois faced with the quality and personalized customer
a life-changing choice. Should he continue service they need,” says Martha Huizenga,
to work as an electrical engineer in a family Chief Operating Officer and Co-Owner. Most
business, or expand his after-hours IT ser- customers do not take the highest-speed,
vices and computerized metal-cutting busi- highest-cost plans, because DC Access takes
nesses? The 25-year-old chose the latter, but the time to educate them on what they actual-
then faced a major problem: His hometown’s ly need. From millennial cord cutters to low-in-
only broadband option was inadequate to come households, urban WISPs are serving
support a burgeoning IT business. Like many customers that are typically neglected and
WISP entrepreneurs before him, he cobbled overcharged by other providers.
together seed money from his family, an in-
kind commitment from a local fiber provider,
and a tower in his backyard. He then began
offering fixed-wireless internet service to his
neighbors, who also craved connectivity and
could share the costs. Five years and 1,400
subscribers later, ProTek Communications
plans to secure another 500 subscribers in
the coming year, but this time also offering
fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) to roughly 100 cus-
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 14SERVING THE UNSERVED Significant numbers of WISPs are now part-
WITH A HYBRID MODEL nering with governments at all levels to bring
new service to the unserved and to grow their
Jim Bouse owns Brazos WiFi, which serves ap- businesses.
proximately 2,000 subscribers in College Sta-
tion, Texas near Houston. The nearby small The recently concluded Rural Digital Oppor-
town of Hearne was long challenged by low tunity Fund (RDOF) Phase I auction will inject
incomes and a lack of job opportunities, and another $9.2 billion in funding for broadband
city officials realized better fixed broadband deployment, and a significant amount of that
service would help attract business and create funding is expected to be authorized for use
jobs. Although Brazos WiFi traditionally relied by WISPs.
on unlicensed spectrum to deliver its services,
it answered Hearne’s call with a targeted roll- EXPANDING TO REACH THOUSANDS OF
out of FTTH. The company connected existing HEARTLAND CUSTOMERS WITH CBRS
homes and businesses and attracted a new AIRWAVES
business park, whose sales pitch included
“low rent and fast internet.” Like a growing Nextlink Internet of Hudson Oaks, Texas was
number of WISPs, Brazos WiFi now puts fiber one of the top investors in the CBRS spec-
into its buildouts where it makes economic trum auction (see page 23, “Spectrum policy
sense. Since 2018, the company has installed trends are highly favorable”), and is an exem-
32 miles of fiber and hooked up hundreds of plar of that program’s success. Nextlink Inter-
customers to its fiber network. net invested $28.4 million in mostly privately
raised capital to win an FCC spectrum auction
LEVERAGING FCC FUNDS TO for 1,072 pending Priority Access Licenses
EXPAND RURAL ACCESS (PALs). These licenses cover 491 counties in
11 states. For a company that had its origins in
Wisper ISP is one of the nation’s fastest-grow- the rural territory north and west of Dallas-Ft.
ing WISPs, delivering high-speed internet ser- Worth, the CBRS investments will enable it
vice in parts of Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, and to expand its 70,000-strong subscriber base
Oklahoma. In recent years, Wisper has been and reach out to 14 million potential custom-
able to expand and upgrade its networks to ers. Company CEO Bill Baker declares, “We
reach more under-served areas in part with want to become the top internet service pro-
support from the U.S. government. Wisper vider in small towns and rural markets across
was the second-largest winner in the FCC’s the central USA, enhancing their quality of life.
Connect America Fund Phase II (CAF II) auc- The CBRS licenses we won will enable us to
tion in 2018, authorized to receive $220.3 mil- do that.”
lion in federal support to expand fixed broad-
band deployment in historically hard-to-serve
rural areas.
Until the CAF II auction, the vast majority of
WISPs were ineligible for FCC high-cost sup-
port. Based in part on the recognition of the
benefits that fixed-wireless-centric networks
can bring to rural communities, the FCC, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and
many state governments have increased
the availability of such funding, augmenting
self-financing, and other private investment.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 15Growth Forecasts
The positive trajectory of subscribers and Based upon our surveys and other research,
revenues in the U.S. fixed-wireless broadband realistic projections indicate this arc will con-
industry is real cause for objective optimism. tinue for years to come.
SUBSCRIBERS
The number of customer subscriptions in this figure reached 6.9 million by the end of 2020
sector was estimated at 4.0 million as of year- and will reach 12.7 million by the end of 2025.
end 2016. The Carmel Group estimates this (See Figure 5.)
FIGURE 5: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Subscriber Growth, 2012-2025
13.50
12.00 12.7
11.3
10.50
10
9.00
8.8
7.50 7.8
Users double every
five years. 6.9
6.00
5.9
MILLIONS OF SUBSCRIBERS
4.50 5.3
4.7
4.0
3.00 3.5
3.1
2.7
1.50 2.3
0.00
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 E 2021 E 2022 E 2023 E 2024 E 2025 E
(E) Estimated/Projected.
Source: The Carmel Group
Numbers and estimates by The Carmel Group are for U.S. operators serving residential subscribers and non-residential subs.
Copyright 2021.All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized distribution, publication, or other uses are strictly prohibited.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 16REVENUES
Core industry revenues from the provision of projected to reach $10.9 billion by the end of
internet services to end-users are estimated 2025. (See Figure 6.)
at $4.4 billion as of the end of 2020. They are
FIGURE 6: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Revenues, 2012-2025
13.50
$13.9
12.00
10.50
$10.4
9.00
More revenue means
7.50 more staying power. $8.3
$7
6.00
DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN BILLIONS
$6
4.50 $5.2
$4.1
3.00 $3.6
$3.1
$2.6
1.50 $2.1 $2 $2.2
$1.8
0.00
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 E 2021 E 2022 E 2023 E 2024 E 2025 E
(E) Estimated/Projected. Source: The Carmel Group
Copyright 2021.Property of the Carmel Group. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized distribution, publication, or other uses are strictly prohibited.
AVERAGE REVENUE PER USER (ARPU)
Per-customer monthly revenues (ARPU) from technological upgrades to equipment, and
residential subscribers have risen steadily. provision of multiple ancillary services is driv-
The combination of better spectrum access, ing the ARPU estimates in Figure 7.
FIGURE 7: U.S. Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Average Revenue Per User, 2012-2025
$80
$79
$75
Consumer savings
AVERAGE MONTHLY SERVICE FEE
$70
from unbundling
more than offset $69
$65 small price increases.
$64
$60
$61
$59
$55 $57
$56
$51 $51 $51
$50 $53
$50 $52 $52
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 E 2021 E 2022 E 2023 E 2024 E 2025 E
(E) Estimated/Projected. Source: The Carmel Group
Copyright 2021.Property of the Carmel Group. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized distribution, publication, or other uses are strictly prohibited.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 17Growth Drivers
The fixed-wireless and hybrid fiber-wireless ISP industry is expected to continue its bull-
ish growth in multiple dimensions for as long as reasonable estimates and analysis can
predict. At least five mega-trends are driving this growth.
1 Fixed-wireless and hybrid networks cost much less.
The economics of fixed wireless are already ally not hampered by the physical placement
very attractive and only becoming more so. of wires, rights of way, or access to heavily
Networks can be deployed for roughly 10% of regulated infrastructure.
the capital cost of fiber, and they can general-
ly be installed in a matter of days. This makes Each generation of wireline technology ulti-
the fixed wireless solution an especially at- mately requires replacement of a large part
tractive option in areas that are unprofitable of the physical network. In contrast, fixed
to serve with fiber and wireline technologies. wireless can be expanded incrementally. Up-
grades are often accomplished with rapid
Fiber typically costs from $12,000 to $50,000 software uploads or replacements of unbur-
per mile, and sometimes more, depending on ied network components.
the terrain and whether the market is rural,
suburban, or urban. There is also the cost of Advances in radio technology are improv-
accessing rights-of-way, which is expensive ing wireless speeds to the point where they
and time-consuming. In contrast, unlicensed are approaching cable and ultimately are ex-
spectrum is essentially a cost-free, last-mile pected to begin rivaling fiber in marketplace
delivery platform to convey internet services; acceptance. At the same time, compres-
and licensed-by-rule spectrum is free but for sion technology continues to evolve such
the low regulatory and coordination costs to that more data can be transmitted at slower
use it correctly. speeds, improving the overall economics.
Another unique cost factor is that as the den-
For the average, fixed-wireless-centric ISP, the capital sity of subscribers in a given area drops, the
cost of adding subscribers is one-fifth or less of the capital expenditure per subscriber of wireline
inevitably increases; but it remains relatively
cost of that for wireline- and satellite-based networks. constant for wireless.
On the equipment side, fixed-wireless hard- As a result of these multiple cost advantages,
ware is relatively inexpensive compared to for the average fixed-wireless and hybrid ISP,
wireline solutions, the latter of which also in- capital expenditures are a fraction of the cost
cur extensive costs for installation, mainte- of wireline or fiber. For example, as indicated
nance, and repairs. Fixed-wireless networks in Figure 8, it generally costs less than $500 in
typically need nothing more than access to network capital outlay for a WISP to connect a
vertical infrastructure and suitable line of fixed-wireless customer versus approximately
sight characteristics. Fixed wireless is gener- $4,500 to connect a fiber subscriber.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 18FIGURE 8: Comparative Economics of U.S. Internet Access Solutions
FIBER CABLE SATELLITE MOBILE FIXED WIRELESS (1)
CAPEX/SUB REL-
ATIVE TO FIXED 9 5 6 3 1
WIRELESS (1)
YE 2020 BROAD-
BAND SUBS IN 15 76 2.5 315 6.9
MILLIONS (2)
EST. TYPICAL
SUBSCRIBER
940 200 20 15 25
SPEED DOWN
(MBPS)
MAX SPEED
2,000 2,000 50 200 + 1,000
DOWN (MBPS) (3)
UPGRADE COST Moderate High Low/High High/Modest Low/Moderate
Low incremental
Only replace the Requires modest
Moderating with cost until the 3G to 4G High;
UPGRADE endpoint; fiber incremental upgrades
DOCSIS 3.1; less satellite dies; higher 4G to 5G
COMMENT remains the in CPE, towers, and
with linear TV. when satellite cost Modest.
same. networks.
is included.
AVERAGE
REVENUE PER $65 $70 $90 $60 $57
USER (ARPU) (4)
CAPITAL OUTLAY
PER SUBSCRIBER
(INCLUDES $4,500 $2,200 $3,000 $1,300 $475
PROVIDED
CPE) (5)
PAYBACK TIME
69 31 32 22 8
IN MONTHS
1) This is a relative presentation comparing all of the technologies to fixed wireless, which is set to an index value of 10.
2) Subscriber numbers come from company filings, the CIA’s “World Factbook,” and estimates by The Carmel Group.
3) Mobile speeds can be higher during low traffic periods.
4) ARPU comes from a blend of advertised prices and company financial reports.
5) Capital Outlay figures come from company financial reports and estimates by The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021. Property of The Carmel Group. All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized use, including distribution, of this chart and/or its data, is strictly prohibited.
Figure 8 compares relative capital expendi- three times more than fixed wireless. Mobile
tures per subscriber as well as speed, upgrade bandwidth is more limited than fixed, but the
costs, ARPU, and ROI-breakeven timeframes compensating benefit is mobility. The FCC
for the five most popular U.S. broadband tech- does not consider mobile services to be a full
nologies. This is a relative presentation, com- substitute for fixed services, but both may
paring the four other technologies to fixed meet the statutory definition of “advanced
wireless, which is set to an index value of 1. telecommunications capability.”
Fiber ends up on the high side, costing about Finally, and perhaps of greatest importance to
nine times what fixed wireless costs. Cable investors, the ROI timeframe for fixed wireless
is more than five times higher. For networks is under one year. This compares to a mini-
based upon geostationary and low earth or- mum of almost two years to as much as six
biting (LEO) satellites, adding subscribers years for the other technologies.
typically costs more than six times that of
fixed wireless, including the costs of satellites. Altogether, fixed-wireless-centric networks
offer the most attractive economics among
The capex/sub of mobile/cellular is about the top U.S. broadband technologies.
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 192 Consumer demand is robust.
Consumer demand for broadband con- finance, critical function communications,
nectivity and many online services and ap- IoT, and data backup for business and gov-
plications was already surging before the ernment – are among the fastest-growing
COVID-19 pandemic. But the pandemic cre- segments in the broadband market, adding
ated even more demand for high-quality in- more fuel to the demand fire.
ternet services, especially for home-based
workers and students. Demand is also ex- Another consumer-relevant advantage for
ploding in many categories of network-en- most fixed-wireless ISPs is that they tend
abled services. More than ever, broadband to offer superior customer service and a
has become an essential service. hometown presence. This shows itself in
the form of prompt service in the field and
The Cisco 2020 Global Networking Trends personal relationships with customers,
Report shows burgeoning home broadband in contrast to the impersonal, mass-mar-
demand being complemented by surg- ket nature of larger incumbents. Most
ing enterprise and business deployments, fixed-wireless operators experience much
the latter especially for home-based work. lower subscriber churn compared to their
Cisco projects 50% of workloads will take competitors. (See Figure 13.)
place outside corporate data centers by
year-end 2021.7 The favorable customer experience offered
by fixed-wireless-centric companies is at-
The ongoing explosion in streaming video, tracting customers not only in rural areas,
online shopping, and internet-connected but also in urban areas. This trend is evi-
devices – including everything from home denced by providers like DC Access (see
appliances to security cameras, business page 14 among the “Case Studies”) and
equipment, health monitors, and drones Starry (see www.Starry.com).
used in agriculture and industry – is anoth-
er powerful growth driver. Consumers also Fixed wireless is also well suited for busi-
are continuing to cut the cord from pay TV ness and industrial facilities, multiple-dwell-
services and to replace expensive program- ing-unit buildings (MDUs), and venues such
ming bundles with less expensive “over the as stadiums and universities. Based on
top” (OTT) apps via broadband. Fixed-wire- industry data, executive interviews, and
less ISPs are making this cost-saving op- surveys, The Carmel Group estimates that
tion – once offered only to urban dwellers urban, non-residential customers will make
– available now to rural and exurban cus- up 35% of total industry revenues by 2025.
tomers.
Moreover, particularly in rural markets,
Technological advances are also dramat- low maintenance standards leading to the
ically reducing the latency of wireless net- recent abandonment of Digital Subscriber
works, i.e., the delay between transmitting Line (DSL) service have led to a rapid user
and receiving data. Broadband applications migration to fiber and fixed-wireless net-
that depend on speed, reliability, and low la- work offerings.
tency – such as gaming, video-on-demand,
7
isco, “2020 Global Networking Trends Report,” p. 11.
C
https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/m/en_us/solutions/enterprise-networks/networking-report/files/GLBL-ENG_NB-06_0_NA_RPT_PDF_MOFU-no-NetworkingTrends
Report-NB_rpten018612_5.pdf
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 20COVID-19 SPAWNS NEW NETWORK TRAFFIC DYNAMICS AND USES
The COVID-19 pandemic had enormous graded their networks to better manage
impacts on internet use. According to a these new dynamics.
WISPA survey of its members in August
2020, during peak hours WISPs experi- Although the U.S. economy contracted
enced an average 43% increase in down- significantly during the pandemic, it is no
load traffic and a 70% increase in upload exaggeration to say that high-speed inter-
traffic. The main drivers of this trend net access is helping Americans weather
were two-way teleconferencing, distance the crisis far better – and certainly far
learning, HD movie streaming, telemed- better than they would have without it.
icine, and web browsing. WISPA data
shows that more than 80% of WISPs up-
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 213 Spectrum policy trends are highly favorable.
Since the last iteration of this report in late gy makes it possible to have a spectrum-shar-
2017, the FCC has made more than 1,200 MHz ing model that allows all users to coexist,
of unlicensed and licensed-by-rule spectrum mostly interference-free, in lightly regulated,
available to the public nationwide. Not unlike licensed-by-rule airwaves.
the land rushes of old, the fresh availability
of these resources is expected to set off un- The CBRS auction proved that when the rules
precedented levels of entrepreneurship, in- enable smaller entrepreneurial players – such
vestment, and innovation in broadband equip- as WISPs – to participate, they do. Almost 70
ment, networks, and services. WISPs won more than 3,600 CBRS licenses to
serve 1,235 counties, marking the industry’s
As described elsewhere in this report, from its largest-ever role in an FCC spectrum auction.
inception, the fixed-wireless industry has re- The auction also reflected a growing maturity
lied primarily on unlicensed spectrum bands, and sophistication of the fixed-wireless indus-
including the 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and try, given its traditional primary reliance on
“TV White Spaces” (TVWS) bands, to provide unlicensed spectrum.
internet access to customers. (See Figure 2.)
In another landmark spectrum policy deci-
Meanwhile, the FCC has recognized that sion, the FCC in 2020 opened 1,200 MHz of
fixed-wireless technology is a quick and the 6 GHz band for unlicensed uses. This
cost-effective means to shrink the digital di- move included up to 850 MHz for shared out-
vide. To that end, that agency has increased door uses governed by an automated frequen-
access to a significant amount of free/unli- cy coordination system. This action makes
censed, and low-cost/licensed-by-rule spec- it possible for fixed-wireless ISPs to increase
trum bands. The FCC has also made licensed capacity and bring high-speed, broadband ac-
spectrum more accessible to smaller entities. cess to more remote areas, while concurrent-
ly avoiding harmful interference with licensed
For example, one of the biggest events ever incumbents in the band.
to reshape the fixed-wireless ISP industry
occurred in 2020, when the FCC auctioned Spectrum sharing – as reflected in both CBRS
licenses in the CBRS band (3.55 – 3.7 GHz). and 6 GHz – is a critically important trend,
Historically, much of this band was reserved freeing up underutilized spectrum for com-
for the U.S. Navy, which used the airwaves mercial use. With little “greenfield” (unused)
only intermittently and only within a few miles spectrum available, the FCC is expected to in-
of the U.S. coastline. Under the new rules, 100 crease spectrum-sharing opportunities in the
MHz of the band are to be shared between pri- coming years. Industry surveys suggest the
vate operators and the incumbents through vendor and operator communities are eager
FCC-authorized Spectrum Access Systems to adopt them.
(SAS). SAS automatically facilitates local ac-
cess to the airwaves, while preventing harmful Finally, the upcoming 2.5 GHz and 3.45-3.55
interference. GHz auctions, as well as unlicensed and li-
censed uses of mmWave spectrum in the
In another innovation in the CBRS band, the 60 GHz and higher bands, show additional
FCC offered exclusive access licenses to much growth and investment opportunities for the
smaller geographic areas than usual. This U.S. fixed-wireless industry.
made it possible for smaller and more diverse
bidders to bid successfully. The SAS technolo-
The 2021 Fixed-Wireless and Hybrid ISP Industry Report, The Carmel Group.
Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved. Any unauthorized distribution or use is strictly prohibited. 22You can also read
