6GHz for 6G: The value not being discussed

News from earlier this week that the EC’s Radio Spectrum Policy Group had issued an opinion proposing 665 or 700 MHz of spectrum in the 6.425-7.250 range be assigned to IMT services was met with no shortage of praise and criticism. 

On the praise side, it’s not surprising that the GSMA called this out as a “welcome recognition of the importance of ensuring Europe’s mobile industry has the spectrum it needs for future growth.”  Those finding fault with the move generally focused on slowing data traffic growth rates and the seeming contradiction with industry calls for a smooth (hardware refresh-free) transition to 6G generally ignoring the impacts of compound growth and the fact that discussions around limiting hardware refreshes have focused on core, baseband and air interface changes more than the addition of new spectrum bands which almost always require new kit (radios and antennas). 

Regardless of the diverse opinions (informed or otherwise), it’s obviously a big win for operators and consumers. GSMA Intelligence valued it at up to $3B in terms of the network densification costs avoided absent additional spectrum in Europe. That’s a big number, sure. Momentum behind 6GHz for IMT services, however, also highlights a number of implications for how operators roll out their networks. I won’t bother you with big numbers but, as operators think about 6GHz deployments, there are other values to consider. 

• Value of Coverage and Capacity. Mobile data traffic growth rates may be slowing, but not yet by large margins. Traffic in the US grew by more than 30% last year. Ofcom predicts the UK will see almost 20% growth this year. This growth comes on top of several years of even higher growth leading to increasing burdens on mobile networks thanks to that pesky compound growth dynamic I mentioned. And this in markets where 5G deployments are mature. It’s not surprising then that operators looking to 6G expect they will need more capacity-focused spectrum; our latest Network Transformation Survey finds 8 in 10 expecting THz spectrum to factor into their 6G deployments. At the same time, just as many say that 6G will need more coverage spectrum in order to be successful. Now, aspirations around THz may be, well, aspirational (particularly given the experience with deploying mmWave 5G). The simultaneous focus on coverage and capacity, however speaks to the need for balanced spectrum assets – including upper mid-band assets like 6GHz.
• Value of Antenna Innovation. It was probably not a coincidence that, last week, Telefonica announced work with Nokia and the Polytechnic University Valencia demonstrating that 6GHz can match 3.5GHz coverage and capacity, given use of active antennas and high-order Massive MIMO. Also not likely coincidental? A 7GHz trial announced by SoftBank, again with Nokia, Masive, MIMO innovation, and solid performance results. Yes, 6GHz spectrum will deliver much needed capacity. It looks to do so without compromising coverage, thanks to advanced antenna technologies. Will that mean telco investment in new kit? Yes, as is almost always the case when new spectrum is put to use. Will it be more expensive than building denser networks with existing spectrum? Nope, please reference that big number up top.
• Value of Investment Planning. AT&T announced this week that it had deployed recently acquired spectrum from EchoStar to almost 23,000 sites in more than 5,300 cities across the US. If you read the news and thought, “wow, that was quick,” that’s more than fair. How did it manage this in short order (it says it only needed “a few weeks”)? By leveraging existing infrastructure that was ready to support the new spectrum. That’s why clarity on future spectrum resources is critical and why 6GHz decisions are critical as operators plan their 6G and upper mid-band expansions.