Verizon - Digital network/how much?

From Verizon's annual report for 2002, found here.

So, they have licenses to about 87% of the population, and they offer service to 78% of the population. Most of that (220/228) is digital, so they have a digital network that is 96% of their total coverage area.

If you consider only native digitial coverage areas, Nextel and Sprint are both bigger, and TM is just behind with coverage to 224M, all digital for each of those companies.

 

Wait second, I love the this term "native digital coverage", no no no no... no.

Sprint and Nextel have less digital coverage then Verizon, Cingular At&t.

That is such a crock of poo. Matt don't take this personally at all this is not regarded at all towards you, I mean this terms "all digital, or Native Digital" are such advertising ploys.

As far as digital coverage goes T-mobile, Nextel and Sprint have less then these the other big three carriers, native or not digital is digital. I could care less if an analog towers was converted to a digital one or whatever, it makes no difference to anyone. what a scam for terminology.

"DiverDown wireless the most native digital coverage in my garage" LOL

 

Diver down, I was almost done posting links to all the carriers native digital coverage (the coverage that they OWN, not including roaming coverage, but it just got deleted!! I wasn't talking about analog. Just digital, just what they own. Not counting Verizon's AC coverage with Alltel, or any of Sprint's partners, or companies TM uses to roam, etc. Just the coverage built out by the companies.

In any event, believe what you want. Maybe tomorrow I will do this again. Anyway, I was working on the top 6 carriers. This is what I had so far.

Verizon 228
T-Mobile 224
Sprint 230+ (they have that on their website, their SEC documents roll the partners in and say over a quarter billion (250))
Cingular 231
Nextel 240 (but includes Nextel Partners - didn't get back to checking them)
AT&T - didn't check them yet.

 

That's very interesting; good job on research, Matt! Correct me if I'm wrong, but having 96% of the population served by a carrier covered by digital could be very different from having 96% of area covered, couldn't it? I was thinking if 100% of the major metropolitan areas (with very high population densities) they serve are digital (I assume this is probably the case), they could leave a lot of analog towers in places like my hometown, with a population of just over 11,000 in the entire county (and only about 350 in the town itself), and still say they are 96% digital. That is my only problem with digital only phones, they're great until you have to drive 50 to 100 miles just to get a signal; and usually that happens at the worst possible time! It would be great if the companies would disclose both population and area covered to seem less misleading, but then that probably wouldn't be good business, would it? BTW, my hometown does have digital coverage, on 800 CDMA only.

 

Rebguy - yes there is a distinction in the numbers. The industry uses "POPs" - people for license information. So companies have licenses to serve xxx POPs. The companies then report "covered POPs" - the number of people covered by their service. It is not a geographical statement. So, Verizon's digital network is 96% of the total POPs covered. It could be, gepgraphically, 80%, 90%, 70%, whatever, of their geographical coverage area, I have no idea. Companies do not report on that basis. That is why a company like TMobile, with no analog network, has a covered POP number similar to Verizon's. TM covers where people live, and right now they don't cover where they don't live.

 

That is definitely true -- a recent report in Sweden shows you can:

1) cover 99% of pops with 41% area coverage
2) cover 84% of pops with 2,7% area coverage
3) cover 30% of pops with 0,7% area coverage

I know Sweden a bit more concentrated than most countries, but a similar pattern will be found in most places.

 

Interesting stats. I would agree that the US would be similar. I would expect that the numbers for Japan, Korea, and Taiwan would be a bit different, but the trends would follow the same pattern.