Sprint’s Really Odd Antenna Configuration Proposal

On one of our municipal client’s towers, Sprint submitted a request to replace three existing antennas with new antennas that add 2.5GHz capability to their equipment.  The subject tower is in a difficult zoning jurisdiction and one where Sprint really doesn’t have any other options.   Their collocation rent was on the higher side but not unreasonably so- and the three other wireless service providers were all paying the same or higher rent.

Because the antennas were the same size or smaller, we did not recommend a rent increase for them.  However, Sprint was adding remote radio units and other equipment so we recommended a fairly nominal increase.  Rather than accept the newly proposed lease terms, Sprint instead asked whether they could replace the existing equipment on the tower with three of these antennas and get a reduction in rent.

Sprint Proposed Canister Antennas
Possible Sprint Replacement Antennas


The proposed antennas are larger than the existing antennas, but Sprint appears to be wanting to go from 9 panels to 3 of these antennas.  (Not 3 of the canisters)  These panels will accommodate all of Sprint’s spectrum bands but would seemingly limit their capacity and number of simultaneous users.   These appear more suitable for a mini-macro as opposed to a macrocell, but I would welcome any thoughts readers have regarding this topic.

At the end of the day, we advised the client that the value of their tower is its unique location, not the specific loading that Sprint is placing or removing from the tower.   Obviously, there will be situations where a reduction in loading or equipment would justify a reduction in lease rate, but this isn’t one of them.

Contact Us

    5 thoughts on “Sprint’s Really Odd Antenna Configuration Proposal”

    1. You really have to look at the antenna specs. What use to be just one antenna can now contain: RRUs; Multiple antenna elements for splitting sectors; and additional antenna elements for adding frequencies. In other words, reduce loading (rent expense), while increasing product (revenue). All carriers, and especially Sprint are in a difficult position, so balance is in trying to help them (nobody likes churn) while protecting your client’s asset.

      1. KMW -ETCR-654L12H6C
        Electrical Down Tilt Antenna
        only 104″ tall not including the 19.7″ lightning rod/anti-nest.

    Leave a Comment

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Scroll to Top