How Real Is the Race to 5G?

Adapted from a Fortune article by Aaron Pressman, 8/7/18; Original article here.

A New Deloitte 5G Report, commissioned by the CTIA, Tries To Explain Why Winning the Race to 5G Matters

This kind of report sounds very similar to a 2017 5G report, by Accenture, also commissioned by the CTIA, that posited familiar unsubstantiated projections that are blindly repeated by many in Congress, at the FCC to justify heinous orders by the FCC in 2017–2018 and Federal Bills such as S.3157 — The STREAMLINE Deployment of Small Cells Act of 2018, which is attempting to rewrite Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act (also known as 47 U.S. Code § 332(c)(7) or the Facilities Siting; Radio Frequency Emission Standards Section.

S.3157, as written, is a disaster for local communities: it is extreme Federal overreach that will severely limit the actions local governments can take on all Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) siting and will significantly reduce the time local governments will have to process these applications — all in an effort to make deployments cheaper, faster, and more consistent across jurisdictions.

In short, S.3157 will unnecessarily shove down the throats of those living in residential areas a slew of Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTFs), aka so-called "Small Cells", proposed for Utility poles and Light poles that are as close as 15 to 50 feet to homes. If you don’t like the sound of that future for your community, then please go here to learn more and help define a better future for your community:

CPMRA-WTF installations in residential zones are unnecessary because Verizon recently admitted that their 28 GHz and 39 GHz signals can transmit 2,000 to 3,000 feet from the source CPMRA-WTF antennas:

The following Verizon videos prove that Verizon DOES NOT NEED Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTFs) installed in residential areas every 500 to 1,000 feetthe 4G/5G WTFs can be 3,000 feet away on Macro Towers.

CNBC: 6/25/18 — Verizon CEO, Lowell McAdam, on The Future of 5G

Verizon: 5/23/18 — The Power (and Reach) of 28 GHz and 39 GHz Millimeter Waves

Lowell McAdam, CEO of Verizon:

"When [Verizon] went out in these 11 [5G test] markets, we tested for well over a year, so we could see every part of foliage and every storm that went through. We have now busted the myth that [5G frequencies] have to be line-of-sight — they do not. We busted the myth that foliage will shut [5G] down . . . that does not happen. And the 200 feet from a home? We are now designing the network for over 2,000 feet from transmitter to receiver, which has a huge impact on our capital need going forward. Those myths have disappeared."

Jason L., Verizon Field Engineer:

"[Verizon 5G] is really high frequency [28,000 MHz and 39,000 MHz], so everybody thinks it doesn’t go very far, but it’s a really big pipe and so that’s what allows you to gain the super fast speeds . . We’re 3,000 feet away from our radio node. the cool thing about this is that we did not move the radio node. It’s pointing down to serve the customers in that area " . . . here even 3,000 feet away, we’re still getting 1,000 [Megabits per second] speeds . . . So now we’ve driven about 1/3 of a mile away [1,760 feet] from the radio node. we are still getting very good speeds even though we have foliage in between [800 Megabits per second]."

This is substantial evidence that proves that the LEAST INTRUSIVE MEANS to close a Significant Gap
in Wireless coverage is to install 4G/5G WTFs on macro towers that are 3,000 feet away from residences.

You have, no doubt heard these figures repeated incessantly . . .

  • $275 Billion in Telco investment
  • Three million jobs created
  • $275 Billion in GDB growth

About the Research: This research was commissioned by CTIA. All data used is publicly available. Statistics are based on industry averages, plus Accenture’s knowledge of expected costs, and assume that adoption and coverage requirements will be similar to those of previous generations of technology. A full breakdown can be found in the report.

This is nothing short of full-speed, high-def propaganda filling the airwaves and internet. The foundation for these unsubstantiated "best guesses" rests on greed, deception, fraud and fluff.

Do you remember 2008 and the role paid by Moody’s AAA ratings for the mortgage-backed securities/junk at that time? These AAA-purchased ratings were not based on hard data — just based on a fictional story favored by Moody’s customers, the investment banks that created these toxic financial instruments. The results? The great recession of 2008 and a nationwide mortgage and housing crisis.

Accenture and Deloitte are the 2018-equivalent of these ratings agencies-for-hire — publishing Telecom-sponsored reports that are being used to lobby/influence US Congress, State Legislators and local City Councils. The misinformation and outright lies are being used to set National and statewide policy to support a massive Telecom Power Grabat a huge cost to the public.

About the CTIA

CTIA® ( represents the U.S. wireless communications industry and the companies throughout the mobile ecosystem. The association’s members include all who profit from unfettered Wireless expansion:

  • Wireless carriers and equipment suppliers
  • Device manufacturers
  • App and content companies

The CTIA vigorously lobbies at all levels of government for policies that foster continued wireless innovation, investment and expansion. The CTIA was founded in 1984 and is based in Washington, D.C and headed run by a former FCC Commissioner, Meredith Attwell Baker.

Here is What the 8/7/18 Forbes Article Says:

Be sure to keep the following statement from Deloitte in mind (from the last page of the report).

As used in this report, “Deloitte” means Deloitte Consulting LLP, a subsidiary of Deloitte LLP. Please see for a detailed description of our legal structure. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting.

This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

This is a popular claim that has been often repeated by the CTIA, Telecoms and many "influenced" members in U.S. Congress and State Legislatures — and then reported by the Media:

China is winning the race against the United States to build a faster nationwide wireless network that uses 5G technology, billed as the mobile industry’s future. Unless the U.S. moves more quickly, it will be at a major disadvantage when comes to creating dominant new companies in the emerging space.

But, is this so-called "Race to 5G" important or relevant, at all? . . . and at what cost to self-determination and local rule?

Deloitte Consulting, a top industry consulting firm, released a report about 5G on Tue Aug 7, 2018. It cited the benefits of what it called the “data-network effect,” in which early leadership in new markets translates into more users who generate more data that, in turn, helps improve services and attracts more users. The report’s authors write.

“Accordingly, countries that adopt 5G first are expected to experience disproportionate gains in macroeconomic impact compared to those that lag”

It’s not, however, clear how closely the claim matches history.

  • The United States led in the development of the Internet and 4G wireless but Google is matched by Alibaba, Uber faces Didi Chuxing, and so on.

  • U.S. companies have been sounding the alarm over a purported race against China over 5G, perhaps playing to the fears and strategic desires of the Trump White House. Their hope is to get the federal government to speed things up by cutting local and state regulatory hurdles to getting approval for the hundreds of thousands of Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antenna – Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (CPMRA-WTFs), aka so-called "Small Cells".

The mobile carriers’ industry association, the CTIA, estimates the number of cell sites in the U.S. will more than double from about 325,000 to 800,000. In another sign of how important 5G is to businesses, T-Mobile and Sprint cite the need to speed up 5G deployment as a major rationale for merging.

In February, Trump administration national security staffers proposed nationalizing wireless networks and building a federal 5G system that Wireless carriers could lease. Companies like AT&T and Verizon through their trade association have strongly opposed such nationalization. All four major carriers are rolling out their own 5G pilot programs, with 5G-compatible phones arriving on the market in 2019.

The evidence that Deloitte used to back up its claim of Chinese leadership in 5G is greater infrastructure spending resulting to install more cell sites. China has about three times as many sites per person and 13 times the coverage calculated by sites per square mile, Deloitte said, noting lower equipment costs in China and easier permitting, which is not surprising, given the Communist government there that has virtually no local rule.

Deloitte towed the U.S. industry’s line when it came to concerns about excessive government intervention. Other countries may subsidize or nationalize their wireless networks, but Deloitte says:

“such interventions in the United States could risk disrupting a communications and technology ecosystem that has proven symbiotic and resilient over the past decade.”

In what could be read as a warning sign for some of the U.S. industry’s 5G business promises, however, the consultants noted the history of current 4G LTE networks. Although widely used, 4G hasn’t been as big a profit center for mobile carriers, as expected.

“Released commercially in the United States in 2010, carriers expected LTE to provide an immediate boost to smart cities, asset tracking, retail, manufacturing, health care, and many other industries. Many assumed that if carriers played an integral role shaping the ecosystems that comprised these use cases, then profits would follow. However, the promise of new revenue streams for carriers enabled by LTE has remained largely unfulfilled.

By increasing capacity, 4G dramatically lowered the cost of transmitting data, allowing the carriers to cut prices but maintain profit margins.