Skip to main content

AT&T to expand LTE coverage by acquiring Verizon’s 700MHz spectrum licenses

Verizon AT&T iPhones
Image used with permission by copyright holder

It looks like 2013 could be the year of LTE for AT&T. The carrier just announced a deal with Verizon Wireless that would allow it to acquire Verizon’s 700 MHz spectrum. Through this acquisition, AT&T will provide LTE coverage to 42 million people across 18 states in North America, the carrier said in a statement on Friday.

These states include California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. AT&T has just acquired these licenses for $1.9B from Verizon.

This 700MHz band was originally used to broadcast analog TV channels, but now that Verizon uses digital technology for its TV services the spectrum has been up for auction since 2008. During that auction Verizon and U.S. Cellular won Block A, which contained licenses covering urban areas. AT&T, however, acquired a whopping 227 licenses when it purchased Block B through the auction.

AT&T uses this 700MHz spectrum to expand its 4G LTE coverage across the United States. The carrier is also providing licenses of its AWS spectrum to Verizon in select markets, such as Los Angeles, Fresno and Portland, so that Verizon can further deploy its own network.

Additionally, Verizon revealed why it has decided to give up these extra 700MHz licenses, according to TechCrunch. During the 2008 auction, the carrier picked up 127 licenses in Block B, which are involved in its current sale with AT&T. Until now, Verizon had used these licenses to provide supplemental coverage in urban areas before it had acquired other licenses that would cover holes in its nationwide network.  This, however, means that it would make sense for AT&T to acquire these licenses, since its exactly what Verizon needs to continue deploying its own LTE network.

This move also serves to help AT&T reach a goal it announced this past November – to reach 300 million people in the U.S. with its 4G LTE network by the end of 2014.

Editors' Recommendations

Lisa Eadicicco
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Lisa Eadicicco is a technology and video game reporter based in New York City. She graduated from Purchase College in 2012…
The 4 best Whoop alternatives in 2024
Someone wearing a Whoop 4.0 and an Apple Watch Ultra 2.

If you’ve been looking for a top-shelf fitness tracker, one of the best brands in the business is Whoop. Having developed quite the reputation over the years, professional athletes and everyday gym-goers are glad to stand behind Whoop’s advanced tracking capabilities, and so are we! But Whoop equipment doesn’t come cheap. That’s why it’s always good to have alternatives when you’re shopping for a new consumer tech device.

To that end, your pals at Digital Trends have got you covered. As experts on health and fitness gear, we’ve gone ahead and rounded up the four best Whoop alternatives to track your workouts in 2024.

Read more
The 6 best Apple Watch alternatives in 2024
Person adjusting Garmin Forerunner 965 on their wrist.

Smartwatches are powerful companions for our smartphones, offering quick access to messages and fitness tracking stats. The Apple Watch lineup is filled with many of the most popular smartwatches of 2024, as they're easy to use, loaded with features, and highly customizable. But if you own an Android phone – or simply don't like the Apple Watch design – you'll be glad to know there are several Apple Watch alternatives for you to choose from.

Ready to find a companion for your wrist? Here are the six best Apple Watch alternatives of 2024. This includes premium fitness trackers like the Garmin Forerunner 965 and the stylish Withings ScanWatch 2. For more great options, check out our roundup of the best smartwatches.

Read more
There’s something Apple isn’t telling you about the new iPad Pro
A render of the front and back of the 2024 iPad Pro.

Earlier this year, I bought a new MacBook Air. It was the entry-level 13-inch trim with an eight-core graphics engine. If my budget allowed, I would’ve loved to go with the higher-end M3 version with a 10-core GPU inside.

Spending a few hundred dollars for the higher RAM and storage configuration automatically gets you the more powerful M3 variant. Conversely, you can’t just pay more for an M3 version with a beefier GPU. If you want the best performance possible, you have to pay for the higher storage/RAM models. It’s an infuriating and darn expensive situation, but that’s how Apple rolls.

Read more