Recently we mentioned that from a carrier perspective the impact of 5G on consumers has been somewhat less than originally expected but has found its way into the business market where it serves as a connection topology for private networks.  These networks can span various business locations but are most effective as part of what are loosely known as ‘smart’ factories.  These facilities can range from small highly automated production centers to vast complexes that encompass everything from business offices to warehouses to large production and assembly operations. 
Before the smart factory concept came into being, production lines were hard wired, meaning that cables were run to various points around the production lines, either in a false floor or overhead.  Not only is this an expensive process, but if the line needs to be reconfigured at a later date, those cables have to be pulled and rerun to new locations, a slow process, and one that essentially limited the number of potential connections for the line.  A wireless network does not have those limitations as reconfiguring a line would mean just moving the sensor or terminal to a different point and reestablishing the network connection, which can take weeks off of a large production line reconfiguration project.
Where the comparison between 5G and a hardwired network on a factory floor becomes more difficult is bandwidth.  Ethernet (hard-wire) theoretically offers higher bandwidth, although 5G continues to offer more adaptable spectrum products. But what balances that give and take is the cost of installing a 5G network at ~50% of a hard-wired one, and is, as noted above, far easier and less expensive to reconfigure.  This weighs the choice more to the wireless side, especially as 5G bandwidth options get closer to matching ethernet.
So, what does a smart factory outfitted with a 5G private network actually look like?  Here’s a practical example:
Pegatron (4938.TT), one of Taiwan’s biggest OEMs, began construction on a greenfield factory in Batam, Indonesia, a few miles from Singapore across the Singapore Strait.  The factory, which is ~915,000 ft2 (23 acres) was built to consolidate the operations of 8 other factories and is Pegatron’s first in Southeast Asia.  The factory recently officially opened (actually started production at the end of last year) and has 26 active production lines with seven more to be built.  There are ~6,000 employees at the complex who produce ~2.5m units/month, primarily CPE equipment (80%) and network products (20%).  The factory has 3 floors that contain ~5,000 machines and 1,000 devices that are interconnected, including automated guide vehicles and cameras that monitor production processes across the floor, with 21 5G radio units as access points across the facility.  Each production line has terminals, cameras, sensors, and process machine output data connections that can be reviewed in almost any configuration.  One might want to see all of the data for a particular line or all of the data for a particular process across all the lines, and as digital wireless data, configuring such information for control panels or dashboards becomes easy.  One can even take camera information for a particular line or process and review it to see what caused a problem that appeared at the end of the line, or use the process review camera information to create training videos that reduce the need for hand-holding during new employee on-boarding.  The camera data and AR can also be used for repair and maintenance, but by far the most important ability for such a network is its cost and reconfiguration ability.
All in, whether consumers recofnize the merits of 5G or feel they should pay a premium seems a smaller issue when compared to the abilities that 5G bring to a smart factory like the Pegatron facility  in Batam.  The flexibility and low installation cost make it a no brainer for those interested in having a flexible and reconfigurable factory that can adapt to new customer demands or new processes.  The LinkedIn video below shows the factory and all the equipment operating under the 5G private network (2:33):
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pegatron-5g_pegatron-5gs-new-smart-factory-in-indonesia-activity-7301915512660275200-TSaM?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAACZQsABSTeutynN9EcgEHCoOEmLOINmF7M
​

"The adoption of 5G will [be] even faster than what we saw on 4G, which was already fairly fast."[1]
"5G is the fundamental platform for the fourth industrial revolution and will become an integral part of societies and civil infrastructures, just like roads, energy and transportation."[2]
"Every generation of wireless technology has brought a huge and largely unseen step forward in innovation. 2G brought us two-way texting. 3G brought us high-quality digital voicemail. 4G bought us Waze, Uber and DoorDash, none of which were envisioned when 4G was rolled out. So 5G is really going to bring us things that we haven’t even imagined yet."[3]
"5G will be the platform linking billions of devices together."[4]
"The arrival of 5G-enabling smart devices will change the way we live, work, and think in fascinating, new ways."[5]
"5G networking is being phased in and will be transformative to society."[6]
Back in 2019, when 5G was first released, it was to be a game changer, providing a high-speed gateway into a new world of devices and applications with unmatched speed and the capacity to link together, well, almost everything.  The promise of a new era of VR was particularly emphasized, with real-time multiplayer gaming, live VR events, and remote collaboration revolutionizing how we are entertained and work, along with the promise of a new healthcare model that allowed doctors to perform complex surgery remotely.  All part of the 5G hype.
Now that 5G has been around for 5+ years, how much of that came true and how much was justification for the spending that carriers knew was coming as 5G rollouts began?  The answer is that neither the glass half full or the glass half empty crowd had any clue about 5G at the time, but they do now.  Fierce Wireless just completed a survey of 176 telco executives (36% are decision makers, 64% are decision influencers) who made their opinion concerning 5G quite plain.
The good news is

• 10% said they believe 5G has been ‘Extremely successful’
• 23% said 5G has been ‘Successful with good ROI’

But…

• 60% said they have had ‘limited success with 5G so far’ (They see it as a long-term return product).
• 7% say they are disappointed with 5G.

So 33% say they see it as a positive, while 67% don’t.  With the 2019 promise of 5G as a world-changing technology comes the reality of what actual benefits 5G has provided for the consumer and telcos.  It seems that telcos are a bit less than impressed with what they have gained from 5G and consumers, well we would be surprised if most consumers realized that they were using 5G at all.  We have doubts that much remote surgery is being done and VR certainly has not been the focus for the average consumer, so what is 5G really being used for ?
The survey says the number one use for 5G is for Fixed Wireless Access, the process by which 5G connects a fiber-optic or microwave backhaul to a local base station which uses 5G’s bandwidth to wirelessly connect to 5G antennas on houses or businesses, which is then connected to an internal modem at each location.  This allows 5G’s high speed and low latency without the high cost of fiber or cable installation, along with rapid deployment time. 48% of telco executives believe that FWA is the key 5G application.  There are limitations for FWA, particularly the need for line-of-sight between base stations and consumer nodes, but FWA is expected to reach over 98m connections this year (global) compared to over 58m last year.
The 2nd most important 5G application, according to telco executives, is network slicing (33%).  Network slicing uses software to define customized virtual networks that share the same physical 5G infrastructure but are isolated from each other.  This allows the 5G spectrum to be used most efficiently, without allocating static network blocks that are not used consistently.  This is a great plus for carriers as they can reallocate 5G bandwidth to those customers experiencing high demand and remove it from those with low demand.  That said, in order for 5G network slicing to be effective the 5G infrastructure that it is operating on has to be 5G standalone (SA), not 5G NSA (Non-standalone), a 5G overlay on top of 4G LTE infrastructure.  The majority of global 5G infrastructure is still NSA and SA is not expected to become the dominant technology until 2028.  The 3rd most important 5G application to telco executives is private wireless, which allows for a completely secure network (24%) and is more profitable for carriers.
When asked about what have been the biggest barriers to 5G deployment there were few surprises with cost having the highest percentage at 39%, followed by 29% citing a lack of in-house 5G expertise.  But when it came to the question of how important 5G is to enterprise customers, not surprisingly, 78% of carriers executives said either ‘critical’ or ‘important’ with only 22% calling it ‘one of many factors or ‘don’t care’.  Of course, when asking that question to those whose livelihood depends on 5G, it should be expected that there will be some bias.
As par for the course, there was a question about AI in relation to 5G, and while we expected AI-based network slicing to be the winner (it was at 24%) AI-based predictive maintenance came in a close 2nd at 22%, with only 9% citing the use of chatbots to enhance customer support or the overall customer experience.  When the final question came up, it was easier to see a bit of frustration with 5G come to the surface.  The final question was “Do you see a need for 6G in 2030?”  51% said yes, as new applications will require it, but 43% said no, with 5G advanced being sufficient and 6% saying they did not even want to hear about 6G.
As with most new technologies, the tendency is to overpromise and underperform, and while that seems to be the case with 5G at least to some, consumers seem oblivious.  While they are able to download a game or video faster and are likely to see less ‘loading’ time for videos, 5G applications are primarily higher level applications that carriers would find most beneficial.  What is surprising to us is how slowly 5G has been deployed globally, despite the hype in the early days, but given that cost was the biggest sticking point for carrier deployment and the fact that not all carriers seem to be making money from 5G, it is logical that deployment has slowed from the days when it was imperative that we install 5G faster than  China.  Does that sound strangely familiar?
BTW, we admit that we had expected mmWave 5G (much higher frequency, leading to higher speed, expanded bandwidth and even lower latency) would be even more popular than sub-6.  We were wrong as mmWave was just too expensive to support itself, as the base station to base station distance is only 600 to 1200 feet, making it only suitable in urban areas and stadiums, so we cut the carriers a little slack…


[1] Ignacio Contreras, Qualcomm’s director of marketing for 5G

[2] Top executives at Verizon

[3] Dolan Beckel, director of the Office of Civic Innovation and Digital Strategy for the city of San José, Calif.

[4] Serhat Terzioğlu, at the World Economic Forum in Davos

[5] Business Today

[6] Streaming Media

Yesterday it was reported that as the 32% tariff in Taiwanese goods entering the US was about to begin, a number of key notebook brands were notifying their supply chain to suspend all notebook and related component shipments to the US for the next two weeks.  Among the brands thought to have participated in the suspension are Dell (DELL), HP (HPE), Lenovo (992.HK), Asus (2357.TT), and Acer (2353.TT), although official statements have yet to be verified.  Over the last 8 quarters, those 5 laptop brands represented between 72% and 76% of all laptop shipments.
While laptop brands have reacted quickly (and after today are likely regretting the idea), component manufacturers are not seeing a radical change in demand and see shipments as relatively normal thus far.  Some hardware oriented component manufacturers have seen a few postponements, although discussions are ongoing about the potential for tariff sharing should they remain in force.  That said, with the tariff front changing daily or hourly, the biggest issue is not the tariffs themselves but the inability of businesses, large and small, to plan on a forward basis, especially as trade talks between individual countries and the US will take weeks or months to resolve.  We don’t need a war or pandemic to create economic instability, Trump is able to do that himself…  +With only 1,306 days until the next election, a good CEO could promise to move production to the US but get bogged down in the contract details for a mere 186 weeks…

There are thought to be 5.56 billion active mobile phones across the globe, and almost every one is Wi-Fi capable.  There are billions of other Wi-Fi enabled devices, ranging from laptops to smart TVs and there are over 15 billion IoT devices connected to the internet, many of which use Wi-Fi to make that connection.  With cellular users numbering a mere 6.4 billion, Wi-Fi is the most ubiquitous network protocol globally, yet we rarely pay any attention to this technology that supports industrial, commercial, and residential users 24/7, unless we hear the words, “Wi-Fi is down!”, at which point panic sets in for most users, along with either a call to tech support or having to go into the cabinet under the TV to see if the router lights are flashing.
Those boxes, and their larger counterparts in commercial systems, grab the text messages, e-mails, pictures, videos, and data that you send, right out of the air.  They package each bit, and send it out into the world over cable, fiber, or cell.  Cellular folks laugh at Wi-Fi’s limited range (see below), but cellular signals, particularly 5G cellular, are quite easily blocked by building structures and geographical obstacles, while Wi-Fi is designed to be a low-power system used as a local network.  The comparison is apples to oranges now, but next year things will get better for Wi-Fi users as Wi-Fi 7 standards will be finalized and the potential for substantial improvements in Wi-Fi will be underway.

Typically, a new standard means that equipment manufacturers will begin adding Wi-Fi 7 capabilities to new models as they are released, however some CE manufacturers have taken the preliminary Wi-Fi 7 protocol and built those capabilities into new devices.  15 smartphone models have been released this year having Wi-Fi 7 capabilities, one back in December of last year, all of which are hoping that the protocol does not change radically from the pre-ratified standard on which they have based their phones.  We do note that Qualcomm (QCOM) released its Fast-Connect 7800 Wi-Fi 7 chipset in May 2022, which will likely be the basis for most of the early devices that have Wi-Fi 7 capabilities.  There are also a few early Wi-Fi 7 routers from TP-Link (pvt), Netgear (NTGR), Asus (2357.TT), and Linksys (2354.TT) that support the pre-ratified Wi-Fi 7 standard.
All of that said, how is Wi-Fi 7 going to benefit the user?  Wi-Fi 7 is faster, actually much faster than current (Wi-Fi 6 & 6e) Wi-Fi protocols.  Wi-Fi 6 & 6e have a maximum data rate of 9.6GB/sec, while Wi-Fi 7 has a max rate of 46GB/sec, almost 5 times faster, although those are rates that are rarely reached in normal use.  Current Wi-Fi divides available spectrum into what are called ‘sub-carriers’, using a technique called orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA – This will not be on the test…).  Each user is assigned a subset of the subsets, which allows users to share channels and bandwidth.  Wi-Fi 7 will expand the size of the channels (2x), which has not changed in over 10 years, and allows all three available frequency bands to be ‘linked’ to allow for higher throughput and lower latency.  The new standard also allows Wi-Fi 7 to carry frames (packets of data with transmission information included) that are 12 bits rather than the 10 that are used now, which leads to a 20% gain in data rates.
Of course, while this sounds impressive, there are issues, mostly regulatory, as no regions in the US support the three-channel approach that Wi-Fi 7 uses.  The FCC is currently working on a plan for allocating the channels and bandwidth in the 6GHz band, which does not require a license, so once that plan is completed, network operators will be able to begin the use of Wi-Fi 7 for customers and equipment manufacturers, seeing a less risky path toward building in Wi-Fi 7 capabilities.  That said, changes in important standards like Wi-Fi take time to propagate through Wi-Fi infrastructure, especially when they are as significant as the changes between Wi-Fi 6e and Wi-Fi 7. 
More complicated antenna systems, potential interference, and even higher power consumption issues must be balanced by designers of Wi-Fi 7 equipment, so we keep our timeline for widespread Wi-Fi 7 adoption a bit more extended than industry members might propose.  However, we are still optimistic about the change and how it will be accepted by consumers, although they will have to buy new routers to take advantage of the upgrades.  There are many out there that will ask the question, “What is Wi-Fi 7”, “What’s a router?” and “How much is this going to cost?”, which will slow early adoption to those that recognize or need the benefits.  The rest will be deluged by carriers offering free Wi-Fi router upgrades if they sign up as a new customer. 

​In or note earlier this week we mentioned that two of the three telecommunication carriers in South Korea have had their 28GHz (mmWave) band licenses revoked by the Ministry of Science for non-fulfillment of contracted obligations., and we mentioned that the 3rd carrier, SK Telecom (017670.KS) was likely to lose its 28GHz band license by the end of the year.  As it turns out on May 31 SK Telecom will be added to the group as the Ministry of Science has found that the company was only able to connect 1,650 devices to its 28Gh. Network, falling considerably short of the 15,000 it had promised almost 5 years ago.  SK Telecom responded, “After allocating the 28GHz frequency band, we have been making continuous efforts to create an ultra-high frequency band ecosystem and discover business models (BMs). I'm sorry it wasn't there”.  As South Korea has been a leader in developing other telecommunication modalities (2G/3G/4G) it is surprising that the country has been unable to continue that leadership in 5G.

When it comes to telecommunications, South Korea is near the top of the list.  The country adopted 2G in 1996, a bit earlier than in the US, followed in 2003 by the adoption of 3G, and was the first country to adopt 4G in late 2009.  5G however, was more of a promise, and while South Korea was still among the earliest, it seems that expectations for 5G across the country have not been met.  When 5G was promoted, ahead of its official release in South Korea, both the government and the country’s three telcos set consumer anticipation with a number of promises for 5G that included speeds of 20x that of 4G, 10x lower latency, and 100x better access.  These were lofty goals, but coming from a country that has led the way for telecommunication progress, such were not impossible.
Moving ahead to the current day, the scorecard on those promises leaves a bit to be desired.  The average 5G download speed in South Korea (October ’22) is 896.1 Mbps, and to put that in perspective, it is 5.9x the average for 4G across the country.  The upload speed average is 93.16 Mbps, only 2.8x that for 4G.  4G latency in South Korea averages ~47ms, which would imply 5G should be under 5ms, which unfortunately is not the case, as it averages ~23ms, although that is a substantial improvement.  However things come apart a bit more when it comes to coverage, which is currently ~33.1%, a bit less than the 100x promised, although with over 99% of the country having 4G availability, the promised improvement was destined to fail from the start, and most of the 5G installations in South Korea are piggybacked on 4G infrastructure and are not standalone 5G installs.
One additional problem that faces the 5G promises made by South Korean telcos is that two of the three carrier in the country have already had their licenses for 28Ghz (mmWave) rescinded, and the third is expected to lose its license for mmWave by the end of the year.  As none of the telcos (nor the government itself) supporting mmWave, the speed boost that would come from averaging in mmWave does not look like it will happen anytime in the near future, which means the incremental speed improvements originally promised will likely not happen in the near-term (or mid-term).
While relative to US telcos, who are always in a ‘battle of promises’ that never quite materialize, South Korea’s reputation for telecommunication innovation would have suggested a better outcome thus far, and while the South Korean government was a willing participant in promising subscribers the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, the South Korean Fair Trade Commission is considering penalizing the three telcos for violating the country’s advertising laws for not living up to their own expectations.

We had made a forecast for Chinese smartphone shipments for the 4th quarter and while the December numbers are not yet in, the official Chinese smartphone shipments for the last two months are 47.16m units, surprisingly 15.6% higher than our estimate, which pushes us to raise our December shipment number from 19.4m units to 22m units.  If this is correct (or close), that would put the full year at 265,65m units, down 24.3% y/y, and the 4th quarter up 16.4% q/q but still down 32.0% y/y, and above our most recent 252m unit estimate.  Most recently we have seen a full year tally of Chinese smartphone shipments totaling 287m units, which would imply a 44m unit shipment month in December, making it the best month this year, by 33%, so we are wanting to understand what the basis for that estimate was, given that our 11 month data is based on information provided by the Chinese government, which, if anything, leans a bit to the high side.
Over the last year 5G shipments in China have tracked fairly closely to overall shipments, representing between 85.1% and 72.2% of total shipments, although the spread narrowed considerably during 2H of 2022.  For the full year, using a proportional 16.97m 5G units in December, we estimate 5G shipments for the full 2022 year to be 207.6m units, or 78.1% of total shipments, down 22.0% y/y, the first year 5G shipments have declined since 2019 when China began releasing such data.  Given the current share, which we expect to expand a bit further this year, we expect 5G shipments in China to be a function of the overall health of the Chinese smartphone market, with far less dependency on the growth of 5G installations across the country than in previous years and more on China’s own macro environment. 
Strict COVID restrictions slowed 5G deployment progress across China last year, and with many of those restrictions being lifted, deployments will likely pick-up, but we are quite skeptical as to the coverage data that the Chinese government has been promoting, and if the data in the US is any example, it bears little practicality to consumers.  Typically many cities that are claimed as ‘covered’ have very spotty 5G service and while the coverage maps look well filled, the detail is far less so, with statistics used more for promotion and politics than actual consumer results.
Chinese brands continue to hold the major share of the Chinese domestic market (84.9%) and while it has deteriorated a bit over the last 4 years (86.5% last year), incursions, particularly by Apple (AAPL), have made little impact on overall domestic brand share in the Chinese smartphone market.  With Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) the only major smartphone brand with a very minor share in China, we expect relatively little change unless Samsung continues to expand and market its foldable line on the Mainland, which, while facing domestic competition, seems to be considered among the most prestigious smartphone devices with Chinese consumers, along with Apple.  However price sensitive buyers do have domestic foldable alternatives and there are still many pockets of nationalistic pride that would push marginal buyers to domestic brands, so for the 2023 year, we expect only a minor reduction in domestic share.
All in, it was a difficult year for CE in China, and smartphones in particular, but while we are careful to temper any enthusiasm against both a poor macro-economic situation on the Mainland, and a festering anti-China manufacturing posture for many global companies, we do take heart in that in recent months, while poor in terms of y/y performance, shipments have been, at the least, relatively stable, which we expect to continue into 1Q.  The Chinese smartphone market is maturing, and with that comes slower growth and more macro affectations, which certainly seems to be the case in recent months.  As that continues we expect the Chinese smartphone market to have basically the same competitive and economic characteristics of the global smartphone market and track more closely to the global markets each year.  That said, Chinese brands have the advantage of lower cost, but also face some political issues, such as those in India, that can offset those cost advantages.  It is up to both the Chinese government and Chinese smartphone brands as to how those issues will play out this year, and over the last year both did little to smooth those relationships that can help Chinese brands gain share outside of the Mainland.  Maybe 2023 will be different, although it is still hard to be overly optimistic.

For the last two months we have expressed some concern over the slowing rate of growth seen in some of the indicators we use to gather insight into 5G infrastructure development, having seen 5G smartphone model growth of only 1.3% and 0.6% in October and November.  While that concern was based on the overall global macro environment, which would lead one to expect at least some slowdown, we note that smartphone model growth increased in December by 2.8%, and while that is still below December’s m/m growth in previous years, it is a step in the right direction, with slower growth expected as the 5G space matures.   
For the 2022 year 5G smartphone model releases grew 47.9%, still a bit below trend line, while total 5G devices grew 43.0%, with vendor count increasing by 24.4%, as overall device growth moving back above trend line in 4Q.  CPE growth was particularly strong in December, up 11.8%, with the full year seeing 30.5% y/y growth for that category, which we use as a proxy for 5G’s expansion from a primarily mobile technology to one that compares to other fixed customer technologies such as cable or fiber.  All in, given the macro environment we believe 5G performed well in almost all categories, especially relative to mobile phone growth or lack thereof.  In 2023, we expect 5Ggrowth to continue but expect y/y comparisons to be reduced as the industry matures, especially form factor growth.  Our focus will be on device count, 5G share of the smartphone market, and CPE growth, which we believe will best reflect the state of the 5G ecosystem.

In November of 2021 we noted that AT&T (T) and Verizon (VZ) had agreed to defer the launch of 5G services on C-Band spectrum (3.7 to 3.98 GHz), a portion of the 5G spectrum that they acquired during an earlier auction, until early January 2022.  The postponement was at the request of the FAA who claims that the new service could interfere with altimeters used on aircraft.   This comes in contrast to the FCC examination and approval of the band, finding no evidence to support the FAA’s claims, making sure that a wide spectrum guard band is left unused adjacent to the C-band spectrum.  That guard band is twice the width requested by the airlines to make absolutely sure the altimeters are protected.
What made that a bit unusual is that the C-band spectrum was already being used in ~40 countries for 5G, with no reported altimeter problems, while at the time the FAA was quoted saying, “Tick, tick, tick” in a Tweet, alluding to the eventual disaster they expected to occur, which has riled many, especially as the FAA acknowledged that it had no proven evidence of interference from C-band operation and continued to use contacts in Congress to wage a battle against the FCC’s ‘no issue’ ruling.  While the FAA continued to push for a block to 5G C-band deployment near airports, they released a bulletin in November ‘21 suggesting that “radio altimeter manufacturers, aircraft manufacturers, and operators voluntarily provide to federal authorities specific information related to altimeter design and functionality, specifics on deployment and usage of radio altimeters in aircraft, and that they test and assess their equipment in conjunction with federal authorities.” In other words, lets upgrade those altimeters, despite the fact that the same C-band issues had been under review for over 4 years.
It now seems that the FAA has issued a new directive that requires both cargo and passenger airplanes in the US to install 5G C-band tolerant radio altimeters or an approved RF filter by February 24, 2024, which will allow AT&T, Verizon, and other potential 5G carriers to bring 5G services to full power near airports, something which they have been unable to do under the 2021 stand-off agreement, but the new directive also contained the FAA’s estimate of what it would cost to modify planes under the new rules.  That cost is ~$26m to outfit 180 airplanes that need new altimeters and 820 that will need RF filters, out of a total fleet of 7,993 planes, far less than the direct and indirect cost of resources used to promote the media battle  that has lasted over a year and a half between the FAA and the FCC.  Some have even suggested that AT&T and Verizon would have paid the $26m for the upgrades out-of-pocket if they had known of the cost, or it could have been included in the price of the spectrum bid at auction if it had been communicated by the FAA (the auction bid for the C-band was $81.2 billion).
Once again political infighting based on political agendas between government agencies cost the taxpayers money and resources, and slowed the progress of technology improvements, with the low level of communications between agencies that have a common focus generating headlines that both confuse consumers and create governmental distrust.  While expanding 5G services might not be an essential key to economic growth in the US, it does have implications across a broad spathe of consumer devices and the deployment of 5G in the US will serve to enhance many existing services and produce income for a wide variety of companies, including the Treasury of the United States.  If carriers are unsure that they will be able to deploy purchased spectrum, the value of that spectrum will decline, and given that the 1st C-band auction, which took place in 2020, generated $81b in gross bids, those dollars will pay for lots of projects that will benefit consumers.
Mandates (according to usa.gov)
FCC - The goal of the Commission is to promote connectivity and ensure a robust and competitive market.
FAA – The goal of the FAA is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.
​

Last month we expressed some concern over the slowing rate of growth in 5G smartphones after seeing a 1.3% m/m increase in available or announced smartphones.  That trend continued in November with 5G smartphone growth registering only 0.6% m/m in November, and while still up 43.8% YTD, the last two months were the slowest growth months this year, as shown in Figure 8, with unit volume growth falling below trend line, after 5 months of above-the-line growth.  We attribute the slowdown to the overall global economic picture, particularly issues in China that have further slowed smartphone shipments.  On a more positive note, CPE devices, an indicator of 5G’s adoption in the FWA (Fixed Wireless Access) market, increased 7.0% m/m, the greatest m/m gain all year, which we see as a positive toward the use of 5G outside of mobile networks. 
We expect December will see a slight increase in the number of 5G smartphone offerings, but we expect lesser growth in 5G smartphones in 2023, a bit due to the economic conditions noted earlier, and more as the share of 5G smartphones against the total number of smartphone offerings is now over 50%.   As that share continues to rise in 2023, we expect more modest growth but will be more focused on the growth in CPE as it is imperative for 5G to become available to businesses and consumers at fixed locations.  We believe CPE device growth will be incremental data in forecasting how quickly carriers will deploy 5G as more than just a mobile transport system.  It’s expanded use in FWA will encourage carriers to build out additional service points to feed CPE demand and give 5G an additional growth path beyond mobile networks.