Article content continued

“We could see greater interest in 3,500 MHz spectrum from incumbents than in 600 MHz as we believe the former band is better suited for 5G deployment,” Desjardins analyst Maher Yaghi wrote in a note to clients.

Barclays analyst Phillip Huang also noted that compared to 3500 MHz, the 600 MHz auction is “less strategically valuable for 5G.”

Bell surprised analysts with its decision not to buy 600 MHz licences, but in a statement indicated the choice boiled down to cost since it already has a lot of spectrum with similar characteristics. It said it doesn’t need 600 MHz to provide 4G and 5G services, adding it’s cheaper to use cell splitting technology and its existing spectrum to deliver wireless advancements.

Analysts noted that Verizon, one of the world leaders in 5G, also elected not to buy any 600 MHz spectrum when the Americans auctioned off the band in 2017.

“Bell quickly felt that pricing in the 600 MHz auction was getting expensive and it opted to keep its powder dry for next year’s 3500 MHz auction and future millimetre wave auctions,” National Bank analyst Adam Shine noted to clients.

Bell also has a network sharing agreement with Telus Corp., which spent $931 million on 12 licences in the 600 MHz band.

Using 600 MHz spectrum and 700 MHz spectrum in different regions isn’t an issue, a Bell spokesman said in an email.

Bell’s decision not to buy 600 MHz spectrum was “prudent” and will not put it at a competitive disadvantage given the network partnership with Telus, Barclay’s Huang noted.