Wow! Did you see that? T-Mobile just dropped a bombshell on the private wireless world, and honestly, if you’ve been following this stuff, you probably saw something like this coming, but it’s still wild to see it happen, and quite frankly, disappointing.
For a long time, T-Mobile was one of the big carriers playing ball with the CBRS band—you know, that shared slice of spectrum between 3.55 and 3.7 GHz. The idea was that they, and other carriers, would be able to use it to support neutral-host networks built by companies like Celona. It was a win-win: vendors got to build out a new business, and T-Mobile got to provide connectivity to enterprises without having to do all the heavy lifting themselves.
But now, they’ve pulled the rug out. They’re telling their partners to prioritize using T-Mobile’s own licensed mid-band spectrum for all new neutral-host projects. They’re basically saying, “Hey, thanks for the help, but we’ll stick to our own airwaves from now on.” And just like that, the industry’s great CBRS experiment just got a whole lot more complicated.
Why This is a Big Deal
This isn’t just a simple business decision; this is a shot fired in a war for control of the enterprise market. On one side, you have the wireless giants—T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon. They’ve spent tens of billions of dollars on licensed spectrum, and their entire business model is built on providing connectivity from their networks. They see private wireless as a massive, multi-billion-dollar opportunity, and they want to own it.
On the other side, you have a whole new ecosystem of innovators. Think of the OnGo Alliance (CBRS Alliance), and companies like Celona and Federated Wireless. They’ve staked their future on a different model: using shared, unlicensed spectrum to give businesses the power to build and operate their own private networks. Their pitch is simple: you get a dedicated, high-performance network for a fraction of the cost and with total control.
For years, these two sides have been battling it out, sometimes in public, but mostly behind the scenes, in conversations with regulators and industry analysts. T-Mobile’s move just brought that fight out into the open for everyone to see.
The Impact on the Market
This is a huge blow to the “neutral-host” model, which was one of the biggest promises of the CBRS band. The very concept of a neutral host is that any carrier can connect to it, but with T-Mobile and Verizon now prioritizing their own licensed spectrum for new deployments, the term is becoming more of a misnomer than a reality. The choice for a venue isn’t between a truly neutral host and a single-carrier solution. Instead, it’s a choice between two competing philosophies: the CBRS model, which still holds the promise of true multi-carrier neutrality but now lacks the full support of two of the three biggest players, and a licensed-spectrum model that, while offering superior performance, severely limits a venue’s ability to host a truly multi-carrier network. In this new landscape, the very definition of a “neutral host” has to be re-evaluated to reflect that it may no longer be a solution that all carriers are willing to participate in.
T-Mobile’s argument is that licensed spectrum simply provides better security, scalability, and performance certainty. It’s a compelling argument, and it’s the same one Verizon has been making for years with its C-band. By aligning, the two giants of the industry are sending a powerful, unified message to enterprises: if you want serious performance, you need to go with us and our licensed spectrum.
But this isn’t just about business. It’s about a bigger fight that is playing out in the halls of the FCC. AT&T, which owns no CBRS spectrum, has been the most vocal in pushing for the FCC to re-auction the CBRS band entirely. T-Mobile’s actions lend a lot of weight to that argument, making it seem like the shared spectrum model might not be a long-term solution.
The outcome of all this isn’t certain. But one thing is for sure: the future of private wireless in the U.S. will likely be decided by this high-stakes battle. It’s not just about technology anymore; it’s about control, strategy, and power.
