So here are the facts: Sprint Nextel plans to spend as much as $3-billion over the next two years to build a nation-wide Wi-Max network. From initial indications, the "winners" will be
- Intel, which is pimping the flavour of Wi-Max being used by Sprint;
- Motorola and Samsung, which were selected to supply technology;
- and consumers, who will have another option for broadband to access voice, video and data services.
   The loser is Qualcomm and the CDMA standard that has been its cash-cow in recent years. As well, Craig McCaw's Clearwire, which will have another rival in the Wi-Max market. Oddly enough, Clearwire just raised $900-million from Intel Capital and Motorola so perhaps they're looking to hedge their bets, or just happy to suppiler equipment to whoever wants it. One more thought: Is it just me or does this aggressive infrastructure spending feel is a little like the telecom boom? Back then, it was fiber-optic networks to provide broadband service. Now, it's high-speed wireless networks to offer broadband service. What's the difference other than there are fewer "CLECs" in the game?
   For more views, check out Joseph Laszlo, who balks at Sprint's insistence on using the terms "4G", Phonescoop, GigaOm and dailywireless.org.
Update: As one of the people who made a comment pointed out, Sprint's Wi-Max strategy could give Rogers and Bell Canada some ammunition to ramp up marketing for their Inukshuk joint venture, which launched Wi-Max service earlier this year. I suspect part of their cautiousness has been the desire to work out any bugs and wait for user-friendly technology such as laptop modems that incorporate Wi-Max and Wi-Fi.

While going through Clearwire's S-1, I came across a rather innocuous looking paragraph, which should make investors think twice (particularly considering a paragraph very similar to this one part of a Nortel filing a few years ago). Make of this what you will:

"In connection with their audits for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2005, our independent public accountants have identified a material weakness in our internal control. A material weakness is a significant deficiency that, by itself or in combination with other control deficiencies, results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement in our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected. This issue relates to a lack of sufficient review of nonroutine and complex transactions. Our independent public accountants have also identified other significant deficiencies in our internal control. If we do not address and remediate our material weakness and other significant deficiencies, the reliability of our periodic reports on Form 10-Q and annual report on Form 10-K may be compromised."

What's with all these money-losing telecom companies going public these days? First, it's Vonage with its troubling addiction to marketing; then Mitel Networks files its prospectus as its spends aggressively on sales, marketing and R&D to compete with Cisco, Avaya, et al in the IP communications market; and now Craig McCaw's Clearwire Corp. announces plans to raise as much as $400-million through an IPO.  If you have an insatiable appetite for wireless and a strong tolerance for red ink, Clearwire is definitely for you. In 2005, the company lost $139.9-million on sales of $33.4-million (which include equipment sales of $25-million). The company said it has 88,000 wireless broadband customers in the U.S. and 11,500 in Ireland and Belgium. The broadband market needs more competition but it's going to be tough and expensive for Clearwire to capture a large enough foothold to create a viable business. The carriers are moving aggressively with DSL to offset the loss of local phone lines while the cablecos are pushing broadband as a way to push in the phone business. Clearwire's largest shareholders are Craig McCaw's Eagle River Holdings (47.2%), Bell Canada (14.4%) and entrepreneur Jim Clark (7%). Bell invested $100-million in Clearwire last year, and provides Clearwire with the technology it uses to provide VoIP service.
Update: For more Clearwire's IPO plans, check out Om Malik. VentureWire quotes Visant Strategies analyst Andy Fuentes, who believes Clearwire will need $5-billion to compete nationally with the mobile carriers. TelcoTrash has an insightful list of the key parts of Clearwire's S-1.

Craig McCaw's Clearwire Corp., which provides high-speed Internet access through its own flavour of Wi-Max, has launched a VoIP service in Stockton, Ca. For those us in Canada, it's an interesting development because Clearwire's VoIP technology is being supplied by Bell Canada. Bell injected $100-million in Clearwire, whos investors also include Intel Corp. Clearwire offers high-speed service in 27 markets across the U.S., as well as Ireland, Belgium, Dennmark and Mexico. For McCaw, Clearwire, which recently raised $360-million in debt, offers a way for him to catch lightning in a bottle again after two big-time misses: XO Communications Inc., which went bankrupt in 2002 after trying to take on the Bells in the local phone market; and Teledesic LLC, which dreamt of offering high-speed Internet access by putting hundreds of satellites before shutting down before even putting a satellite in orbit. Then again, McCaw made $11.5-billion selling McCaw Wireless to AT&T in 1994 so it's not like he can't afford an entrepreneurial mistake. Bell launched its own Wi-Max service last month along with joint venture partner Rogers Communications.
Update: Engadget has more details on the cost of the service and features.

It has only taken seven or eight years but the Inukshuk network - which uses Wi-Max technology - has finally been launched by Rogers and Bell. In a sense, it's a sad day for Canadian broadband consumers because Inukshuk had the potential to be the third high-speed competitor to keep Bell and the cablecos (Rogers, Videotron, Cogeco) in Ontario and Quebec honest. Instead, the Canadian government watched Rogers and Bell take control of Inukshuk - and then approved the deal. This meant the idea of more competition in the broadband market has pretty much evaporated. Instead of a vibrant marketplace, Bell and Rogers get to retain their stranglehold on the market. Anyone expecting a deal on Sympatico Unplugged or Rogers Portable Internet will likely be disappointed - Bell is charging $45 a month for a high-speed lite-like service (512kbps) and $60 for 3Mbps service, while Rogers is charging $49.94 for 3Mbps service. Where Inukshuk could be competitively interesting is Western Canada where the service will battle broadband rivals Shaw and Telus. As for other jurisdictions, competition could come from Toronto Hydro, which will launching a Wi-Fi service later this year. Barrett Xplore is also in the game with a fixed wireless and satellite-based service.