le Communications Ecosystem Table 9.5 DVB-H VS. MediaFLO Cap-Ex DVB-H Cap-Ex Antenna Transmission New Sites Stations Station Cost Sites Total Karachi $420 000 $180 000 $240 000 $9 000 000 $9 840 000 Lahore $210 000 $90 000 $120 000 $4 500 000 $4 920 000 Islamabad $105 000 $45 000 $60 000 $2 250 000 $2 460 000 MediaFLO Cap-Ex Antenna Transmission New Sites Stations Station Cost Sites Total Karachi $480 000 $180 000 $240 000 $7 500 000 $8 400 000 Lahore $240 000 $90 000 $120 000 $3 750 000 $4 200 000 Islamabad $120 000 $45 000 $60 000 $2 000 000 $2 225 000 foothold in USA and in some parts of Asia and Europe in coming years MediaFLO provides 3-4 dB better performance as compared to DVB-H designs which can lead to savings in CapEx [25]. The deployment of either technology is coverage driven rather capacity since both of them are broadcast technologies. Once planning is completed to provide coverage, it can serve a very large population without additional infrastructure. A raw and a high level CapEx analysis for the three large metropolitan cities of Pakistan is highlighted in Table 9.5. The three cities are Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad with areas of 3530, 1772, and 906 km2 respectively. The following common assumptions were made for the analysis: UHF band will be used by both technologies. Cost of content is assumed to be the same. Software cost and inter-city transmission cost (long haul/DWDM network is well placed in the country) are not included. 95% reuse of operator's existing cell sites. 95% coverage indoor and outdoor. Antenna Cost is $15 000. Transmission equipment cost $20 000. Civil works cost is $50 000 (existing site). New site cost (including repeater) is $250 000. The following assumptions were made for DVB-H: DVB-H has 8 Mbps capacity providing 25 TV channels at approximately 300 kbps. DVB-H base station cost is $30 000. The following assumptions were made for MediaFLO: 3G service will be made available for MediaFlo. MediaFLO has 8 Mbps capacity providing 27 TV channels at approximately 300 kbps. Me