dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Tulsa, OK

It's a given the goal is to crush the competition

There's no doubt this will give Verizon and the cable MSO's a massive competitive advantage over everyone else.

IMHO far too much of the spectrum is already in the hands of the big two, Verizon and AT&T.

What should be happening is the Congress and the FCC should be looking seriously at expanding the spectrum options for everyone else, and that includes fast tracking Dish's LTE plans and smaller operators.

The whole point of the auction process to the MSO's was to generate new options and competition--- not to turn around and have them hand it all over to the entrenched players. Which is pretty much exactly what has been happening....

We all will suffer for this.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Trogglus normalus

Chicago, IL
I dont see the big deal as comcast is not a wireless company.
It would not be right to say no to comcast and say if they want wireless they have to build it themselves as they are not a wireless company.

This does not crush competition. It really does nothing but give consumers an option to get a couple dollar discount per month by bundling a 3rd parties LTE with their comcast landline services. I am sure the discount wont be much.

ATT and verizon already does this with their wireless, TV, and land line internet. Comcast wants to be like them but by using Verizon's wireless.

As for the 122 Advance Wireless Spectrum licenses Verizon is buying, it does not matter when the sellers were not going to use it quick enough.
The FCC just needs to enforce that verizon must develop on the spectrum or lose it.
Even if verizon develops it, the government can still force them to sell it later. So in the end who cares.



·Verizon FiOS

4 edits

1 recommendation

I see the big deal as comcast is a wireline company. Verizon should be selling, endorsing, and improving their OWN wired network, not abandoning it in favor of cable. These companies compete on the wired side of the business. Its not just about FiOS either, Verizon still has millions of landlines/ DSL, they should be selling their own products, competitively against the cable co's.

The entire deal is hypocritical, and circumvents the entire goal of the '96 telecom act.

The cable co's should have pooled all their spectrum together and created their OWN wireless co, OR partnered with a Wireless co that does not have their own Wired products , Tmobile , Sprint ( I believe they spun off wireline to Embarq)

If none of that was good enough, the cable co's should have auctioned the spectrum off ! And VZ could have, and probably would have won the bid, without a conflict of interest.

There is so much wrong here, its sickening.

Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Onion, NJ
and the Sherman Anti-trust act too.

Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Tulsa, OK
reply to ITALIAN926
Unused for wireless, it should have reverted back to the taxpayer.

My views are my own.

1 recommendation

reply to KrK
It's very simple.. if Comcast doesn't want the spectrum then they should turn it back over to the FCC. I don't think that private sales between business should be allowed.

The fact that comcast wants to turn around and sell it to VZ could easily be theorized that it was intended all along.. similar to when AT&T wanted MediaOne as did Comcast.. AT&T got it, shelled the company of @home, took the ISP and then sold the operation to Comcast anyway. These kinds of deals piss me off and this one is no exception.

While there is certainly no proof that my theory above is true, there is certainly enough past precedence to say I'm probably right.