dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Government Considers New Shared Spectrum Proposals
Incumbent Carriers Really Aren't Going to Like This...
by Karl Bode 02:36PM Monday Jul 23 2012
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology sent the Obama Administration a new report (pdf) last week requesting that the President make even more airwaves available for wireless services -- and that those airwaves be shared. The Obama administration pledged in 2010 to make another 500 megahertz available over 10 years to wireless carriers, but the President's advisors argue that this total should be increased to around 1000 megahertz. More interesting perhaps is the proposal's recommendation that this spectrum be shared among companies, instead of sold and locked down by carriers. From the report:
quote:
Another recommended change is that Federal spectrum, instead of being divided into small, dedicated frequency blocks as it is at present, should be divided into substantial fre­quency blocks spanning several hundred megahertz. Establishing these wide bands will make it easier for spectrum sharing to be the norm, a transformation in which all Federal agencies would be required to cooperate. Making spectrum access available to a wide range of services and applications will also require provision of a framework that establishes minimum technical standards for the coexistence of transmitters and receivers, in contrast to the present system that focuses on transmitters.
That's a proposal that certainly isn't going to sit well with incumbent operators, who've balked at previous suggestions of this type -- in part because allowing them to squat on a supposedly publicly-owned resource gives them a way to help prevent alternative competitors from emerging. In turn, it may not float easily within the heavily-lobbied Congress. The report on gives a few vague suggestions for these shared spectrum trials, which could involve semi-exclusive licenses where they share airwaves with government services, or some kind of unlicensed approach not unlike white space broadband.

view:
topics flat nest 
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

Hah!, AT&T and Verizon play fair?!?

Crazy talk..!
You see what happened with wireline services....
How about fixing that dysfunction first!!!!
Something on the order of the Penn State sanctions oughta do..
negate all profit since 2003 for Verizon and 2006 for AT&T...

FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Re: Hah!, AT&T and Verizon play fair?!?

said by tmc8080:

Crazy talk..!
You see what happened with wireline services....
How about fixing that dysfunction first!!!!
Something on the order of the Penn State sanctions oughta do..
negate all profit since 2003 for Verizon and 2006 for AT&T...

Here is the opening the blue ribbon panel gave to AT&T & Verizon:

formation of a Spectrum Sharing Partnership Steering Committee (SSP) of industry executives (CEOs) to advise on a policy framework to maximize commercial success.


--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

Never gonna happen

If you think about it the FCC cashed in to the tune of billions (a tax per se), and now if the allow sharing all of that government sponsored monopoly spectrum will become much less valuable. In addition, they don't really need more spectrum, by doling this spectrum out to potential competitors would turn their share your wallet plans into, OMG I have to compete and sell you data for $1 for every 5GB plan. And of course data/voice competitors would come out of the woodwork to compete here. You couldn't imagine all of the innovation that would happen--of course it would probably take out a few of these wireless weenies, a la RIMM...

It would be the best thing to happen to telecom in 100 years, so that's exactly why it WONT happen. The government is over the falsetto voice that they are actually for the people, or at least those who still actually believe such nonsense.

They are already trying to lock up whitespace for their greedy fingers now.

sadfsa2232

@comcast.net

Consumers will get hit no matter what

Shared or no shared does not make any different. Bottom line is Consumers always pay more
Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23

...ouch

prices are gonna go threw the roof.. this is horrible.. no its not a bad idea and should of been started when wireless started.. but instead sold it

now your wanting the companies to share it so that way spectrum is freed up and more efficient.. what you think the companies are gonna do? play fair? maybe but theirs gonna be a price to pay for that because they will not loose billions over this prices are gonna rise like crazy now
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: ...ouch

You say twice that prices will soar but don't give a single reason why, beyond stating they will do it to try and protect their current profits.

Considering that this would hopefully create a large pool of providers that will be able to provide the same coverage and potentially the same services, how will prices increase?

What I see happening is that 1.) They will compete on price 2.) They will compete on services 3.) They will compete on innovating to capture more customers 4.) It will lower the cost to build and operate as networks will be more compatible/interchangeable 5.) Phones will be cheaper to make as they will have less "standards" to design to and dole up their hardware for.

All of those things benefit consumers in every way and being that no corporation has "a right" to make billions in profit every quarter, it certainly is not going to hurt them to compete.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2

Re: ...ouch

Up here in Canada smaller companies started up. Right now the have zones, primarily in large urban Areas. Once you leave that zone, you roam on one of the incumbents networks. The incumbents have ben doing their best to make it difficult, instead of a seamless switch, they drop the call. They advertise false claims ( which has cost them huge fines), and lastly started up their own low cost companies to compete with the newcomers.

If you think the US incumbents would do less, you're in for a surprise.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake.......
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: ...ouch

Oh, I dont put anything past these greedy SOB's and would expect nothing less.

However, one would hope that with time the elected officials will do their job and provide the oversight needed to correct the problems. (Another pipe dream of course)
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

bump goes the night

I don't want to place words, but if they announce this it will be phased say 5 years. Once verizon and at&t find that out they will jack up the prices to monetize the spectrum holdings because their value will surely decrease. They will need to make up that gap, each of billions.

So take VZW, 100m customers and a gap of 5 billion, that would be 50 dollars/user to recoup in 5 years, which isn't significant however they will probably tax us to the tune of $5/month to make sure we fund the new build out and pad their pocketbooks before the rats leave the ship.

In any case I think they will have their hands full with these new share plans with churn for the next two years. AT&T played it better than verizon w/ slightly higher cost (to make up for phone subsidy gap) and not forcing people onto the plans (for now).
rdmiller

join:2005-09-23
Richmond, VA

Natural next step

If white space broadband proves successful, this would be the natural next step.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

conflict of interests abound

the major wireless carriers have just the right amount of spectrum to price gouge based upon the millions of dollars of investments and spectrum holdings.. now the fcc wants to flood the market with spectrum to what end? the major carriers have no interest in bringing prices down with a glut of spectrum that would enable unlimited high speed broadband/data, unlimited calling and services nearly equivalent to wire line... the investments to build the towers to get enough customers to make that possible (read: profitable anwhere near what they get today) is not something these carriers are interested in.. price gouging and offering the least amount of service for the highest price is the motto of these greedy companies whom you can not trust (cough, cough at&t-tombile) and veri$on is also a gluttonous piece of work these days..

Verizon got rid of their slogans... AT&T is still beating a dead deathstar horse with Rethink Possible... rethink DOJ breakup of your company (probable)..