Verizon Pouts About Spectrum Auction Rules, Calls it a 'Subsidy'
AT&T recently threatened to take their ball and go home
(read: not participate in the upcoming 600 MHz spectrum auction) if the government imposed rules trying to ensure that smaller competitors weren't blocked by larger carriers when it comes to grabbing valuable spectrum. After meeting with FCC officials AT&T appears to have changed their tune
, now insisting that "our desire to participate in this auction and our hope for a successful auction is unchanged."
What happened? The FCC released a few more details on the spectrum auction process, making it clear that initially, nobody will be blocked from bidding on spectrum:
When the auction reaches a “trigger” point that the Commission will set in advance of the auction – largely based on meeting a price threshold – wireless providers with a dominant low-band position in a license area will be constrained from bidding on a few “reserved” spectrum blocks. The exact amount of “reserved” spectrum available will depend on how much spectrum non-dominant providers are actively bidding for at the trigger point, but in no instance will the reserve exceed 30 megahertz.
In short, the FCC's blocking off of spectrum is fairly minor, and it appears AT&T was pouting before fully understanding what the FCC had planned. Verizon, however, has no such reservations. Despite the company having so much spectrum they've had to offload much of it in recent months, the telco told the FCC in a statement
that it's not fair to impose limits on spectrum ownership because that's akin to "subsidizing" them:
Verizon stressed that it would be perverse and unjust for the
Commission to adopt auction rules that subsidize some large multinational companies at the expense of their competitors. T-Mobile and Sprint are large corporations with established, well-financed corporate parents. They and their parent corporations are more than capable of paying substantial amounts to acquire spectrum in the incentive auction if they choose to do so.
That of course ignores that AT&T and Verizon not only already dominate existing spectrum reserves, but wireless retail, and the special access market as well. It also ignores Verizon Wireless and Verizon's long history of receiving subsidies for doing little to nothing, as we've seen in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey
. Apparently Verizon meant to state that they're opposed to "subsidies" unless they're the ones getting the subsidizing?
Verizon Wireless? "It also ignores Verizon Wireless and Verizon's long history of receiving subsidies for doing little to nothing,"
Pretty sure Verizon WIRELESS didn't have anything to do with the NJ and PA Regulatory failure
If you're going continue to spin out of control, might as well blame Chris Christie, Rob Ford, and Karl Marx for that because we KNOW at least 2 of them probably did something wrong.
Re: Verizon Wireless? It's not a conspiracy if it's true. I don't blame snowden, I blame the oligarchy that the US has become. Politicians no longer represent the people, and CORPORATIONS are to blame. It all started when 'corporations' were declared to be 'people'. If you tell me how we can put VERIZON in jail for breaking the law, THEN I will give the corporations the right to donate money, free speech. Guess what, those RIGHTS that you have, you CAN lose them if you commit a crime and go to jail. If a CORPORATION breaks the law, there is no 'jail', thus, they should have no RIGHTS to start with. A corporation should have the right ONLY to collect money and distribute money. Any CONTRACTS by a corporation should be signed by a REAL PERSON, who CAN go to prison if the need arises. Any laws broken by a corporation should have REAL PRISON possibilities for the officers of said corporation if they break the law. Corporations DO NOT EXIST to serve people, they EXIST solely to MAKE MONEY, NOT serve the public. Thus, they have ZERO moral compass, and should have VERY limited rights.
The best way to defeat religion it to ignore it. Look at Ra/Thor/Zeus, they all thought they were forever.
·Time Warner Cable
Re: Irony of the haters
said by Mr Guy :You really think that the 2GB cap is due to not having the bandwith. Okay then I have the golden gate bridge for sale and 50mbs/5mbs cable is the same as 1000/1000 fiber too, oh and T-Mobile customers using 300+GB on unlimited are only able to do that because there are only about 1/2 of the size and if they had the same number of customers they would have to go from 1TB to 2GB right?
People wanted to keep at&t and Verizon from getting to much spectrum but if they had more spectrum they could actually be a competitor for cable internet which is what people constantly whine about. So quit whining about cable monopolies when you want to prevent competitors from existing in the first place. Sorry but if you want wireless to have caps of at least in same range as cable 250-300 GB or higher( instead of 2 GB -10 GB ) and have speeds in excess of 10 Mbps well someone is going to need 200 MHz just for download and no one has that nor will they at this rate.
Sprint is the biggest squatter Sprint is squatting on over 100 mhz of 2.5 ghz spectrum across the country. They are only using it in a handful of cities with the goal of being in 100 markets in 3 YEARS! That's far too long to be sitting on the spectrum you already have. In my opinion Sprint should be the one that is barred from this auction and also barred from buying T Mobile.
Re: Sprint is the biggest squatter Yes 2.5 GHz is not good for long range. It is well suited for densely populated areas such as major cities. It is well suited for malls, sports arenas, parks, times square, etc. It can be used very well. I have Verizon Wireless and live on Long Island. My signal is weak at about -110 which is about 1.5 bars. 4G does come up but it eats the phone's battery like crazy, and stays connected even when on WIFI so you can get MMS messages from Verizon's private server. I wrote a Tasker application that shuts that off completely when connected to WIFI. No data, and the radio only connects for voice. There was no other way to deal with it. Verizon Wireless has a ticket opened for this problem, but since it is my problem, not theirs, they have done nothing to fix it. Smaller 2.5GHz cells placed strategically to allow the lower frequency towers to expand their circle and transmit more signal would be the solution, but I would die waiting to get that. Go to London and you will see micro cells everywhere. Actually I take that back. You will not see most of them, but they are there.