Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Although I see your point, how would it be inforced? When they didn't make quota, do the ones that did get installed jsut get shut off when spectrum gets returned. Allocating spectrum based on empty promises is not good practice either. What they aught to do is have the selling price and give a discount in the form of rebates at time quotas are met. The problem with charging based on number's served is that spectrum is not necessarilly going to be used for a volume market, other reasons may be jsut as valuable. For example public safety may serve fewer people but have just a value to consumer well being. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Imagine what would happen if the FCC sold the license not to the highest bidder, but the one that was contractually forced to serve the most customers. Either way the company in question would require billions to win, but the later option might actually result in more customers being served, the money being spent on deployment, and the ability for innovative companies to raise money contingent on their business model winning. -Matt Rich Comroe wrote: Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Way back in the time known as BC ... (that's Before Cellular), the FCC authorized different frequency coordinators in various markets to manage licenses. An applicant applied to the frequency coordinator for the frequency, lat, lon, and power of a desired station, the frequency coordinator checked for conflict with other licensed stations, and the FCC actually issued the licenses for a fee. The terms of the license required implementation within a year (IIRC), and the license holder was required to submit at some interval (yearly?) how many transceivers were served to the coordinator to keep its database up to date. It was (IMHO) rational, and served the market of radio users. Doesn't sound that far off from what Matt describes. Cellular changed all that. In the early 80s the FCC feared an avalanche of applications for a limited number of licenses. Cellular design dictated that the licenses be regional, permitting the operator to place stations at will within the served area. But it was made clear that all licensed systems would have to follow the standard (AMPS) and be interoperable. They tried a lottery, hoping market pressures would force the multiple applicants to consolidate down to fewer applications (that deals, perhaps monitary in nature, would be made among the applicants keeping the FCC out of it). Later when the first PCS licenses were issued it's my impression that an accounting type mentality had taken over at the FCC ... let's grant the license to the highest bidder ... and to maximize the monitary value, they made it clear that any carrier winning the license could put up whatever technology they wanted! Interoperability in the interest of the nation's good was dismissed in favor of maximizing government revenue ... and the first PCS auction amazed everyone how much government revenue could be extracted in return for licenses. Consumer service (coverage) for digital cellular plummeted as subscribers could receive no service from roughly 4 out of 5 deployed towers, the US digital cellular standard was abandonned, and the rest of the world looked elsewhere for digital cellular leadership (adopting GSM, largely because of the simple fact that European licensing strategies were much more rational, which promoted their industry and their technology). All in all I don't consider Matt's idea hair-brained at all, but merely a return to a more rational time when the FCC's mandate was to simply serve the nation's spectrum needs (rather than serving the Treasury Dept). Rich - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 9:21 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Although I see your point, how would it be inforced? When they didn't make quota, do the ones that did get installed jsut get shut off when spectrum gets returned. Allocating spectrum based on empty promises is not good practice either. What they aught to do is have the selling price and give a discount in the form of rebates at time quotas are met. The problem with charging based on number's served is that spectrum is not necessarilly going to be used for a volume market, other reasons may be jsut as valuable. For example public safety may serve fewer people but have just a value to consumer well being. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Imagine what would happen if the FCC sold the license not to the highest bidder, but the one that was contractually forced to serve the most customers. Either way the company in question would require billions to win, but the later option might actually result in more customers being served, the money being spent on deployment, and the ability for innovative companies to raise money contingent on their business model winning. -Matt Rich Comroe wrote: Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA
RE: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
I am always amazed at the ideas that come out of this list. I totally agree with Rich here about how the federal government keeps finding ways to slow down the entrepreneurial spirit with their greed. It is like the frog story. (When you put a frog in boiling water, it will jump out of your pot. If you put it in cool water and slowly turn up the heat, it will just sit there and get cooked.) When you back up and take a look at the big picture and see how we got to the level of auctioning air, it is apparent that the more we accept from the government, the more they want in return. So, what is the answer?? How do make progress in our industry and lose spectrum at the same time because we don't have deep pockets? Thanks for the post on FCC history Rich. Matt, I think you have a good start to a good idea. Imagine accountability in our govt, schools, etc. Regards, David Weddell Director of Sales 260 827 2551 Office 800 363 4881 Ext 2551 260 273 7547 Cell www.onlyinternet.net www.oibw.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Comroe Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 12:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Way back in the time known as BC ... (that's Before Cellular), the FCC authorized different frequency coordinators in various markets to manage licenses. An applicant applied to the frequency coordinator for the frequency, lat, lon, and power of a desired station, the frequency coordinator checked for conflict with other licensed stations, and the FCC actually issued the licenses for a fee. The terms of the license required implementation within a year (IIRC), and the license holder was required to submit at some interval (yearly?) how many transceivers were served to the coordinator to keep its database up to date. It was (IMHO) rational, and served the market of radio users. Doesn't sound that far off from what Matt describes. Cellular changed all that. In the early 80s the FCC feared an avalanche of applications for a limited number of licenses. Cellular design dictated that the licenses be regional, permitting the operator to place stations at will within the served area. But it was made clear that all licensed systems would have to follow the standard (AMPS) and be interoperable. They tried a lottery, hoping market pressures would force the multiple applicants to consolidate down to fewer applications (that deals, perhaps monitary in nature, would be made among the applicants keeping the FCC out of it). Later when the first PCS licenses were issued it's my impression that an accounting type mentality had taken over at the FCC ... let's grant the license to the highest bidder ... and to maximize the monitary value, they made it clear that any carrier winning the license could put up whatever technology they wanted! Interoperability in the interest of the nation's good was dismissed in favor of maximizing government revenue ... and the first PCS auction amazed everyone how much government revenue could be extracted in return for licenses. Consumer service (coverage) for digital cellular plummeted as subscribers could receive no service from roughly 4 out of 5 deployed towers, the US digital cellular standard was abandonned, and the rest of the world looked elsewhere for digital cellular leadership (adopting GSM, largely because of the simple fact that European licensing strategies were much more rational, which promoted their industry and their technology). All in all I don't consider Matt's idea hair-brained at all, but merely a return to a more rational time when the FCC's mandate was to simply serve the nation's spectrum needs (rather than serving the Treasury Dept). Rich - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 9:21 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Although I see your point, how would it be inforced? When they didn't make quota, do the ones that did get installed jsut get shut off when spectrum gets returned. Allocating spectrum based on empty promises is not good practice either. What they aught to do is have the selling price and give a discount in the form of rebates at time quotas are met. The problem with charging based on number's served is that spectrum is not necessarilly going to be used for a volume market, other reasons may be jsut as valuable. For example public safety may serve fewer people but have just a value to consumer well being. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Imagine what would happen
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Imagine what would happen if the FCC sold the license not to the highest bidder, but the one that was contractually forced to serve the most customers. Either way the company in question would require billions to win, but the later option might actually result in more customers being served, the money being spent on deployment, and the ability for innovative companies to raise money contingent on their business model winning. -Matt Rich Comroe wrote: Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
The answer is base station licenses for those who need / want spectrum with interference protection and higher power. With this model you could apply for a base station license (in other words 1 tower location worth of spectrum in one geographic area), pay an annual fee and have exclusive use of a small bit of spectrum to allow you to offer services without fear of interference and with higher power which would give you enough coverage area to serve 100% of the potential customers around your base station. This is the answer. Scriv Rich Comroe wrote: Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale
Bunch of Commie bums, What happened to the great capitalist dream?? :-P John as a Rotarian you know, If you help them with the right tools and no handouts the community will succeed. And that is what the FCC must be doing. Competition is good, keep the playing field level and may the best man win. Here's a question, All the incumbents bought alot of spectrum now the other day, they are all now buying more spectrum. Where does the money come from, whose money are they spending And then they squat on the spectrum. You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca office 905 349-2084 Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900 skype cajeptha John Scrivner wrote: The answer is base station licenses for those who need / want spectrum with interference protection and higher power. With this model you could apply for a base station license (in other words 1 tower location worth of spectrum in one geographic area), pay an annual fee and have exclusive use of a small bit of spectrum to allow you to offer services without fear of interference and with higher power which would give you enough coverage area to serve 100% of the potential customers around your base station. This is the answer. Scriv Rich Comroe wrote: Amen. Designing government policy for the purpose of generating the highest income from spectrum licensing is completely contrary to policy designed to serve the public. This had a major role in the US cellular industry losing the worldwide lead (which didn't do any American any good). Why can't our government understand this? European 3G spectrum auctions nearly broke the back of BT (forced it into bankruptcy and spliting the company such that the telecom half didn't sink with the cellular half ... or at least that's how I understood it). The FCC should be managing spectrum for the benefit of the American people, not managing spectrum to maximize government revenue. But that's just me. Rich - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale Finally, a big company that's got the brains to tell the government to stick their high price spectrum tax where the sun don't shine! marlon - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: [WISPA] DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale DirecTV, EchoStar reduce bidding in wireless sale http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060816/tc_nm/telecoms_wireless_satellite_dc_3 Thank you. Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
