Jump to content

FCC Intends to Bar Joint Bidding in Airwaves Auction


GoBigRed79

Recommended Posts

I disagree with Chairman Wheeler. Blocking joint bidding reduces competition in bidding allowing the duopoly to get more. Smaller providers need to jointly bid in order to effectively make competing bids with the duopoly. He is completely wrong on this issue, if his goal is competition. Whether for consumers or to raise bids/revenue on the spectrum sale.

 

Only the duopoly wins with the stand. Everyone else loses.

 

Robert

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see this sticking at all, what in the hell are the "little guys" suppose to do to compete?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total bullshit and par for the course. Doesn't surprise me.

 

This is what happens when big corporations are allowed to lobby government to further their cause. Then one with the most money wins.

 

Wheeler is a shill. Period.

 

 

 

Sent from my LG G3 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wheeler has been a shill from day one. He basically killed net neutrality. Softbank don't get it the whole bs of the fcc concerned about 4 wireless players is because the twin bells told this shill to block it. It's not concern about lack of competition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go for broke Softbank.

Take all that T-Mobile purchase money, smoke as much of this auction as you can. T-Mobile will die without it.

My thoughts exactly.

 

Use that Alibaba IPO windfall to run the table on these jokers.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldnt a single company / entity owned by the two, and put together only for this auction bid on the spectrum?

 

Possibly.  We will have to see what Edict the Spectrum King hands down.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fanboys at tmonews.com assume tmobile will have more money to outbid sprint in the 600mhz auction.

 

Uhh yeah.  Not unless Masa owns them too.

 

Robert

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh yeah.  Not unless Masa owns them too.

 

Robert

This is the funniest part of most of the arguments on those websites....How do they expect Tmobile to magically have the funds to do things like that...Masa is rich...He's very very rich, and SoftBank is not going anywhere...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh yeah.  Not unless Masa owns them too.

 

Robert

 

I actually laughed out loud when I read that.  Best part, its true.  TMobile would be bringing a knife to a gun fight when it comes to Softbank.  The voracity and audaciousness that Masa shows is incredible.  He gets his way, or pummels you into submission, and still gets his way.  

 

I think with enough effort they could sway the merger with the regulators, because hes got the cash.  Cash buys lobbyists, which buy politicians and corrupt employees. I just hope he goes the other way and says F this, I am going to crush you and take over your customers once you are irrelevant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idiot chairman is idiot :). You cannot have the two smaller providers compete against the big two unless they cooperate on network deployment. I have been agitating for either a common network or a merger for ever. I swear he is in AT&T/Verizon's pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idiot chairman is idiot :). You cannot have the two smaller providers compete against the big two unless they cooperate on network deployment. I have been agitating for either a common network or a merger for ever. I swear he is in AT&T/Verizon's pocket.

He is a Verizon pet. Jump on Reddit and just watch the trending articles, you can see a Verizon slime bag move everyday, with the FCC no where to be found.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is the duopoly opposes it because if Sprint/Tmo joint bid on the portion of the auction the duopoly can't get, then they will have more money for the open portion, potentially being able to out bid the big 2.

 

We wouldn't want that to happen now would we ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me that T-Mobile is the loser in this scenario. If sprint can get a hold of at least 5x5 nationwide to help with coverage sprint will be sitting OK with the 2500mhz they have. T-Mobile can't afford not to buy any additional spectrum low band and mid range. So I believe that T-Mobile needs this joint venture more than sprint does.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, didn't the Chairman cap the amount of spectrum that one carrier can obtain in an effort to allow smaller carriers like Sprint and TMobile a better opportunity to win some spectrum? So wouldn't a combined TMobile and Sprint then put themselves into the larger carrier category?

 

Second, whether justifiable or not, the chairman is opposed to the Sprint / TMobile merger. Allowing them to join forces in the spectrum bid would sort of be like allowing them to back door any merger efforts they're currently trying to put together.

 

And third, one goal of the spectrum sale is to generate revenue; if carriers were allowed to join forces (aka collude with one another) in the bidding process, that would effectively eliminate one of the big bidders in the process, in turn reducing the potential of income. The more bidders putting cash on the table, the higher the bid price (supply & demand).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really think this auction is about the money generated for the spectrum, or, for the money these corrupt officials get from the lobbyists and corporations?

 

Supply and demand is only a factor when all things are neutral. Allowing Sprint and T-Mobile to bid together gives them more money to bid with, not less. This scares the duopoly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, didn't the Chairman cap the amount of spectrum that one carrier can obtain in an effort to allow smaller carriers like Sprint and TMobile a better opportunity to win some spectrum? So wouldn't a combined TMobile and Sprint then put themselves into the larger carrier category?

 

Second, whether justifiable or not, the chairman is opposed to the Sprint / TMobile merger. Allowing them to join forces in the spectrum bid would sort of be like allowing them to back door any merger efforts they're currently trying to put together.

 

And third, one goal of the spectrum sale is to generate revenue; if carriers were allowed to join forces (aka collude with one another) in the bidding process, that would effectively eliminate one of the big bidders in the process, in turn reducing the potential of income. The more bidders putting cash on the table, the higher the bid price (supply & demand).

 

If they can't afford to outbid VZW or ATT will they even bid at all on many key markets? By ruling out smaller companies joining forces you remove additional bids, not add more. The Chairman knows this, but is spinning it to try to get us to believe it will raise more money. Essentially it will make sure just the Duopoly bids on the best licenses. Smaller providers will be relegated to the scraps. It will be 700MHz all over again.

 

If smaller companies could band together, they'd have a shot at actually bidding against the duopoly. Thus adding a third bidder and driving UP prices. The Chairman can do sleight of hand all he wants, but most of us will not be convinced.

 

Additionally, joining forces on one band of spectrum is not a de facto backdoor merger. It would allow two independent companies to be able to better compete with the Duopoly. Which is what the FCC says they want.

 

Or maybe they don't want that at all? Maybe all their moves aren't to protect consumers, but special interests? Nobody wants there not to be a merger more than the Duopoly. And if you think about it, no one loses on a Tmo/Sprint 600MHz sharing arrangement other than the Duopoly.

 

It would be the best for consumers. Just imagine all that Legere could do for the little people if he only had access to choice 600MHz spectrum. But joking aside, VZW and ATT already have lots of low frequency spectrum. They can easily serve all the indoor and fringe areas it wants. They need to focus on high frequency capacity now to bolster their networks.

 

Tmo has virtually no low frequency spectrum and Sprint only a little. They desperately need it. And the Duopoly knows that. They are trying every move they can to stop it. This is one of those moves. Their lobbyists have been able to convince the Chairman this is the right move. But I completely declare it is wrong for everyone other than the Duopoly's interests.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CCA should start it's own spectrum holding company, and all the members should pool their money in to fight the Duopoly in this auction. A spectrum sharing agreement of this magnitude will scare the crap out of AT&T & VZW.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they can't afford to outbid VZW or ATT will they even bid at all on many key markets? By ruling out smaller companies joining forces you remove additional bids, not add more. The Chairman knows this, but is spinning it to try to get us to believe it will raise more money. Essentially it will make sure just the Duopoly bids on the best licenses. Smaller providers will be relegated to the scraps. It will be 700MHz all over again.

 

If smaller companies could band together, they'd have a shot at actually bidding against the duopoly. Thus adding a third bidder and driving UP prices. The Chairman can do sleight of hand all he wants, but most of us will not be convinced.

 

Additionally, joining forces on one band of spectrum is not a de facto backdoor merger. It would allow two independent companies to be able to better compete with the Duopoly. Which is what the FCC says they want.

 

Or maybe they don't want that at all? Maybe all their moves aren't to protect consumers, but special interests? Nobody wants there not to be a merger more than the Duopoly. And if you think about it, no one loses on a Tmo/Sprint 600MHz sharing arrangement other than the Duopoly.

 

It would be the best for consumers. Just imagine all that Legere could do for the little people if he only had access to choice 600MHz spectrum. But joking aside, VZW and ATT already have lots of low frequency spectrum. They can easily serve all the indoor and fringe areas it wants. They need to focus on high frequency capacity now to bolster their networks.

 

Tmo has virtually no low frequency spectrum and Sprint only a little. They desperately need it. And the Duopoly knows that. They are trying every move they can to stop it. This is one of those moves. Their lobbyists have been able to convince the Chairman this is the right move. But I completely declare it is wrong for everyone other than the Duopoly's interests.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

The FCC is corrupt and we all know it...  just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • T-Mobile has saved its 28Mhz mmWave licenses by using the point to point method to do environment monitoring inside its cabinets. The attachment below shows the antennas used: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp;JSESSIONID_APPSEARCH=LxvbnJuvusmIklPhKy6gVK7f9uwylrZ8LiNf3BqIKlDp3_5GxoBr!300973589!225089709?applID=14787154#   Here are the sites for Franklin county OH: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=66518254&attachmentKey=21989782&attachmentInd=applAttach
    • Yep, there is a label on the side of the box but it doesn't provide any useful info that the city doesn't already provide (Crown Castle Solutions is the franchisee). You can see my graphical interpretation of the city's dataset here.
    • T-Mobile UScellular agreement links from SEC filings: https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/821130/000110465924065665/tm2415626d2_8k.htm Look inside for main link. Credit mdav-dos1 on reddit
    • Totally agree.  In my county and surrounding counties, TM did not place n-41 on every site.  When I look at the sites in question, I probably would have not placed it there either.  I can find just a few with n-71 only and in most of those cases if you live there and know the probable usage of the residents, you would not do a full upgrade on those sites.  One site in particular is set up to force feed n-71 through a long tunnel on the Turnpike.  No stopping allowed in the tunnel. No stores, movie theaters, bathrooms, so n41 would be a waste.    n25 is not really needed either, so it is not there.  The tunnel is going through & under a mountain with more black bears than people.  TM was smart.  Get good coverage in the tunnel but do not waste many many thousands of dollars with extra unused spectrum. I also see sites with only n71 & n25.  Again this makes sense to me.  Depending on what county we are talking about, they moved much of their b25 from LTE to nr.  Some counties have more n25 than a neighboring county, but luckily, it is plenty everywhere.   When you are in a very rural area, n41 can run up the bills and then be barely used.  I am NOT finding sites that should have had n41 but TM failed to provide it.  They may have to come back later in a few years and upgrade the site to n41.  However, we just may eventually see the last little piece on Band 25 leave LTE and move to n25. I am not sure if the satellite to phone service is using band 25 G block as LTE or nr. We also can possibly have at least some AWS move from LTE to nr at some point.  Yes, everybody wants n41. it is not justified in some cases.  When I travel, I desire some decent service along the entire route but it does not have to be 1 or 2 gig download.   If I can get 50/5 on a speedtest with data that will flow and not stutter, I am very happy. Yes, they will swap out the USC gear.  TM needs to match their existing network. The USCC equipment did the job for years, but it is time to retire it.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...