Jump to content

600 MHz auction results posted and transition schedule


ericdabbs

Recommended Posts

For 126 MHz, it was $86.4 billion, IIRC.

 

How does the loss of only two OTA physical channels drop the target by over $30 billion?  That 114 MHz seems like too much spectrum for too little money.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does the loss of only two OTA physical channels drop the target by over $30 billion?  That 114 MHz seems like too much spectrum for too little money.

 

AJ

 

In the initial stage, a number of markets had no competitive bidding (see any area with market variation as examples).  With the addition of two more channels, most (not all) markets have now had at least some competitive bidding. 

 

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much do TV stations in the 600MHz band make per year? Most of them actually will be repacked in lower bands so they are not going to lose their allocation. The millennials don't watch TV, either OTA or cable or satellite. So why the hell are we paying the OTA spectrum holders? Can somebody tell me?

 

How much do we make? Not nearly as much as you think...

(The political season is driving up add costs, so that is helping in the short term)

 

Most of your smaller market stations barely break even looking at cost to get product on air vs revenue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much do we make? Not nearly as much as you think...

(The political season is driving up add costs, so that is helping in the short term)

 

Most of your smaller market stations barely break even looking at cost to get product on air vs revenue. 

 

I want that spectrum to be used to generate higher GDP. I do believe that wireless carriers will do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want that spectrum to be used to generate higher GDP. I do believe that wireless carriers will do that.

 

I did not know that "600" stands for "GDP."  I also did not know that wireless operators do not presently have spectrum with which to generate higher GDP.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not know that "600" stands for "GDP."  I also did not know that wireless operators do not presently have spectrum with which to generate higher GDP.

 

AJ

 

Spectrum is a public resource and it should be used in the most economically efficient manner. I believe that is cellular communications. My beef is why the hell are we paying the broadcasters to vacate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spectrum is a public resource and it should be used in the most economically efficient manner. I believe that is cellular communications. My beef is why the hell are we paying the broadcasters to vacate.

 

You really have gone off the deep end on this one.  Your beliefs do not a logical argument make.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spectrum is a public resource and it should be used in the most economically efficient manner. I believe that is cellular communications. My beef is why the hell are we paying the broadcasters to vacate.

 

"Land in cities is a limited resource and should be used in the most economically efficient manner.  I believe that to be apartment buildings.  Why the hell are do private apartment building developers have to pay people to vacate their single family homes when they should be able to just bulldoze them and build apartments?"

 

Not the perfect analogy, but pretty close.  Unless you're one of those people who believes eminent domain should be used to kick people out of properties to hand over to private developers, does that not strike you as unfair?  Usually, private developers pay people a premium to move out of their homes in prime locations to build there because it's more valuable as apartments.  How is this any different?

 

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Land in cities is a limited resource and should be used in the most economically efficient manner.  I believe that to be apartment buildings.  Why the hell are do private apartment building developers have to pay people to vacate their single family homes when they should be able to just bulldoze them and build apartments?"

 

Not the perfect analogy, but pretty close.  Unless you're one of those people who believes eminent domain should be used to kick people out of properties to hand over to private developers, does that not strike you as unfair?  Usually, private developers pay people a premium to move out of their homes in prime locations to build there because it's more valuable as apartments.  How is this any different?

 

- Trip

 

TV broadcasters did not pay for their spectrum. They were given it for free. To extend your analogy, let's say that a public housing project was built in what is now considered prime real estate. A private developer comes in and wants to buy the land from the government for a large amount of money so he can built high rise condos on the spot. Not only that but he will built a new public housing development in another spot. What shall the government do?

Edited by bigsnake49
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TV broadcasters did not pay for their spectrum. They were given it for free.

 

And the land the houses were built on was taken from the Native Americans for free, too.  Since then, market transactions have, in almost every case, included the value of the underlying land/spectrum.

 

- Trip

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spectrum is a public resource and it should be used in the most economically efficient manner.

 

Yosemite National Park is a public resource.  But most of it is just sitting there, unimproved.  We need to sell it to Disney.  Raising admission prices, building roller coasters, and creating jobs will increase GDP.

 

The White House is a public resource.  We need to take advantage of built in cross marketing and open a White House Black Market fashion boutique just off of the Rose Garden.

 

Public resources should be used in the most economically efficient manner.  We must increase GDP!

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spectrum is a public resource and it should be used in the most economically efficient manner. I believe that is cellular communications. My beef is why the hell are we paying the broadcasters to vacate.

 

bigsnake49, you had a phone message while you were out this afternoon.  Let me see, oh, here it is...

 

Ayn Rand called.  She said, "You and your ideas be cray cray extreme."

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TV broadcasters did not pay for their spectrum. They were given it for free. To extend your analogy, let's say that a public housing project was built in what is now considered prime real estate. A private developer comes in and wants to buy the land from the government for a large amount of money so he can built high rise condos on the spot. Not only that but he will built a new public housing development in another spot. What shall the government do?

 

Ah, you edited your post.

 

Well, the TV stations aren't owned by the government, like most public housing would be, so that analogy falls apart.  Furthermore, I'm not sure which part of forcing the TV stations off the air is anything like "new public housing [will be built] in another spot".

 

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

bigsnake49, you had a phone message while you were out this afternoon.  Let me see, oh, here it is...

 

Ayn Rand called.  She said, "You and your ideas be cray cray extreme."

 

AJ

 

Not so. Why do you think we have this auction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

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

    • A heavy n41 overlay as an acquisition condition would be a win for customers, and eventually a win for T-Mobile as that might be enough to preclude VZW/AT&T adding C-Band for FWA due to spreading the market too thinly (which means T-Mobile would just have local WISPs/wireline ISPs as competition). USCC spacing (which is likely for contiguous 700 MHz LTE coverage in rural areas) isn't going to be enough for contiguous n41 anyway, and I doubt they'll densify enough to get there.
    • Boost Infinite with a rainbow SIM (you can get it SIM-only) is the cheapest way, at $25/mo, to my knowledge; the cheaper Boost Mobile plans don't run on Dish native. Check Phonescoop for n70 support on a given phone; the Moto G 5G from last year may be the cheapest unlocked phone with n70 though data speeds aren't as good as something with an X70 or better modem.
    • Continuing the USCC discussion, if T-Mobile does a full equipment swap at all of USCC's sites, which they probably will for vendor consistency, and if they include 2.5 on all of those sites, which they probably will as they definitely have economies of scale on the base stations, that'll represent a massive capacity increase in those areas over what USCC had, and maybe a coverage increase since n71 will get deployed everywhere and B71 will get deployed any time T-Mobile has at least 25x25, and maybe where they have 20x20. Assuming this deal goes through (I'm betting it does), I figure I'll see contiguous coverage in the area of southern IL where I was attempting to roam on USCC the last time I was there, though it might be late next year before that switchover happens.
    • Forgot to post this, but a few weeks ago I got to visit these small cells myself! They're spread around Grant park and the surrounding areas, but unfortunately none of the mmwave cells made it outside of the parks along the lake into the rest of downtown. I did spot some n41 small cells around downtown, but they seemed to be older deployments limited to 100mhz and performed poorly.    
    • What is the cheapest way to try Dish's wireless network?  Over the past year I've seen them add their equipment to just about every cell site here, I'm assuming just go through Boost's website?  What phones are Dish native?  
  • Recently Browsing

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