Sprint not participating in the 600 MHz auction (report)

[Trip]

I have a strong viewpoint that this auction is very important and I think the wireless needs for this spectrum greatly outweigh those of television broadcasters

 

But the auction is voluntary for broadcasters.  If wireless guys don't show up, and thus the reserve and the price the TV stations want for the spectrum isn't met, then the whole thing doesn't happen regardless of which you think "ought" to have it.

 

- Trip

[dnicekid]

Just curious.. If the auction is voluntary how do they even know how much spectrum will be available? With everyone backing out could Tmo get some on the cheap? Could tv say let's wait and back out thus reducing how much is avail?

 

Maybe this is why sprint is backing out for now...to many questions still need answering.

[Trip]

Just curious.. If the auction is voluntary how do they even know how much spectrum will be available?

 

They don't.  Once TV stations submit their applications will there be an idea of how much spectrum.  Then the reverse auction happens, determining how much money needs to be raised, then the forward auction, where the carriers bid and money is raised.  If money raised is less than money needed, the amount of spectrum goes down, and the reverse and forward auctions repeat. 

 

- Trip

[S4GRU]

With everyone backing out could Tmo get some on the cheap?

No. Because everyone who 'backed out' can opt back in. This spectrum will sell for equal or greater than AWS-3. It's not that AT&T, VZW and Sprint don't want the spectrum. They just want to delay it a little while.

 

No one wants to dump all that capital out there right now. They all are busy spending billions upon billions on their networks. No one wants to go borrow money to do this right at this second. They will if they have to, and it may come to that. But for right now they are trying to kick the can down the road a little longer.

 

The only carrier who does not have nationwide low band spectrum is Tmo. And they have great momentum that will help them borrow money for this auction. Tmo needs 600 in every market they don't have 700 now. Which is a lot of the country. Tmo would also love to leap frog Sprint and be able to offer wider than 5MHz LTE channels in low band.

 

Right now, Tmo needs this auction. And Sprint needs a time out.

 

Using Tapatalk on BlackBerry Z30

[Rawvega]

Strong words from Commissioner Ajit Pai:

 

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-335499A1.pdf

 

 

Sprint’s decision not to participate in the incentive auction highlights the folly of the FCC’s attempt to pick winners and losers before the auction begins. It also intensifies doubts about how competitive the bidding will be for set-aside spectrum and whether American taxpayers will receive fair compensation for that scarce public resource. Sprint’s announcement only strengthens my belief that the FCC should not have granted a spectrum giveaway in this auction or placed artificial limits on carriers’ participation

[dnwk]

I think Sprint may realize that the auction will take a big hit on its cash flow. They won't admit it. So they claim they have enough spectrum to do it.

[Arysyn]

But the auction is voluntary for broadcasters. If wireless guys don't show up, and thus the reserve and the price the TV stations want for the spectrum isn't met, then the whole thing doesn't happen regardless of which you think "ought" to have it.

 

- Trip

That does change my outlook on this auction, it being voluntary. I've already wrote about what I think should happen, and now I just think this auction is even more of a mess. The comment made by the commissioner makes it even worse in my views.

[jefbal99]

I've very surprised at the amount of complaining regarding the lack of low band spectrum.  Sprint has nationwide ~7Mhz FDD in eSMR.  I live in a IBEZ non-deployed area for eSMR and just the B41 project alone made Sprint's network very usable.  To the west of me, eSMR is deployed and it is not an end all fix, just like 600Mhz will not be a guaranteed fix.  It would still need to be deployed in a dense fashion to make any sort of a difference.

 

There is enough spectrum in the US currently between 700Mhz, eSMR/Cellular, PCS, AWS, EBS/BRS, and WCS (I'm probably missing something too!).  Make the users of the existing spectrum maximize its usefulness rather than give them a bandaid of additional spectrum to further add to already stressed cell sites.

 

If Sprint would take its existing spectrum and maximize its usefulness with small cells, DAS, and macro sites (basically the exact definition of NGN) and ensure that eSMR is expanded as far as possible, then they don't need 600Mhz.

 

Same for Verizon with their 700Mhz, Cellular, AWS, PCS holdings, use it until you can't divide a cell any further, then go to the FCC for more.  And at&t with their random holdings.  Sunset legacy tech and reuse what you already have!  Both at&t and Verizon have plenty of Cellular holdings that they can refarm.

 

Create your own capacity by using what you already have is what the fcc needs to be preaching.

[coccydynia]

Sprint has already shown that when they densify their network, they come out on top. Their reliability is constantly improving and the only part that they are really behind is speed. And clearly speed will not be an issue on Sprint once B41 CA is in full swing.

 

So why the crazy doom and gloom because sprint doesn't want to spend billions for most likely a 5x5 piece that they can't even use till about 2020? And then spend billions more to deploy it?

 

I have a feeling with Sprint bowing out of the auction, FCC will look at lowering the reserve spectrum. And if Verizon bows out as well, the auction will probably not happen. Verizon is probably more interested in the AWS holdings of DISH than spending bucket loads of more money.

[Arysyn]

I'm starting to change my mind about Sprint's decision not to be at the auction. While I still believe neither Sprint nor any other major carrier has the power to delay or cancel the auction, it seems more and more that this auction is just a big mess, along with being a waste of time and resources, considering that it is voluntary to the television broadcasters, which now who knows how much spectrum will actually be available.

 

It is clear to me what a big mess the FCC is. The entire way spectrum is allocated and offered out by the FCC making such a vast difference in spectrum holdings not only between carriers, but between markets. I can understand competition between carriers in who can afford which and how much spectrum being part of the capitalistic system in this process, but not between markets, at least not to the extent which consumers quality of service is so much at stake, ultimately making this not so much of free choice after all.

 

So, with that as it is, can anyone really count on the FCC handling this auction properly, and the 600mhz spectrum being handled the same. For Sprint wanting to avoid this and concentrate on what they have, is completely understandable. Plus, I think if Sprint thought this auction were as simple as bidding, winning, and receiving spectrum, perhaps it would be likely they'd participate in it. Although considering what I now know fully of this auction, which I'm sure Sprint knows too, it makes sense to skip it.

[ttwiitch]

Sprint has already shown that when they densify their network, they come out on top. Their reliability is constantly improving and the only part that they are really behind is speed. And clearly speed will not be an issue on Sprint once B41 CA is in full swing.

 

So why the crazy doom and gloom because sprint doesn't want to spend billions for most likely a 5x5 piece that they can't even use till about 2020? And then spend billions more to deploy it?

 

I have a feeling with Sprint bowing out of the auction, FCC will look at lowering the reserve spectrum. And if Verizon bows out as well, the auction will probably not happen. Verizon is probably more interested in the AWS holdings of DISH than spending bucket loads of more money.

Sprint does NOT have a speed problem at all. Sprint just needs constant speeds and building penetration and that is done though network density if they don't want to opt in to buying in this coming auction.

 

Sent from my HTC Evo 4G ????

Edited September 28, 2015 by ttwiitch

[Arysyn]

I just finished writing a post in the Marcelo/Sprint thread about the auction and the FCC, which I probably should have posted to this thread instead.

 

I've changed my mind about the auction. I think ultimately if Sprint saw this as a good thing, they would have participated in it. However, the FCC has made a mess of this auction, which there are so many issues involved, that it pretty much is a waste of time for Sprint to devote resources to, which would be better served densifying the network.

 

I use to think they could do both, but I now clearly see they cannot, because of how this auction is arranged. It is one or the other, which now I believe Sprint made the right decision.

[jefbal99]

Sent from my HTC Evo 4G

 

Seriously still have an OG Evo 4G?  I miss mine, that thing was so ahead of the curve.  Think about a device that blew everyone else out of the water like that did on the current NV with all 3 LTE bands and CA.  Drool...

[ttwiitch]

Seriously still have an OG Evo 4G? I miss mine, that thing was so ahead of the curve. Think about a device that blew everyone else out of the water like that did on the current NV with all 3 LTE bands and CA. Drool...

Still have it laying around ????

 

Sent from my HTC Evo 4G ????

[jefbal99]

I just finished writing a post in the Marcelo/Sprint thread about the auction and the FCC, which I probably should have posted to this thread instead.

 

I've changed my mind about the auction. I think ultimately if Sprint saw this as a good thing, they would have participated in it. However, the FCC has made a mess of this auction, which there are so many issues involved, that it pretty much is a waste of time for Sprint to devote resources to, which would be better served densifying the network.

 

I use to think they could do both, but I now clearly see they cannot, because of how this auction is arranged. It is one or the other, which now I believe Sprint made the right decision.

 

After Sprint's experience in running the still ongoing program to move the Public Safety folks for the eSMR rebanding, I'm not shocked at all that they don't want to do that again with TV stations.  TV channels gain nothing to move or possible move again after the 700Mhz auction 10yrs ago.  I don't see this being a highly successful venture

[Trip]

However, the FCC has made a mess of this auction

 

How?  Recall that Congress passed the law requiring the FCC to conduct this two sided auction using market forces to determine the amount of spectrum to be recovered and whatnot.

 

I will also point out that there is no more "virgin spectrum" sitting out there unlicensed, unused, and waiting for wireless companies to buy it up and deploy it.  From here on out, any spectrum reallocated to anyone is going to have to come from somewhere else and presumably someone is going to have to be paid to relocate out of it.

 

- Trip

[Fraydog]

http://www.wirelessweek.com/news/2015/09/legere-analysts-respond-sprint-auction-withdrawal

 

I'm shocked that Susan Grimaldo and Roger Entner were praising Sprint for dropping out. 

[caspar347]

Still have it laying around

 

Sent from my HTC Evo 4G

Same. I'll probably re-activate it temporarily at some point soon to get a final snapshot of how the WiMAX network performs here and see what spectrum WiMAX occupies here.

[lilotimz]

And watch it go offline on Nov 6

[caspar347]

And watch it go offline on Nov 6

Oh yeah. I'll definitely have it activated for that. I can witness a major historical event in wireless from the comfort of my own bedroom thanks to the WiMAX site half a mile east.

[Arysyn]

How? Recall that Congress passed the law requiring the FCC to conduct this two sided auction using market forces to determine the amount of spectrum to be recovered and whatnot.

 

I will also point out that there is no more "virgin spectrum" sitting out there unlicensed, unused, and waiting for wireless companies to buy it up and deploy it. From here on out, any spectrum reallocated to anyone is going to have to come from somewhere else and presumably someone is going to have to be paid to relocate out of it.

 

- Trip

It's a mess basically due to several reasons which have been talked about here and on other sites online throughout the past some months. I'd literally have to spend several hours compiling it all, time I'd rather not spend. Although a simple explanation for it would be to say why have an auction of spectrum currently being used by television broadcasters, when it is voluntary of them to decide whether or not to give up that spectrum for the sake of wireless.

 

It reminds me of a non-rent controlled apartment building where there are people renting a few apartments, though the building owner/landlord really wants to sell to a condominium developer, though the building owner/landlord isn't going to force the renters to move out, and is going to tell the condominium developer they must allow the renters to stay at the rent they are paying, despite the building not being rent controlled at all.

 

At least that is the closest analogy I can think of at the moment and isn't exactly, though somewhat close to how I'm viewing this auction. Of course, the auction is much more complex, but it shows to me a simple form of what a mess it is, along with all the various other reasons I've read about online.

[travismheim]

I'm wondering how willing broadcasters are going to be to relinquish spectrum if one of the four carriers already said they will sit out. If another like Verizon makes the same announcement, it might kill the auction before it even starts.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[ericdabbs]

I'm wondering how willing broadcasters are going to be to relinquish spectrum if one of the four carriers already said they will sit out. If another like Verizon makes the same announcement, it might kill the auction before it even starts.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

I guess at this point, lets just hope Verizon and AT&T announce that they will bow out of the 600 MHz auction.  That will probably confirm the theory that Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are really interested in delaying the 600 MHz auction hopefully for another 2-3 years.

[Trip]

It's a mess basically due to several reasons which have been talked about here and on other sites online throughout the past some months. I'd literally have to spend several hours compiling it all, time I'd rather not spend. Although a simple explanation for it would be to say why have an auction of spectrum currently being used by television broadcasters, when it is voluntary of them to decide whether or not to give up that spectrum for the sake of wireless.

 

It reminds me of a non-rent controlled apartment building where there are people renting a few apartments, though the building owner/landlord really wants to sell to a condominium developer, though the building owner/landlord isn't going to force the renters to move out, and is going to tell the condominium developer they must allow the renters to stay at the rent they are paying, despite the building not being rent controlled at all.

 

At least that is the closest analogy I can think of at the moment and isn't exactly, though somewhat close to how I'm viewing this auction. Of course, the auction is much more complex, but it shows to me a simple form of what a mess it is, along with all the various other reasons I've read about online.

 

You're missing my point.  You specifically said the FCC made a mess of it.  I'm curious what parts you feel the FCC made a mess of as opposed to what the FCC was required to do by the law Congress passed.  The FCC is implementing a law Congress passed to voluntarily allow TV stations to sell spectrum to wireless companies with the FCC acting more or less as a broker.

 

- Trip

[Arysyn]

You're missing my point. You specifically said the FCC made a mess of it. I'm curious what parts you feel the FCC made a mess of as opposed to what the FCC was required to do by the law Congress passed. The FCC is implementing a law Congress passed to voluntarily allow TV stations to sell spectrum to wireless companies with the FCC acting more or less as a broker.

 

- Trip

So what you are saying is that this auction, unlike typical FCC auctions where the FCC sells a pool of spectrum the FCC has directly to the carriers, the broadcasters offer up a certain amount of spectrum the FCC can sell on their behalf?

 

Where I am confused by this, is that for several years, I've heard that the FCC has practically given away the public airwaves to these broadcasters in exchange for the FCC regulating content on them, sort of like how broadcasters cannot show full nudity etc.

 

Based on that prior to what you've told me, that the FCC was going to take back that spectrum from the broadcasters and directly resell them to carriers, while the FCC works with the broadcasters on suitable replacement spectrum for the broadcasters to use. If that were the case, then I would be thinking differently, more positively of this auction.

 

However, if the FCC were giving away the airwaves to broadcasters for their use, then to tell these broadcasters they have the right to decide whether to give that free spectrum to the carriers or not, than that certainly would be making a mess of things by allowing that when carriers are willing to spend alot of money for that spectrum which helps fund important things for society.

 

Yet, if what I've been hearing for several years, from many different news sources, reliable ones at that, about the FCC giving away the airwaves to broadcasters over the past many decades, and if these broadcasters had been paying the fair worth of the airwaves over the years, then I can understand how this auction is fair. Otherwise though, it is not.