Jump to content

FCC auction 110 status update(s)


dkyeager

Recommended Posts

Auction 110 is for 100Mhz at 3.45GHZ of excess government spectrum and had a reserve requirement of about $15 billion to cover the costs of consolidating and moving spectrum, primarily by DOD.  Two days ago that was in doubt with only about $9.5 billion bid after numerous rounds. In a single day it appears to have exceeded that and grown to $15.5 billion.  This spectrum is in the mid range bands for 5G.

https://www.sashajavid.com/FCC_Auction110.php

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost $20 billion.  Hottest markets are in random order: 

market_number market_name price_mhz_pop
PEA008 Dallas, TX $1.382261
PEA015 Phoenix, AZ $1.258463
PEA010 Houston, TX $1.250934
PEA020 Denver, CO $1.240004
PEA009 Miami, FL $1.237690
PEA004 San Francisco, CA $1.236883
PEA002 Los Angeles, CA $1.235332

 

source: https://www.sashajavid.com/FCC_Auction110.php

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 11:12 PM, dkyeager said:

Almost $20 billion.  Hottest markets are in random order: 

market_number market_name price_mhz_pop
PEA008 Dallas, TX $1.382261
PEA015 Phoenix, AZ $1.258463
PEA010 Houston, TX $1.250934
PEA020 Denver, CO $1.240004
PEA009 Miami, FL $1.237690
PEA004 San Francisco, CA $1.236883
PEA002 Los Angeles, CA $1.235332

 

source: https://www.sashajavid.com/FCC_Auction110.php

Surprised Dallas and Houston are that expensive. Denver makes sense as it's late-clearing on C-Band.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

almost $22 billion

hottest markets:

market_number market_name price_mhz_pop
PEA369 Red Oak, IA $2.664540
PEA304 Mount Airy, NC $2.324113
PEA371 Wytheville, VA $1.957278
PEA038 Milwaukee, WI $1.676194
PEA410 Valentine, NE $1.585283
PEA100 Greenville, NC $1.519378
PEA008 Dallas, TX $1.382261
PEA349 Marion, NC $1.352162
PEA406 Anamosa, IA $1.332498
PEA015 Phoenix, AZ $1.258463
PEA010 Houston, TX $1.250934
PEA020 Denver, CO $1.240004
PEA009 Miami, FL $1.237690
PEA004 San Francisco, CA $1.236883
PEA002 Los Angeles, CA $1.235332
PEA108 Des Moines, IA $1.231065
PEA281 Muskogee, OK $1.226319
PEA267 Sheboygan, WI $1.156137
PEA007 Boston, MA $1.140213
PEA011 Atlanta, GA $1.138702
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That list is hysterical to me.   Places like Mount Airy & Marion NC or Wytheville VA (have been in all three, 2 within the last 3 months even) make no sense juxtaposed against the likes of Atlanta/Boston/San Fran/etc, but that they're actually commanding higher comparatively even as well...? 😲

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

That list is hysterical to me.   Places like Mount Airy & Marion NC or Wytheville VA (have been in all three, 2 within the last 3 months even) make no sense juxtaposed against the likes of Atlanta/Boston/San Fran/etc, but that they're actually commanding higher comparatively even as well...? 😲

Just curious, could some squatters be hoarding some licenses in those areas creating a shortage of usable space?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2021 at 12:30 PM, iansltx said:

Surprised Dallas and Houston are that expensive. Denver makes sense as it's late-clearing on C-Band.

The two largest markets in one of the fastest growing states in the nation. While Austin was the largest growing market in the state percentage wise,  Houston and Dallas grew way more in raw numbers. (Or at least that's what I remember reading from the last decade...i don't have the numbers in front of me).

It makes sense that wireless carriers are buying based on future projections of population growth.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

Just curious, could some squatters be hoarding some licenses in those areas creating a shortage of usable space?

It could be a local ISP/WISP that helped drive those numbers up. Remember, those numbers are by Price Per MHz-POP.

  • Like 2
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

    • I assume that any agreement is not perpetual and has an end date. - Trip
    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
  • Recently Browsing

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