The current spectrum auction (the 600 MHz incentive auction) isn't going that well. It looks like it will only raise $18.5B (of which $11.5B goes back to the broadcasters that relinquished the spectrum) for 84 MHz of spectrum (of which only 70 MHz will be used by telcos). Compare that with $41B raised in the AWS-3 auction for 65 MHz of spectrum. https://auctiondata.fcc.gov/public/projects/1000 The speculation on why it's not working out is: 1) The telcos spent all their cash on the AWS-3 auction which was only 2 years ago. They're tapped out. 2) Although 600 MHz was billed as "beach front" spectrum, it may actually be the wrong frequency. First, although it's great for coverage, it's poor for capacity. Second, it may be technologically obsolete. Everyone is looking ahead to 5G on millimeter frequencies (28, 37 and 39 GHz). 3) The "spectrum crunch" isn't real.
I'm curious where all that spectrum goes when the fad-cell-phone-of-the-month band stops being used? 20y ago, the world was on fire to move old point-to-point 2GHz systems to 6GHz to make way for the new "PCS" cell phones. Those phones are dinosaur fossils now, but I never heard what happened to the spectrum that was auctioned to make way for them?
The bands get "refarmed" eventually. The oldest band is the original analog cell phone band at 824–849 MHz and 869–894 MHz (formerly TV channels 70 through 83). For example, all 2G services will end at some point and that band will be refarmed for 4G LTE. Sprint is already using their spectrum at 862 MHz for 4G LTE after they shut down Nextel iDEN 800. If it's already been auctioned, it won't be auctioned again. That's certainly the case for PCS (1850 to 1910 MHz and 1930 to 1990 MHz), which was auctioned in the late 90's.
They aren't "sold away" in the conventional sense like selling a horse or a car. The "rights" are sold. Its more like selling a 'monopoly' to certain frequencies. The public loses nothing. Its just that the Feds decide how best to utilize these freqs and in order for them to develop there must be some implied use and the bidders bid accordingly. Its not like Verizon or whoever can sell it to Bob's CB Shack who rents it out as a new Chicken Band.
So what you are saying is that they are paying a one-time, huge "licensing fee" in order to use the band for a really long time?
I had a chance to meet Mr. Pai at a community meeting where he spoke last year. I asked him about amateur radio and he expressed appreciation for the service that amateurs provide for emergency communication. I was able provide some examples including recent severe weather events. I came away from the discussion hopeful. He has been at odds with the majority of the FCC commissioners since he started. Would expect change of direction on a lot of things.
Well Consumerist website brands him as a foe of net neutrality, which I do not think is a good thing...... https://consumerist.com/2017/01/23/net-neutrality-foe-ajit-pai-officially-named-fcc-chairman/ good thing the ionosphere can't be programmed to favor certain signals over others, or they would take advantage of that to make $$
Feb 25, 2015 - Net Neutrality is "a solution that won't work to a problem that doesn't exist," says Ajit Pai, a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Pai's an opponent of aggressive government regulation of the Internet, because he thinks it ends innovation and investment, resulting in low speeds over copper wires. The regulatory uncertainty (how will the FCC fine us next?) creates endless litigation. Threats of multi-million dollar fines from an inexpert agency like FCC (their own website crashed and was built on 30 year old tech until recent efforts to fix it) causes investors and innovators to look elsewhere. He believes the Internet was the biggest and most successful juggernaut of social change and technological advancement, precisely because the FCC was not involved in meddling with the details and processes. Also, many of Ajit Pai's peers think 'net neutrality' was actually an Obama plan to reward FANG (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Google) for political activism, putting other companies at a disadvantage in the marketplace. In other words, it was about stealing from one set of robber barons and giving to another set of robber barons, in exchange for political favors. The tremendous lobbying power of the Frightful Five: Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, and Alphabet, Google’s parent company, means that smaller startups and innovators (without $ and power to lobby) don't stand a chance at the FCC, which is lousy with lawyers on a carousel of government-to-lobbyist positions in private industry. In 2016, just 14 venture capital-backed technology firms completed initial public offerings (IPOs) in the US, after 15 frustrating years of lagging IPO activity. With the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other Washington regulations discouraging young firms from going public themselves, the big five are happy to gobble them up, providing founders and venture capitalists much needed exits. Meanwhile, regulation of the physical industries makes entrepreneurship and market-entry by technology upstarts more difficult. This leads to fewer challengers not just to the big five but other large incumbents in other industries. (The total number of companies listed on US stock markets is just half of its 1990s peak.) The operative theory in this administration will be that regulation kills innovation, investment, and jobs. http://www.techpolicydaily.com/communications/3-takeaways-eu-net-neutrality/ http://www.techpolicydaily.com/communications/want-bipartisan-fcc/ http://www.techpolicydaily.com/technology/tech-titans-crushing-competition-washington/ https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/blog/post/what-s-cause-and-effect-plummeting-public-firms
I hope this new FCC leader is going to throttle the enormous influence of the Telecoms and Network providers (CISCO, etc.) on decisions or lack of decisions by the prior FCC. 5G networks have not been researched to see if their is an environmental impact to humans. Tom Wheeler ruled that he would let the industry do testing not the FCC. This is the equivalent of a fox guarding the hen house. Look at the cancer clusters around cell phone towers which you cannot get away from. Look at the national toxicology report in May/June of 2016, they have proven a link within FCC ERP guidelines to low level non ionizing 900 MHz 24 x 7 exposures and Brain Cancer. On my ham radio I can choose to turn it off, the same goes for my cell phone. If I live near a cell tower I cannot do very much to protect myself from the 24/7 RF radiating from these towers. 5G will make this much worse. 5G is key to enabling autonomous vehicles, because the tall buildings in New York blocking RF can limit where the vehicles can go. They plan to include a RF transmitter at every stop light. Bill KD8IGK
