The 700mhz Spectrum Auction In Perspective

YIAAL writes "Writing in Popular Mechanics, Robert X. Cringely looks at the upcoming auction of the 700mbz spectrum, which is currently used for soon-to-be-defunct analog TV. 'Why are all these companies so excited? Because the 60 MHz of spectrum that's about to be auctioned is the last prime real estate for mobile communications that will be available in the U.S. for decades to come ... Some pundits (that would be me) think Google will bid to win its spectrum block, then will trade that block to Sprint/Nextel for some of that company's 2.5-GHz WiMAX licenses that are far better suited for data.' Plus, the prospect of offering unlicensed data service in the 'white space' between existing broadcast channels."

Comments

Just a thought... UHF 60-69 for... TV?

[RingDev]

And what would happen if one of the bid winners licensed existing TV stations to broadcast over some specific frequency just as they already are? Sure, it's not innovative or revolutionary, but the broadcast TV model has already proven profitable, and there are a LOT of people in the US with out HD TV's/Converters. Seems like there could be a rather solid market out there to continue the status quo, at least for a while until the HD penetration numbers rise.

-Rick

Re:Just a thought... UHF 60-69 for... TV?

[hedwards]

In general I agree, I've played around a bit with my wee small antenna and an atsc tuner, and the results are far better than I was getting with an ntsc tuner. The picture is crisp, clear and consistent in a way that the analog signal never was in this room.

But anybody that lives out in the boonies, the places where getting quite a bit of static are going to be screwed over if they haven't gone satellite.

Overall though, I think that the people that are screaming to maintain the status quo and the horribly inefficient allocation of the airwaves for an increasingly small minority need to think about the common good, and consider whether they have a right to forgo paying for a subsidized box if it means depriving everybody of the use of the spectrum.

It would in many ways make more sense to subsidize a basic satellite package for people that live far enough away from the nearest broadcaster than to maintain the system as it is.

Even if the spectrum is bought out by a company that misbehaves in the end, we still have an additional choice to make, whereas previously we had one fewer option. And that's a good thing either way, it gives a chance for a new service to sink or swim.

coupons here

[bobs666]

You can get 2 $40 coupons at this site

Re:Transcript of the trade

[mounthood]

Google: Hey Sprint/Nextel, trade you my 700 Mhz for your 2.5Ghz!
(awkward pause)
Sprint/Nextel: nah.
(awkward pause)
Google: ... damn!

Google: OK we'll just buy you.

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=Google+Sprint

Re:The 700MHz Band is great for data

[morton2002]

The better propagation characteristics do have a drawback: limited frequency reuse. The cells will have to be spaced further apart to avoid overlap, resulting in more users communicating with the same tower. Furthermore 700 MHz doesn't have the scattering properties of higher frequencies that allows for multipath signal combining, which is tremendously useful in non-line-of-sight situations. This means that coverage in dense urban environments will have to rely exclusively on the partial propagation through buildings, which may leave shadows on a coverage map. These quiet zones could be targeted with additional tower placement, if not for the frequency reuse problem.