Google a "Happy Loser" In Spectrum Auction

Large cell service providers won almost all of the licenses in the recently concluded FCC spectrum auction. Google didn't get any and won't be entering the wireless business. Verizon Wireless was the big winner, laying out $9.4 billion for enough regional licenses in the "C" block to stitch together nationwide coverage, except for Alaska. On this spectrum Verizon will have to allow subscribers to use any compatible wireless device and run any software application they want. AT&T paid $6.6 billion, Qualcomm picked up a few licenses, and Paul Allen's Vulcan Spectrum LLC won a pair of licenses in the "A" block. One analyst called Google a "happy loser" because it got the openness it had pushed for. The AP's coverage does some more of the numbers.

Comments

Android

[bluefoxlucid]

Now verizon can't make you use a shitty phone. Now Verizon can't lock you into their ringtones only. Now Verizon can't stop you from using generic Android-sporting phones.

Re:Android

[houstonbofh]

Sure... I will bet you money Verizon will find a way to make the requirement to "allow subscribers to use any compatible wireless device and run any software application they want" not a feasible option. Something like "With our stuff you get data discounted to 2 cents a byte. With yours it is the full price 2000 cents a byte..." Betcha money...

Re:Android

[mweather]

If they were dumb enough to do that, then they would be forced to license the patent, or loose the spectrum.

Re:Android

[pthisis]

However, the actions of a particular corporation, should not be viewed in a good or evil way, but rather from the standpoint of a completely amoral and dispassionate entity who seeks to maximize his profits. You assert this but give no reason for it. And to a lot of people (I'd venture to say _most_ people), seeking to maximize profits without considering the other repercussions of your actions can easily be evil (depending on the actions it leads you to take).

The rational (i.e. profit maximizing) behavior for a monopoly firm in any market is to price discriminate or in other words they charge each customer the maximum amount that he or she is willing to pay for a particular amount of goods or services (or as close to that amount as their metered pricing schemes and various contracts can get). Most people believe that to be bad, hence the heavier legal regulation of firms that have monopolies.

Who won Alaska

[AK Marc]

Great, they announced that Verizon took everything but Alaska. So, who won Alaska? I ask because I read the messages and couldn't tell who won it, and I live here. Is there a link to the actual results, rather than an analysis that says everything but Alaska but doesn't specify who took the elusive 49th state?

Phone company idiocy

[whoever57]

At the risk of being OT.....

I got a new Nokia/T-Mobile phone recently. According to Nokia's documentation, the phone has an email client. I have been through the menus (including the ones in the manual that reference email) and there is no email client in the phone, so I assume that T-Mobile has disabled this feature.

Now, since there is no e-mail client, why would I want to have Internet access on the phone? I probably would have signed up for Internet access, but since T-Mobile doesn't want me to use email on the phone, I won't. Smart move there by T-Mobile.

Does it have to be a cellular network?

[Fatal67]

Why does everyone assume verizon will use the spectrum for wireless when they have just as much need to deliver Video as they do wireless?

They could run a completely wireless 'cable' network over this spectrum and the only compatible device would be a set top box with a wireless interface that was compatible with their head end equipment. Was there something in the auction that requires the spectrum to be used for Cell phones or Internet access? I missed it if there was. Anyone know?

Re:Does it have to be a cellular network?

[ecliptik]

I recently had a phone interview with Qualcomm for a position in their MediaFlow division. Apparently they are planning to use recently freed UHF frequencies to digitally broadcast "cable" TV directly to cell phones . I wouldn't be surprised if they continued to expand this type of service with the additional licenses they picked up in the auction.

Does Open = Without charges?

[el_benito]

I'll pass on using mod points because I don't see anyone else asking this yet: Is there anything in the requirements that says that Verizon cannot charge for people to use any compatible device? Can we run our applications without them charging us money? Do they have the right to 'shape' bandwidth once somebody figures out how to torrent stuff over this network? Can I IM without them exacting an exorbitant fee per message? In short: Are we gonna get screwed through a loophole? /rhetorical

AT&T's Spectrum Does Not Hanve Any Restriction

[Dopeskills]

Everyone is talking about the open access rules regarding Verizon's spectrum, but it is interesting to point out that AT&T does not have to deal with any restrictions on its 700mhz spectrum. AT&T's 700mhz coverage includes the spectrum acquired from Aloha Partners combined with the B block from the auction (totals 95% of the USA). This means that AT&T can still deploy a completely locked down network if they choose.

Sprint + Google

[Darth Cider]

Verizon paid 9.6 billion for C Block licenses, but Sprint-Nextel has a market cap of only 18 billion, so for 9 billion (more or less) Google could buy controlling interest. Sprint owns WiMax spectrum that reaches everywhere the C Block reaches, and has infrastructure in place that Google would have needed to capitalize on 700 MHz spectrum. Why buy spectrum when you can buy comparable spectrum PLUS a phone company? Google wouldn't have to buy them outright, or buy even 50 percent, either, just put up a few billion, and Sprint would essentially be theirs. Plus, they could still make use of unlocked Verizon and AT&T services.

Google's lobbying for open access was incredibly smart. What they didn't pay for spectrum could buy a whole phone company, one competing against companies burdened by all that auction debt.