Slashdot Mirror
Google Ends Silence On C Block Auction
Phurge found a post on the Google Policy Blog in which they lift the cone of silence that had been imposed by regulation over the recently concluded FCC spectrum auction. As some had speculated, Google was in it mainly to force some openness into the wireless industry. "Based on the way that the bidding played out, our participation in the auction helped ensure that the C Block met the reserve price. In fact, in ten of the bidding rounds we actually raised our own bid — even though no one was bidding against us — to ensure aggressive bidding on the C Block. In turn, that helped increase the revenues raised for the US Treasury, while making sure that the openness conditions would be applied to the ultimate licensee."
So they artificially bumped up the price to make AT&T and Verizon have to pay more?
Very nice!
The real take away from this press release is that Google is expecting that the first phones based on Android will be released later this year. That is good news for those who are interested in open platforms and enjoy hacking. link
I wonder how happy Verizon's stockholders are going to be when they find out that Google was bidding up the price for essentially no reason at all and Verizon jumped in on top of that. not too bad, it seems
From TFA:
"As you probably know by now, Google didn't pick up any spectrum licenses in the auction. Nonetheless, partly as a result of our bidding, consumers soon should have new freedom to get the most out of their mobile phones and other wireless devices."
also,
"But it was clear, then and now, that Verizon Wireless ultimately was motivated to bid higher (and had far more financial incentive to gain the licenses)."
Now, if they pushed Verizon to bid higher to win the contract won't they just charge the end users more?
Help a man when he is in trouble and he will remember you when he is in trouble again.
Slashdot believes whatever google says; all other corporations lying scum.
Film at 11.
Helping pay off the National Debt. What will they take credit for next?
Don't you get banned from eBay for doing that?
In fact, in ten of the bidding rounds we actually raised our own bid -- even though no one was bidding against us -- to ensure aggressive bidding on the C Block. In turn, that helped increase the revenues raised for the US Treasury ...
But ultimately the winners are going to have to make their money back by sticking it to the consumer. The bidding system is basically a government tax on something that's free, the airways. So the revenues Google so kindly helped raise for the Feds are ultimately gonna be paid for by the end user.
They manipulated the pricing to reach a certain threshold. Once it's bought for a certain price the owner of the license must conform to certain rules of "openness" for what can used on that spectrum.
Developers: We can use your help.
... the winning company actually *implements* the "intended" level of openness and has it in their terms-of-use section in their contracts.
A popular thing for telecoms to do these days seems to be re-interpreting words in contracts. "Unlimited access" is re-interpreted to mean "Unlimited connection time", even though there are at most 744 hours per month. "Unlimited internet service" is re-interpreted to mean "unlimited, as long as you don't transfer more than XXGB a month". I don't even want to get into what Comcast redefined to get their computer-impersonating policies to fly. Companies are redefining words like it's going out of fashion.
Google may be cheering and patting each other on back for a job well done, but to be honest, I don't think they've achieved anything they've set out to do. All they've done is get the FCC to say "Oh yeah, and the network must be open to other devices", while everyone nods "M-hm, oh yes of course" while looking at their toes.
Going so far as telling everyone how clever they were the first opportunity allowed seems a bit premature. The network's not up, the company's services aren't for sale, the consumer-end terms-of-use contracts aren't drafted, so what exactly are they cheering about when they got a telecom company to say "Okay, we'll 'allow' 'open' 'devices' and 'open' 'applications'"?
All companies are theoretically like that, since stock prices are based on the net present value of future dividends. CEOs only started being short sighted when stock options encouraged them to fool the market into overvaluing the shares in the short run, at the expense of the long run value of the company -- but the long run didn't matter since the options would be cashed in long before then. So companies would do things like cut back too far on R&D -- hurting the company in the long run, but boosting short term profits and, because traders were assuming the increased profitability was permanent, boosting the stock price as well. Basically it was a way for CEOs to use their options to scam the shareholders.
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
But they DID want something. There were certain openness requirements that would only happen if the bidding moved past the $4.6 billion threshold.
In effect Google was saying "we want the block to pass the $4.6 billion mark so badly that we'll pay it ourselves if we need to"
Once bidding had passed that mark, they didn't really care if they or someone else footed the final bill. The thing they wanted had come true.
I have a lot of opinions about Cyborgs and Architects