AT&T is petitioning the Federal Communications Commission to impose network buildout conditions on Dish’s satellite spectrum –- requirements that would be passed onto AT&T if it acquired the satellite TV provider. Meanwhile, Dish insists it plans to use that spectrum to build a commercial LTE network to challenge the reigning nationwide mobile operators, including AT&T. These are hardly the actions of two companies about to tie the knot.

What we’re witnessing here is some very cynical pre-nuptial gamesmanship. According to TMF Associates satellite communications analyst Tim Farrar, Dish is playing AT&T off its competitors by threatening to partner with MetroPCS to build a nationwide LTE network over its satellite broadband and 700 MHz spectrum. To muck up Dish’s plans, AT&T is insisting to the FCC that the satellite TV provider face the same strict rollout requirements the commission imposed on fellow satellite spectrum holder LightSquared: An LTE rollout covering 100 million people in 33 months and 260 million in less than 6 years.

As Farrar wrote in his blog:

This submission is a blatant attempt by AT&T to put a thumb on the scales, as the FCC weighs up the appropriate balance between buildout mandates and clawback of any windfall. The reason for AT&T’s action at this very late stage in the process appears to be that DISH is trying to play off AT&T’s prospective bid against a potential venture with MetroPCS. MetroPCS would certainly be unwilling to commit to a 260M POP buildout, so if the FCC conceded AT&T’s demands, they would be the only game in town and DISH would lose its leverage in price negotiations. We’ll find out soon enough if AT&T’s gambit succeeds, but few would bet against [Dish chairman] Charlie Ergen’s poker playing skills after the events of the last year.

AT&T may seem like the bad guy here, but Dish’s motives are just as suspect. In an FCC filling Thursday, Dish maintained it plans become a competing mobile operator, launching an LTE network that would compete with the big 4:

The overly aggressive and unrealistic schedule AT&T advocates would likely set DISH up for failure or force DISH into unfavorable business arrangements with large Commercial Mobile Radio Service (“CMRS”) carriers.  It would erect artificial barriers to DISH’s plan to construct a new mobile broadband network on its own or consideration of partnerships with smaller companies, and could threaten DISH’s ability to roll out a retail service.  In short, an impracticably tight schedule would be a triple loss for consumers, the Commission, and DISH.

But as my colleague Stacey Higginbotham wrote when Dish first applied for permission to build LTE, Dish’s proposal sounds more like a financial gamble to cash in on the skyrocketing value of mobile broadband spectrum, rather than a legitimate bid to become a wireless competitor. One big clue is Dish’s insistence on deploying an LTE-Advanced network in order to “enter the market for the first time with the most advanced technology.” Of course, LTE-Advanced was just finalized as a standard so Dish claims it will have to wait several years before commercial equipment is available.

That’s absolute malarkey. LTE-Advanced is an iteration of LTE technology, not a completely new network. Claiming that you must wait until LTE-Advanced equipment is available before building a network is kind of like insisting you can’t move into a house before the shag carpeting is installed. There’s nothing stopping Dish from building an LTE network this year and evolving it into an LTE-Advanced network in 2013 or 2014.

Supposedly we face a spectrum crisis, but no one is acting like it. Instead of using public airwaves to deploy real networks, operators seem to be playing high-stakes poker with their licenses. AT&T’s motives may be self-serving, but maybe in this case it’s right. If it forces strict rollout guidelines on Dish’s spectrum and then buys those licenses, we may actually get a new mobile broadband network – rather than a bunch of operators whining about how they don’t have the spectrum to build them.

Poker Image courtesy of Flickr user Ross Elliott
Tower Image courtesy of Flickr user Nikhil Verma

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• 2012: Data, spectrum and the race to LTE
• Mobile Q4: The scramble for spectrum continues
• Confused about the wireless markets? Here’s a breakdown

alt=''
border='0'
/>

GigaOM

Verizon originally framed the convenience fee as a way to cover costs for single payments. It was supposed to go into effect on Jan. 15. But many, including my colleague Kevin Fitchard, saw the fee as a way to direct people to pay bills through their preferred channels including AutoPay, which is one of a number of payment methods that would not require a fee.

“At Verizon, we take great care to listen to our customers. Based on their input, we believe the best path forward is to encourage customers to take advantage of the best and most efficient options, eliminating the need to institute the fee at this time,” said Dan Mead, president and chief executive officer of Verizon Wireless.

Verizon may have been motivated by news that the Federal Communications Commission was also looking into the fee. “On behalf of American consumers, we’re concerned about Verizon’s actions and are looking into the matter,” the FCC said just hours before Verizon reversed course.

Verizon already has to deal with questions about recent LTE outages. And the fact that it was introducing a new fee that seemed to penalize its own customers did not go over well with consumers, some of whom brought up comparisons to Bank of America’s failed debit card fee.

It’s nice to see that Verizon was listening to consumers and reacted quickly to its overreach. But it should have known that a fee like this wouldn’t have gone over well. Score another one for the Internet.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• The role of organizations, individuals and managers in the new workplace

alt=''
border='0'
/>

GigaOM

Continue reading FCC Fridays: December 16, 2011

FCC Fridays: December 16, 2011 originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:00:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments
Engadget

Continue reading FCC Fridays: December 9, 2011

FCC Fridays: December 9, 2011 originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:00:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments
Engadget

Following the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to send the -billion proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile USA to an administrative hearing on Tuesday, AT&T has withdrawn its official application to combine its spectrum with T-Mobile’s. The company also said that it will take a -billion charge against earnings should the deal fall through. Both actions, which were taken on Wednesday, indicate that AT&T’s confidence in the deal is waning, and could be the final actions before a formal abandonment of the purchase.

AT&T still plans to fight the antitrust case that the Department of Justice has filed and has not said it plans to walk away from its deal just yet, but it clearly has realized that the forces arrayed against this combination will be hard to quell. As I noted on Tuesday, unless AT&T or T-Mobile pull the plug between now and then, the next big date should be the Department of Justice lawsuit hearing in February. From AT&T’s statement:

AT&T Inc. and Deutsche Telekom AG are continuing to pursue the sale of Deutsche Telekom’s U.S. wireless assets to AT&T and are taking this step to facilitate the consideration of all options at the FCC and to focus their continuing efforts on obtaining antitrust clearance for the transaction from the Department of Justice either through the litigation pending before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:11-cv-01560 (ESH) or alternate means. As soon as practical, AT&T Inc. and Deutsche Telekom AG intend to seek the necessary FCC approval.

The Department of Justice has come out against the deal, citing a lack of competition, while the FCC this week determined that the new entity wouldn’t create the jobs that AT&T has said it would, and in fact, would result in, “a massive loss of U.S. jobs and investment.” Since no one is buying AT&T’s and T-Mobile’s claims, perhaps the next big question is what happens next with T-Mobile. In the meantime, by taking a charge against its fourth-quarter earnings that reflects a -billion breakup fee and the -billion value of T-Mobile’s spectrum, AT&T is clearly prepping for trouble.

Given that the charge will occur before its day in court, I’m not sure if we should expect AT&T to walk before the close of this year, or if it’s just being cautious with Wall Street.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Finding new solutions for the new age of wireless networks
• Sprint’s tightrope walk: finding a balance for its network modernization plan
• Mobile Q1: All Eyes on Tablets, T-Mobile and AT&T

alt=''
border='0'
/>

GigaOM

AT&T's proposed WCS spectrum sale

Sprint believes it has caught to have AT&T in a ‘gotcha!’ moment. While AT&T is using the threat of a spectrum crunch as justification to buy T-Mobile, Ma Bell is trying to sell off mobile broadband airwaves it already owns. In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, Sprint basically calls AT&T a hypocrite, citing AT&T’s intended sale of its 2.3 GHz spectrum as another reason for the FCC should deny AT&T and T-Mobiles’ -billion deal. While Sprint has levied plenty of dead-on criticisms against AT&T-T-Mobile deal in the past, this time the operator has overshot the mark.

Here’s an excerpt for Sprint’s letter, signed by Sprint attorney Charles Logan:

“AT&T, in fact, has more licensed spectrum than any other CMRS provider in the country. Other wireless carriers, such as Verizon, manage to serve more customers with less spectrum resources than AT&T by using their existing spectrum licenses, deploying new technologies, and investing in infrastructure. To the extent AT&T can be said to be constrained at all, therefore, any ostensible limitations are the result of years of underinvestment by AT&T in its network and AT&T’s failure to put its existing spectrum to more efficient use – or, in the case of AT&T’s WCS spectrum, to any use at all.”

Heady stuff, but it ignores the fact that the 2.3 GHz Wireless Communication Services (WCS) spectrum bands are a mess. Ever since the licenses were auctioned off in 1997, every major operator owning WCS has tried to find some use for that spectrum, but they all came up with squat. Power restrictions in the band make it useless for any kind of mobile voice and broadband service. And attempts by AT&T and BellSouth (which AT&T acquired) to use it for fixed wireless DSL-replacement technologies fell flat after numerous trials.

The specific C-block and D-block licenses AT&T is trying to sell in partnership with NextWave are even more problematic. They straddle opposite ends of the Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service (SDARS) band used by Sirius XM Radio, requiring any network to have a guard band to prevent interference with Sirius’ radio signals. That means the already small allotment of capacity in each block, 5 MHz, is cut in half.

At worst, AT&T is guilty of putting lipstick on this WCS pig — rouge and fake eyelashes as well — in attempt to find a buyer for the licenses. AT&T pointed out just how worthless these licenses are in its public policy blog after Public Knowledge made similar criticisms of hypocrisy. Yet, the little fact sheet AT&T and NextWave put together to market the spectrum paints WCS in much gentler light. In those materials, AT&T claims that the licenses can be used for all kind of nifty applications: smart grids, supplementary downlink for mobile networks, fixed wireless broadband access, backhaul and one-way broadcast services.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Sprint’s tightrope walk: finding a balance for its network modernization plan
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro
• Mobile Q1: All Eyes on Tablets, T-Mobile and AT&T

alt=''
border='0'
/>

GigaOM

We used our cell phones to check on the safety of relatives and friends, to stay in contact with work, to get the latest news in our communities, look at photos and video of storm damage, order takeout food and even to network socially. In fact, status updates on Facebook and tweets about the frustrations of losing power were made possible by using smartphones that maintained their Internet and cell connections, technology that didn’t exist in the past with hurricanes such as Hurricane Gloria in 1985.

Despite widespread power outages, wireless networks stood up well to Irene. According to a New York Times report, the Federal Communications Commission said thousands of wirelines went down during the storm while 1,400 cell sites along the coast were down, and several hundred were running on backup power.

Backup power for extended periods of time to cell phone sites is critical in times of natural disaster like Irene. We’ve heard of generators and use them in our homes and businesses. But the problem I see with diesel generators for cell sites that we might not be aware of is that they are noisy, produce noxious emissions and require a lot of maintenance and repair because they have moving parts. Diesel also is commonly stolen in some countries, with around 15-30 percent of generator fuel being siphoned off in some developing regions — and as soon as the site runs out of diesel, it goes down.

A better way

A cleaner alternative is emerging. Wireless service providers increasingly are investing in fuel cell systems for backup power. Fuel cells use hydrogen and oxygen, the molecules that create water, to produce electricity with no pollution. We see it as a green alternative that is on the rise. Clean and energy efficient fuel cells can help reduce CO2 emissions by 50 percent as well as decrease other toxic emissions and deliver additional environmental and efficiency benefits.  They also are very quiet, less costly to maintain and are not targets for theft.

When there is a loss of power for the electric grid, an attached fuel cell system senses the drop in the direct current voltage and automatically starts up, and begins reforming fuel. The liquid fuel is heated to the vapor point, and steam is reformed, and at the same time hydrogen starts flowing to the fuel cell module. Electricity is generated in the fuel cell stack by the chemical reaction between hydrogen from the fuel processer and oxygen in ambient air. The fuel cell can deliver power in about one minute and reach full power in 3.5 minutes, providing 5 KW of power to the telecom site.

When Irene was in full force with high winds that knocked out electrical grid power in one tropical location, a customer of our ElectraGen ME backup power fuel cell system reported the system automatically turned on, providing power to the telecom base station for hours. And members of this resort community never lost cell service.

Around the globe in times of severe weather, emergencies and in countries with limited or unreliable grids, backup fuel cells provide this essential service countless times – without cell phone users ever knowing it, but keeping them happy that they always have service.

With consumers’ growing reliance on cell phones, we expect wireless carriers around the world will continue to recognize the need for backup power. And with today’s energy-consciousness and sustainability efforts, we expect they’ll increasingly turn to a greener and sustainable solution: advanced fuel cell systems.

Just think — the next time you’re in the dark texting friends during a storm, it may be thanks to a fuel cell system.

Kathy Fosberg is marketing communications manager at IdaTech, a leading global supplier of fuel cell systems for backup power to the telecom industry based in Bend, Oregon.  

 Image courtesy of Flickr user Undertow851.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Green IT Q1: Cleantech Breaking Out — and Bracing for Hard Times
• What Amazon’s new Kindle line means for Apple, Netflix and online media
• The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro

alt=''
border='0'
/>

GigaOM

Wired Top Stories

This afternoon, AT&T and T-Mobile dedicated a twenty-eight page PDF to convincing regulators that their billion aquisition wouldn’t violate antitrust law, using images like the one above. Well, as you can imagine, Sprint had something to say about that, and you can read it immediately below.

The combination of AT&T and T-Mobile USA, if approved by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC), would alter dramatically the structure of the communications industry. AT&T and Verizon are already by far the largest wireless providers. A combined AT&T and T-Mobile would be almost three times the size of Sprint, the third largest wireless competitor. If approved, the merger would result in a wireless industry dominated overwhelmingly by two vertically-integrated companies that control almost 80% of the US wireless post-paid market, as well as the availability and price of key inputs such as backhaul and access needed by other wireless companies to compete. The DOJ and the FCC must decide if this transaction is in the best interest of consumers and the US economy overall, and determine if innovation and robust competition would be impacted adversely and by this dramatic change in the structure of the industry.

Last week, rumors flew that Sprint, not AT&T, would be the one to join T-Mobile and create a vast wireless network, and while we haven’t heard any proof of that so far, it probably wouldn’t be terribly happy to settle for “number 1 spectrum position” if the tables were indeed turned.

Sprint critiques proposed AT&T / T-Mobile deal, says buyout would ‘dramatically alter’ telecom industry originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 20 Mar 2011 23:42:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Phone Scoop  |   | Email this | Comments
Engadget

Wired Top Stories