Spectrum License–Just like Oceanfront Property–Going Fast
April 29, 2009
I have stumbled upon something. It’s so hideous we must protect our children from it.
One part of me says not to look at it again. The other side says to dig in so you can drive yourself crazy.
I have discovered a journal that I was not aware of over my vast and somewhat interesting career in telecommunications. Perhaps it was for the better, maybe God was trying to protect me. This Journal is called: Federal Communications Law Journal. This journal is a cesspool of legalese, theories and views of telecommunications not suitable for those under the age of 21. It is a Beltway Bible of sorts.
In the future, I just may find myself writing a blog comment or two on some article I happen to run across that totally contradicts common sense or demonstrates slight of hand maneuvering. Yes, it is possible, the typical article in this journal will more than likely have been written by a lawyer with a political bent. In essence, I will be reading the devil’s words!
Just happens to be, I read an article already. It was 36 pages long. It espoused a “vision” for a new Communications Policy in this new millennium. The author–I won’t share this person’s identity, but I will share this persons ideas on how the government should be managing licensed spectrum. The author has a deep, deep, deep Beltway history.
The author pretty much pooh-poohs the Communications Act of 1996, though the author played a significant role in its foundation, philosophy and design. The article is pure genius of hindsight Teflon and forward prose of a new communications era. The new Policy “vision” spoke about many, many aspects of Telecom – from access networks to real facilities competition to VOIP to spectrum licensing. The spectrum licensing idea, I mean “vision” is one aspect I found most interesting.
Remember not to long ago the spectrum auctions? This was when carriers or other interested parties would bid on spectrum licenses nationwide, regional or in pockets. If you received a license, you thought you bought some type of exclusive use of the spectrum frequency obtained. In aggregate, these licenses sold for billions of dollars. I would often hear, “… you can’t go wrong buying a spectrum license, it’s like ocean front property, they just don’t make it any more!”
Anyhow, the visionary in this article has a different interpretation of these licenses under a new Communications Policy. I will attempt to simplify things as not too many PhD’s read this blog nor should they!
Let’s say you bought a 700 MHz license. The signal reach, coverage, or broadcast distance falls within a certain band based upon linear amplitude. In simpler terms, for example, we have a 50,000 watt radio station in Rochester, New York that runs on the AM band at the 1180 MHz frequency. This wattage allows for extremely wide broadcast reach – it can cover 26 states and parts of Canada. The reason it can do this is that under Federal license it’s linear amplitude of 50,000 watts allows it to do so. The government licenses this as a part of the Emergency Broadcast System or EBS. Cincinnati, Ohio also has a 50,000 watt station likewise which serves a similar purpose. Such high-power stations are located across the United States for EBS situations stemming from the Cold War days. If you try to find another AM station close to a 50,000 watt behemoth on the dial, it is difficult to gain reception because the signal amplitude is overpowering.
From a commercial perspective, those holding these types of radio broadcast licenses have far greater broadcast reach–larger audiences than those running a 100 watt linear antenna, for example. A need to boost signals or repeat signals is non-existent.
So let’s say you bought a 700 MHz license and you believe you have bought some beach property. No one can block your view, it’s an exclusive. Well, according to the visionary in this article, new Telecom Policy should honor these licenses at their peak linear values. However, lower powered devices should also be able to operate within the band provided that they do not interfere and remain distant from the peak linear aspects of the original licensed owners. Thus, and subject to government regulation, a certified wireless device that can operate within our 700 Mhz spectrum example, may do so at no cost, provided the device does not go above a yet-to-be-determined linear range.
May I quote: “Licensees should be allowed to compete to provide whatever service they think will serve consumers’ demand, provided that they do not cause undue interference to other spectrum users.”
Take this a step further, if you can ride free at 700 MHz albeit over a shorter distance, the use of femtocells may certainly assist in broadening the capability. But that’s just me thinking out loud. If I were a cable company I would…
Talk about the large wireless carriers getting kicked in the wallet! Once again, this is a new Policy vision–not my vision. I will be watching as the new FCC and Administration start looking at revising telecom policy.
Another hypocritical thought I found amazing in this journal article was an idea that the FCC needs a makeover. May I quote: “To this end, the FCC should be about half the size, and about half the personnel should be engineers, economist, and other technical advisers, as opposed to lawyers. No other field offices or other industry support groups should exist.”
Talk about calling the kettle black! Talk about a new Policy of — Do As I Say, Not As I Did!
Written by Dave Rusin - Telecom Executive
Posted by wbrache | Filed Under American telecom, Telecom Blogs, Telecom USA, Telecom news, Telecommunications industry, Telecommunications news
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Comments
Got something to say?
Feeds
