We don't want to share spectrum

[Steveanderson13]

Stephenson said said regulators are working hard but have challenges. He said they have been like “sands in the gears of the industry” and haven’t done enough to help carriers meet their demands. The Federal Communications Commission and Commerce Department have proposed government agencies and private companies share spectrum bands for consumer use.

That idea,however,doesn’t appeal,he said.

“It’s hard for a company like us to [share] and manage quality of service,” Stephenson said. “I don’t see that as a fix for addressing the issues we have.”

http://mobile.washingtonpost.com/rss...&cid=-1&page=1

Fire away!

[zentec]

There is little in the past that I've found myself agree with in principle with AT&T or in particular, Mr. Stephenson. In this case however, I have to agree. Dealing with your own spurs and mixing products is bad enough, having to engage a government agency whose gear is maintained by any number of tech and management firms, would be a nightmare.

If AT&T were serious about this, they'd offer up a solution as Sprint did where they moved the Broadcast Axillary Service on their own dime. For $750 million, they gained a good chunk of the newly freed 35 MHz of spectrum. What did AT&T just piddle away with an attempted take-over bid?

For the billions squandered with no real relief, they could have easily moved any or all of the 800MHz public safety land mobile occupants and given many much better service than what they have now.

So I can see where Mr. Stephenson can feel the way he does.

[efparri]

The Federal Communications Commission required Sprint Nextel to pay for moving broadcast stations out of the Broadcast Auxiliary Service bands. Sprint Nextel expected to have it done at no expense to themselves after making the request.

[zentec]

The Federal Communications Commission required Sprint Nextel to pay for moving broadcast stations out of the Broadcast Auxiliary Service bands. Sprint Nextel expected to have it done at no expense to themselves after making the request.

As any US corporation would expect, demand others get out of their way and essentially use eminent domain on RF spectrum.

That still doesn't change the outcome however; the broadcasters received upgrades to equipment that they would have been loathe to do themselves (and probably would not have given the downturn in their business), and $750 million is a good deal for an allocation.

AT&T can do the same. But I expect AT&T will want it for free, on point with your comment.

[jet1000]

Fire away!

It's ridiculous for the government to impose these kind of requirements on private corporations. The government needs to make the spectrum available so that it can be put into use.

The 700 Block D idea has been a complete failure. The government was under the mistaken notion that someone would gladly maintain a public safety network in order to get some spectrum. Why shouldn't the government maintain their own network?

[Squid7085]

I find it humorous that AT&T basically balmes the state of their network on Spectrum, when here where I live, an area of about 700,000 people, has a horrible network running on 850Mhz, while AT&T just sits on all the PCS spectrum they have here. The need for spectrum only really exists in the few very heavily populated areas, and lets be honest, spectrum isn't the only thing that is in low supply in those areas. Not to mention the vacant spectrum, even within the wireless area that companies are just sitting on. That's one of the big issues in my opinion. AT&T and the other carriers haven't filled up the spectrum holdings they have, how can you convince the FCC to give you more? It's like having a 90 floor building with only the first 10 occupied and then saying you need more ground floor office space.

[fraydog]

Squid, AT&T is using PCS in the ex-Alltel areas they acquired. I know Hutchinson is not in that bubble of Alltel in Western KS but every indication is that AT&T is using 1900 spectrum for UMTS out west.

[Squid7085]

Squid, AT&T is using PCS in the ex-Alltel areas they acquired. I know Hutchinson is not in that bubble of Alltel in Western KS but every indication is that AT&T is using 1900 spectrum for UMTS out west.

I actually live here and I can tell you they don't. Even here in Wichita they don't use their 1900Mhz spectrum at all, and many of the towns in Western Kansas also do not. I haven't been to every square inch of Westen Kansas, but cities like Garden City and Dodge City, the higher population centers out there are 850 only. If I remember correctly, AT&T had 1900 state wide, they only seem to use it to cover the Interstates.

[GSMinCT]

As long as AT&T and Verizon have roughly the same amount of spectrum, they both have more than enough. They need to actually go and build their networks to keep up with data demand. Heck, they would be fine if they each had 25mhz of CLR and nothing more, as long as they both had the same, and thus incurred the same costs on building more dense cell networks.

[fraydog]

There are parts of the network that AT&T and Verizon can share on the back end, especially in rural areas. I don't think the government should regulate them into doing this, however.

[GSMinCT]

There are parts of the network that AT&T and Verizon can share on the back end, especially in rural areas. I don't think the government should regulate them into doing this, however.

That would be great, but it probably will never happen. I could see AT&T and T-Mobile doing a joint network to gain the benefits of the merger that was killed off, although I don't know how that is affected by regulations.

[ilvla2]

There are parts of the network that AT&T and Verizon can share on the back end, especially in rural areas. I don't think the government should regulate them into doing this, however.

It's like protecting the environment, corporations often won't so the government has to step in. If private enterprise can't police themselves on things like this, they better expect the government to step in. It's funny too, these companies yell for government money, but when they are asked to play nice in return the same companies scream bloody murder. I really get tired of their hypocrisy.

[Steveanderson13]

There are parts of the network that AT&T and Verizon can share on the back end, especially in rural areas. I don't think the government should regulate them into doing this, however.

This item, though only one sentence, does not mention regs or commercial sharing. Do govt agencies have their own?

The Federal Communications Commission and Commerce Department have proposed government agencies and private companies share spectrum bands for consumer use.

[bigsnake49]

In most of the country, both AT&T and Verizon have plenty of unused spectrum. In NY and San Fran and LA and Chicago, why don't they just buy the upper UHF stations and put them out of their misery? Forget about voluntary auctions, just buy them and seek to convert the licenses. I don't think the FCC will mind at all. I don't think that there's too many upper UHF stations in my neck of the woods that will be worth more than couple of mil.

[GSMinCT]

In most of the country, both AT&T and Verizon have plenty of unused spectrum. In NY and San Fran and LA and Chicago, why don't they just buy the upper UHF stations and put them out of their misery? Forget about voluntary auctions, just buy them and seek to convert the licenses. I don't think the FCC will mind at all. I don't think that there's too many upper UHF stations in my neck of the woods that will be worth more than couple of mil.

Neither company needs spectrum. They just need to build more sites out.