![Cellphones Cellphones](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/cellphones_64.png)
![The Internet The Internet](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/internet_64.png)
Spectrum Auction Could Be A Game of Chicken 193
Ardvark writes "Google promised some time ago to bid at least the reserve price for the C block of 700Mhz spectrum if the FCC accepted its demand for an open access rule for devices using the band, which the FCC did over Verizon's objections. If the reserve price is not met the rule will be dropped and the block re-auctioned. It appears now that bidding has stalled just short of the reserve price. It's assumed that Google has no interest in becoming a cell phone company and with a recession looming the 700MHz spectrum now seems worth a whole lot less. If Google's strategy was to force the bidding above the reserve but still lose the auction, Verizon could be calling their bluff, threatening them to live up to their word and buy what to Google could be the equivalent of a $4.6 billion 'doohickey.'" Update: 01/31 16:01 GMT by Z : And just like that, the plot thickens: the C block has hit the reserve price during bidding.
UK 3G (Score:5, Interesting)
Take a look at what happened in the UK when the 3G air was up for sale - they threw money at it and ended up with next to no customers.
With the way things are economically at the moment, people are not looking to up their monthly spend on their mobile phone bill. Companies will have a hard time recouping a huge outlay.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with 3G isn't the band it is in, it's the fact that the hardware is still expensive and power hungry, which makes it less than ideal for the intended purpose of being used in smartphones. Give it a few years and you'll likely see considerable growth on that chunk of the spectrum as the ch
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
- Keep them away from bright light
- Don't get any water on them
- Never, never ever feed them data after midnight
Clever (Score:5, Interesting)
They can't, however, be accused of not doing what will profit them the most in the short term.
In this case, they've collectively called Google's bluff. I don't see Google having $4.6B in spare cash, to purchase the spectrum they have no idea how to make money on. This is a tough spot for Google, because not only do they stand to lose their coveted "shared spectrum" rule, but they also stand to lose much of their perceived invulnerability on the market.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:FIOS (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:FIOS (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.tispa.org/node/14 [tispa.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It may be a good service (and believe me, if it were available where I lived, I'd have it), but the money being used comes as a result of the initial copper wiring subsidy. Had they never had the copper subsidized, they could have never come up with the profits to build the fiber infrastructure.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Google: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=GOOG [yahoo.com]
Verizon: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=VZ [yahoo.com]
From a cash perspective, google looks in much better condition to go on a $4.6B shopping spree.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, they've collectively called Google's bluff. I don't see Google having $4.6B in spare cash, to purchase the spectrum they have no idea how to make money on.
Translation:
TheMeuge (645043) has no idea how Google would make money on the next big thing in wireless
http://investor.google.com/releases/2007Q3.html [google.com]
As of September 30, 2007, cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities were $13.1 billion.
(I'm not sure how much of that cash went towards the $3 billion they dropped on DoubleClick.)
If Google wants to blow $5 billion "to purchase the spectrum they have no idea how to make money on" AKA "the next big thing in wireless", I highly suspect they can afford t
Re: (Score:2)
The telecoms can take the heat for being heartless monopolies, for providing terrible service at a high price, and for leveraging their monopolies to avoid upgrading their taxpayer-financed infrastructure.
They can't, however, be accused of not doing what will profit them the most in the short term.
In this case, they've collectively called Google's bluff. I don't see Google having $4.6B in spare cash, to purchase the spectrum they have no idea how to make money on. This is a tough spot for Google, because not only do they stand to lose their coveted "shared spectrum" rule, but they also stand to lose much of their perceived invulnerability on the market.
I don't quite follow your reasoning. Having its own national slice of broadband would be terrific for Google. This 700Mhz band would be a great thing to own--penetrates walls really well, wide area networking potential is great. Google could lease its bandwidth to hundreds of startup wifi phone providers and give established companies like Vonage and Skype a nice alternative pipeline.
Can you imagine what a cheap or free search-ad supported wifi network would do to the existing local monopolies? Skype r
Nah . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Check out the FCC auction yourself! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Check out the FCC auction yourself! (Score:5, Informative)
Open Access is good to go!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why is Verizon so against the concept of a 700MHz open network when they've stated that they're going to open up their own network [arstechnica.com] some time this year?
Re: (Score:2)
It's speculated that Verizon did that to divert consumer attention from the 700 MHz auction. Presumably, they'd like the ability to close "their spectrum" if opening it becomes disadvantageous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seeing as that happened, I wonder if that section will now see tons of bidding (they don't have to worry about making it free, it's already there) as companies try to get (some) control over it, or will bidding be mostly dead since the companies lost their (theoretical) game of chicken and now they have to comply with open access rules... making it less profitable (in theory) to buy?
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that some blocks have less qualified bidders than others, I think it's pretty obvious that the "C" block has only got one or two bidders. Who should have done their homework better was the NYT, since all they would have had to do was wait for the next round of bidding ended. Oh, that's right - they don't care about reporting news, as long as they can speculate about it and run Google's name through th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google will not let us down. (Score:5, Funny)
And then when they get it they will build out a solar powered wireless network that will offer broadband everywhere. Not only that it will be free and be faster than FIOS. It will be IPv6 so every user can have their own block of static IPs and it will smell like home made cookies and be as warm as a puppy.
Yea that is it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, your Hummer wins at crushing ponies.
Re: (Score:2)
They could as well make a 6 billions package and buy a small cellphone company for the 1.3 billion that's left...
Game Theory? (Score:3, Interesting)
Did! Did Not! (Score:5, Interesting)
The article summary is garbage, or should I say simply wrong?
Google set 4 conditions it wanted to see. The FCC agreed with 2 of them, so Google is faced with half a glass. (Yes I know the Engineer's view of half a glass.) I don't recall them saying they'd bid reserve to ensure only half of their wishes.
Release it! (Score:2)
If Google wins, and they don't know what else to do with it, I think they should release their block of the 700 MHz bandwidth under the GPL.
RMS would be so happy!
Re:Release it! (Score:5, Funny)
If Google wins, and they don't know what else to do with it, I think they should release their block of the 700 MHz bandwidth under the GPL.
It would be worth it just to see approximately a million dorks have their heads explode as they endlessly debate what it means to copyright bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
when the usa purchased alaska from russia (Score:5, Insightful)
it was a joke. why did we spend $7 million on some permafrost again?
same with anyone who doubts the value of this auction
i can't see why a monopoly on a prime band of communication spectrum can't be anything but pure gold. there's only so much spectrum, but more and more people and more need for communication tech every day
Re:when the usa purchased alaska from russia (Score:5, Interesting)
i can't see why a monopoly on a prime band of communication spectrum can't be anything but pure gold. there's only so much spectrum, but more and more people and more need for communication tech every day
The auction is a gigantic tax and nothing more. If the markets are efficient, the winning company will be rewarded only related to the risks it is taking. Everything else will be going to the government, and out of the pockets of consumers.
It's laughable how the auctions are being sold as a good way to raise funds for the government without impacting the taxpayer. Who doesn't use communications technology if not the taxpayer? This is the perfect way to cripple a single industry, because a) the winning company will have less immediate funding available for infrastructure b) consumer prices will be much higher, lowering the adoption rate significantly.
Just look at what happened in Europe. A lot of countries did the smart thing and gave the spectrum to the companies that were willing to guarantee the best service levels for the cheapest consumer prices, but then a few large countries ruined it for everyone by suckering companies into auctions. (To be viewed as a serious competitor, you had to take part in the largest markets.) The end result was what I described above, and we are only now starting to recover.
If you think that the beauty contest model will result in excessive profits for the winner, keep in mind the guarantees, and the fact that one winner wasn't awarded all the spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I understand your logic, but you're not taking it far enough. True, the money will come from Google, or Verizon, or whoever else ends up winning. And that company will pay for it out of the money they charge their customers. However, There's nothing that says that I must pay [auctionwinner] any money. If Goo
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that was the whole point of this. If it passes the threshold, then there is no "monopoly on a prime band.. yada yada".
Getting the band for unlimited use for your company's product would be a goldmine, especially for 4.638 billion, just under the threshold.
But, if you bid more than 4.638 billion, I'm not sure what you get. You can't promise your customers that their phones will work, becau
700 Mhz Spectrum? (Score:2)
Bidding on Round 17 has closed.. (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Your wrong!
1 New bid @ $4,713,823,000
Everyone on ebay knows... (Score:4, Interesting)
This auction will go on for months, and we're at the one week mark now?
Anyone who says Google is "bluffing", or the price won't go up is full of it. Google may not bid as much as they say, they may, someone else might bid more, or who knows? It's just way to early to be saying much of anything about the auction, what the different strategies are, and who will win.
Re: (Score:2)
According to the article, the FCC has certain rules about bidding in the auction (you must bid every round unless you are the high bidder, you have three waivers that you can use to skip a round, etc.), so I don't think we'll be seeing eBay style auction-sniping here.
Re: (Score:2)
so I don't think we'll be seeing eBay style auction-sniping here
You're focusing too much on one example I gave. It's not about sniping, or ebay, or whatever. It's about making dumb predictions and prognostications at barely the start of the game. Strangely enough, this one already turned out to be dead wrong.
Its an auction (Score:2)
I bet they have a wicked fast sniping script. After all they're Google!
Reserve met (Score:2)
This article was just wasteful speculation. I guess that shouldn't surprise me.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the link to the auction status (Score:4, Informative)
http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/default.htm?job=auction_summary&id=73 [fcc.gov]
Under Results click: View Auction Results (buttheads are using javascript for linking so no direct linking possible).
Please note it wants you to run some java. I clicked no and everything runs fine.
Who said anything about a recession? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can't know (under one common definition) until you've already been in it for at least half a year (that doesn't mean its over).
A depression isn't a term with any generally accepted concrete definition, its just a common term for a really severe recession. So if we're "spiraling into a depression", we then, ipso facto, are either in a recession or have one looming.
Re: (Score:2)
You do not know you are in a recession until after it happens.
That's assuming the recession lasts just long enough to meet the newspaper* definition of a recession (2 quarters), then turns itself around.
How do you know we're not spiraling into a depression?
Because the definition of a depression is a long or severe recession?
According to your logic, we won't know that there was a depression until after it happens.
According to real logic, we'll know when real GDP shrinks by >10%.
*A more accurate definition is that real GDP declines by 10% in a recession
Re: No Depressions for a while (Score:2)
You can also know you are in a recession
Nothing to see here yet, move along... (Score:4, Insightful)
Obviously this is just gamesmanship.
As of 11 AM EST this story is false (Score:4, Informative)
https://auctionbidding.fcc.gov/auction/home/announcementDetail.htm?ann_id=402 [fcc.gov]
Announcement
1/31/2008 11:00:41 AM
C Block Reserve Price Met in Round 17
At the conclusion of Round 17, the provisionally
winning bids for the C Block licenses exceeded the
aggregate reserve price of $4,637,854,000 for the
block.
The plot "thickens"? (Score:5, Funny)
Once the auction hits reserve (Score:5, Funny)
Google doesn't need to build out C-block. (Score:5, Interesting)
there's an idea that should have "it's MY network, and all these guys behind me will beat you if you disagree" shivering.
yes, bring your BT, NTT, Korean phone over here with you. it will work. every time you hit send, two cents to Google for use of the C block airwaves. one cent if the home phoneco had built the network in that regional area.
profit per click. no investment in the backbone. that's something they know about.
it can work.
The D Block is the Real Game (Score:2)
Second, the rules are that the FCC has an OPTION to reauction that block if it fails to meet its reserve. The PSST can also negotiate with the high bidder of portions of its own pieces of the spectrum.
So... why not get Google to run after the C block and then turn around and pull some back room deals to pull out the
google's stock price holding steady (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
$4,713,823,000 (Score:2)
A random number? A secret message indicating the bidder (they can't say during bidding, and no, 18323 is not a valid US zip code)? Google revenues while I was writing this message?
Any ideas?
Re:$4,713,823,000 (Score:4, Funny)
too bad (Score:2, Interesting)
Virtually all middle-class job fields are either stalled, or firing... and as far as the real estate market goes, here's a story.
In 1995, about 50% of Nassau county (Long Island, NYC metro area) residents could afford to purchase the homes they were living in, given market price. In 2005, that number was down to about 5%. Yes, we have had spectacular success in destroying the middle class. At least they're scared of being poor, so they keep on
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Layne
Re:too bad (Score:5, Informative)
Telecommuting just isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just rent. It's perfectly affordable. You don't even have to rent an entire house--you can rent a townhouse, or if you don't have a large family, you can rent an apartment.
I rent a large townhouse in a big city (Dallas, TX) for about 70 cents per square foot, and I can afford it on my entry-level programming job. It's also in a good location, too: I'm right next to a major shopping center. I can walk to restaurants, bars, supermarkets, etc.
I'm sick and ti
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1. It's a way to collect your savings into something (equity in your house builds over time, there is no equity in renting).
2. In most states, it is one of the few things most creditors can't touch should you go bankrupt (except of course people with leins).
3. Tax deductible interest helps defray some of the cost and in some years makes the house cheaper than renting.
4. Over time, the value of the house will actually surpass the amount you've paid for it (as
Re: (Score:2)
2500 square foot house: $170,000. Getting to live somewhere better than Indianapolis: $400,000. The market places a lot of value in being in the right place, although post-bubble, not quite as much value as it used to.
Re: (Score:2)
As George Carlin noted (albeit a hyperbole): "The middle class pays all the taxes, and does all the work. And the poor are just there to scare the shit out of the middle class".
I know the author of this link may not be popular in the crowd, but this Rush Limbaugh article [rushlimbaugh.com] disputes the claim that the middle class pay all the taxes. He has several other years' figures on the site too, with attributions. Got any proof otherwise? I'd love to know otherwise. The numbers seem to indicate that it's not the middle class that pays all the taxes, but the "rich".
Re:too bad (Score:4, Informative)
The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% of wage earners rose to 34.27% from 33.71% in 2002. Their income share (not just wages) rose from 16.12% to 16.77%. However, their average tax rate actually dropped from 27.25% down to 24.31%
So the rich 1% pay 34.27% the middle class pay ~96.54% - 34.27% = 62.27% of income taxes and the middle class also pays 500 billion for Social Security and most property, excise and sales taxes.
So yes if you look at all the numbers the middle class is paying most of the taxes.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
So pretty much everyone who is not in the top 1% is middle class? That's not gonna fly.
When they talk about middle class, lower middle class, upper middle class, etc - they're talking about quintiles named "lower class, lower middle class, middle class, upper middle class, and upper class" - not everybody who i
Re:too bad (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, I love how you complain that the top 1% ONLY pay 34% of income takes. I suppose you would think it's more fair is the top 1% paid something close to 50%? Where does it end? Heck, why not just cap all income at 100k, and say anything over that goes to the gov't? That'll stick it to 'em!
I'm still scratching my head over how the middle class pay more sales tax. The last time I went Walmart, the didn't ask me what my income level was and tax accordingly. Property tax is more malarkey.
Re:too bad (Score:5, Insightful)
For that matter, any assertion involving the term "middle class" is open to interpretation.
It's not so much that Limbaugh isn't popular with technically-minded people, it's that he is not nearly as interested in facts as he is in attention. He himself has admitted as much. He makes money by remaining popular, by inciting listeners to excitement. That's the stock in trade of talk radio: Current events plus interpretation with a clear agenda, designed to leave you feeling a certain way.
There's nothing wrong with choosing that flavor of entertainment. The problems crop up when you begin to use data from an entertainment source as fact. For example, I thoroughly enjoyed Michael Clayton [imdb.com], but if I wanted facts about corporate crime, I'd look elsewhere.
If Limbaugh inspires you, great. Inspired people move things forward. One of our biggest problems lately is that the inspired don't step out and think for themselves. My recommendation is that you maintain the distinction between entertainment and news. Get your facts from a reliable source, i.e., from a different source than your inspiration.
If you like thinking for yourself, that is. If you'd prefer to just listen without asking any questions, go right ahead. Just don't expect anyone who isn't plugged into the same source to treat you with any respect.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally distinguish wages from salary, i.e., I define wages as trading hours for money. Salaried employees, like the executives you mention, are most certainly not paid by the hour. Many of those are paid a relatively low base salary, with quarterly bonuses based on easily attainable goals. Look more closely, and recall that th
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad there are no jobs
My company has tripled in size over the last 2 years.
and the houses are way too expensive.
Depends on your definition. Prices have come down, but living within the limits of a city is still a luxury for most. I do it, but the price I pay is that I live in a tiny house next to an auto-body repair garage (nice guys, it turns out).
Virtually all middle-class job fields are either stalled, or firing
I know someone who is out of work. December was dead (as it typically is), but January has been one interview after another.
... and as far as the real estate market goes, here's a story.
In 1995, about 50% of Nassau county (Long Island, NYC metro area) residents could afford to purchase the homes they were living in, given market price. In 2005, that number was down to about 5%.
Define "afford to purchase."
I could have purchased the house I was in in 1995, but it would
Re:too bad (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah. People throw their hands in the air over this incoming recession, and sure the stock market is having some problems, but so many areas of this country are still doing well. The company I'm working for is hiring like mad (any aerospace engineers looking for work? let me know). Within my house, which used to be out in the country surrounded by fields, there are no less than five new housing developments that sprung up in the last year
(and "recessions" aren't all bad
Re: (Score:2)
My company has tripled in size over the last 2 years.
Yeah. People throw their hands in the air over this incoming recession, and sure the stock market is having some problems, but so many areas of this country are still doing well.
True enough, and even the stock market isn't doing all that bad. Look at . Look at [yahoo.com] the S&P 500 over 5 years [yahoo.com]. We're seeing a sharp correction, but it's not like we're even returning to 2005 levels, much less earlier. You get a much clearer view when you look with some historical perspective (which the news media rarely does these days). Look back at the S&P 500 since 1950 [yahoo.com] and you'll see what an amazing market run we've had and continue to have.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a bigger house than Bill Gates' house! (Score:2)
Unless those are Lego housing developments...
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno where you are, but there are plenty of webdev and software development jobs where I am. To the point where recruiters still assail me for larger businesses and I get emails from contacts about startups. Lots of entry-level webdev work exists, with a mean pay of around $55k/yr. For people willing to acquire these skills (and not everyone has to be as good as
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I don't understand why... (Score:4, Informative)
CQ CQ CQ (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Grrrr . . .I wish they'd announce it early! The other slices could take weeks to sort out, but I do understand why they probably won't announce a winner until it's all over as it could affect the outcomes of other auctions.
There's been a lot of speculation that Google doesn't want the spectrum, just the open access, but I could see them going for it. A nationwide broadband data network will be easy to sub-let to other companies and gives Google a direct path to users without any meddling cable companies