<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Big winners in the airwave auction- Verizon and AT ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-23T05:37:26-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Okay, it seemed like they gave more time in the ...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458834]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[eighties when the cell air space sold. But I couldn't swear to that. Thanks for the news, I don't keep up as well as I'd like to!Back then nobody wanted it or new what the heck it was, so the little guys pooled their money. I could still kick myself in the butt, but OH WELL! No point crying over spilled milk!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458834]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:31:00 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I didn't see your link but I did see it on Sc..]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458833]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[the Science Channel had an article on it.I'm intensely interested in altenate energy also. There is a guy up in Detroit that invented a very efficient solar panel made with nano-tech that can be severly damaged and still put out high efficiency energy. If my foggy memory is working right I think he was getting close to 30% efficiency, which was previously unheard of.When you got your whole house painted in solar panel this is not a consern however, as it is so cheap and large surface area; I would think way more cost effective!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458833]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:25:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[But dawgit]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458352]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The streets of America have and are being auctioned off... States and the federal goverment now are offering private firms the right to control previous public roads as toll roads to lesson the cost... And the same argument is being made that I think that you just presented..http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-14-toll-roads_x.htmThis isn't the article I was thinking of, but it spells out the same things that I read in a much more recent article.There still is goverment intervention though, goverment control of these assets... Just is it enough I think should be the question.Dan]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458352]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DanLM]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:28:34 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I thought that the FCC published this sale]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458351]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[A long time in advance JC.  I know I seen it months ago... But, I'm a news junkie... I read political, national, international, scientific, and just tech news every day... Too much I think some times... But, again... I do remember reading about the FCC putting up these specific bands for auction along time ago... I'm more inclined to think that nobody had the money to go up against the big boys.... Dan]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458351]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DanLM]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:23:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I didn't mean my reply to be adverse]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458349]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I guess thats the word I'm looking for... Just was following up.Joe/Jane six pack still can get my patronage. it just won't be in a market where it requires heavy investment into an infastructure... Unless he is the one to start it..Never give up on Joe/Jane Six pack... More idea's, good idea's, have been hatched around kitchen tables then we will ever imagine... And they still are.Now, the Joe/Jane Six pack is an engineer with 20 years experience comeing up with new methods for alternate fules, renewable energy.  That is where if I had the money, I would love to invest right now.... Or, recycling of hazerdous components which will be needed for alternate energy... Hell JC, did you see the link I put up about a UK company that makes clapards(I think it's siding?).  They had a college intern researching paint for these clappards to find a way for it not to break down due to sun and weather... He stumbled on a way to make the paint collect the solar energy for use... Joe/Jane six pack... Dan]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458349]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DanLM]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:19:22 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The loosers? The People, The Question however...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458281]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The question that needs to be addressed isn't even asked in the general public. While it has come up in certain Academic circles, the general public hasn't got a clue as to what just happened to &quot; Their &quot; Air Waves. Some variation of the FCC has been around since the begining of &quot;Radio&quot;. At that time it was the contention that the Air, Air Waves, and the Water were the property of the people of the United States. The Air Waves were to be governed, or controled for them (the people) by the Government to ensure a fair and free use for  All . That certain Frequences, or Frequency Bands would be set aside for certain purposes. Fine, Done, no problem. Those who wanted to use a certain Frequency just had to ask to be Licenced to do so. If that Frequency was available for that purpose, for that area, and the use was indeed valid and proper. It would / should have been issued. The FCC acted as the Registrar, and trafic cop of the Air Waves. (Just like any state does for your roads) This &quot; Auction &quot; now changes all the accepted roles of the &quot;Governing body&quot; That which was &quot;Auctioned&quot; off now &quot;Belongs&quot; to private companies. (and no longer &quot;Belongs&quot; to  Any  of the &quot; All  the People&quot;) Companies that are no longer are acountable to &quot;The People&quot;.  It's as if your community, or State decided to &quot;Auction&quot; off your streets. You would then no longer be driving on public streets to your house. (That's happening now too in the US) We are entering the &quot; Brave New World&quot; folks.  I hope you enjoy the trip. -d]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458281]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dawgit]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:18:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[No wonder the FCC was blocking ISP startups in ..]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458162]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[small markets, especially where Sprint was involved. I know a lot of small communities who have NO internet or are beholding to SPRINT dialup and want broadband who are being blocked by state or FCC authorities from starting their own cooperatives. Otherwise I would have thought that would have been a God given right to start a cooperative in your own community; as long as you can gather the bucks for infrastructure!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458162]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:28:40 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Good question...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458168]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Like I was relating to DanLM; I was once offered a stake in the early cell service investment; back when people thought it was crazy to by blocks of &quot;air&quot; for small chunks of money.But I had already sunk my money into a worthless house; and have regretted it every since. Others who made the jump made out like bandits selling out to the big providers. Some of them may have hung on and earned royalties off the investment. I bet it pays better than CDs in a bank account!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458168]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:14:12 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Please don't misunderstand. I agree with you...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458137]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I was just pointing out that for some markets what happened in the past was good for a lot of people.Now that bandwidth of any kind is seen as valuable &quot;real-estate&quot; only the big players will be able to invest. I'm not saying that is necessarily bad, but I miss the day when joe six pack could plunk his nest egg down and become a millionair..I speak from personal experience too; as I was one of the unfortunate ones that had already invested in dirt real-estate and missed my opportunity to make it big in &quot;air-estate&quot; ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458137]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:05:21 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[JC, I made that statement from personal experience]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458120]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[First it was ATT, they sold out to Cingular, then it was ATT again... That is how long I have been with them.  It's easy to change phone service, it's hard to find good service.  Thats why I have never switched providers.Dan]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458120]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DanLM]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:48:46 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Back to Google]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458051]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I agree and hope very much that what you talk about is still alive and well.  I just don't think we all know the real story, as if it was that great, why did Google back down?  They have the power, money and are organized enough to do what you suggest.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2458051]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 06:03:06 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I agree with you DanLM...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457954]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[but in the mid eighties purchase cooperatives were organized to give small investors an opportunity [much the same way the stock market works] and then the big companies and small companies came and bought the part of those rights in the markets that made sense to their business models.There were definitely too many crappy little nets and .coms, but people in the small markets that were being neglected by Sprint and AT&amp;T(Bell) were finally getting something for service, and in the mean time the little guy had an investment opportunity.The sad thing is now it seems like the big companies are given the opportunity to horn in on the market before the anyone else could organize a cooperative to take advantage of the &quot;Oklahoma Land Rush&quot;.. It takes time to put together the kind of investment money to fight the likes of those two.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457954]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:07:02 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I'm not &quot;in the loop&quot; so to speak, but I'm wondering...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457952]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[if people were given enough time to react to this auction. Back when cell service was some crazy guys idea, a lot of small investors became millionairs because they were given individual offers to participate in purchasing cooperatives.I think a lot of people would have been more interested in participating in something similar this time, especially with the ho-hum stock market now; a good long term investment would have been attractive. However now that everyone knows that bandwidth is valuable they seemed to scramble for it before such a middle class reaction could organize in time.Bear with me as I am neither a big businessman or a big investor; but I've missed big, enough times, that I have become very aware of the pain of missed opportunities. Was the FCC in too big a hurry for this offer?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457952]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:45:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I don't know the history of the cell phone...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457949]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[airscape; but I was offered a legitimate piece of the pie for $10,000 dollars back in 1987 and I would have taken it if I hadn't unwisely invested it in something else.How do we know that some of these smaller offerings won't be taken up by small entrepreneurs like me? If you got a little nest egg and are aware of who is reselling it why not? It may not just be the big movers making a little scratch here!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457949]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:30:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Quote from MRT article]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457770]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I thought I would add this quote from a MRT article as it is relevant to why the D block will be hard to sell. &quot;Sprint Nextel pleaded its case this week before a federal appeals court regarding an FCC order issued last fall that requires the carrier to vacate its 800 MHZ channels by June 26, regardless of whether reconfiguration is completed. Sprint believes doing so is unfair and places an undue burden on the carrier to find a temporary home for tens of thousands of its iDEN customers until channels currently occupied by public safety licensees are freed.As I?ve written before in this space, I couldn?t agree more with Sprint on this matter. The dispute never should have reached the courts. The FCC failed to quickly recognize that the ?minimum cost? provision of its original rebanding order was the single biggest factor in the glacier-like pace of negotiations between Sprint and the public safety licensees. Once the FCC clarified what it meant?two years after the reconfiguration began?the pace of negotiations picked up considerably. But the rebanding project is woefully behind schedule precisely because so many negotiations took so long.Consequently, the FCC should give Sprint a break on this issue. The carrier says it will be ready to vacate its 800 MHz channels, wherever reconfiguration has occurred, within 60 days of a public safety licensee?s request, as required by the order. That should be enough.There could be another reason beyond fairness for the FCC to cut Sprint some slack, as pointed out to me this week by MRT Senior Writer Donny Jackson. The 700 MHz auction ended this week, with just one bidder for the 10 MHz D Block. The $472 million bid was well below the FCC?s $1.3 billion reserve price for the airwaves, which are supposed to be paired with 10 MHz of adjacent public safety spectrum to form the backbone of a nationwide broadband wireless network for first responders.Speculation for the lack of bidding has centered on the reserve price and the penalty established by the FCC that would require the D Block winner to forfeit 10% of the reserve price should it be determined that it failed to negotiate in good faith with the Public Safety Spectrum Trust, the FCC-designated licensee for public safety?s spectrum.Indeed, those conditions by themselves would have been enough to give potential bidders pause. But also hanging overhead, like the Sword of Damocles, is the unprecedented public/private partnership that is supposed to build out the network. The fact that such a partnership never has been attempted on a project of this scale would be enough to make any commercial entity wary. But they also had to be wondering about the performance requirements for the network?99.3% coverage of the nation?s population and 99.9% reliability?and whether the FCC would treat them fairly in terms of meeting those requirements.Cutting Sprint some slack in the 800 MHz dispute would be the right thing for the FCC to do. It also would be the intelligent thing. Unfairly holding Sprint?s feet to the coals by forcing it to prematurely vacate its channels would send a terrible message to any commercial entity still contemplating taking a shot at the D Block spectrum, should the FCC decide to re-auction it. &quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457770]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:02:01 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Michael, I can always count on you]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457786]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In the citations posted, Google is characterized as the &quot;happy loser&quot;.  If Google phone was such a lucrative business line, why would they be so happy?It was considered that Google was on the cusp of doing something that the customers didn't really want and would have cost them many $$$ to develop as a line of business.  But they DID manage to get &quot;open&quot; considerations packaged in the block.  However, there is no way to know how that will be managed or policed.You are absolutely correct.  Hmmm]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457786]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tig2]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:55:50 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[ya know, every minor player i've had to have the misfortion to deal with]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457739]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[sucked.Id rather have someone that does provide good service... ATT always has for me.  And I have NEVER had issues with their customer service.  One on one or via their automated.  Maybe if small companies learned how to copy that proven service, they might have a chance.Sorry, small companies mean crap service in fast moving technoligy's that require major investment in infastructure.Screw that, as a consumer... Small companies WON'T get my money in this specific market.Dan]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457739]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DanLM]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:56:12 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What is really important in this country?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457647]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The common people that work for a living are no longer important. Providing many services to all is forgotten. You know the saying money talks..and everything and everyone else is forgotten. In a sense we support this by buying all these services from the non-caring corporate and seemly government entities of our country.Bless all the EMT's world wide for the good work you do for all human beings.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457647]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Toreo]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:57:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The simple solution...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457453]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[PhoneAnon, or Callers Anonymous, or whatever &quot;12 Step&quot; program someone can create to break this world of their addiction to the phone.  It really is pathetic that someone can't drive from their home to the corner store without their phone plastered to their ear.  They can't spend one single day in work without making or taking several personal phone calls.  (Emergency/Urgent calls are another matter entirely.)  As long as people stay addicted to their cell phone &quot;crack&quot;, providers have no reason to change.  Here's what I did.  When my last contract expired, I went out and bought a $20 AT&amp;T/Motorola GoPhone.  I buy a $100 calling card that lasts me an entire year.  How?  Well, I don't call all my friends every single day when I should be working.  I don't spend all day sending foolish (not to mention &quot;not free&quot;) text messages.  And I certainly don't need to watch TV or movies or any other type of videos on a 1 inch by 1 inch screen.  Thus, my cell phone usage averages me $8 per mohth (the cost of the $100 card over the course of the year).In short, if you keep giving them your money, they're gonna keep on taking it.  Simple enough.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457453]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[MGP2]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:27:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Flip side, maybe?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457428]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I sense that many people are upset at the results. Most industry pundits, even &quot;not remotely in the loop&quot; me, pretty much felt that this was going to be the results. Just consider the amount of money required to setup the infrastructure. Newcomers would not be able to afford that kind of a rollout on any kind of a business plan the shareholders would like. For example already troubled Sprint maybe in more trouble, losing a portion of its allocated spectrum. As it has not been able to rollout the infrastructure for that portion of spectrum and the deadline is fast approaching. Another point is that AT&amp;T already had a big chunk of the 700MHz spectrum from last year's buyout.I would like to throw out something for discussion as well.  I was curious as to how the members felt about Google's hand in this. On one side they were helpful in forcing the bidding to a point where implied open source is a requirement.  But, did they ever intend to actually use the spectrum? Would the others have had to bid so high, if Google stayed  out of the bidding?  It could be implied that Google was upping the bids and we as consumers will have to cover that additional expense.  Hmmm.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258240-2457428]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:13:26 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

