If you're the government, the auction gives you funding.
If you're the carrier, the auction gives you exclusive access, which
makes a return on investment easier. And yes those spectrum rights are
a valuable asset which they can sell and trade.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
These rules also come from a time when there weren't thousands of
wireless operators. If there are only 3 people at the negotiating table
then of course the rules are written to address them.
On 10/31/2018 12:06 PM, Joe Novak wrote:
" On the other hand, they get rewarded for carrying spectrum as an
asset on their balance sheet."
This is the most disgusting thing about the American auctioning system
right now.
Who in their right minds thought it was a good idea to just auction a
finite resource to the highest bidder? Why isn't a use it or lose it
system enforced, or at the very least a system like we will see in
CBRS? It all seems like such a sham that gets propped up continuously.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:42 AM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
<mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
It’s going to be interesting, I wonder why the carriers would pay
anywhere near the kind of money for CBRS spectrum that they are
used to for low and mid band spectrum, when they can use it for
free as GAA. Similar to 5 GHz. No cost, and opportunistic use
for carrier aggregation.
On the other hand, they get rewarded for carrying spectrum as an
asset on their balance sheet.
I’m thinking of a scenario where the auction sets too high a
minimum bid, and they get zero bids. Even 10 cents per MHz-POP
might be too high, if it can be used as GAA at no cost. As long
as they have an anchor channel in other spectrum, CBRS is like
icing on the cake, nice but not mission critical, and possibly not
worth paying much money to “own”.
*From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>> *On Behalf Of *Dave
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 31, 2018 10:13 AM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Mobile in CBRS
That makes it easier for the carriers to stomp out the little GAA
guys :)
On 10/31/18 9:50 AM, Joe Novak wrote:
I think it's more likely that they will have a licensed anchor
channel and only aggregate 3.65 in the downlink, using
different frequencies for uplink. Carrier aggregation is a
whole different game of spectrum usage.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:38 AM Adam Moffett
<dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
One thing that was unfortunate about the NN license was
that mobile
stations had a stupid low Tx power limit. Basically mobile
wasn't viable.
Is CBRS going to have that type of restriction?
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
