Official 700MHz Bidder List 75
j.sanchez1 writes "Wired has the scoop on the official bidder list for the 700MHz auction slated for January 24, 2008. Here are PDFs of the lists of accepted applications (96 names) and incomplete applications (170). Along with AT&T and Verizon, Google and Paul Allen's Vulcan Spectrum are in on the bidding."
Why do the rest even bother? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Why do the rest even bother? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Why do the rest even bother? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Next day:
Gerbil Grooming owner: Hello, FCC. What are the requirements for bidding in the wireless auction?
FCC: Fill out this paperwork...and the minimum bid is $4.6B...
Gerbil Grooming owner: Great, send over that paperwork!
Two weeks later:
FCC: We are going to start the bidding at $4.6B.
Gerbil Grooming owner: (raises hand and snickers).
FCC: Ok, do I hear 4.8B?
Google: (raises hand and snickers).
FCC: Do I hear $5B?
Gerbil Grooming owner: (raises hand and laug
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
like to wait and see.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice list (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Nice list (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is not the multibillion dollar companies, the problem is the FCC. The FCC creates the regulations, and laws, and restrictions, and mandates, that force you and I and a million others from tossing in our own $1500 each and competing. We'd need to hire lawyers who probably worked for the FCC and wrote the rules. We'd need to get approvals from a slow and red-tape-ladened administration. We'd need to prove who we are and what our intentions are.
That's the problem. You think it's these huge megacorps that cause these issues? Well, they sure lobby for them. But if the Federal Executive branch actually followed the Rule of Law (i.e., the Constitution), the FCC would be probably a teeny tiny organization that just made sure no one was perverting the airwaves with massive noise outputs from dirty electronics.
WiFi is relative proof that you can go relatively unregulated in spectrum bandwidth and have things work just fine. Yes, yes, some people in the middle of Manhattan complain about WiFi performance, but my experience at my old office in downtown Chicago showed that things worked just fine -- all the time.
We don't need the FCC, we need more individuals getting together, pitching in a few grand, hiring managers, and competing with the old powerful regimes. Unfortunately, it isn't available. We can't do it. We can't compete. The market doesn't work efficiently when there are barriers to entering the market, and the ONLY barrier is government regulation. Raising $1billion is easy; the machete you need to cut through red tape is nearly non-existent.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, that's not quite the most compelling argument I've heard about this issue. Certainly not the most informed, either.
Re:Nice list (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We have the technology now to fight this problem. The only thing we lack is the innovation. The technology of the future would be based on homebrew inventions that amateur
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It turns out your brain isn't as good a filter as you'd like, if you can't filter that out.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd also be aware that *any* transmission at the very least increases the noise floor. The bandwidth is inher
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Free"ing the airwaves would just cause chaos like any kind of anarchy.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I also understand that the military uses spread spectrum, but there aren't any real powerful foreign governments left to test the system against. I'm sure alqeada and Iraq couldn't give it th
Re: (Score:1)
Considering the capabilities of HF to cross borders I could see some international issues there, but what if we just deregulated everything about 30Mhz? WiFi works. We have ways to make self healing mesh networks that can work with large numbers of nodes. It's the type of technology on which the Internet is based.
Why must I be forced to use 2.4 GHz for my wireless networks? It barely goes through walls, and is pretty clo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The common theme is rather that we want more spectrum to be available to the general public without the restrictions of the amateur radio bands.
What Wifi has shown is that allowing parts of the spectrum to be used freely allows a lot of applications that would simply never happen on the licensed bands. Many of us would like to play with a smallish part of the 700MHz band.
Re:Nice list (Score:5, Insightful)
For many years, the idea of a truly software-based, frequency-hopping radio was the idea of dreams and science fiction. We have them today. They work well, but are still limited in frequencies they can utilize. Power-sources have been the biggest limiting factor for opening up spectrum for unregulated use, but that too is quickly being overcome by technological discoveries (see the nano-wire battery article from yesterday).
Regulated spectrum may have been important when radio transmissions were inefficient, dirty, and even dangerous. We've overcome those issues, and now have the technology to utilize wireless transmissions that could be best navigated and selected based on distance to the other transceiving device, available power for transceiving, speed and latency requirements, and other traffic detected. Because power is not limitless, the idea that one massive power source would likely overpower everything in the area is only based on the idea that someone would or even could transmit garbage over every frequency at high power levels. Yes, I know there are technological marvels that COULD do this, and that's why I will allow for the idea that the FCC may exist only to penalize users of such dirty-transmission devices. Personally, I feel that the market would correct for these power-wasting freaks, but I'll at least accept a small role for the FCC to prevent dirty-transmissions.
With frequency-hopping, and software-based radios, we'd reach a new era of wireless. We're WASTING gigahertz of spectrum on old media -- TV, radio, even cell phone and cordless phone frequencies that could be better used to combine everything into a WiFi-like system. The days of forced media schedules are slowly ending, with more and more people grabbing TV shows a la carte, via bittorrent or PVR-systems. Instead of flooding the airwaves with the gigahertz of garbage no one is watching, de-regulate that bandwidth and allow more wireless providers to send people what they want, when they want it.
Those who demand faster bandwidth and lower latency may spend the money for the extra power they'll need to acquire the spectrum they need in their area, for their purposes. Yet power is the BIGGEST cost of wireless transmissions, and I can guarantee that anyone who wants to hog a wide swath of spectrum will find themselves with an unbelievable electric bill after one month. Yet even with someone locally occupying a certain amount of frequencies, there is still a huge amount of bandwidth available all over the entire radio spectrum. A move to digital, on demand IP-based transceiving makes more sense. We're moved beyond the need for fixed-frequencies, except for the old media who needs to control, and regulate, competition out of existence.
They know their time has come. The need to keep cell phones on the same basic frequency, TV on the same basic frequency, and radio on the same basic frequency has been replaced, and proven so, by the newer technologies out there (Satellite, XM, WiFi, even 700Mhz cordless phones). Those days are over, but we're too engaged with the old system to realize it.
The best thing the FCC could do is to just deregulate the 700Mhz-900Mhz frequencies entirely, and let the market provide services. Let's see what would happen. I bet amazing things would come into the market quickly. Then start deregulating more frequencies, until the FCC shrinks to a minor enforcer of clean transceiving.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Rule of law: a state of order in which events conform to the law
- Princeton WordNet
The Constitution is a living document, and was designed as such. Any law invoked here was instated within the confines and regulations of the constitution- therefore lawful. Your "Rule of Law" argument is misplaced.
And while in many sectors there are artificial governmental barriers to entering, this is almost certainly not one of them. It seems you are atop a soapbox preaching about big government and interference with the free market, but you chose a completely inappropiate time to
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, WiFi is a case-in-point of why the existing regulatory scheme is broken, and how completely "unregulated bandwidth" would be a disaster for our communications infrastructure.
Case study: Portland's
Re: (Score:2)
WiFi is relative proof that you can go relatively unregulated in spectrum bandwidth and have things work just fine. Yes, yes, some people in the middle of Manhattan complain about WiFi performance, but my experience at my old office in downtown Chicago showed that things worked just fine -- all the time.
I've just got to take issue with this statement, true enough lots of wifi equipment works well with other wifi equipment in the 2.4 ghz band. unfortunately its one band being used for a number of purposes. Try adding a TV sender into the mix. Wifi becomes highly unreliable and the tv transmission is hit badly by the random wifi packets add a cordless phone into the mix and none of it works reliably.
There is no need for more red tape but a few more low power frequencies with type approval for each band allo
Xpressweb Internet Services? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There are actually almost 1100 distinct licenses up for auction, and the vast majority of them are for regional licenses that will go for maybe a couple million dollars. That's what all the smaller companies are signing up for.
lynxcache mirror (Score:2, Informative)
Paul Allen? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, all Jimi Hendrix, on every frequency, all the time.
The Coming Cellphone Revolution? (Score:5, Interesting)
I could VERY easily see Google offering about five models of cellphones, all with user-modifiable environments with broadband TV access, internet, and of course cell (or wifi or some such combo). A recent interview with the CEO of HTC [engadget.com] suggests there are some big plans with Android/Google/HTC. This would all be possible with a low unlimited usage fee (say $50 unlimited cell access, $75 unlimited TV/internet, etc.) Maybe you will see some sort of music site popup over this or integrate it with Google's music info site. This will of course be highly marketed and everyone will flock to it. Maybe not everyone will get to use it and it will become a tester in some markets sort of like gmail beta when it was first introduced. This sort of thing is usually looked at skeptically (think when 3G first rolled out after many delays, all the complaints and grumbles) but by Google will be looked at as the hippest thing since white bread!
This of course over time will force the other cell providers to change their scrupulous business practices or be satisfied with greatly reduced user-base. Which of course is more incentive for these other companies to get their hands on it over Google.
It seems to be infrastructure and other base technology is already in place for it, so immediate rollout could happen, of course in that interim introductory period additional infrastructure can be added to beef up the spectrums inevitably high usage!
This is all of course simple musing, but looking at Google's past and their current state coupled with their desire for this spectrum leads me to believe there is a plan for it and its big. I look forward to this possibility... hope it comes true. Now if anyone can punch holes in any of this please do so now.
Re:The Coming Cellphone Revolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google will track wherever you go via GPS. Google can then sell advertising to companies that you walk by. The more people that walk by a business, the more they can charge for advertising. Then, when you walk within 500 feet of that business, they'll send you some text message telling you of said business's latest deals. You clear the message, and in another 300' you get another text message from another business with their lunch specials.
Then, of course, google will have you use your "google logon" with your cellphone, too. So when you go do Internet searches on your PC, it will cater the results to where you go and where you've been. "Hey, I noticed you're looking for anal plugs... there was a good shop with a buy one get one on your route to work".
Of course, google will also use that GPS data to notify businesses in your local area what you're searching for and what you buy from their competitors.
Then Google founders will use all that extra cash to buy an EVEN BIGGER private jet to go play around the world and burn more fuel while hypocritically telling us that we need to reduce our fuel consumption to save the environment.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably pretty insightful, actually. Google could very easily do all of that, especially in the areas where they've ALREADY mapped out everything at the street level. If they bundle that with free airtime and throw in the phone at a heavy discount as well, people would put up with it too.
Re: (Score:1)
If someone is making money on providing me with information that might actually benefit me, what's the harm? As long as I have control over my privacy, I would much prefer that to blinking banner ads and billboards.
If cheap or free ad-supported cell pho
Re: (Score:1)
I love Google, but I think the "do no evil" thing went out the door when they went public and got shareholders whom expect returns. So far they're not evil, and I love them for it. But as they amass assets like this spectrum, they might start changing.
Re: (Score:2)
If they do *that*, it's pretty easy to layer VOIP on top of it to create cellphone/blackberry-like services, but that'd only be part of it. Imagine wireless connectivity anywhere for the price you now pay your IS
UHF TV. What about VHF? (Score:3, Interesting)
So, I guess VHF [wikipedia.org] TV frequencies will be auctioned off soon too? Or is that going to be completely used by radio services (Marine, some aviation and some consumer goods.)?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm rich! (Score:5, Funny)
Background information (Score:2, Informative)
http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/700mhz-explained/ [gigaom.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/700_Mhz_wireless_spectrum_auction [wikipedia.org]
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070815-700mhz-auction-whats-really-up-for-grabs-and-why-it-wont-be-monopolized.html [arstechnica.com]
For instance the GSM 750 band (has been in the GSM standards for at least 7 years) is a part of the spectrum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM_frequency_bands [wikipedia.org]
No revenue range for Google? (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The Incomplete Application List (Score:2, Interesting)
Paul Allen was a Ricochet/Metricom investor (Score:2, Informative)
For those to lazy to rtfa here is the list (Score:1)
ooops the list formattted (Score:2, Informative)
0014061097 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 0 - 15,000,000
0000021188 AlasConnect, Inc.
0016161788 Aristotle Inc. 0 - 15,000,000
0016927360 AWS Spectrum, LLC 15,000,000 - 40,000,000
0017118837 Bayou Internet, Inc.
0002477636 BEK Communications Cooperative 0 - 15,000,000
0003764727 Bend Cable Communications, LLC
0003766201 Blanca Telephone Company 15,000,000 - 40,000,000
0017147406 Blue Sky Cell, LLC 0 - 15,000,000
0010698868 Bluegrass Wireless LLC
0017194473 Bresna
Improved range! (Score:2)
I knew the 700MHz spectrum has much improved range compared to WiFi, but Vulcan? [wikipedia.org] WOW!!! ;)
The Incomplete List (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Small bidders, Incompletes, and Licensing (Score:1)