| Forums | Active Topics | [Click to Join Our Forums] | Cell Tower Pictures | FAQ | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| | #1 |
| Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 3,140
Phone(s): Moto v3 Razr, Blackberry 7230 Provider(s): Cingular (Voice) + T-Mobile (Blackberry) Devices: Crackberry Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Nextel, FCC in Standoff Over Prime Cellular Spectrum By Yuki Noguchi Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 7, 2004; Page E01 Nextel Communications Inc. yesterday made another pitch for valuable new cellular spectrum, as the Federal Communications Commission appeared poised to approve a proposal that would give the Reston-based company less desirable airwaves, a plan Nextel opposes. In a filing with the FCC, Nextel criticized a study cited by Verizon Wireless that concluded Nextel should pay about $5 billion for the spectrum it wants, far more than it has proposed paying. Nextel filed a study it commissioned from American Appraisal Associates Inc., which said the earlier report contained faulty calculations. Fire, police and emergency communications systems have complained of interference from Nextel's cellular communications systems. Nextel has proposed giving up some existing airwaves and paying $850 million to move the public safety users. In return, Nextel wants a swath of spectrum in the 1.9 gigahertz range. Competitors, as well as some politicians, including most recently Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), have opposed Nextel's proposal, saying Nextel should pay far more for that spectrum. The FCC agrees with Nextel that the public safety users should be moved, but a majority of the commissioners appear ready to offer Nextel a slice of less-valuable spectrum in the 2.1 GHz range, said sources close to the FCC. The commissioners' main goal is to solve the public safety question in a way that would minimize the chance of a serious legal challenge. They also want Nextel to pay to move the public safety users. Initial problems with outages or dropped calls started to appear five years ago, and for the past two and a half years, the FCC has been considering solutions. The FCC can order Nextel to fix interference, but whether the commission can require the company to pay to move public safety groups is unclear. The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association, which includes Verizon Wireless, Nextel's most vocal opponent, said it would endorse a deal that gives Nextel the less-valuable spectrum and requires it to pay $3 billion. Lawrence R. Krevor, Nextel's vice president of government affairs, said the company would not accept the higher frequency airwaves. Cellular equipment isn't currently made to operate in that range, and Nextel would have to pay more to relocate current occupants in the 2.1 GHz range, he said. "At this point, we don't see any scenario where 2.1 [gigahertz] comes close to the value" that Nextel is offering, Krevor said. "We are not doing this for charity." Nextel wants the 1.9 GHz range because standard cellular equipment can be used there. The company's current airwaves make it dependent on a technology made by a single vendor, Motorola Inc. Nextel also needs more spectrum to offer high-speed data services and to continue to carry increasing call traffic. Some FCC staffers, as well as lobbyists for other major carriers and a source close to Nextel, said they think Nextel would accept the 2.1 GHz range if the FCC were to offer a reasonable price. "If Nextel walks away, the FCC holds all the cards, because they've created a record showing that they have a public-safety interference problem," said a lobbyist for a rival carrier, who asked not to be named because his information was based on private conversations with commissioners. "It's a question of who's going to blink first." Last edited by GoodmanR; 05-07-2004 at 12:50 PM. Reason: Note Source |
| | |
| | Original Poster
#2 |
| Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 3,140
Phone(s): Moto v3 Razr, Blackberry 7230 Provider(s): Cingular (Voice) + T-Mobile (Blackberry) Devices: Crackberry Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I think this is the best article I have seen about this...
|
| | |
| | #3 |
| Iowa Cellular Guru Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: SID 150 or 1214 Posts: 3,472
Phone(s): Nokia 6256i, (retired) Motorola V120c, Timeport 270c, Nokia 252 (Airtouch) Provider(s): Verizon Wireless Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I this article reminds me of the Nextwave Verizon saga back in 2001-2002 I think the FCC should auction off PCS block G nationwide starts off at $5 billion. If Nextel wins they get the license, if not they pay 3 billion for a AWS (Advanced Wirless Services) 10 MHz (Block C? I think is the one that is 10MHz?) 1700/2100 MHz in the areas they need it. Hopefully by then the millitary has moved off the 1700 MHz area where Nextel will need to move. Old info onPCS Block G |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 3,425
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Why can't Nextel just fix the Problem or it can't be Fix?
|
| | |
| | #5 |
| Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: US Virgin Islands Posts: 754
Phone(s): iPhone 3GS Provider(s): AT&T Mobility Devices: iPod Touch 2G, WiFi gear Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
It's about time the FCC grow some b@11s! |
| | |
| | #6 | |
| Iowa Cellular Guru Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: SID 150 or 1214 Posts: 3,472
Phone(s): Nokia 6256i, (retired) Motorola V120c, Timeport 270c, Nokia 252 (Airtouch) Provider(s): Verizon Wireless Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Iowa Cellular Guru Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: SID 150 or 1214 Posts: 3,472
Phone(s): Nokia 6256i, (retired) Motorola V120c, Timeport 270c, Nokia 252 (Airtouch) Provider(s): Verizon Wireless Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
sorry if I sound kinda harsh toward Netxel. |
| | |
| | Original Poster
#8 |
| Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 3,140
Phone(s): Moto v3 Razr, Blackberry 7230 Provider(s): Cingular (Voice) + T-Mobile (Blackberry) Devices: Crackberry Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
They won't continue to make a huge impact if they don't get new spectrum. They do not have enough spectrum right now to run CDMA. They need to offer good data services if they wan't to be competitive 10 years down the road, something they are a long way from doing (despite testing in NC)
|
| | |
| | #9 | |
| Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: on the right coast Posts: 326
Phone(s): i95cl, R85.01.02, w/ SYN0547 Provider(s): Nextel Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I bet Nextel is working something out with the FCC to use iDEN for public safety......in exchange for a fair price for 1.9. Quote:
| |
| | |
| | Original Poster
#10 |
| Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 3,140
Phone(s): Moto v3 Razr, Blackberry 7230 Provider(s): Cingular (Voice) + T-Mobile (Blackberry) Devices: Crackberry Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
DandyDon, I think it is hard to argue that Nextel doesn't need more spectrum. They do, and they need it badly. iDen can't continue to be their standard for all that long. Nextel agrees that they need more spectrum, everyone does, that's why they are pressing so hard for this. |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: on the right coast Posts: 326
Phone(s): i95cl, R85.01.02, w/ SYN0547 Provider(s): Nextel Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| |
| | |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| |
| | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Nextel to try TD-CDMA in Washington | Fire14 | Wireless News | 1 | 06-30-2005 5:28 PM |
| Cellular Mobility Has Its Limits - Washington Post | GoodmanR | Wireless News | 14 | 05-25-2004 11:20 AM |
| Nextel Says Compromise Won't Work - Washington Post | GoodmanR | Wireless News | 3 | 05-13-2004 2:40 PM |
| Wireless Gets The Priciest Plugs - Breakdown and Analysis of Advertising - Washington Post | GoodmanR | Wireless News | 0 | 10-31-2003 8:34 PM |
| According to the Washington Post.... | GoodmanR | Southern US Wireless Forum | 3 | 10-09-2003 10:27 AM |