Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Nextwave Telecom Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pcstel who wrote (602)	12/8/2001 9:10:27 AM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 1088

re: Powell on Settlement Thursday ... >> FCC's Powell Defends NextWave Settlement Reuters December 6, 2001 As opposition mounts in Congress to a settlement over disputed wireless licenses held by a bankrupt company, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell on Thursday defended the deal as in the best interest of the American people. The deal would provide the government with twice the amount of previously expected revenue from the sale of the licenses, end years of legal wrangling and provide new airwaves for established carriers to offer expanded and new services, Powell said in a telephone interview. The settlement, which took weeks of contentious negotiating to craft, calls for NextWave to give up its claim to the wireless licenses in exchange for more than $5 billion and the government to receive $10 billion, all funded by other mobile telephone carriers who bid for the airwaves last January. "I personally think getting $10 billion today that I can put in the bank for that spectrum versus the roughly $5 billion that I might be able to get from NextWave over a 10-year installment period was fiscally better," Powell said. To be implemented, the pact requires Congress to pass legislation by Dec. 31 to authorize the government to enter into the settlement, pay NextWave to abandon its claim to the licenses and insulate it from lengthy legal challenges. Yet, two key senators came out publicly Thursday against the deal in part because they believe the government should pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court so the licenses can be repossessed and in part because they have not had time to review the deal. "While we might get that interpretation from the Supreme Court, the cost in time and potentially money to the American consumer, seemed to us that a settlement that protects our interests was a better option," Powell said. Lawmakers are now contemplating attaching the settlement to several bills pending in Congress although the exact path is uncertain. He said that Congress had the prerogative to take its time to evaluate the deal, however, lawmakers must weigh the risk that the settlement, which would mean enormous revenue for the government at a time of great need, would fall apart if lawmakers did not act by the end of the year. "The options are they can do it as proposed in the time frame, they can be willing to do it but insist on making some modest modifications of it and seeing whether that's acceptable or third they can kill it," Powell said. "It seems to me that keeping the public interest at the forefront of our focus, the first two options are the ones that where the debate should be held, in my opinion," he said. Prolonged Battle NextWave bought dozens of licenses in 1996 for $4.7 billion but then sought bankruptcy protection after paying only $500 million. The FCC tried to repossess the licenses but an appeals court ruled the agency could not do so simply because of nonpayment. The government has appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, but officials said the settlement they negotiated would provide the government with needed revenue while quickly getting the licenses into the hands of companies that can use them. Sen. Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat and head of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee said he would oppose attempts to include the legislation in pending bills however he did not details how he would do that or the level of support for his position. "They ought to pursue the appeal," Hollings said during a news conference. "I've got work to do, I can't run around lobbying everybody like they do," he said, referring to the mobile telephone companies who would acquire the licenses. There are several methods the NextWave legislation could be attached to pending measures that must still pass Congress, including in conference reports on must-pass spending bills. It could also be included in an economic stimulus bill that is being crafted. "We're very concerned, especially of it being put in a conference report," said Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain. "Don't confuse lobbying and fighting, we intend to fight this as hard as we can, for our committee's jurisdiction and against this settlement--at least for a full and adequate ventilation of a $16 billion issue." The settlement, if approved, will be funded by Verizon Wireless and partners of AT&T Wireless Services and Cingular Wireless among others, who will pay $15.85 billion for 216 licenses that cover lucrative markets such as Los Angeles, New York and Seattle. They plan to use the airwaves to fill gaps in coverage and add new products and services. Powell said he was willing to meet with lawmakers to discuss their concerns with the settlement although he was not a lobbyist. "I think it should have a full and open hearing before Congress," Powell said. "But it is important to constantly ask what's the alternative, where is the higher public interest alternative, and I, at least, have trouble seeing it." NextWave shares, which are traded on the Pink Sheets, traded down 70 cents to $9.30. << - Eric -

To: pcstel who wrote (602)	12/10/2001 12:39:16 PM
From: Rono	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1088

pcstel, the Consumers Union state the licenses are set to expire in 2006. According to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau the C block licenses have a second buildout deadline of 1/03/07. I had assumed if the first buildout deadline of 1/03/02 was not met, the licenses would be forfeited, and the second deadline would be moot. Since reading the following, I'm not so sure. December 6, 2001 United States Senate Washington DC 20510 Dear Senator: Subject: NextWave spectrum reallocation and wireless competition We understand that an amendment may be presented during the defense appropriations bill to end the five-year dispute over NextWave’s acquisition of wireless spectrum and subsequent bankruptcy. Accounts indicate that this legislation may be necessary to facilitate the transfer of NextWave’s wireless licenses to other wireless carriers who successfully bid for these licenses. The proposed legislation is a raw deal for American taxpayers. The amendment would make taxpayers bear the financial risk of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) bungling of the license process. The FCC should never have handed over these licenses free and clear before they received payment for them. Under this deal taxpayers would have to pay Nextwave $9 billion. Nextwave would then pay its tax bill of $3 billion, leaving the company with $6 billion. Subsequently, the companies that bid $15.7 billion for this spectrum last January will reimburse the treasury for these payments, covering taxpayers’ expenditures. If everything goes as planned, taxpayers will be covered. However, as this deal should have taught Congress, things do not always go as planned. Rather than giving Nextwave a huge windfall, Congress should focus on insulating taxpayers from financial risk and making sure that we serve consumers’ need for more competition between wireless and wireline companies. It is important to remember that Nextwave would have originally paid more than $4.7 billion for this slice of spectrum, but never had to bid against the large incumbent providers under the "designated entity" rules set up to increase competition by favoring entrepreneurs that would be new market entrants. Now, five years later—having defaulted on their payments and having served no customers—the FCC is in effect allowing Nextwave to turn around and sell their licenses to Verizon and other large incumbents for a $9 billion profit ($6 billion after taxes). The public loses twice. First, spectrum it sold on a discounted basis to add competition to the market—but that “competition” comes primarily from the nation's largest cell phone company. Second, a company that manipulated the auction process and defaulted on its responsibilities is being paid $9 billion in ransom, revenue coming straight out of taxpayers’ pockets. Instead of handing approximately $6 billion to a company that never signed up a single customer, Congress should be concerned about making sure independent wireless companies survive. It is the competition from a diversity of wireless business models that drove wireless prices down and ratcheted up quality of service over the last decade. As the FCC just eliminated the primary mechanism for ensuring that competitive diversity—the 45 MHz wireless spectrum cap—it is up to Congress to repair the crumbling competitive foundation that has given consumers affordable rates, increased choice and better service. The FCC claims there is no better alternative to this deal; that at least the public will receive a portion of the auction revenue ($6 billion instead of the $15.7 bid last January) as well as better cell phone service as incumbents put the spectrum to use. But in fact, the public would be no worse off—and probably farbetter off—if this settlement is rejected and the FCC proceeds with its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the FCC wins before the Supreme Court, the public would receive the entire $15.7 billion and the confusion over interpretation of bankruptcy law would be resolved in favor of the government. If the FCC loses in court, then Nextwave will have to pay the government what it owes from the original auction. If this turns out to be grossly inadequate, the FCC can re-auction the spectrum after 2006 when the license expires and more than make up for any losses. Even a loss before the Supreme Court would clarify the disputed interpretation of the status of FCC licenses in bankruptcy law – and allow Congress to fix that law if it chooses. Most importantly, Congress should ensure that the FCC uses the license allocation process to create wireless alternatives to local wireline monopolies, rather than handing over more spectrum to local monopolies when they have no incentive to compete against their core businesses. If the FCC continues to foster nothing but consolidation in the wireless industry, consumers will see the vibrantly competitive marketplace for wireless services evaporate into an extension of the local phone monopoly. Competition, not the beneficence of incumbent monopolies, is what makes markets work. If Congress is going to smooth the way for wireless companies to expand their service areas or obtain wireless licenses, we believe Congress should both ensure that taxpayers do not bear additional financial risks, and also make sure that the FCC does nothing that diminishes the number of wireless suppliers unaffiliated with wireline local telephone companies. Sincerely, Chris Murray Gene Kimmelman Telecom and Internet Counsel Co-Director, Washington Office Consumers Union Consumers Union

To: pcstel who wrote (602)	2/14/2002 3:04:14 PM
From: Dennis Roth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1088

NextWave activates wireless network in 60 markets biz.yahoo.com WASHINGTON, Feb 14 (Reuters) - NextWave Telecom Inc., which is in bankruptcy protection and fighting in court to retain its wireless licenses, said on Thursday it has activated its wireless network in 60 markets and is conducting customer trials for its wireless data service in some areas. ``Deployment of an advanced IP-based wireless network has always been one of our primary goals, and deploying facilities and providing fully mobile wireless service to test customers represents an important milestone for the Company and its investors,'' NextWave Chief Executive Allen Salmasi said. The Hawthorne, N.Y.-based company has been engaged in a massive legal battle with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which has tried to repossess the wireless licenses from the company because it failed to pay for them on time. The network was activated in cities ranging from Orlando, Seattle and Washington, D.C. to Kansas City, Los Angeles and Boston, according to the NextWave. ==== Looks like they built out. Some had doubts. DPR ===== From Message 17062042 BTA # BTA Name State Block Call Sign 10 Allentown PA C KNLF674 20 Asheville NC C KNLF681 27 Austin TX C KNLF671 29 Baltimore MD C KNLF652 36 Bellingham WA C KNLF801 51 Boston MA C KNLF646 56 Brownsville TX C KNLF692 59 Bryan TX C KNLF698 74 Charlotte NC C KNLF656 81 Cincinnatti OH C KNLF654 84 Cleveland OH C KNLF649 93 Columbus, IN IN C KNLF699 95 Columbus,OH OH C KNLF660 106 Dayton OH C KNLF666 124 El Centro TX D KNLH230 128 El Paso TX C KNLF676 135 Evansville, IN IN C KNLF682 159 Gainesville FL C KNLF693 174 Greensboro NC C KNLF665 179 Hagerstown MD C KNLF689 189 Hickory NC C KNLF690 196 Houston TX C KNLF648 204 Indianapolis IN C KNLF662 212 Jacksonville FL C KNLF667 220 Joplin MO C KNLF696 226 Kansas City, MO MO C KNLF655 235 Lafayette IN C KNLF694 239 Lakeland FL C KNLF686 244 Las Cruces NM C KNLF697 252 Lexington KY C KNLF672 261 Longview WA C KNLF803 262 Los Angeles CA C KNLF645 263 Louisville KY C KNLF661 268 McAllen TX C KNLF685 274 Manchester NH C KNLF678 289 Melbourne FL C KNLF687 298 Minneapolis MN C KNLF804 318 New Haven CT C KNLF670 319 New London CT C KNLF688 324 Norfolk VA C KNLF657 329 Oklahoma City OK C KNLF663 331 Olympia WA C KNLF805 336 Orlando FL C KNLF664 350 Pittsburgh PA C KNLF650 357 Portland ME C KNLF683 358 Portland OR C KNLF812 361 Poughkeepsie NY C KNLF684 364 Providence RI C KNLF659 374 Richmond VA C KNLF668 376 Roanoke VA C KNLF677 401 San Antonio TX C KNLF658 402 San Diego CA C KNLF651 408 Sarasota FL C KNLF680 412 Scranton PA C KNLF675 413 Seattle WA C KNLF813 428 Springfield, MO MO C KNLF679 440 Tampa FL C KNLF653 441 Temple TX C KNLF691 461 Washington DC C KNLF647 480 Worcester MA C KNLF673