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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Ecclesine who wrote (21226)	5/3/2007 12:40:27 PM
From: ftth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

re: My point is the WiMAX paper does not cover any aspects of regulation that foster broader use of spectrum, just more of the exclusively licensed, frequency coordinated, Part 101 microwave use. Do any of the limited number of WiMAX band profiles cover spectrum where completely new ways of regulating spectrum is an active policy issue? I think it's enough of a challenge just to get regulators worldwide to allow WiMAX into their non-technology-neutral, frequency-coordinated plans, let alone getting a wholesale change in spectrum policy mindset. PS you seem to be talking about spectrum that would live under a technology and protocol mandate, accepting that as integral to that new way of thinking about spectrum policy. As I'm sure you are aware, having regulators pick the technologies rubs many people the wrong way. It's in some ways a "back to the future" approach of purpose-built spectrum silos. That may very well turn out to be the best approach when you weigh all the factors, but it will be many years before the "technology neutrality" bug gets out of some people's system, since it's only been very recently that they came to accept that point of view.

To: Peter Ecclesine who wrote (21226)	5/4/2007 2:21:58 AM
From: axial	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 46821

"My point is the WiMAX paper does not cover any aspects of regulation that foster broader use of spectrum, just more of the exclusively licensed, frequency coordinated, Part 101 microwave use." Am I the only one that believes that strategies are being discussed here? The technical aspects of the WiMax paper are interesting, but take a step back, and read the implications between the lines. That's where the real import lies, because it reveals the strategy that will dictate future actions. "For the game to go one way or the other, some of the rules have to change." Message 23486733 "It appears that some mobile operators and some carriers are lining up for WiMax; the guess is that in future they intend (or hope) to grab complementary spectrum. If this is a discussion about WiFi vs WiMax, then I still believe that before a clear winner will emerge, the rules have to change, and that change must be at spectrum." Message 23503137 We have discussed the effect of all-IP on voice revenues, especially for mobile operators. We have also discussed the fact that it's difficult to see how operators will counter the threat from "Silicon Valley" so to speak. Peter's approach to open spectrum, and freeing up spectrum allocation is very much the preference of one commercial camp. It favors their their silicon, their products and devices. WiMax/operator/carriers will counter that spectrum strategy with their own, by using their High Ground position and influence to retain more traditional allocation, especially for complementary spectrum. So Peter, your statement is true as far as it goes, but I believe there's more. This is not to say that the WiMax/operator/carrier coalition will be triumphant, but rather, that's how they will choose to fight. Given the large contributions they have made to government coffers through spectrum acquisition, I believe their views will be met with some sympathy. Also, Frank's view on the ultimate triumph of all-IP will be correct in the long run, but there are too many stakeholders who would be disadvantaged (not to mention the previously-discussed financial consequences for carriers/operators) if sudden, disruptive change were permitted. Near-term, wireless players will battle at spectrum allocation, I think. I'm not sure how big a niche they can carve, but frankly, I just don't see operators/carriers/and their WiMax coalition being knocked out of the game. Not yet, and probably not for another decade or more. JMO, Jim