“It is common error to infer that things which are consecutive in order of time have necessarily the relation of cause and effect.” Jacob Bigelow.
I read with great interest Harold Feld’s most recent post, which is ostensibly about the AWS-3 band, but nevertheless manages to meander its way along the gamut of spectrum topics related to the National Broadband Plan. Although interesting (and I have a healthy respect for Harold’s expertise in spectrum matters), I take issue with a few of his conclusions.
While it is of little consequence to policy, I disagree with Harold’s characterization of the history of the AWS-3 band. Harold characterizes the band as “forlorn” until M2Z came along and reminded everyone that the band was awaiting service rules. In actuality, a complete draft NPRM (replete with tentative conclusions) existed long before M2Z made its filing. Unfortunately, a certain legal advisor (ahem, me) wanted the NPRM to ask broader questions, so it was held up for redrafting. At about the time the redraft was completed, M2Z filed its “application.” M2Z’s filing raised a slew of novel legal and technical issues and (initially) a bevy of interest on the 8th floor. Resolving the legal questions posed by the M2Z filing and socializing the issues on the 8th floor was what slowed progress on the AWS-3 band. In the absence of the novel M2Z filing, an NPRM for the band would likely have been issued much earlier.
But that’s all just history now, and Harold can’t be blamed for lacking the requisite historical information. He can, however, be faulted for his illogical assumption that the removal of prophylactic spectrum cap regulations produced two “also rans” (presumably T-Mobile and Sprint Nextel) in the wireless market. Here Harold is guilty of the common error described by Jacob Bigelow. There is no cause and effect relationship between the elimination of spectrum caps and current market shares in the cellular industry. Read the rest of this entry »