The FCC should reject “self-serving” arguments by...
The FCC should reject “self-serving” arguments by Sprint and T-Mobile asking it to rethink key parts of its May 15 spectrum holdings order (CD Aug 13 p1), Mobile Future Chairman Jonathan Spalter said in a blog post (http://bit.ly/1pmKT2x). Sprint and…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
T-Mobile have had a different message for Wall Street and the FCC, he wrote. Spalter cited a T-Mobile news release (http://t-mo.co/1qFPGev) and a Sprint comment on the carrier’s spectrum position (http://bit.ly/1tP8cBv) saying the firm’s “spectrum position allows us to take a more aggressive stance in offering more data.” In “today’s more transparent world, you can’t have it both ways: Desperately seeking special spectrum handouts from government while simultaneously declaring spectrum superiority,” Spalter said. Sprint fired back. “Mr. Spalter’s latest blog is yet another attempt to perpetuate a virtual duopoly in the U.S. wireless market,” a spokesman said. AT&T and Verizon, “major supporters” of Mobile Future, “control the lion’s share of low-band spectrum and will go to great lengths to preserve their competitive advantage,” the spokesman said. Competitive carriers also need access to low-band spectrum, said Steve Berry, president of the Competitive Carriers Association: “It is not surprising that Mobile Future, an organization largely funded by AT&T and Verizon, is going to bat for the largest national carriers.”