Not surprisingly, cable operators joined with Verizon to
strongly defend the telco's deal to pay them billions for advanced wireless
spectrum the cable operators say did not pan out as a business plan competitive
wireless service.
That came in reply comments to the FCC on Verizon's planned
purchase of spectrum from SpectrumCo. -- Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Bright
House -- and Cox.
They argue there are compelling reasons to grant the license
transfers, primarily that it will promote the wireless broadband that the FCC
and Obama Administration have said they are eager to deploy.
They also point out that freeing it up in the secondary
market, rather than having to wait for an auction, will get that spectrum into
the market and that service to the public expediently, another FCC goal.
They took aim at suggestions by opponents that the spectrum
could be sold to alternative buyers, saying that was dealing in speculation,
and said the FCC should reject requests that it modify its spectrum screen--the
test for concentration of spectrum in a market.
Verizon and the cable operators also said the FCC should not
include their cross-marketing deals--Verizon sells cable service, cable ops
bundle Verizon wireless--in the review since those are entirely separate from
the license transfers. They also point out that Justice is already reviewing
them.
Verizon says that it will not be able to meet
"skyrocketing" demand for mobile broadband without adding spectrum.
