Cyren Call Goes Flat at Senate Hearing

by on February 9, 2007 · 4 comments

The siren call of Cyren Call seems to have gone a bit flat yesterday. Morgan O’Brien, the company’s founder, testified Thursday to the Senate Commerce Committee on his plan to give 30 MHz of spectrum to public safety agencies, rather than go through with a planned auction. According to Anne Veigle in Communications Daily (subscription), senators were less than impressed. “This is creating a new FCC, isn’t it?” asked Vice-chair Ted Stevens (one FCC presumably being more than enough). Former FCC chair Michael Powell, in a letter to Stevens, was even harsher. “Follow the money,” Powell wrote: “Who is going to benefit the most, those in uniform who are sworn to serve or those in suits who are set to profit?” The theme was picked up by Senator McCaskill of Missouri. “I’m assuming that this proposal is predicated on the idea that it will make a profit,” she said to O’Brien. That probably wasn’t the aspect of the plan the telecom entrepreneur wanted to stress. All in all, it doesn’t sound like it was a good day for Cyren Call.

  • http://www.jerrybrito.com Jerry Brito

    I think it’s good that Cyren Call’s plan to cut in half the spectrum up for auction has gotten a cold shoulder. However, I think it’s a terrible that it’s getting a bad rap for simply being a “for profit” public safety company. As if it’s impossible to provide a good service to first responders that can save live and make money at the same time. I would argue that’s one of the only ways the interoperability problem can be solved. There just no reason why we have to do it on new public safety spectrum. When McCaskill scorns, “I’m assuming that this proposal is predicated on the idea that it will make a profit,” that’s not good news for first responders.

  • http://jerrybrito.com Jerry Brito

    I think it’s good that Cyren Call’s plan to cut in half the spectrum up for auction has gotten a cold shoulder. However, I think it’s a terrible that it’s getting a bad rap for simply being a “for profit” public safety company. As if it’s impossible to provide a good service to first responders that can save live and make money at the same time. I would argue that’s one of the only ways the interoperability problem can be solved. There just no reason why we have to do it on new public safety spectrum. When McCaskill scorns, “I’m assuming that this proposal is predicated on the idea that it will make a profit,” that’s not good news for first responders.

  • James Gattuso

    Jerry — That’s a good word of caution. I agree — the profit motive is part of the solution, not the problem. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise, and should have made that clear. My impression though was that the concern expressed at the hearing was not that somebody was profiting per se. Its that Cyren Call is not advocating its plan out of an abstract sense of the public good, but that it has a financial stake in the outcome. Again, as Seinfeld would say “there’s nothing wrong with that.” But, remember that Cyren Call is asking that auctions be forgone here. McCaskill’s concern, according to Comm Daily’s Veigle, was why Morgan O’Brien “wouldn’t bid on the spectrum like other companies.” That’s seems at least a fair question.

  • James Gattuso

    Jerry — That’s a good word of caution. I agree — the profit motive is part of the solution, not the problem. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise, and should have made that clear. My impression though was that the concern expressed at the hearing was not that somebody was profiting per se. Its that Cyren Call is not advocating its plan out of an abstract sense of the public good, but that it has a financial stake in the outcome. Again, as Seinfeld would say “there’s nothing wrong with that.” But, remember that Cyren Call is asking that auctions be forgone here. McCaskill’s concern, according to Comm Daily’s Veigle, was why Morgan O’Brien “wouldn’t bid on the spectrum like other companies.” That’s seems at least a fair question.

Previous post:

Next post: