AT&T/T-Mobile highlights artificial spectrum scarcity

by on March 21, 2011 · 10 comments

Many folks will no doubt be writing a lot about the competitive issues surrounding the announced AT&T/T-Mobile merger, so instead I thought I’d weigh in on what I know best: spectrum.

To the extent you’re worried about the concentration of the wireless market, you should really be concerned about the government policies that make entry and expansion so difficult.

First, if a carrier wants to acquire more spectrum to meet consumer demand for new services, it can’t thanks to the artificial scarcity created by federal policies that dedicate vast swaths of the most valuable spectrum to broadcast television and likely inefficient government uses. It’s gratifying to see the FCC now confronting the “spectrum crunch,” but waiting for a deal to be brokered on incentive auctions is a luxury carriers don’t have. So, buying a competitor might be the only way left for them to acquire more spectrum.

Second, if a carrier wants to put up a new tower, or add antennas to existing towers, it has to get permission from the local zoning board. This can be an extremely onerous process as different localities will have different reasons to hold up the process. Buying a competitor is therefore also an obvious way to get access to more towers.

Again, I’m not sure this merger will have a negative effect on competition. Many high sunk costs industries are perfectly competitive with just two or three players. (I’m look forward to a good analysis on that question, perhaps from our own Geoff Manne of Josh Wright.) What I do know is that if you are worried about competition, antitrust policy is not going to solve the long-term issue of artificial scarcity, which is the real problem here.

Entry is possible. In fact, a new entrant in the wireless market is waiting in the wings in the form of the cable industry with the spectrum they acquired in the AWS auction. Before they can start offering services, however, they must move incumbent users of the bands they acquired. There is also Clearwire, part owned by Comcast, Time Warner, and Google–serious competitors to the Bells.

If we really got serious about reallocating broadcast and inefficiently used federal spectrum, we might not have to worry competition. We’d likely see new entry, and access to spectrum would be less of a reason to acquire a competitor.

  • http://techliberation.com/2011/03/21/some-random-thoughts-on-att-t-mobile-merger/ Some Random Thoughts on AT&T / T-Mobile Merger

    [...] is all about getting more high-quality spectrum, which is in increasingly short supply. Indeed, as Jerry Brito noted earlier, this merger should serve as another wake-up call regarding the need to get spectrum reform [...]

  • http://tieguy.org/ Luis

    Jerry, is there a good survey of what a more optimal allocation might look like? Besides the TV spectrum, is there other low-lying fruit?

  • Steve Crowley

    An inventory of federal and non-federal spectrum authorizations and utilization would inform a reallocation process. This idea has been kicking around for a few years. There’s the proposed Snowe-Kerry RADIOS Act, among others, at this time. Why hasn’t Congress approved inventory legislation by now?

  • http://www.americannewsblog.info/tech-at-night-att-t-mobile-fcc-patents Tech at Night: AT&T, T-Mobile, FCC, Patents | American News Blog

    [...] Tech Liberation Front also hammers the spectrum issue, calling the problem “artificial spectrum scarcity.” [...]

  • http://www.stanislausgop.org/2011/03/24/tech-at-night-att-t-mobile-fcc-patents/ Tech at Night: AT&T, T-Mobile, FCC, Patents

    [...] Tech Liberation Front also hammers the spectrum issue, calling the problem “artificial spectrum scarcity.” [...]

  • http://www.theamericanconsumer.org/2011/05/16/spectrum-should-go-to-the-highest-bidder-period/ The American Consumer Institute – » Spectrum Should Go To The Highest Bidder. Period.

    [...] from 2009 to 2014.  Each carrier is addressing the coming capacity crunch in different ways.  The AT&T/T-Mobile merger is one example of a path to acquire access to more spectrum resources in the [...]

  • http://www.city-data.com/forum/cell-phones-smartphones/1231430-damn-t-buys-t-mobile-4.html#post19197996 Damn! AT&T buys T-mobile – Page 4 – City-Data Forum

    [...] process. Buying a competitor is therefore also an obvious way to get access to more towers." AT&T/T-Mobile highlights artificial spectrum scarcity The merger will give AT&T as many new cell towers = to five years of construction. Assuming in [...]

  • http://reason.com/blog/2011/08/31/the-department-of-justice-vs-a The Department of Justice vs. AT&T – Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

    [...] Jerry Brito, a technology policy expert at The Mercatus Center, explained earlier this year, "if a carrier wants to put up a new tower, or add antennas to existing towers, [...]

  • http://dailylibertarian.com/2011/08/31/the-department-of-justice-vs-att/ The Department of Justice vs. AT&T | Daily Libertarian

    [...] Jerry Brito, a technology policy expert at The Mercatus Center, explained earlier this year, “if a carrier wants to put up a new tower, or add antennas to existing [...]

  • http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/15/washington-post-columnist-plea Washington Post Columnist: Please, Won’t Somebody Socialize America’s Wireless Networks! – Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

    [...] When mobile carriers want to build new cell towers to expand to new service areas, they have to navigate expensive, time-consuming local regulatory mazes. When mobile carriers want to expand their spectrum holdings—the virtual real estate required to [...]

Previous post:

Next post: