Public Policy Blog

Updates on technology policy issues

Who's going to win the spectrum auction? Consumers.

Friday, November 30, 2007
Share on Google+ Share on Twitter Share on Facebook
Google
Labels: Public Policy Blog , Telecom

4 comments :

  1. KGNovember 30, 2007 at 10:14 AM

    Thank you. Basically every U.S. consumer watching this saga hopes that you guys will win. Best of luck!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  2. http://search-engines-web.com/November 30, 2007 at 11:08 AM

    if this story was in fact leaked by Google to WSJ - perhaps you should consider other sources.

    WSJ is subscription based, so most will only get a paragraph.

    WSJ is usually first with every major Google related leak - please consider your readers who do not have subscriptions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  3. Michael MuchaDecember 1, 2007 at 9:57 PM

    Bidding on this seems like a no-lose proposition for Google, since even if you don't win the auction, by forcing the price to be at least $4.6B, you'll still weaken the walled gardens significantly because of the new, open spectrum, which is good for net neutrality, which is good for Google.

    But...is it really "no lose", as in, could an Evil Telco, e.g.:
    a) overbid to make sure they get the spectrum. What's an extra $5B when you have the amount of cash that an AT&T has on hand, and nothing else to really spend it on?

    and then

    b) "bury" the spectrum, i.e. take 5 years to roll out a uselessly buggy version 1.0 and then another 5 to roll out 1.1, and then drag the ensuing "you have to live up to the deal" litigation out another 10 years as the FCC, Google and company try to force the winner to live up to the deal
    ?

    What's the legal reality? Significant precedents?

    Nice post, can I bet on the auction in Vegas?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  4. fastcreditcardapprovalsJanuary 31, 2008 at 8:46 AM

    I sure hope Google wins the bid and see their wireless service develop to give us the consumer more choices and lower prices on wireless service or even free in exchange of ad viewing, which there are everywhere already. bid is up to 12billion 01/30/08

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
Add comment
Load more...

The comments on this blog belong only to the person who posted them. We do, however, reserve the right to remove off-topic or inappropriate comments.

  

Labels


  • Accessibility 5
  • Ad 2
  • Advertising 11
  • AdWords 2
  • Anti-defamation league 1
  • Book Search 16
  • Broadband 11
  • Business Issues 26
  • Buzz 1
  • buzzemail 1
  • Canada 1
  • Child Safety 18
  • Chrome 1
  • Cloud Computing 2
  • Competition 19
  • Congress 10
  • Constitute 1
  • copyright 7
  • Cuba 1
  • Cybersecurity 9
  • D.C. Talks 16
  • Digital Due Process 1
  • Digital Playbook 1
  • Economic Impact 5
  • Economy 13
  • ECPA 4
  • Elections 24
  • email 1
  • Energy Efficiency 29
  • Europe 2
  • FCC 7
  • fellowship 2
  • Fighting Human Trafficking 1
  • Free Expression 54
  • Geo 1
  • Gmail 1
  • GNI 2
  • Good to Know 5
  • Google Fellow 2
  • Google for Entrepreneurs 1
  • Google Ideas 2
  • Google Maps 1
  • Google Policy Fellowship 1
  • Google Tools 78
  • Government Transparency 33
  • Hate Speech 1
  • Health 5
  • How Google Fights Piracy 1
  • Human trafficking 1
  • Identity theft 1
  • Immigration 1
  • Intellectual Property 19
  • International 46
  • Journalists 1
  • Malware 1
  • Maps 1
  • National Consumer Protection Week 1
  • Net Neutrality 24
  • Patents 5
  • piracy. ad networks 2
  • Politicians at Google 11
  • Politics 23
  • Privacy 93
  • Public Policy 1
  • Public Policy Blog 806
  • Safe Browsing 3
  • scams 1
  • search 3
  • Security 17
  • Small Businesses 3
  • spectrum 4
  • State Issues 5
  • Surveillance 6
  • Technology for Good 1
  • Telecom 71
  • Trade 3
  • Transparency Report 4
  • White Spaces 23
  • WiFi Network 1
  • Workforce 5
  • Yahoo-Google Deal 5
  • YouTube 4
  • YouTube for Government 1


Archive


  •     2016
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
  •     2015
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2014
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2013
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2012
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2011
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2010
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2009
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2008
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr
    • Mar
    • Feb
    • Jan
  •     2007
    • Dec
    • Nov
    • Oct
    • Sep
    • Aug
    • Jul
    • Jun
    • May
    • Apr

Feed

Give us feedback in our Product Forums.

Company-wide

  • Official Google Blog
  • Europe Blog
  • Student Blog

Products

  • Android Blog
  • Chrome Blog
  • Lat Long Blog

Developers

  • Developers Blog
  • Ads Developer Blog
  • Android Developers Blog
  • Google
  • Privacy
  • Terms