FCC chairman would sign off on Dish Network's bid to become a wireless carrier under one condition
The good news for Dish is that Genachowski is willing to sign off on the papers required for Dish to enter the wireless business. There is one condition, though, and it is sure not to put a smile on Charlie Egren's face. The FCC Chairman wants Dish to lower its power levels to avoid interference with other networks. Egren says that this would prevent Dish from becoming competitive as a mobile operator.
LightSquared had the same problem with its proposed network interfering with GPS signals used by the military and FAA. LightSquared never received a license to operate and the company is trying to get back on its feet after a bankruptcy filing. Luckily for Dish, it has its other business providing television content via satellite. But Egren still wants to make a go of it in the wireless industry, saying that it will need a partner to build out its pipeline, and that it could be completed by 2015. He notes that Dish Network has $6 billion to spend on creating a new wireless carrier, but adds that the FCC could make it risky for them to proceed.
The FCC will vote by the end of the year on whether or not to auction of some spectrum that will be used in conjunction with first responders. FCC Spokesman Neil Grace says that if approved, it would help add competition to the industry and unlock billions of dollars of value for consumers.
source: WashingtonPost via Phonescoop
13. MeoCao (unregistered)
I think Dish can get around the problem by building many smaller towers with lower power.
2. lyndon420 (Posts: 1782; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
Agreed...take my money-especially if Google gets involved.
9. MAXXtreme007 (Posts: 22; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
I don't care a ton about Dish, but if Google is involved, I'm IN!!! Google is AWESOME!!!
3. dorianb (Posts: 421; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
"FCC Chairman wants Dish to lower its power levels to avoid interference with other networks."
How low we talking & what are the drawbacks? Beside obvious penetration into buildings & the like.
4. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 864; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
Penetration and distance. This would mean a whole lot more cell sites and skyrocketing the cost of service.
5. tward291 (Posts: 559; Member since: 14 Feb 2012)
i would love this free tv free wirless service. well not free but ill get one hell of a discount. not to mention internet. i wonder how low the fcc want to go.if its to low to push up cost there better off with the partnership with tmobile. or sell there spectrum to att. profit sharing baby
6. cheeseycheeser (Posts: 389; Member since: 24 Mar 2011)
Imagine if T-Mobile buys metro, then Dish and Google team up with T-Metro to make a super carrier that already has great overage with rock bottom prices and all the new nexuses!!
7. DaNTRoN (Posts: 135; Member since: 23 Jul 2012)
A lower power would stretch the wave length making it longer. Now I'm probably wrong but long wavelengths travel father and penetrate deeper. The only thing i see as being a problem with this, keeping in mind i could be wrong, but the only draw back would be less data transmitted per wave. Thus lowering data speed.
8. kg4icg (Posts: 68; Member since: 18 May 2008)
Lowering power does not make the frequency wavelength any longer. What it does is makes it harder for receivers to puck up signals at longer distance making static more susceptible.
10. JeffdaBeat (unregistered)
I'm not a ridiculously huge fan of Google or the thought that the company will perpetually be this benevolent force in the tech industry (we don't know who who have control of all that information as time goes forward). Still, if any company is going to do wireless as it should be done, it would be Google. No contracts, high speed internet partially for a profit, but to also catch the United States up to the rest of the world for network size and strength. We have companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint that are indeed tech companies, but they are so saddled with old business that they don't innovate. Google would force them to make drastic changes to the usual. If they do this and the network is open, I'm going to move myself over to their network. Even if it isn't the best starting out. I'm tired of these cellular companies absolutely screwing people...
12. MorePhonesThanNeeded (Posts: 645; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
I don't understand the FCC, why should Dish lower their power levels to avoid interference with other networks such as those used by the FAA and the Military? Hold on these two should be using the best possible frequencies and devices and if they are susceptible to interference then they are using garbage ass technology and need to upgrade to something much better and more stable. FCC is so retarded, why auction off spectrum if the companies who have to use it are stuck having to pay exorbitant amounts of cash to build towers all over the damn place to keep their signal a live whilst the FAA and Military get a free pass to basically squat on old tech which can be messed with by high power equipment on a frequency close by...these are the cheap guys running the country right there. FAA and Military should have some of the best equipment out there, but according to the FCC chairman they obviously do not.
Dish will probably bite the bullet on this and shake hands with the Goog and go all out, not sure how Dish will profit from this as Goog will make buckets off the adverts but Dish would have to get their money somehow...customers...!
14. tward291 (Posts: 559; Member since: 14 Feb 2012)
dish should just take that spectrum and offer wireless service for tablets and laptops.