Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Jeffrey Carlisle, EVP of Regulatory Affairs for the controversial new broadband provider, LightSquared, made a suprising statement yesterday.  In referencing a recommendation by the National Executive Committe for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, & Timing (that's a mouthful) to the FCC, Carlisle said it “should be given no weight by the commission.”  Which, on the surface sounds harsh, but begs the question: who, then, can policy-makers trust?

Carlisle's argument is not unintelligent.  The board's recommendation that the FCC should refuse LightSquared's use of spectrum previously dominated by satellites was reached before LightSquared announced it's plans to avert any ill-effects of their technology.  Carlisle also pointed out that the board, while having an impressive title, does not write policy or have any real "power" over executive decision. 

What Carlisle didn't include in his appeal (and wisely so, perhaps) is the fact that this "National Executive Committee" consists primarily of private-sector agents representing the interests of businesses who stand to be affected by LightSquared's new technology.  Why does that matter?  It means that Carlisle and LightSquared cannot be slanted as the only party in this matter with financial motives at heart.  The FCC must decide what's just and what's best for the nation's communication infrastructure realizing that both their National Executive Committee and LightSquared's appeals have commercial motives.

The trouble is: whose advice can the FCC trust?  The reality is that the best and brightest minds in a capitalist world will be employed in the private sector.  So, when the government needs unbiased and highly technical analysis, who will perform it? 

I don't envy the FCC's role in making this decision. Whichever direction they decide to go, much criticism will befall them.  If the businesses dependent on satellite technology suffer because of the FCC's decision to permit LightSquared to proceed, age-old industries will be at risk.  However, the FCC also stands the potential err of protecting established industry at the cost of single-handedly destroying an innovating tech start-up.  Quite honestly, that prospect scares me. 

The answer, perhaps, lies in the T-Com industry at-large.  Competitors, vendors, and allies of LightSquared should consider sending their own suggestions and feedback to FCC regulators.  Unbiased and biased alike, if the FCC is to make a just ruling, then more input may be required for a wide range of sources.  Fortunately, the FCC has invited you to do just that.  Via the website reboot.FCC.gov, you can submit feedback directly to the FCC regarding this and any other matters.  So, I encourage you: consider the matter, compose your thoughts, and submit the feedback.

Labels: Broadband, FCC, lightsquared, tcom

posted by Unknown at 8:34 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, September 7, 2010
This is a trend that I've casually noticed over the years, but I am recently beginning to really ponder. Have you ever met someone that's head-over-heals in love with their telecom provider? I've read raving reviews of restaurants, hospitals, banks, and even lawyers (yeah, I know) but never have I heard an unsolicited and heartfelt praise of any tcom institution. Can the industry really be that universally bad? Or, is it possible that this is a business people love to hate?

I hear it all the time with wireless carriers. "I used [insert carrier here], but hated it so I switched to [insert another carrier here]." And, it's odd, but the names of the biggest carriers like AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint all get placed interchangeably into either of the two slots, depending on who you talk to. So, if everyone's getting frustrated regardless of company: could it be that the problem isn't the company after all?

For starters, a comment on human nature. We love to complain. And, for some reason, there is a mob mentality when it comes to complaining. If one person in an office hates the candy selection in the vending machines, if left unchecked, before you know it everyone is moaning about it... even Fred, the health nut who refuses to eat from vending machines. It's just human nature. Why? Because Fred wants to be like the others--so he adopts their affinities and their disdains. I have no doubt that somewhere along the way, it became trendy to be at odds with your telecom provider--the cable company, the phone company, the wireless carrier, the broadband privder--whoever it is.

"How did such a trend get started?" we must ask, if ever to resolve the issue. My theory: with generation e"X"pectancy. Oh, and don't worry, I cannot be accused of age bias--I'm an x'er myself. So, I can say it. We want it all, we want it now, and we want it free. It's a market demand that many industries have capitalized on by satisfying--hence: consumerism. But it's a bit more challenging for tcom companies to satisfy this desire in their customers. We want native-tongue support specialists (in a country with sky-rocketing health benefits and mimimum wage above $8/hr) but we want it for free. We want faster speeds, but we don't want our yard dug up nor to bear the costs of millions of miles of fiber. We want a company that's committed to our needs, but we don't want to commit to a contract.

But the problem can't be oversimplified to just a whiny generation. The reality is: the system is flawed... or at least, it's feeble.

Consider this. A waiter cannot improve your food, no matter how hard he wants to serve. The cook himself is even limited by the supplies he has. The farmer can try as he may to improve the quality of his produce and meat, but at the end of the day, he has a limited resource.

In reality, the majority of the industry that everyone loves to hate is comprised of waiters and waitresses. And, while there are more "cooks" today than ever before, that market is still somewhat limited. However, the most notable fact about our telecom industry is that all the cooks are buying primarily from one age-old farmer that has largely built this nation's telecom infrastructure for over a century.

But I'm the last person to point a finger at "THE phone company." The reality of the situation boils down to this: despite their best efforts to fill every customer's desire, our nation's telecom industry at large is trying desperately to meet an unprecedented growth in demand... and the resources simply cannot keep up.

But I'm hopeful. Why? Why am I so amicable to the industry everyone loves to hate? Because just today, my "waitress" for residential broadband sent a letter to my house saying that upgrades in my area have doubled my speeds--on the house! Can't beat that.

Labels: "Internet infrastructure", Broadband, tcom, Telecommunication, The phone company

posted by Unknown at 9:17 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments