Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Google Ready to Bid on 700 MHz

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Wed Aug 22, 2007 04:44 PM
from the protecting-your-interests dept.
Seppanen Style writes "The 700MHz spectrum auction looks like it's going to be heated. Google CEO Eric Schmidt has all but confirmed that Google will make a play for the spectrum that will be on offer next January. 'In effect, this could give Google control of the entire pipe between customers and Google servers, a move that could be very good for business strategy, even if the wireless network is not a major profit center. Companies never like to be at the mercy of other companies, and Google is no exception.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Mobile: Google Plans to Bid 4.6 Billion on 700MHz Band 148 comments
NickCatal writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google plans to bid $4.6 Billion on the 700 MHz radio spectrum being auctioned off by the FCC. What is most interesting is that they are not planning on partnering with other companies to raise the cash, they are going to spend their own cash and possibly borrow some. With partners such as Sprint Nextel and T-Mobile in their 'Open Handset Alliance' is this a sign that they are willing to directly compete with the people they courted to join?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • 700 MHz? (Score:5, Funny)

    by adnonsense (826530) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @04:52PM (#20323191) Homepage Journal
    I have one in my closet they can have. I'll even throw an extra 128MB of SDRAM!
  • Last big spectrum givawa^d^d^d^d^d^d^d auction I think most of the spectrum went for some sum just north of the cost of a large mocha. If the telco's get scared pissless from Google here we might just see a very heated auction rather than the collusion assgrab many of these things are in America.
    • by thesandbender (911391) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:28PM (#20323445)
      I consider myself a die hard republican and even I can recognize that we have a bunch of incompetent, self-serving grab asses in office. Given that this is the FCC this money should be put to opening a up public spectrum, researching lost cost internet or even contributing to NPR or PBS (yes... I'm a conservative who loves Nova, Frontline and All Things Considered). Instead it will be used to have a go at random super-bowl boobies and censor TV shows that are on when children should be in bed.

      Not that I want an Democratic administration to have the money either.

      Hmm... don't Australians have topless beach, beer, grilled shrimp and beer?
  • Does anyone know the specifics of what sort of limitations the FCC will put on the 700Mhz spectrum? Will they be able to transmit up to 15miles? Up to 100,000 watts? Something like that? Who is to say that the G people will be able to convince everyone in the US to use their pipes?
    • Is there off-the-shelf equipment for 700MHz? If not, then anyone buying a 700MHz solution will be locked in to that provider.

      Private spectrum is not really any different to any other kinds of lock-in.

      • by MorpheousMarty (1094907) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:42PM (#20323563)
        However this spectrum must be open in two key ways [slashdot.org]
        From the Summary

        This portion of the spectrum also happens to be the one with two open access conditions attached to its sale mandating that all devices be allowed to access the band and that all applications can be able to run across the network.
        This means that it may become the dominate frequency for off the shelf parts, since they know that no provider can actually keep their product off the market. Honestly you combine these rules with a device like the N95 or iPhone, add a little Skype, and what you get is Nerdvana, a network where you only pay for the pipe, but you can flush anything you want down it.
    • Re:Does anyone know? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by NickFortune (613926) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @06:34PM (#20323971) Homepage

      Who is to say that the G people will be able to convince everyone in the US to use their pipes?

      I've been thinking about this, and I don't think they need to convince anyone.

      I mean, yes, I'd expect them to use the wireless spectrum to give them a "last mile" connection to all that dark fiber they've been buying up. But I think they'll also hook it up to the conventional Internet, and keep it truly network neutral. Once that's in place, AT&T can packet shape youTube all they want; all that will happen is that the best route will be via Google's fiber and AT&T will lose money because they won't be peering so much data.

      If Google do this right, AT&T will have to stay network neutral just to stay in the game. It'll be typical Google; altruistic on the surface, with a business strategy behind it. It's going to be interesting to see how this issue develops :)

  • Offtoic, sure... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by veganboyjosh (896761) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @04:58PM (#20323247)
    ...but this being slashdot, I rarely rtfa's. Are all of arstechnica's articles well laid out like that? I'm used to some other websites whose articles are 3 paragraphs spread out over 17 pages or the like. I got to the end of this one, expecting more article. Turns out it was the end of the thing.

    Kudos to them, I say.
  • This major for Google, and thus major for the Telecoms.

    Google has many multiple billions in cash, and can always raise more.

    vs.

    The entire sucky telecom industry.

    Not only that, but Google ace is open-standards.

    May the best bidder win, and I hope it is open standards.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Eff the best bidder, I've had SBC and AT&T and their ilk handling my telco needs all my life and I know exactly what I'd be getting with them being in control. A pile of useless crap, over priced and under maintained.

      May GOOGLE win it. Even if they do absolutely nothing with it and just sit around using the paperwork as toliet paper, it's a fair cry better than letting the rapidly reforming Mother Bell have a hand over it.

      Stuff like this makes me want to break out the Christmas fund and invest in Google
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:00PM (#20323265)
    I think the 2.4GHz spectrum is where all the heat is.
  • Google wireless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HaeMaker (221642) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:00PM (#20323267) Homepage
    Here's what I want:

    $29.95/mo 3G wireless internet w/ basic voice plan.
    Free text. because paying for text when it costs the telco so little needs to stop.
    Bluetooth data access that actually works.

    If they can achieve that (by 2009, not too hard), the phone system is done.

    Only problem? the cell towers.
    • If they can achieve that (by 2009, not too hard), the phone system is done.

      Only problem? the cell towers.


      Once they have regulatory backing, cell towers are no biggie. Modern honeycomb towers are fairly inexpensive to build, and are also fairly unobtrusive -- all Google needs to do is lease a few million rooftops, which shouldn't be too difficult (especially if they throw in free access as a park).

      The hard part will be rural coverage.
      • The hard part will be rural coverage.

        If they build the container datacenters at the cross-connects of the dark fibre they own, as has been rumored, put the rural tower on that.

        Done.

        Google should hire us.

      • by wsanders (114993) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:37PM (#20323521) Homepage
        There are are more constraints to leasing rooftops than meets the eye. In most residential areas, Joe Blow can't lease his rooftop to a commercial entity without an insane amount of hoopla. Otherwise, all cell phone companies would have 100% coverage everywhere - and it's taken them years just to get to the 90-something percent coverage they have now.

        In my neighborhood, the Metricom wireless network of yore (fairly cheap flat-rate 50 - 100k service, ubiquitous in the SF Bay Area in the 90s) was not available in my town, because the NIMBYs wouldn't allow it. Lot's of other towns with the same bad attitude as mine.

        "Are you radio transmissions going to give my babies cancer?"

        "I dunno - now, how many packs a day do they smoke?"
      • by WindBourne (631190) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:43PM (#20323567) Journal
        The majority of those towers are owned by the telcos. Normally, the cross license their towers with each other. But they all want this 700 MHz and now Google is saying that they are going to make wireless be CHEAP. Think that they will be in the mood to share? I think not.
    • by fireboy1919 (257783) <rustyp.freeshell@org> on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:56PM (#20323687) Homepage Journal
      Are we saying what we want for a $30 monthly fee?
      Here's what I want:

      $29.95/mo unlimited telepathy+teleportation

      If they can achieve that the phone system is done. So is the airline industry. Probably the education system as well.

      Only problem? We have no idea how to do it.

      OH! Forgot something. I'd also like a pony [i-want-a-pony.com].

    • That's interesting you would list those features... since Sprint's SERO (google it, wealth of information on http://www.slickdeals.net/ [slickdeals.net] http://www.fatwallet.com/ [fatwallet.com] http://www.howardforums.com/ [howardforums.com] provides just that kind of cellphone service for those who sign-up with Sprint's not so secret discount plan.

      My SERO Plan:
      $30/month
      Unlimited data, EVDO rev. 0, rev. A when it is out. (I bought the HTC Mogul)
      Unlimited text (promotion until 9/29, probably extended).
      500 minutes, 7PM nights & weekends
  • Google is playing with the worst of the worst kind of competitor with the telcos and I doubt they have the finances much less the dirty tricks to pull it off.

    I'm very interested in hearing how others think it will play out.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Last time I checked Google had a Market Cap of around 120 BILLION dollars...
      I think they have the money.
      • by Arabani (1127547) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:44PM (#20323581)
        If market cap was actually an indicator of potential success in the auction, Google would lose.

        The telecoms:
        AT&T: $242 billion
        Sprint: $53 billion
        Deutsche Telekom (they own T-Mobile): $79 billion
        Verizon: $121 billion

        Versus:
        Google: $160 billion

        Luckily, there's more to this game than pure market caps. Google is probably better able to raise cash, and may also have more cash on hand, than the telcoms. On the other hand, though, you have companies that have been around for a long time, and are fairly good at getting what they want. Regardless, I'm looking forward to the auction. A Google win would be awesome, but the actual event should turn out interesting as well.
    • Google will win (Score:5, Interesting)

      by HaeMaker (221642) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:27PM (#20323437) Homepage
      They have the money to be the loss leader.

      They can go in and undercut everyone to bring some sanity to the cellphone market.

      Paying to text is absurd. Paying to send email is absurd.

      They will probably come in with some kind of deal where you pay for voice and everything else is free. Given their infrastructure, they can probably pull that off.

      If they go GSM with some advanced, high-speed data underneath. They will win, big time.

      Get the google quint-band phone with GSM (700Mhz, 850 MHz, 900Mhz, 1.8Ghz, 1.9Ghz), bluetooth, cameraphone with automatic youtube and picasa updates. Total market ownage.
    • For all their foibles, the telcos are regulated, at least in some sense of the word -- either by laws or by competition. Google doesn't like laws or competition. They'd love to acquire another monopoly they can leverage.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Google is the one who made the minimum bid proposal of 4.6billion that got this auction reserve to be set at 4.6billion. And this proposal was on the stipulation that the winner would be required to lease out to competitors. Thus, competition. Even if Google wins. Even if Google loses.

        Google isn't worried about competition, they're worried about being locked out.
      • Another monopoly? What's their current one? It's not search, it's not advertising, it's not any of their apps...
  • Seems sensible (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Mike1024 (184871) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:15PM (#20323375)
    The fact that Google offered to make a $4.6 billion bid for the spectrum implies (1) Google has $4.6 billion in capital available, and (2) Google has a use for that spectrum.

    It seems reasonable to assume they would make a bid, even without the four openness rules - after all, if they win they can make their own openness rules, and if they don't win, it costs them nothing.

  • Secret phone recordings suggest that Royksopp [wikipedia.org] are also involved in some shady underhand negotiations for 700MHz

    (Phone rings) "Hello?"
    "Yeah it's me... I wanna give you some good frequencies; 1710, 2.6, 2245..."
    "Yeah"
    "3032, 700"
    (Surprised) "Seven hundred?!"
    "Yeah."
    "I'm coming right over."
    "Do that."
    "I'll be there in two seconds"

    (Later)

    "You bastard! You sold me 700 Terahertz!"
    "That'll teach you to be more careful with your units next time."

    • > "You bastard! You sold me 700 Terahertz!"

      Yeah, but then they own the color purple. Take that, Alice Walker.
  • Do they accept paypal?
  • by morissm (22885) <morissmNO@SPAMlexum.umontreal.ca> on Wednesday August 22 2007, @06:20PM (#20323861) Homepage
    I am not sure Google is really interested in winning the auction. Their play might be to put pressure on the telcos in order to strike an access deal with them.

    The telcos have something that Google wants: unfettered and maybe even exclusive access to their users. Telcos however are notorious for their habit of restricting their devices' access to services that net them more profit. Google knows that and knows that wireless devices may be tomorrow's prime mean of accessing the Internet. If this were to happen, search and content providers would have to strike very onerous deals with telcos in order to maintain access to their clientele.

    As a result, the FCC's decision not to require open access to the Internet for users of the 700Mhz spectrum threatens to put Google's future in the hands of the telcos.

    The menace to enter the telcos' market strenghtens Google's barganing position because
    a) Google has the money to make good on that threat and may chose to do so as a defensive measure
    b) the telcos need that spectrum a lot more than Google does.

    I wouldn't be surprised to hear in the coming months that Google has struck many major long term deals with several telcos and has finally decided to bow out of the auction.
    • by Frenchy_2001 (659163) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @07:01PM (#20324231)
      That's where the fun is: They "win" without even paying a cent. They succeeded in adding the openness term to the auction. Now, they just need to place *ONE* minimal amount bid and look at the other players rip each other's throat to block them access to the airwaves. But, by placing the bet, they ensure that the openness clause will take effect

      In the end, they'll just have to put out a device on the standard.

      Now, they definitely could use that spectrum to actually create a last mile connection network. As they are rumored to already own a bunch of dark fiber, they would have a top to bottom network infrastructure. Enough to scare the telcos. Maybe Google will enter that market to ensure a free (as in unrestricted) connection to their customers. Maybe they'll just stick to online service and enter devices on a free network. The uncertainty will push the telcos to bid higher and they certainly don't have as much cash laying around as Google does...
  • If i had to choose between Google and at&t, id choose google.
  • Companies never like to be at the mercy of other companies, and Google is no exception.

    In my experience companies are perfectly happy to be at the mercy of other companies. It's hardly unknown for a company to source software products from a single company, for example, with no easy migration path to any other product.

    Perhaps Google is the exception after all.

  • advertising (Score:4, Funny)

    by delvsional (745684) on Thursday August 23 2007, @02:52AM (#20327427)

    Phone Rings

    Husband: Hey honey, What do want for dinner tonight?

    Wife: How about some chicken?

    Husband: That sounds good, how about some popeyes?

    Wife: That sounds good, or we could ...

    recording interrupting....

    Recording: (uber-cheerfully) I hear you're looking for chicken in your area.... I'd just like to let you know that there's a KFC on The corner of Campbell and Howard. There is also a popeyes on the corner of vero beach and tracy, a KFC on the corner of

    Husband: Shut up!!! I know where the chicken places are, I live here.

    Recording: juno and tibedeau and there's a popeyes at 945 Main

    Wife: just let it finish.

    Recording: Street and there's a Publix at 177 center street.

    husband: Damn Google and this cheap phone service. I can't even have a conversation anymore.

    Recording: I heard google, Would you like to look something up? Perhaps how to buy 'conversations' on E-bay?

  • bittorent (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wwmedia (950346) on Thursday August 23 2007, @06:25AM (#20328339)
    so what woudl happen once every torrent user moves onto their network?

    will the "do no evil" moto have to change then?
    • by Valacosa (863657) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:26PM (#20323427)

      If Google wants to "do no evil" why don't they fund the removal of [George W. Bush]?

      Hey, better yet, why don't they convince the UN to send peacekeepers to Darfur? Why don't they fund alternative energy research? I'm sure they have enough money to get a fusion research lab up and running. Why don't they fight cancer?

      The problem is even if they did set up a lab to do research with the intent of "fighting cancer", some asshole like you would complain they're not fighting AIDS.

      Anyone who wants to fight to do good in this world only has limited resources to work with, as such, one must pick their battles. Taking on the crooked telco companies is worthy enough for me.

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      And making Dick Cheney the president is going to help us how?
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Most of their shareholders support GWB

        Like Al Gore? Brin and Page own special preferred stock that effectively means they still retain control of the company. They (as well as Google employees, many of whom live in liberal California) vote (and donate [usatoday.com]) overwhelmingly democratic.
      • Not really (Score:5, Interesting)

        by WindBourne (631190) on Wednesday August 22 2007, @05:39PM (#20323529) Journal
        Some of his major investors include Buffett who is very opposed to W. As to W's policies helping Brin/Page, that is VERY false. To date, the top 10 wealthiest ppl in America have come out SOLIDLY opposed to W's tax cuts and his ongoing deficits. To that end, Buffett, Gates, etc have been moving their money out of dollars and buying up other currency (mostly euros). Why? Because they believe that W's deficts on top of reagans is destroying our ability operate. I think that they are right.
    • by encoderer (1060616) on Thursday August 23 2007, @07:13AM (#20328599)
      Obviously wireless spectrum is going to be an end-user product. Allowing a nationwide wireless network similar to what Google paid for in the bay area recently.

      But the dark fibre...

      Yes, no doubt, perhaps used to connect wireless broadcasting centers to each other, but also, my speculation is that it's going to be used for television. Google is an advertising company. For the forseeable future, there is no bigger advertising medium than Television. True, the major networks upfronts were lower this year than in the past, but that's only because the rise of original content on cable networks has created more premium content for advertisers to buy into.

      Google is going to need massive bandwidth to build a next-gen network for TV advertising. Perhaps even one day using the Overlay technology it's deploying on YouTube. Time shifting is here to stay. Advertising is here to stay. I suspect the latter will adapt to the former, and overlays seem a pretty likely candidate.

      Who has the technology, bandwidth, ad sales teams, and capital to make it all work? .... Good question .... maybe somebody should Google it...
      • Much more than that (Score:5, Interesting)

        by MikShapi (681808) on Thursday August 23 2007, @05:34AM (#20328113) Journal
        Google has spent a decade and some on one side of a very big coin. Search, ads, gmail, google maps, google docs, google this, that, everything translates into one simple thing - they have the "Where Joe wants his browser to be" for a VERY big number of Joes worldwide.

        Buying up the 700MHz band will make them, in the US, own the "Where Joe is coming from". A mountain of dark fiber they've been purchasing lately will supply the infrastructure to connect side A to side B.

        Together, these are worth more than the sum of their parts. Coupled, rather than Google wanting to hookup to tier-1 ISP's, it will be tier-1 ISP's who will be jumping through hoops to get closer to the wirelessgoogle plate.

        They seem to be using the momentum of their products to try and catch a rather big chunk of the internet backbone and haul it right up onto their own back (just the bit that involves peoples traffic going to them). Quite admirable in its own right, if they manage to pull it off.

        Rather than bean-counting and looking for a direct profit, a move like that would reposition them in an entirely different league of players, give them way more power, regulation leverage and later translate into an insanely bigger profits.

        I'm eager to see if they manage to pull this off, if for the sheer ability to outsmart all of the established competition for that power. And frankly, even without them being holier than the bloody pope, I'd much rather have them have it than any other player their size.