<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Harbinger&#8217;s new plan: 2GHz first?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/03/10/harbingers-new-plan-2ghz-first/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/03/10/harbingers-new-plan-2ghz-first/</link>
	<description>Satellites, spectrum and other stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:36:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: IM Gadgets &#187; Lightsquared Signs Cricket Wireless</title>
		<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/03/10/harbingers-new-plan-2ghz-first/comment-page-1/#comment-517</link>
		<dc:creator>IM Gadgets &#187; Lightsquared Signs Cricket Wireless</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=1500#comment-517</guid>
		<description>[...] If Harbinger can strike a deal with MetroPCS to make a joint bid for the TerreStar and DBSD spectrum, then any LTE buildout might also be counted towards Lightsquare&#8217;s build-out obligations, according to satellite consultant Tim Farrar. MetroPCS already has about 97M covered POPs. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] If Harbinger can strike a deal with MetroPCS to make a joint bid for the TerreStar and DBSD spectrum, then any LTE buildout might also be counted towards Lightsquare&#8217;s build-out obligations, according to satellite consultant Tim Farrar. MetroPCS already has about 97M covered POPs. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: timfarrar</title>
		<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/03/10/harbingers-new-plan-2ghz-first/comment-page-1/#comment-511</link>
		<dc:creator>timfarrar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 22:11:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=1500#comment-511</guid>
		<description>The big question is whether anyone other than LightSquared is in a position to get a similar waiver from the FCC. Arguably the LightSquared waiver has made it difficult for the FCC to sustain its original position on the 2GHz spectrum, that there would need to be &quot;appropriate compensation for the step up in value??? from any change in the ATC rules (see &lt;a href=&quot;http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/11/29/could-the-fcc-end-up-torpedoing-its-own-nprm/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/11/29/could-the-fcc-end-up-torpedoing-its-own-nprm/&lt;/a&gt;).

However, in granting the waiver to LightSquared, the FCC set out a &quot;public interest&quot; justification based on the commitments LightSquared had made, including that it was building out a nationwide network and restructuring the L-band (see &lt;a href=&quot;http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/01/26/order-and-confusion/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/01/26/order-and-confusion/&lt;/a&gt;).

If someone like MetroPCS wanted to buy the 2GHz spectrum on its own, then the question is what commitments could it make to the FCC in respect of the &quot;public interest&quot; to avoid paying &quot;appropriate compensation for the step up in value&quot; to the government.

With regard to the specific points above, it is true that LightSquared&#039;s ATC waiver (to allow terrestrial-only devices) appears to only cover the L-band. However, with respect to the 100M POP buildout the situation is slightly less clear. The requirements can be met using &quot;any other terrestrial spectrum that...is made available to SkyTerra for pooling with its spectrum&quot; (see &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tmfassociates.com/Harbinger-SkyterraOrder.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.tmfassociates.com/Harbinger-SkyterraOrder.pdf&lt;/a&gt;). At the moment the 2GHz spectrum might not necessarily be considered as &quot;terrestrial spectrum&quot;, but the current MSS NPRM proposes to change that designation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The big question is whether anyone other than LightSquared is in a position to get a similar waiver from the FCC. Arguably the LightSquared waiver has made it difficult for the FCC to sustain its original position on the 2GHz spectrum, that there would need to be &#8220;appropriate compensation for the step up in value??? from any change in the ATC rules (see <a href="http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/11/29/could-the-fcc-end-up-torpedoing-its-own-nprm/" rel="nofollow">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/11/29/could-the-fcc-end-up-torpedoing-its-own-nprm/</a>).</p>
<p>However, in granting the waiver to LightSquared, the FCC set out a &#8220;public interest&#8221; justification based on the commitments LightSquared had made, including that it was building out a nationwide network and restructuring the L-band (see <a href="http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/01/26/order-and-confusion/" rel="nofollow">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/01/26/order-and-confusion/</a>).</p>
<p>If someone like MetroPCS wanted to buy the 2GHz spectrum on its own, then the question is what commitments could it make to the FCC in respect of the &#8220;public interest&#8221; to avoid paying &#8220;appropriate compensation for the step up in value&#8221; to the government.</p>
<p>With regard to the specific points above, it is true that LightSquared&#8217;s ATC waiver (to allow terrestrial-only devices) appears to only cover the L-band. However, with respect to the 100M POP buildout the situation is slightly less clear. The requirements can be met using &#8220;any other terrestrial spectrum that&#8230;is made available to SkyTerra for pooling with its spectrum&#8221; (see <a href="http://www.tmfassociates.com/Harbinger-SkyterraOrder.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.tmfassociates.com/Harbinger-SkyterraOrder.pdf</a>). At the moment the 2GHz spectrum might not necessarily be considered as &#8220;terrestrial spectrum&#8221;, but the current MSS NPRM proposes to change that designation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jhc8d</title>
		<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2011/03/10/harbingers-new-plan-2ghz-first/comment-page-1/#comment-510</link>
		<dc:creator>jhc8d</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 21:47:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=1500#comment-510</guid>
		<description>Tim -

Really enjoy your blog. Couple of questions though:

1) I&#039;m under the impression that the FCC Waiver was given to Lightsquared with respect to the L-Band Spectrum. Not necessarily a blanket waiver for other MSS spectrum that Lightsquared may acquire. Is that correct?

2) The milestones for the network build were imposed on Lightsquared when they &quot;acquired&quot; SkyTerra&#039;s L-Band Spectrum. So - if Lightsquared and MetroPCS were to partner together to purchase and build out the S-Band Spectrum - would that be helpful to Lightsquared and their 100MM POP hurdle for 2012?

If the above is true, I just don&#039;t see why MetroPCS needs Lightsquared at this point. They should acquire the S-Band spectrum directly - all 40 MHz or just TSTR

Looks like they can pay $0.22 per MHzPOP to beat the current non-binding offer from Solus/Lightsquared. Adjusting for the fact that Metro&#039;s markets only cover 142MM POPs - that&#039;s $0.48 per MHzPOP - still below the average price paid for spectrum in both the AWS and PCS auctions. Those went for $0.54 and $1.08 per MHzPOP, respectively - and are in neighboring frequency bands.

If they were to go this route - doesn&#039;t seem like they&#039;ll have a problem getting a similar waiver from the FCC.

Do you agree?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim -</p>
<p>Really enjoy your blog. Couple of questions though:</p>
<p>1) I&#8217;m under the impression that the FCC Waiver was given to Lightsquared with respect to the L-Band Spectrum. Not necessarily a blanket waiver for other MSS spectrum that Lightsquared may acquire. Is that correct?</p>
<p>2) The milestones for the network build were imposed on Lightsquared when they &#8220;acquired&#8221; SkyTerra&#8217;s L-Band Spectrum. So &#8211; if Lightsquared and MetroPCS were to partner together to purchase and build out the S-Band Spectrum &#8211; would that be helpful to Lightsquared and their 100MM POP hurdle for 2012?</p>
<p>If the above is true, I just don&#8217;t see why MetroPCS needs Lightsquared at this point. They should acquire the S-Band spectrum directly &#8211; all 40 MHz or just TSTR</p>
<p>Looks like they can pay $0.22 per MHzPOP to beat the current non-binding offer from Solus/Lightsquared. Adjusting for the fact that Metro&#8217;s markets only cover 142MM POPs &#8211; that&#8217;s $0.48 per MHzPOP &#8211; still below the average price paid for spectrum in both the AWS and PCS auctions. Those went for $0.54 and $1.08 per MHzPOP, respectively &#8211; and are in neighboring frequency bands.</p>
<p>If they were to go this route &#8211; doesn&#8217;t seem like they&#8217;ll have a problem getting a similar waiver from the FCC.</p>
<p>Do you agree?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
