Broadcast spectrum suggested for 3G use

Thomas Hazlett, resident scholar of the American Enterprise Institute, says he has a way to satisfy the cellular industry’s grab for more spectrum that does not touch the multichannel multipoint distribution service (MMDS)/instructional television fixed service (ITFS) spectrum.

“You have this elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. What’s the deal with the broadcast spectrum?” he asked during a panel at this week’s Wireless Communications Association (WCA) convention in Boston.

Hazlett believes the broadcast spectrum makes sense for 3G services, because 91% of TV viewers in 2005 will get television from cable or satellite. He estimates it will cost about $3 billion to provide satellite reception gear to the remaining 9% of consumers, freeing up about 400 MHz of spectrum for 3G when it is no longer necessary to receive broadcast signals over the air.

Hazlett fortified his argument by noting the ongoing slow transition to digital television will cost consumers about $50 billion for digital TVs or set-top boxes to receive digital signals. Last year 98% of all televisions purchased were not digital, indicating a vast majority of consumers are saying “’I don’t want to spend the extra to buy digital.’”

The government could use broadcast spectrum to create five nationwide 80 MHz licenses, which “far outweighs” using the spectrum for digital broadcast TV, he said.

Taking the 2.1, 2.5-2.7 GHz MMDS/ITFS spectrum “boggles the imagination,” he continued. “Right now, the American public is getting cheated out of the value of the broadcast spectrum.”

Hazlett, a former FCC chief economist, predicted that non-broadcast technology companies would lead the charge in demanding the use of this spectrum for something other than broadcast television.

“People ought to keep their eyes on this,” he said. “This is where the big money is.”