Regional carriers plead with FCC for compulsory roaming
By Chris Ziegler 
posted Sep 23rd 2006 11:05PM
posted Sep 23rd 2006 11:05PM
It's no secret that rural and regional carriers don't enjoy the most amiable relationship with the Big Four here in the States; there's a plethora of reasons why the two groups don't always get along, but whether they like it or not, they're sorta stuck in the same boat. In terms of infrastructure, the national carriers obviously own (or hold exclusive leases to) far more property, leaving them holding nearly all the cards in the roaming game. That leaves the regionals in a bit of a pickle, and once again, they're turning to the FCC for help. This time around, the main complaint circles around the regionals' desire for the national carriers to be required to offer automatic roaming; that is, any carrier of the same technology (GSM or CDMA, that is) should be allowed to roam on their network at a "reasonable" price. Furthermore, they're asking the FCC to to require that any service offered by the nationals be offered to regional carriers' customers as well -- we're not really sure we're following that part of the argument, since it's the big guys that end up footing the bill for the technology build-outs (albeit by charging their own customers in kind) -- but then again, we're all about choice. Predictably, the nationals aren't happy; both T-Mobile and Cingular have come out against the proposal, and we're guessing Sprint and Verizon share the sentiment. It's not known when (or if) the FCC will make a ruling, but the outcome could ultimately determine the fate of some rural carriers relying heavily on third-party infrastructure to provide their user base with service.[Via The Wireless Report]
So let the big companies fix the problems...and then the little ones can just leech? C'mon this is rediculous...
I pay Verizon more money because they spend $4bil a year to make "their" network better...and it is...why should someone from Alltel pay half what I do for the same service?
This is ridiculous. Now I hate big business just as much as the next person. I even agree with AMD's lawsuit and all that jazz but I mean WTF!! Why should a company be required to allow other companies to use their equipment for anything less than what they want to charge. If somebody is using MY equipment I get to charge them whatever the hell I want. It's not like there is a monopoly. And in all honesty, if you can't handle the heat...then don't try getting into the business. But please don't try to get the governement to force someone to have to discount the use of the equipment THEY (Cingular, Verizon, etc) paid for. This should be a no brainer for the FCC. I mean really, get yor own.
if the spectrum licenses were cheaper, than maybe it would make the regional operator concerns cited here ridiculous.. buts its these high fees that make their business models to expand nationally unviable and hence government has to give them some assistance. I agree that network equipment costs money but if the air (substitute "spectrum") cost as much money, where would these smaller operators get all that financing backing?
Quote MS: I agree that network equipment costs money but if the air (substitute "spectrum") cost as much money, where would these smaller operators get all that financing backing?
They don't...the fundamental difference between the major carriers and the smaller ones is the coverage. If you want more coverage pay more. If you don't need it go with a smaller company. Should a "small" company like Kia be able to use Honda engine technology for free (or significantly reduced price) to try and even the playing field? C'mon, honda can sell their motors for what ever price they wan't, and the same should go for the wireless companies as well. Or should we just follow the Communist approach and have just one wireless company that can use everything, at a government controlled rate?
If you wan't coverage go with a big company...if you wan't to pay less go with a local...you can't have both.
So by the comments on this so far, it's not OK for Americans to travel anywhere else in the world and use their phones?
The clue here is in the ROAMING. It's not going to be free, there will be cross charges, but it means people don't have to swap SIM cards, or handsets jus because they go on vacation for a few weeks somewhere else for instance.
It's attitudes like this driven by the $ than explain why your mobile phone systems don't meet global standards, and why you are so far behind with common technologies.
If you let people work together, it benefits everyone, and the big players will make more money by allowing this.