http://www.ft.com/…

Morgan Stanley has won the contract to market the prime broadcast spectrum that will become available for sale once all television stations switch from analogue to digital signals in 2012.

The auction, which may raise up to £5bn for the Treasury, will make available up to eight packages of wavelength in a “sweet spot” on the spectrum.

About 128Mhz of spectrum in the sweet spot around 700Mhz will be available.

Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, is expected to begin the process at the end of next year or in early 2010.

The spectrum provides an optimum combination of broadcast range and the ability to carry large amounts of data. It will be of particular interest to mobile telephone companies and those wishing to build wireless networks in urban areas.

Wherever a television signal can be received, the same will apply to mobile phones and laptops.

Morgan Stanley beat several other banks and two marketing companies to the contract, the value of which was not disclosed.

An official at the regulator said that Morgan Stanley’s contact book, allowing it to open direct contact with anyone from US telecoms groups to Asian investors, would be of great value in getting the best price.

In the US last March a similar sale of 52Mhz in the 700Mhz range raised $19.1bn (then £9.8bn). Taking into account the size of the market, this suggests a figure of £4.4bn for the 128Mhz on offer in the UK.

Analysts expect existing telecoms companies to take up most of the spectrum, although Ofcom believes that it can spark wider interest from around the world.

An auction of spectrum in 2000 raised £20bn from mobile phone companies for 3G services.

I’m against government ‘owning’ the radio spectrum anyway but why is it that they are contracting out the auctioning of it? Whether it’s a fix ammount or a percentage of the winning bids the ammount spent is far too much in my opinion. Sure there will be a lot of paperwork when you get down to it the only thing occurring is a transfer of license owner. Why does an organisation like Morgan Stanley need to be involved? I’m sure given the size of the federal government and the FCC itself there is some system which could be arranged without the need of a middle man.

http://arstechnica.com/…

The FCC is considering a cap on cable ownership that could spell trouble for Comcast’s growth plans. News of the plan comes hard on the heels of FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s push to exert regulatory control over the cable industry, a plan that has so far faltered over concerns about the data used to justify the new FCC authority. The cable ownership cap has the necessary votes, though, and it looks like Martin might bring the industry to heel after all.

According to multiple news sources, the FCC hopes to cap any single company’s control of the cable market at 30 percent. No company has currently exceeded that limit, but Comcast is pressing up against it with 27 percent and would likely be the first company to feel the effects of a new rule.

What exactly is this supposed to do? Prevent a monopoly from forming? How about withdrawing local monopoly status’ of almost all current cable companies so that they may compete if they wish to. With all the different services the cable companies provide, the number of companies involved and those who are entering… there are more than enough players to prevent any mythical monopoly from spawning.

http://www.reuters.com/…

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday voted to ban exclusive deals between building owners and cable television providers to give apartment and condominium dwellers a greater choice of pay television services.

The FCC approved a new rule nullifying existing exclusivity provisions and prohibiting any new ones, saying the deals are unfair and prevent new competitors from providing service in many apartment and condo buildings.

“There is no reason that consumers living in apartment buildings should be locked into one service provider,” FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a statement.

Why shouldn’t the apartment building owner or condominium’s governors choose who they do business with? If you don’t like the policies don’t sign the contract to live there. This doesn’t create competition… it places one more regulation into the system.