WASHINGTON-NextWave Telecom Inc. took Omnipoint Corp. to task over its Nov. 24 petition for reconsideration and clarification regarding proposed financial options for C-block personal communications services players.
Comments on Omnipoint’s opposition were collected Dec. 29 despite an effort at by Antigone Communications L.P. and PCS Devco Inc. to move the filing deadline back.
In its petition, Omnipoint, also a C-block winner holding 18 licenses, said the Federal Communications Commission’s proposed four-prong financial restructuring plan favored “the insistent needs of a few licensees” but failed to address companies that had either failed to win C-block markets, those (like Omnipoint) that have made significant strides in building their networks, and bidders in other PCS auctions. Omnipoint asked for four modifications of the order:
Clarify that a licensee that has built out a market still can give back 15 megahertz through the disaggregation option;
Require NextWave to voice its restructuring plan prior to the Jan. 15 deadline;
Give licensees equivalent credit for monies already paid regardless of whether the prepayment or disaggregation option is chosen; and
Following the reauction of any C-block licenses, allow D-, E- and F-block licensees the same financial restructuring options.
In explaining its stance on NextWave’s going first in announcing restructuring plans, Omnipoint wrote, “This staggered election should result in no material disadvantage to NextWave because it does not face another C-block licensee that can so unilaterally change the import of the election decision, as NextWave’s decision will do for others. Moreover, NextWave and its affiliates have been among the most vociferous proponents for dramatic alterations to the payment rules, and so they can hardly complain of this small change to the election process that makes it more rational for other C-block bidders, many of whom never asked for any auction debt relief.”
NextWave contended that Omnipoint had flip-flopped in its argument for fairness for all C-block players. “It claims that NextWave does not deserve equal treatment concerning the commission’s decision to require C-block licensees to declare a financing option simultaneously,” it wrote. “Instead, Omnipoint wants NextWave to publicly commit to an option before Omnipoint and other licensees, so it can factor that information into its own decision making. This is an unbridled attempt to obtain an early signal of NextWave’s intentions and `game’ the auction rules to secure a competitive advantage.”
NextWave countered that although it had paid the most money for its licenses, it still only owned 12 percent of the total markets granted. “Omnipoint itself admits that nearly half of the licenses in the top 50 markets are held by carriers other than NextWave.”
Omnipoint should be the one to make the first decision regarding the commission’s four financial-restructuring options, NextWave said. “As the beneficiary of a pioneer’s preference for claimed innovations in spread spectrum technology, Omnipoint already has reaped substantial competitive and financial advantage from the regulatory process. Given Omnipoint’s experience in wireless financial markets, advance knowledge of its C-block financing election could greatly improve other licensees’ understanding of the spectrum marketplace.”
The commission should adhere to its initial Jan. 15 filing date, NextWave concluded.
