FCC Executive Director of Broadband Initiative – Blair Levin
When you’ve been a Wall Street analyst for the past 8 years, as I have, you think a lot about how to get the best return on invested assets. In my return to the FCC, I’ve found that the same question is relevant, particularly as to our nation’s spectrum. Of course, our “return” is different—we don’t just think about maximizing profit, we think about providing important public benefits. But still, it’s the question the broadband team asks each day: how can we maximize the return on our most valuable assets to their owners—all of the American people?
Recently, I’ve seen a lot in the press about our efforts to consider the best way to maximize the benefits on spectrum. Much of this chatter was triggered by a recent study submitted through the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA). The study suggested that broadcasters own licenses to approximately $62 billion worth of spectrum, but only extract $12 billion of value from that spectrum. In different hands, the study argues, that spectrum could be worth an extra $50 billion which in turn would drive an extra $500 billion to $1.2 trillion dollars of economic activity. Not everybody agrees with the study, though, and Communications Daily reports that some broadcasters and broadcasting trade groups, including the NAB and MSTV, are preparing to commission their own research that takes into account a different range of factors than did the CEA study.
We welcome this as great news. As the record indicates, spectrum is a key input for broadband, but we know that it also has other uses of great economic and social importance. So we welcome a robust debate about how we can best allocate spectrum—both to maximize economic growth, but also to maximize the public good. We look forward to the NAB findings.
Beyond the study, there have been reports about conversations I’ve had with broadcasters about spectrum. I’m not in the practice of publicly discussing details of private discussions—I want to ensure that every party is as candid as possible in helping us determine the best strategy to move America forward— but I do want to clear up a few details.
These conversations originated from a few broadcasters, who recognized that they had more spectrum than they needed to deliver an economically efficient bitstream. We started discussing whether there could be a market-clearing solution that allowed them to monetize their extra spectrum, while allowing us to maximize the public good. This is the driver behind our discussions: we want the country to use most effectively one of its most valuable resources, while increasing optionality of those broadcasters who recognize that they’re not maximizing returns for their shareholders. We recognize that not all broadcasters would make the same choice but our goal is to determine if there is a mechanism that will attract the interest of a critical mass.
I don’t know if we will succeed in our efforts to allow broadcasters that option, but I do know that if we didn’t try, it would be a disservice to citizens and stakeholders on all sides of the equation.
