Social Feed

justalurker said:

Doubtful? Doubtful that they will sign at 2pm, that they will sign on Monday or that they will sign at all?

Click to expand...

I would expect that today they would sign a sales agreement and the board would approve. The sales agreement would give state a day for the closing and transfer of the assets.

The two transponders are not part of the sale. VOOM is using 13 TPs at the moment. 11 it owns and wants to sell to Echostar. The other 2 are the unlicensed ones that the FCC wants to sell (VOOM has temporary authority to use the 2 until they are sold).

Click to expand...

The STAs for those two transponders are part of the sale. In the FCC filing the STAs for those two frequencies would be transfered to Echostar.

No, you are missing the point, it not just about those two transponders, read:

Because these channels are the only remaining unassigned DBS channels in the 12 GHz DBS band that could provide service to the Eastern half of the continental United States, we conclude that such a restriction on eligibility to use them will serve the public interest by helping to promote the development of an additional provider of DBS services," the bureau said in its order.


What that says to me is that they( FCC) really want a third provider, if they know that Mr.Dolan is willing to give a try to keep it going, and not go out of business, that will make the FCC think more about approving or disapproving the sale, that would be a good goal for a petition.

Click to expand...

Your thinking is sort of like mine. As the only Eastern side slot space must be reserved for a 3rd DBS provider since none of the Western slots can be viewed from the East. I can see if someone just wants a Western slot to provide DBS services to the territories as an Eastern one wouldn't be needed, but there is only 1 Eastern slot. The FCC never wanted all the DBS frequencies owned by a couple companies and envisioned many satellite owners like we have in C-Band and KU-FSS. I think the FCC was a little disapointed that none of the DBS licensees have opted to be common carriers.

I think the FCC should deny the transfer of frequencies to Echostar as this would be permanent. However, if Rainbow wants to lease the frequencies to Echostar for a few years while it finds a more suitable buyer that would be ok. Or if Rainbow doesn't want the licenses then the FCC should let E* have an STA for the frequencies until they are auctioned and used by another provider, which is what E* had before.

It could be that the company that wants to create a new slot at 105w would be interested in purchasing the frequencies at 61.5, but isn't interested in the R-1 sat and it's capabilities. I have to wonder if Rainbow looked for any other buyers other than E*. I can't remember that company's name off hand, but they want to be a common carrier on DBS, unlike the current frequency owners. They would provide the infrastructure, receivers, activations, etc... but others would lease TPs and provide packaging (just like we currently have with KU-FSS).

Pleading Cycle Established

source: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-501A1.pdf

Comments/Petitions Due: March 28, 2005
Oppositions Due: April 12, 2005
Replies Due: April 18, 2005

On January 28, 2005, EchoStar Satellite L.L.C. ("EchoStar") and Rainbow DBS Company LLC ("Rainbow DBS") filed applications pursuant to section 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, seeking consent to assign authority held by Rainbow DBS to operate a Direct Broadcast Satellite ("DBS") space station, Rainbow 1, at the 61.5º W.L. orbital location, and the associated earth station facilities at the Black Hawk site in Rapid City, South Dakota, to EchoStar. Specifically, the assignment request includes Rainbow's authorization to operate Rainbow 1, call sign DBS 8701, at 6l.5º W.L. on 11 odd-numbered channels (channels 1-21), the Special Temporary Authority ("STA") to operate on 2 additional DBS channels at that orbital location (channels 23 and 24), and the license to operate the Black Hawk Earth Station, call sign E020248. The pertinent file numbers associated with this assignment request are as follows:

Click to expand...

bryan27 said:

It could be that the company that wants to create a new slot at 105w would be interested in purchasing the frequencies at 61.5, but isn't interested in the R-1 sat and it's capabilities. I have to wonder if Rainbow looked for any other buyers other than E*. I can't remember that company's name off hand, but they want to be a common carrier on DBS, unlike the current frequency owners. They would provide the infrastructure, receivers, activations, etc... but others would lease TPs and provide packaging (just like we currently have with KU-FSS).

Click to expand...

The new DBS slot would be at 105.5 W, 4.5 degrees between the DBS slot at 101 W and 110 W. The company that has applied to the FCC for this 105.5 W slot is none other than SES Americom, owner of AMC-6 or Rainbow-2. It is also been fairly well established that SES Americom already has an agreement in place with Echostar (Dish) to lease them the satellite at the 105.5 W DBS slot if approved by the FCC. Realize also that Dish is leasing the 105 W Ku band slot from SES Americom with the AMC-2 satellite that should be replaced by the much more powerful AMC-15 that is already on orbit and being tested at 117 W. Dish is also leasing the 85 W Ku band slot from SES Americom and AMC-16 is already on orbit being tested as well.

The other 4.5 degree DBS slot that is being considered is 114.5 W, half way between 110 W and 119 W. Dish has applied and had rejected their application to the FCC for this slot a year or so back. Another company Spectrum Five which I believe is part of General Dynamics has also recently applied and had reject by the FCC their application for the 114.5 W DBS slot.

A few things have or will be changing since the FCC ruling on the two unassigned frequencies at 61.5 W. First, Cablevision/Rainbow DBS obviously could not make Voom work from a financial standpoint and that is the major point of the Rainbow DBS/Echostar argument in the application for frequency transfer. The second point is that there has been and will be significant changes in personnel at the FCC since the ruling on the two unassigned frequencies. This includes the FCC Chairman, Michael Powell who should be gone before the ruling on the frequency is made. I also believe that the FCC did not want to appear to show favoritism to either Rainbow DBS or Echostar related to this unassigned frequencies but let Rainbow DBS use them temporarily until they could get established. The FCC was going to put these two frequencies up for auction with the stipulation that Rainbow, Dish or DirecTV could not bid on them to demonstrate their dedication to competition with the belief that no other company would bid on them. At that point, they would let the three companies either bid on them and/or split the two between Rainbow and Dish.

bryan27 said:

The FCC never wanted all the DBS frequencies owned by a couple companies and envisioned many satellite owners like we have in C-Band and KU-FSS.

Click to expand...

The FCC envisioned carriers getting matched transponders. Have 8 transponders east? Get 8 transponders west. That would have given even coverage for east and west. The problem came when it was discovered (noticed?) that three of the eastern positions were good enough to cover the entire US. Most of the original assignees defaulted on their western assignments to concentrate on building and buying more eastern assignments and left the FCC with a problem. What to do with western positions that in today's marketplace no longer can be matched in the east. Their solution: auction the western slots. Unfortunately that didn't attract any new entrants and, technically, left TP23 and TP24 on 61.5 as the only free DBS slots. Any new entrant (fifth DBS provider) would have trouble reaching the west coast and NOT be able to provide service at all via DBS to Alaska and Hawaii.

The FCC's witholding of TP23 and TP24 from Rainbow and Echostar did NOTHING to encourage or permit a fifth DBS carrier to enter the market. It was a good decision not to award the channels both to V* or both to E* but with the near total lack of interest for US slots from new entrants it would have been better if they just split the difference - TP23 to V* and TP24 to E*. Only E* bid on 157. Only V* bid on 166 and 175. Where is "the next" DBS provider?

Those two transponders belong to the FCC and they can withold them until the federal courts step in. RainbowDBS' licenses are being transferred within the law and within the FCC rules. If the FCC decides to interfere with the legal transfer of licenses on a whim (gee, we wish there were another provider) would find the ruling appealed, in court and reversed.

JL