Executive Session with john hane

Here's What's Next For The Spectrum Auction

Washington communications attorney John Hane walks us through how the just-authorized broadcast TV spectrum auction may play out. He explains what the FCC has to do, how it may proceed, the vagaries of the whole process and points out what broadcasters should be wary of.
TVNewsCheck,

 Last week, President Obama signed into law legislation authorizing an incentive auction of broadcast spectrum as a means of transferring spectrum from TV to wireless broadband, where the FCC and others policymakers have concluded it will eventually be badly needed.

To get a handle on how the auction would work and what it all means to TV broadcasters, TVNewsCheck Editor Harry A. Jessell spoke with John Hane, a Washington communications attorney with the firm of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman.

As Hane sees it, the FCC's big job is to induce enough stations in the most densely populated areas to give up their spectrum for auction with the guarantee of a definite payoff — a payoff established by a preliminary reverse auction.

Story continues after the ad

He also says that broadcasters who choose to hang on to their spectrum are protected to a certain extent by the safeguards that NAB lobbyists had built into the authorizing language, especially a provision that says the FCC has only one shot at the TV spectrum.

It will take years for a motivated FCC to conduct the necessary rulemakings and implement the auctions, he says. But each broadcaster needs to pay attention to what's going as the auctions and attendant repacking will shake up the entire TV band. "If I can't outrun the bear, then I want to outrun the other guy. I want to get the best new assignment in my market," Hane says.

An edited transcript follows:


Sponsored Content

Explain how the incentive auction would actually work.

The FCC is going to try to clear broadcasters completely out of the top end of the UHF TV  band so it can create new licenses there. To do that successfully, it needs some stations in the Washington-Boston corridor, the major markets of the West Coast, some border areas and a few other places to be willing to sell their licenses.

So, the first step is for the FCC to get a sense of how many stations in those areas might be willing to sell. It has a lot of ways of figuring that out, but it won’t know for sure until it has run a so-called “reverse” auction. In a normal auction, the seller finds the highest price a buyer will pay. In a reverse auction, the buyer — the FCC — will find out the lowest prices at which stations may be willing to sell their licenses.

For the reverse auction, stations in each geographic grouping will submit bids identifying the lowest price at which they are willing to sell. The FCC will notify each station whether its bid was accepted, and those whose bids were accepted will be obligated to sell after the forward auction.

In the forward auction, the FCC simply sells to the highest bidders, presumably wireless carriers. If all goes well, the forward auction will yield enough money to pay off the broadcasters who participated in the reverse auction, cover the repacking costs of the broadcasters who didn't volunteer spectrum and still deliver a big check to the treasury.

What happens if the total from the forward auction is less than that from the reverse auction?

The law requires the auction to at least break even. So if the forward auction doesn't yield enough money, then no TV licenses are reclaimed and no new wireless licenses are issued.

Once the FCC has conducted the reverse auction, it will have enough information to repack the TV band to consolidate and maximize the spectrum available for the forward auction. Is that correct?

Yes. The FCC can’t design the licenses it wants to sell until it knows how much spectrum it can clear. And to figure that out, it has to have a good idea of how many stations are willing to tender; how efficiently it can re-pack remaining stations; and what constraints it will face along the Canadian and Mexican borders.

There’s probably a huge, huge difference in the whole auction depending on whether a half-dozen stations in a few key markets are in or out. The amount of spectrum cleared nationwide would be much greater if 18 stations in New York, Baltimore-Washington and Los Angeles bid versus 12. Those aren't the only critical markets, but you get the idea. The FCC really needs volunteers in areas of high population density.

What's involved with the repacking?

Repacking means moving all stations nationwide out of the bands to be auctioned. So you will have repacking even in markets where there was no reverse auction.

Each station that doesn’t sell will be subject to having its license modified. Many or most will receive different channels and many may be assigned different power levels or in some cases even different transmitter sites.

We can only guess at the rough outlines of the auction at this point. The new law gives the FCC a huge amount of flexibility to design both auctions, and allows them to be conducted separately or at the same time.

Tags

Comments (5) -

David Schutz Nickname posted a year ago
John & Harry; this is the most comprehensive overview of the Auction process that I have seen anywhere. Well Done!
D BP Nickname posted a year ago
It confirms what I've suspected, that the downward push on LPTV and translators will be severe. The service itself will survive but not all stations.
Oded Bendov Nickname posted a year ago
As a practical business and PR matter there should be no more than one additional DTV transition in the next 20 yrs. Either due to repacking or due to new transmission standard. That's why both should be done simultaneously. The other reason for doing a simultaneous transition is that is the sure way to maximize the delivered payload to consumers.
Lare Nickname posted a year ago
What about collusion? in some markets a single individual controls multiple TV outlets. is coordination of bids prohibited or encouraged?
csn88 Nickname posted a year ago
What a great interview Harry... John Hane is a pure pro when it comes to broadcasting legal matters. Nice work !

Classifieds

The Market

Symbol Last Change (%)
Nasdaq 3459.14 -0.27 (-0.01%)
NYSE 9442.23 -24.08 (-0.25%)
S&P 500 1649.60 -0.91 (-0.06%)
Updated 05/25 6:15a ET Quotes delayed at least 20 mins.
Source: Financial Content

Ratings

Overnights, adults 18-49 for May 23, 2013
  • 1.
    1.7/6
  • 2.
    1.4/4
  • 3.
    1.3/4
  • 4.
    1.2/4
  • 5.
    0.8/3
  • 6.
    0.2/1
Source: Nielsen
Reviews
Opinions
Features
  • Eric Deggans

    On the surface, Behind the Candelabra is the perfect HBO movie. It has a gleaming creative pedigree, led by superstar director Steven Soderbergh and uber producer Jerry Weintraub. It has a scandalous story with a new look at an old time, exploring the relationship of closeted, pop-classical pianist Liberace with house husband Scott Thorson in the late '70s and early '80s. And it has bravura performances from film stars Matt Damon as a hunky, often bewildered Thorson and Michael Douglas as Liberace himself. But what this movie doesn’t really have, is the most important element of all: insight.

  • Hank Stuever

    Has it really been only a week since we buried The Office? The laughs may have indeed vanished, but the workplace angst and resentment burns on in Fox's late-season experiment in true office awkwardness, a reality show called Does Someone Have to Go?, in which the boss hands over the reins to the employees, who evaluate one another and decide who should get fired. Does Someone Have to Go? provides little in the way of a grand statement or meaningful takeaway. In one regard, the show is very much a reflection of how we work and what we’re willing to do to cling to mediocre pay and unsatisfying jobs. In another regard, it’s simply another stop on television’s eternal trip on the humiliation train.

  • Tom Conroy

    NBC’s new sitcom Save Me, starring Anne Heche as alcoholic housewife who begins receiving what she thinks are messages from God after a near-death experience, seems to be striving for the pungency of cable satires like HBO’s Enlightened and Showtime’s Weeds. But its premise often makes it feel like something out of the era of situation-heavy sitcoms like Bewitched.

  • Mike Hale

    Motive, a Canadian crime drama beginning on ABC, reveals early the who did what to whom; it’s the why that’s held for the climax. It’s reasonably smart, reasonably interesting and reasonably well acted without being particularly good. You might enjoy it as a low-key alternative to hyped-up American cop shows, or it might strike you as a mingy and borderline dull reworking of cop-show formulas. Either way, it’s likely to stick around: a second season has been ordered in Canada, and the price point for ABC is probably pretty low.

  • Ed Bark

    Here's a man who's accomplished the seemingly impossible — making Lewis Black seem upbeat and Larry David positively cheery. He's Marc Maron, real-life host of the podcast WTF with Marc Maron and star sour ball of IFC's darkly amusing new Maron which the network describes as a "fictionalized version of Marc's life." Probably not that fictionalized, though. Maron will probably never be wildly famous, which likely wouldn't please him anyway, but Maron should put him more firmly on the map as a seriously funny guy who takes in stray cats but swears off dogs because they're "too needy." Take it from him, "If there's gonna be somebody crying and panting in my house, it's gonna be me." Meow to all that.

  • Matthew Gilbert

    Why, on so many levels; why? It seems tragic that, given the number of comedy writers out there, ABC didn't come up with a stronger vehicle than Family Tools. The show is just another set of prefab sitcom tropes pasted together with cheap jokes. The ensemble, led by Leah Remini and J.K. Simmons, has as much chemistry as an organic farm.

This advertisement will close automatically in  second(s). You will see this ad no more than once a day. Skip ad