EchoStar, Intelsat, SES and the Satellite Industry Association...

inquiry into whether incumbent satellite operators are operating in ways that inhibit competition (CD June 10 p8). The NOI’s proposals “would deter future investment and cast a regulatory cloud over the deployment of new satellites and assets,” SIA said in comments in docket 13-147 (http://bit.ly/12mBk6V). The NOI is premised on misplaced concerns that alleged satellite warehousing practices are restricting consumers’ access to new services and “preventing newer more efficient spacecraft technologies from entering the market,” it said: The industry is highly competitive, “with many providers ... aggressively competing to serve customers in the U.S and abroad.” Unused capacity exists in all terrestrial and satellite communications networks, and for many good reasons, it said. EchoStar agreed, saying unused capacity “benefits consumers by ensuring that supply exceeds demand, thus placing inherent limits on price” (http://bit.ly/172u55P). EchoStar suggested the FCC open a rulemaking proceeding, instead, “to provide satellite licensees with greater flexibility to manage their fleets and implement their systems,” it said. The allegations of vertical foreclosure don’t warrant FCC action, SES said (http://bit.ly/14TMQUn). There is “simply no evidence that would warrant revision of the commission’s policies,” it said. The premise that any slot not occupied by a satellite “operating across all available frequencies and substantially full is being warehoused and restricting competition is totally wrong,” Intelsat said (http://bit.ly/14TOxB0). “If warehousing is to be considered as a competitive constraint, the commission must develop evidence that some enhanced operation is in fact being impeded by less than full utilization of existing licenses.” The NOI stemmed from allegations by Artel, Spacenet and other integrators against Intelsat (CD May 9 p3).