Verizon and Vodafone said Monday they reached a deal under which Verizon will buy the U.K.-based carrier’s 45 percent stake in Verizon Wireless for $130 billion (http://vz.to/17je3As). The deal had been long rumored, and talks were confirmed last week by the seller (CD Aug 30 p11). The deal would put Verizon on an equal footing with AT&T, which has owned its wireless operations since the AT&T/BellSouth deal consolidated AT&T’s control of what had been Cingular. Analysts and public-interest officials don’t expect major regulatory hurdles for the transaction, they told us in the hours after the deal was disclosed.
Fire Island Battle Forces Exam of Whether Wireless Equal to Traditional Phone Service, Officials Say
As the fight continues over Verizon’s plan to rebuild its network on Fire Island destroyed during Superstorm Sandy using wireless infrastructure, one big question that arises is what’s wrong with wireless anyway as an alternative to the plain old telephone service. With small carriers across the U.S. deploying wireless-only systems and larger carriers making wireless a big part of their IP transition plans, some industry observers are asking if the FCC needs to change its regulatory worldview of wireless substitution. Last week, the FCC Wireline Bureau opted not to “automatically” grant Verizon’s Communications Act Section 214 petition (CD Aug 15 p1) to discontinue domestic phone services, but to instead request additional data from Verizon.
The FCC should deny Local TV’s request to transfer control of three TV stations to Dreamcatcher Broadcasting under shared service agreements (SSAs) as part of Local’s proposed $2.73 billion sale of 19 TV stations to Tribune (CD July 2 p2), said Free Press and Put People First in a petition to deny filed Monday (http://bit.ly/13Pfmaf). The stations are in Hampton Roads, Va., and Wilkes-Barre, Pa., areas that have market overlaps with Tribune newspapers and thus a conflict with FCC cross-ownership rules, said the petition. Tribune “seeks to evade” the cross-ownership rules by using Dreamcatcher as a “shell corporation” to own the stations while Tribune provides them with services under SSAs, said the petition. Former Tribune President Ed Wilson owns Dreamcatcher, and the company was created shortly after the proposed merger was announced, the groups said. “For all intents and purposes, Tribune would control the Dreamcatcher stations and daily newspapers that serve the same communities as these stations, thereby violating” the commission’s cross-ownership rules, said the petition. Tribune disagreed with the groups’ characterization, and told us it’s preparing a response to their petition. “The transactions have been structured in compliance with FCC rules and precedent,” a Tribune spokesman told us in an email. “A transaction can be legal and still not be in the public interest,” responded Andrew Schwartzman, who represented Put People First in the petition and has opposed media consolidation for many years with the Media Access Project. “Any transaction that has the same result as a violation of the Commission’s local ownership rules is necessarily contrary to the public interest,” said the petition. If the commission does grant Local’s request to transfer the stations to Dreamcatcher, it should make the approval conditional on the outcome of any rulemaking related to the FCC’s 39 percent national television ownership cap, the groups said. The FCC is circulating a draft NPRM seeking comment on possible elimination of the UHF discount (CD Aug 14 p1). The Tribune/Local merger would put Tribune’s nationwide coverage at 44 percent if the discount didn’t exist, the groups said. “Absent the UHF discount, the proposed assignment of all Local TV stations including these three licenses to Tribune would violate the national television multiple ownership rule,” said the petition. The commission should also address the Local TV request as a full panel rather than through the delegated authority of its bureaus, said the petition. The matter merits the attention of the full commission because “the use of SSAs to evade the Commission’s ownership rules is an unresolved question,” the groups said, referring to a pending application for review in the Media Council Hawai'i ownership case (CD June 21 p20). Delaying a full commission ruling on SSAs and the ownership rules could lead to “additional litigation” or “harm parties to such SSAs because they will face the problem of unwinding them” if the commission grants the Media Council of Hawai'i Application for Review, the groups said. “These transactions raise novel questions of law, fact, and policy, and thus must be acted upon by the full Commission rather than the Media Bureau,” said the petition.
FCC Chairman nominee Tom Wheeler will play a critical role in whether the agency should impose some kind of limits on how much 600 MHz spectrum any carrier can buy in the incentive auction of broadcast TV spectrum, said numerous industry executives and former commission officials.
Tom Wheeler, nominated to be the next FCC chairman, will play a critical role in whether the agency should impose some kind of limits on how much 600 MHz spectrum any carrier can buy in the incentive auction of broadcast TV spectrum, according to numerous industry executives and former FCC officials.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit allocated 40 minutes for oral argument on Verizon’s appeal of the FCC’s 2010 net neutrality rules, in an order handed down Thursday. The case is to be argued Sept. 9 starting at 9:30 a.m. The order allocated 20 minutes to Verizon and 20 minutes to FCC and intervenors. Public interest lawyer Andrew Schwartzman, a longtime court watcher, said the fact that the D.C. Circuit provided only 40 minutes for oral argument was a surprise, but that arguments likely will take much longer. “The over/under betting line would be that each side will wind up arguing for about 45 minutes,” said Schwartzman, who supports net neutrality. Judges David Tatel and Judith Rogers and Senior Judge Laurence Silberman are to hear argument.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit allocated 40 minutes for oral argument on Verizon’s appeal of the FCC’s 2010 net neutrality rules, in an order handed down Thursday. The case is to be argued Sept. 9 starting at 9:30 a.m. The order allocated 20 minutes to Verizon and 20 minutes to FCC and intervenors. Public interest lawyer Andrew Schwartzman, a longtime court watcher, said the fact that the D.C. Circuit provided only 40 minutes for oral argument was a surprise, but that arguments likely will take much longer. “The over/under betting line would be that each side will wind up arguing for about 45 minutes,” said Schwartzman, who supports net neutrality. Judges David Tatel and Judith Rogers and Senior Judge Laurence Silberman are to hear argument.
A draft rulemaking notice that could lead to elimination of the UHF TV ownership discount listed as on circulation at the FCC may partially be a reaction to a recent spate of broadcasting mergers, said broadcast attorneys in interviews Monday. They said the change in the value of UHF stations since the DTV transition also could be a reason for the FCC to nix the discount. With the Sinclair/Allbritton and Tribune/Local TV deals brushing against or even exceeding the 39 percent ownership cap without the discount, according to Free Press, the commission may be trying to eliminate the UHF discount in advance of ruling on those mergers, said Fletcher Heald broadcast attorney Peter Tannenwald.
The three-judge panel selected to hear Verizon’s appeal of the 2010 FCC net neutrality order could be a good panel from the agency’s perspective, but there are few certainties in appellate law, said attorneys following the case closely. While Republican-appointed judges outnumber by 9-5 those appointed by Democrats at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, two Democratic appointees, David Tatel and Judith Rogers, were selected for the panel, as was Laurence Silberman, widely viewed as the intellectual leader of the conservative appellant movement.
The three-judge panel selected to hear Verizon’s appeal of the 2010 FCC net neutrality order (CD June 26 p1) could be a good panel from the agency’s perspective, but there are few certainties in appellate law, said attorneys following the case closely. While Republican-appointed judges outnumber by 9-5 those appointed by Democrats at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, two Democratic appointees, David Tatel and Judith Rogers, were selected for the panel, as was Laurence Silberman, widely viewed as the intellectual leader of the conservative appellant movement.