Skip to main content
The boards are getting a new home!

We're pleased to announce an update is coming to the community boards.

Sunday, September 25th: We are migrating the boards to a new platform. The site is currently in read-only mode and we will bring it back online as soon as the migration is complete. | The Motley Fool Community
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 1
Thanks for the reply,

<IF this was true,(and I rather doubt it), then like in any auction situation it was a very risky tactic to pursue.>

I will see if I can find the information that I referenced.

<<It appears that Asia will probably award licenses on technical merit. >>
<Probably the only alternative to an open auction is what has been described as a "beauty contest".>

I meant "beauty contest". Sorry about the confusion. However, a primary criterion of a beauty contest is technical merit.

<God forbid that any government should decide on, and enforce the technical merit of a free market activity. I don't say that they might not try, I just shudder at the thought. Their function is to ensure a level playing field where appropriate and put a stop to illegal practices. (Microsoft?)>

Let's not get into this. MS's competitors brought this issue up. If the DOJ prevails, the competitors win not consumers. However, there are other examples of antitrust abuse. I agree with you and George Soros that the free market must be constrained to some degree to prevent abuses.

However, I do not agree that charging fees (i.e. taxes) for use of portions of the radio spectrum is reasonable. The governments do not own the airwaves.

If you really want free market forces, then let the governments simply allocate portions of the spectrum for each type of use. Then let market forces prevail.

License fees, particularly the exorbitant fees charged in the UK and Germany, distort the market. The big company with the old stodgy board is better able to pay the fee than the start up with the true killer application.

The license fees themselves prevent many smaller players from entering the market.

Consider this: Would we have an Apple Computer today if Jobs and Wozniak had been forced to pay a huge license fee to enter the computer market? Would Michael Dell have been able to form a company in his dorm room at the University of Texas had he faced such a licensing requirement?

All the licensing fees do is pre-select the most cash rich companies. The consumer decides in a truly free market. With such high fees, I am afraid that the consumer will be denied many choices that they might have had.
Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.