*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 56397.doc*
 STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  JONATHAN  S.  ADELSTEIN 
 CONCURRING 
 Re:  Auction  of  Advanced  Wireless  Services  Licenses  Scheduled  for  June  29,  2006;  AU  Docket  No.  06-  30 


 I  am  concurring  in  this  item  because  of  my  overriding  commitment  to  hold  a  timely  Advanced  Wireless  Services  (AWS)  auction  in  June.  I  have  been  committed  to  this  date  for  the 
 past  year,  and  do  not  think  we  are  well  served  by  having  prolonged  uncertainty  in  the  auction  procedures  with  less  than  a  month  before  the  Short-  Form  Application  Filing  Window  Deadline 
 of  May  10,  2006.  While  I  am  pleased  that  the  original  proposal  has  been  modified  to  reflect  some  of  the  legitimate  concerns  raised  by  the  industry  –  companies  that  hopefully  will  bring 
 billions  of  dollars  to  this  auction,  and  even  more  investment  to  building  out  the  spectrum  –  I  cannot  fully  endorse  the  Public  Notice  (PN)  adopted  here  today  because  so  many  important 
 questions  raised  during  the  past  several  weeks  remain  unanswered  for  me. 
 By  this  PN,  the  Commission  is  being  asked  to  adopt  a  proposal  that  could  form  “blind”  or  “anonymous”  bidding  procedures  in  the  upcoming  AWS  auction.  I  understand  that  some  of  the 
 Commission  staff  believe  that  in  adopting  blind  bidding  we  are  correcting  a  problem  with  the  current  auction  structure.  But  while  we  have  identified  and  fixed  harms  in  the  past  related  to 
 auctions  –  such  as  trailing  digits,  time  stamping,  or  bid  withdrawal  signaling  –  it  is  unclear  to  me  what  specific  harms  this  proposal  is  intended  to  address.  Indeed,  our  effort  to  develop  a  full 
 record  on  this  proposal  has  been  hindered  by  the  truncated  process  and  timeframe  that  has  been  followed  with  respect  to  this  item.  Because  the  Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau  initiated 
 this  proposal  on  its  own  motion,  the  full  Commission  did  not  have  the  opportunity  to  shape  the  original  proposal  or  add  questions  that  may  have  helped  inform  the  decision-  making  process. 
 Under  these  circumstances,  many  commenters  raise  legitimate  questions  about  whether  there  is  solid  evidence  of  a  problem  that  needs  to  be  corrected,  particularly  by  an  action  so  sweeping  as 
 blind  bidding. 
 I  am  very  troubled  by  the  impact  of  this  decision  on  small  companies.  I  was  originally  told  that  small  companies  would  benefit  from  our  blind  bidding  proposal  because  it  would 
 protect  them  from  becoming  victims  of  large  carrier  bidding  strategies.  In  an  interesting  twist,  it  is  the  smallest  carriers  who  have  spoken  the  loudest  against  the  proposal.  They  have  raised 
 legitimate  concerns  about  access  to  real  time  auction  information  that  significantly  informs  their  auction  bidding  strategy.  They  have  pointed  out  to  us  that  this  is  a  completely  new  spectrum 
 block  with  uncertain  business  models  and  equipment  opportunities.  Who  is  bidding  and  how  much  they  are  bidding  plays  a  significant  part  in  a  smaller  carrier’s  auction  strategy. 


 As  one  Tier  II  carrier  executive  commented,  participating  in  an  auction  is  like  placing  a  bet  –  we  are  perfectly  willing  to  make  that  bet,  but  there  is  a  big  difference  in  making  a  blind  bet 
 versus  an  educated  one.  Without  access  to  real  time  auction  information,  companies  like  this  one  may  be  forced  to  scale  back  their  auction  plans  –  an  outcome  completely  inapposite  to  our 
 statutory  obligations  under  Section  309(  j).  Instead  of  developing  auction  procedures  to  promote 
1
 economic  opportunities  and  competition  for  small  businesses,  we  may  in  fact  be  turning  them  away  by  our  actions  today. 
 I  recognize  that  there  are  policy  reasons  in  support  of  blind  bidding.  Indeed,  blind  bidding  might  be  the  right  approach  for  future  auctions.  And  the  blind  bidding  proposal 
 definitely  has  been  improved  by  adding  a  bidder  eligibility  ratio  trigger  and  allowing  increased  information  availability  in  the  event  blind  bidding  is  used.  So  these  are  important  steps  that  I 
 hope  will  mitigate  the  effect  of  our  proposal  on  any  possible  impact  on  small  business  participation  in  the  AWS  auction.  But,  with  only  11  weeks  left  until  the  AWS  auction,  I 
 continue  to  have  lingering  questions  as  to  why  we  would  experiment  with  dramatically  new  procedures  on  an  auction  of  this  size  and  scope. 
2