*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 59950.doc*
 CONCURRING  STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS 
 Re:  Implementation  of  Section  6002(  b)  of  the  Omnibus  Budget  Reconciliation  Act  of  1993;  Annual  Report  and  Analysis  of  Competitive  Market  Conditions  With  Respect  to 
 Commercial  Mobile  Services,  Eleventh  Report. 
 As  in  previous  years,  I  concur  in  this  year’s  CMRS  Competition  Report.  I  want  to  begin  by  repeating  my  observation  that  the  quality  of  our  reports  is  improving  and  by  thanking  the 
 Bureau  staff  for  their  hard  work  in  producing  the  item  we  release  today.  I  am  pleased  the  Commission  is  devoting  more  resources  to  fulfilling  Congress’s  mandate  that  we  review  and 
 analyze  the  competitive  conditions  for  commercial  mobile  services. 
 I  only  concur  because  we  still  have  a  long  way  to  go  to  meet  the  mandate  of  Congress  to  analyze  whether  there  is  “effective  competition”  in  the  mobile  services  market.  As  in  years  past, 
 we  do  not  provide  an  adequate  definition  of  the  term.  The  need  for  a  clearly-  stated,  objectively-measurable  definition  of  “effective  competition”  gets  more  compelling  every  year.  Today’s 
 report  is  the  first  to  incorporate  data  reflecting  the  move  from  five  to  four  national  carriers  (brought  about  by  the  Sprint-  Nextel  merger).  Our  conclusion  that  competition  remains  effective 
 post-  merger  would  be  more  credible  if  we  had  defined  that  term  ahead  of  time  and  then  assessed  whether  current  competition  data  meets  our  definition.  Instead,  we  come  at  the  problem 
 backwards—  gathering  some  data  throughout  the  year  and,  when  report  time  rolls  around,  letting  the  data  drive  us  to  an  undefined  conclusion  that  competition  is  present.  Not  only  does  this  ad 
 hoc  process  lack  methodological  discipline,  but  it  leaves  consumers,  industry,  and  Congress  with  no  clear  idea  of  how  this  Commission  will  react  to  further  changes  in  the  market. 


 I  also  believe  that  any  credible  definition  of  “effective  competition”  must  take  account  of  the  effects  arising  out  of  the  cross-  ownership  of  wireless  and  wireline  companies.  In  this  era  of 
 convergence,  we  often  hear  that  new  technologies  will  bring  competition  to  markets  currently  dominated  by  incumbents.  But  what  about  when  the  same  company  or  companies  dominate  both 
 the  new  and  the  old  markets?  Will  a  parent  company  really  allow  a  subsidiary  to  introduce  products  that  cannibalize  existing  revenue  streams?  I  expect  that  this  issue  will  become 
 increasingly  important  in  the  wireless  industry—  especially  with  the  next  generation  of  broadband  services—  and  I  hope  that  future  CMRS  reports  will  take  account  of  it. 


 I  am  also  concerned  about  our  cursory  examination  of  whether  wireless  customers  have  access  to  product  information  that  allows  them  to  make  suitable  buying  decisions.  This,  too,  is 
 part  of  competition.  So  many  consumers  who  I  meet  have  complaints  about  their  wireless  bills.  It  is  instructive  that  a  number  of  states  have  taken  steps,  or  are  considering  doing  so,  to  address 
 this  problem  legislatively.  Moreover,  we  continue  to  receive  a  significant  (albeit  declining)  number  of  consumer  complaints  each  quarter,  around  half  of  which  concern  billing  and  rate 
 issues.  All  this  indicates  that  further  investigation  is  warranted,  and  I  hope  next  year’s  report  addresses  this  particular  question  in  greater  depth. 


 Finally,  we  really  need  to  develop  new  methods  to  measure  coverage  in  rural  areas.  As  today’s  report  acknowledges,  one  important  flaw  in  our  present  methodology  is  the  assumption 
 that  if  one  part  of  a  county  (such  as  an  interstate  highway)  receives  coverage,  then  every  part  of  the  county  receives  coverage.  Though  gathering  more  granular  data  may  be  difficult,  I  think  we 
 need  to  investigate  whether  a  sampling  methodology  may  be  appropriate.  The  present  method  distorts  reality. 
1
 So  that’s  the  path  I’d  like  to  see  us  embark  on  for  the  next  report.  Nothing  that  I  have  said  should  detract  from  the  good  stories  that  our  mobile  industry  has  to  report,  including  growing 
 subscribership  and  dramatically  increasing  minutes  of  use.  We  need  to  monitor  and  study  all  these  developments  accurately  and  in  their  many  ramifications  in  order  to  make  sure  that 
 consumers  can  reap  maximum  benefits  from  the  successes  of  this  dynamic  industry. 
2