You are here

More evidence Google's bidding against itself was improper in 700 MHz auction to trigger conditions

The more we learn about Google's behavior in the FCC's 700 Mhz auction the more clear it is Google acted improperly and "gamed" the auction and Fleeced the American taxpayer as I explained in my original post on this subject.

  • Here's the new evidence...per Communications Daily today: Dean Brenner, VP for Government Affairs for Qualcomm: "By bidding in the opening round, the company kept its options open in case the D-block went over the reserve price, and Qualcomm decided not to bid against itself to exceed that price." Comm Daily reported "QualComm bid $472 million for the D-block while the FCC had set $1.3 billion as the reserve price." [bold added]
  • In somewhat analogous circumstances to the 'C' block, it seems like Qualcomm behaved unlike Google, and had the ethics and good sense to not bid against itself to trigger a reserve price.
    • I have yet to hear a credible defense for Google "bidding against itself" repeatedly in an anonymous public auction.
    • If Google was ethical and straightforward, it would have opened with one bid that would trigger the openness conditions. 
      • But no, google gamed the auction, pretending to simulate a small stair-step auction competition when it was really just Google so that they did not scare away another bidder with a big opening bid which would have increased the risk for Google actually winning the auction and having to become a third national broadband provider.
    • No Google's tactics with hindsight are pretty obviously suspect and and improper. They were not participating in the auction for the purposes laid out in the auction, they were gaming the auction with what we now know to be ulterior motives.   

BTW, my original post on Google's fleecing prompted a broadside by Techdirt and a interesting commentfest followed -- that I have actively participated in.

If you can wade through the many ad hominem attacks on me from Google's defenders, there are some interesting points made.    

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths