IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/brd/wpaper/121.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Evolution of U.S. Spectrum Values Over Time

Author

Listed:
  • Michelle Connolly

    (Duke University)

  • Nelson Sa

    (Brandeis University)

  • Azeem Zaman

    (Harvard University)

  • Chris Roark

    (University of Chicago)

  • Akshaya Trivedi

    (Trinity College,Duke University)

Abstract

We consider 1997 to 2015 data from FCC spectrum auctions related to cellular services to attempt to identify intrinsic spectrum values. Relative to previous literature, we control for license specific auction rules, and introduce measures to separate out technological progress that effectively reduces spectrum scarcity from progress that increases demand. Results confirm that technological changes have led to increases in the relative value of higher frequencies. Surprisingly, 47 percent of these licenses have been won by “small” bidders, representing 27 percent of the real value of these licenses. The use of bidding credits further appears to consistently reduce auction competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Michelle Connolly & Nelson Sa & Azeem Zaman & Chris Roark & Akshaya Trivedi, 2018. "The Evolution of U.S. Spectrum Values Over Time," Working Papers 121, Brandeis University, Department of Economics and International Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:brd:wpaper:121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.brandeis.edu/economics/RePEc/brd/doc/Brandeis_WP121.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ciccone, Antonio & Hall, Robert E, 1996. "Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 54-70, March.
    2. Jeremy T. Fox & Patrick Bajari, 2013. "Measuring the Efficiency of an FCC Spectrum Auction," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 100-146, February.
    3. Thomas W. Hazlett, 2008. "Property Rights and Wireless License Values," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(3), pages 563-598, August.
    4. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    5. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Peter Cramton & R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan, 1997. "Synergies in Wireless Telephony: Evidence from the Broadband PCS Auctions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 497-527, September.
    6. Thomas W. Hazlett & Roberto E. Muñoz, 2009. "A welfare analysis of spectrum allocation policies," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 424-454, September.
    7. McMillan, John, 1995. "Why auction the spectrum?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 191-199, April.
    8. Klemperer, Paul, 2002. "How (not) to run auctions: The European 3G telecom auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 829-845, May.
    9. Moreton, Patrick S & Spiller, Pablo T, 1998. "What's in the Air: Interlicense Synergies in the Federal Communications Commission's Broadband Personal Communication Service Spectrum Auctions," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 677-716, October.
    10. Gregory Rosston, 2014. "Increasing the Efficiency of Spectrum Allocation," Discussion Papers 13-035, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    11. Gregory Rosston, 2014. "Increasing the Efficiency of Spectrum Allocation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(3), pages 221-243, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas W. Hazlett & David Porter & Vernon Smith, 2011. "Radio Spectrum and the Disruptive Clarity of Ronald Coase," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 125-165.
    2. Thomas W. Hazlett & Roberto E. Muñoz, 2009. "A welfare analysis of spectrum allocation policies," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 424-454, September.
    3. Gary Madden & Hiroaki Suenaga, 2017. "The determinants of price in 3G spectrum auctions," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(32), pages 3129-3140, July.
    4. Peter Cramton, 2002. "Spectrum Auctions," Papers of Peter Cramton 01hte, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 16 Jul 2001.
    5. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    6. Rosa, Benjamin V., 2022. "Bid credits in simultaneous ascending auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 189-203.
    7. Bajari, Patrick & Yeo, Jungwon, 2009. "Auction design and tacit collusion in FCC spectrum auctions," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 90-100, June.
    8. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    9. Choi, Yong-Jae, 2022. "Spectrum auctions in a thin market: The Korean case," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8).
    10. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    11. Rosston, Gregory L. & Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2021. "Reclaiming spectrum from incumbents in inefficiently allocated bands: Transaction costs, competition, and flexibility," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7).
    12. Erik Bohlin & Gary Madden & Aaron Morey, 2010. "An Econometric Analysis of 3G Auction Spectrum Valuations," RSCAS Working Papers 2010/55, European University Institute.
    13. Blumrosen, Liad & Solan, Eilon, 2023. "Selling spectrum in the presence of shared networks: The case of the Israeli 5G auction," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2).
    14. Lawrence White, 2000. ""Propertyzing" the Electromagnetic Spectrum: Why It's Important, and How to Begin," Working Papers 00-08, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    15. Madden, Gary & Mayer, Walter & Wu, Chen & Tran, Thien, 2015. "The forecasting accuracy of models of post-award network deployment: An application of maximum score tests," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 1153-1158.
    16. Thomas W. Hazlett, 2008. "Property Rights and Wireless License Values," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(3), pages 563-598, August.
    17. Halil D. Kaya & Julia S. Kwok, 2016. "A Framework for Telecommunication Auctions," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 6(10), pages 128-135, October.
    18. van Damme, E.E.C., 2002. "The Dutch UMTS-auction," Other publications TiSEM e33a97f5-c69b-4c3b-9aca-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Sridhar, V. & Prasad, Rohit, 2021. "Analysis of spectrum pricing for commercial mobile services: A cross country study," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9).
    20. Azacis, Helmuts & Burguet, Roberto, 2008. "Incumbency and entry in license auctions: The Anglo-Dutch auction meets another simple alternative," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 730-745, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    HSpectrum; spectrum Scarcity; Auctions; FCC; Auction Rules; Mobile Applications; Spectral Efficiency; Broadband Speeds; Closed Auctions; Small Bidders; The Google Effect;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:brd:wpaper:121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Andrea Luna (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsbraus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.