At every opportunity – in blog posts, Perspectives from FSF Scholars, and comments filed with the FCC – Free State Foundation scholars (me included) make the case that 5G fixed wireless access (FWA), and wireless broadband generally, directly compete with traditional fixed offerings, primarily cable and fiber. A recent report commissioned by CTIA provides evidentiary support for that assertion.
"The Impact of 5G Fixed Wireless Access Entry on Competition in the U.S. Residential Broadband Market," released on October 8, concludes that, from a policy perspective, "analyses of broadband competition, whether in merger review, the FCC's mandated competition reports, or states' broadband planning, should treat fixed wireless as a full competitor."
Regarding the IP-based distribution platform – that is, Internet access – it certainly is time for government writ large to acknowledge what individual consumers long have accepted as a given: that, for in-home service, providers of "fixed broadband services," "mobile wireless services," and "satellite communications services" (differentiating terms of art employed in the Public Notice) in fact are fungible services that compete head-on for customers.
Section 4.3 of the 2023 Merger Guidelines states that, in identifying a relevant antitrust market, the FTC and the Department of Justice "may rely on … evidence on observed market characteristics ('practical indicia'), such as … sensitivity to price changes."
The report provides precisely such evidence, finding that "[i]n local markets where T-Mobile, AT&T, or Verizon launched 5G fixed wireless home internet, cable broadband prices were approximately 12 percent lower than the estimated counterfactual price – what prices would have been absent FWA entry."
To be sure, the broadband marketplace is dynamic, and the report should not be taken to mean that 5G fixed wireless access is superior to other distribution technologies: cable, fiber, low-Earth orbit satellite, and others, each with their own unique set of advantages and disadvantages. Nor should the report be interpreted as concluding that FWA will – or should – win out in the marketplace.
Rather, it should be viewed as a source of further evidence that consumers are able to choose from a wide range of robust options, both wired and wireless – and that, as a consequence, there is a compelling justification for policymakers to eliminate regulations that discourage investment and innovation.
Posts
