2008•SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Exclusive Handset Prohibitions: Should the FCC Kill the Goose that Laid the Golden iPhone?

Barbara S. Esbin, Berin Michael Szoka

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

My colleague Barbara Esbin and I address a petition filed by the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) asking the FCC to prohibit exclusive arrangements between wireless handset producers and carriers. The RCA petition claims that large wireless companies have an unfair market advantage by giving their customers exclusive access to certain advanced smart phones, such as the Apple/AT&T iPhone - and that this anticompetitive practice is harmful to rural consumers served by RCA members.We debunk RCA's arguments premised on a supposed lack of competition in wireless markets. We also explain the virtues - or at least, the practical necessity - of exclusivity: such arrangements ultimately benefit all consumers by allowing handset manufacturers (i) to fund expensive development efforts for new mobile products through revenue-sharing and (ii) to develop truly innovative devices by ensuring that new services function properly on the provider's network.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

My colleague Barbara Esbin and I address a petition filed by the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) asking the FCC to prohibit exclusive arrangements between wireless handset producers and carriers. The RCA petition claims that large wireless companies have an unfair market advantage by giving their customers exclusive access to certain advanced smart phones, such as the Apple/AT&T iPhone - and that this anticompetitive practice is harmful to rural consumers served by RCA members.We debunk RCA's arguments premised on a supposed lack of competition in wireless markets. We also explain the virtues - or at least, the practical necessity - of exclusivity: such arrangements ultimately benefit all consumers by allowing handset manufacturers (i) to fund expensive development efforts for new mobile products through revenue-sharing and (ii) to develop truly innovative devices by ensuring that new services function properly on the provider's network.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

My colleague Barbara Esbin and I address a petition filed by the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) asking the FCC to prohibit exclusive arrangements between wireless handset producers and carriers. The RCA petition claims that large wireless companies have an unfair market advantage by giving their customers exclusive access to certain advanced smart phones, such as the Apple/AT&T iPhone - and that this anticompetitive practice is harmful to rural consumers served by RCA members.We debunk RCA's arguments premised on a supposed lack of competition in wireless markets. We also explain the virtues - or at least, the practical necessity - of exclusivity: such arrangements ultimately benefit all consumers by allowing handset manufacturers (i) to fund expensive development efforts for new mobile products through revenue-sharing and (ii) to develop truly innovative devices by ensuring that new services function properly on the provider's network.

Key concepts: Handset, Business, Competition (biology), Revenue, Function (biology), Commerce, Advertising, Telecommunications

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Exclusive Handset Prohibitions: Should the FCC Kill the Goose that Laid the Golden iPhone? — Research Paper | ScholarLens