x
5G

Top 5 Tech Trump Expectations for 2017

Donald Trump's policy statements on technology before the election were nearly non-existent, so what's going to happen when he becomes US President in January? Here are just a few possibilities...

1. Huawei & ZTE: USA, no way
We can be relatively certain that Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. and ZTE Corp. (Shenzhen: 000063; Hong Kong: 0763) aren't getting a sniff of US carrier business a Trump administration. It would also have been unlikely if Clinton had won instead. But Trump has named Peter Navarro to oversee US trade and industrial policy. Harvard-educated economist Navarro is the author of the 2012 documentary "Death By China." So there may be further trade impact with China beyond the Huawei and ZTE ban, as yet unknown.(See Surprise! Sprint Still Has Huawei in Its Network.)

2. We'll be FCC-ing you!
Trump has appointed two advisors to his transition team who make no bones about their desire to end Net Neutrality and gut the FCC. Jeff Eisenach and Mark Jamison joined the Trump team in November: Eisenach had previously told a government committee that, "Net Neutrality would not improve consumer welfare or protect the public interest." (See Trump Team Appoints Net Neutrality Naysayers for FCC Transition and Wheeler to Leave FCC Next Month.)

3. Trumping 5G?
The possibility of a neutered FCC does lead to an interesting question about the future of next-generation wireless services: How might a potentially hamstrung FCC handle opening up 5G spectrum? Tom Wheeler's FCC has been aggressive about moving toward opening millimeter wave spectrum for 5G use around 2020, but it's not happened yet. Will it be a priority for Trump's FCC? (See 5G in US: Will Spectrum Be the Speed Bump?)


For all the latest news on 5G, visit the 5G site here on Light Reading.


4. Bigly M&A?
If Trump can do as he promised and reduce corporate tax from 35% to 15%, that will likely mean a lot of US companies bringing cash back from overseas. Will it return in the form of share buy-backs and dividends or be used by tech titans to buy up startups and rivals to expand their reach? Probably a combination of both, but as I've reported before, the tax and regulatory environment could mean that some Yuuuge acquisitions are in our future. (See Trump Promises Tech Execs 'Easier' Trade Conditions and T-Mobile CFO on Trump: Expect More Consolidation & More Competition.)

5. Who's gonna drive you home?
Elon Musk and Uber CEO, Travis Kalanick, have been brought on as advisors to Trump. Their roles may cover a wide remit, from space travel to renewable energy. Both men, however, have a strong interest in getting self-driving cars on road. States in the US have typically set the pace on self-driving cars so far, but could that change if Musk and Kalanick have Trump's ear?

— Dan Jones, Mobile Editor, Light Reading

<<   <   Page 2 / 4   >   >>
brooks7 1/4/2017 | 10:20:04 AM
Re: Trump Tech Gregg,

So what is wrong with making Internet Access a Utility and treating it just like the old Utility functions?  Worked for 60 years and I would argue that there is not significant technological innovation in access today.  So, its not like bits from anybody are different.  All Muni Based OA models do is increase the divide since there will be inconsistent technologies, timelines and penetration.  Rural areas outside the IOCs will still be underserved.  Our target needs to be 100% available and afforadable Internet Access.

seven

 
GregW333 1/4/2017 | 9:00:52 AM
Re: Trump Tech Seven,  you need to understand the newer open access models.   True, previous attempts have proven problematic...The new model solves these issues. 
GregW333 1/4/2017 | 8:58:20 AM
Re: Trump Tech KBode...you're 100% correct... The problem is classic incumbent stifling innovation for their own self interest. 
brooks7 1/3/2017 | 2:17:56 PM
Re: Trump Tech Uhh...if price and speed are dictated and broadband is required to every dwelling - which is what was done with POTS...then who cares if you are beholden to the incumbents?

Open Access is a problem.  The basic issue is that the value of being an ISP is $0.  We have priced it that way.  So, how can you build your company when the price of your service - beyond bandwidth is 0?

seven

 
KBode 1/3/2017 | 11:27:19 AM
Tea leaves "Trump has appointed two advisors to his transition team who make no bones about their desire to end Net Neutrality and gut the FCC. Jeff Eisenach and Mark Jamison joined the Trump team in November: Eisenach had previously told a government committee that, "Net Neutrality would not improve consumer welfare or protect the public interest." "

 

Three, actually.

 

And all three are making it VERY clear one of their biggest goals is to defund and defang the FCC. Going to be a busy year for activists, I think. 
KBode 1/3/2017 | 11:26:24 AM
Re: What about broadband? Net neutrality actually isn't (and shouldn't be) a partisan issue whatsoever. It has broad, bipartisan consumer support as a concept, especially once people are actually educated on what it is -- and break free of some of the false stereotypes on the concept actively pushed by incumbent opponents.
KBode 1/3/2017 | 11:24:41 AM
Re: Trump Tech The FCC came to that conclusion on open access years ago. Then promptly ignored their findings. You are correct. Unfortunately I fear that's a pipe dream at any scale here in the states with the amount of political influence giants have on state legislatures and federal regulators. 
GregW333 1/3/2017 | 8:18:56 AM
Re: Trump Tech @brooks7

The problem I see with your approach is that people and towns will be forever at the mercy of the incumbents. In large parts of the USA the only incumbent with FCC mandated broadband rates is the cable monopoly and in others it's a small ILEC.  The latter lacks the expertise and capital and demographics to fund the future.  

From my extensive research and analysis I've come to the conclusion that the long term optimal solution for the entire ecosystem is open access.  If the cable MSO's were smarter they'd welcome OA instead of filing gratuitous law suits by the dozens.  This is a classic example of incumbents stifling innovation to protect their interests.  

Happy '17

GW
brooks7 1/3/2017 | 2:09:23 AM
Re: Trump Tech @Gregw333,

I don't think muni networks or OA are the answer.  I think it is much simpler than that.  Make Broadband a Universal Service.  Make it a legal requirement that the telco/mso/whomever ends up being the B-COLR MUST bring you a Broadband connection.  Add to that a mandated upgrade of bandwidth to be Broadband on a known schedule.  If its 25 Mb/s today, call it 100 Mb/s by 2020 and so on.

Then we will have to mandate Rate Cap pricing and poof all solved.

seven

 
GregW333 1/2/2017 | 11:06:57 AM
Re: Trump Tech @wanlord...wow, where do you get such great insights to "Most Trump Voters"?  Are you clairvoyant?
<<   <   Page 2 / 4   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE