Is this rebate thing really fair?

[alfnuts68]

I just bought new Sennheiser G3 systems due to having to start replacing my inventory because of the 700MHz auction. I like thier stuff. I was offered a rebate of $160 per unit I turn in. I'm not real happy about this. I have invested over $15000 in gear and if i turn it in all I get $1600. so i have a few questions...

When did Sennheiser(other manufacturers) know about the auction of the 700MHz band? I purchased my units in 2004. and if they knew about it then why did they sell these units?

Do they really need to replace the units? couldn't they do an upgrade to switch the frequencies?

Am I just hosed?

[rwhealey]

No, it's not really fair, but there isn't anything you can do about it I've been told that it's not really possible to change the frequency.

You can try selling them overseas, but that might be cost prohibitive. Try over on PSW.

[ChrisPistols]

Well I don't know if you can blame the guys who make the mics. If you're pissed at anyone it should be the FCC. There are a lot of tools out there that could help you with your wrls issues. Shure has the Wireless Work Bench Software and then there is also the IAS software. As far as replacing the mics go it is a pain in the butt I work for a production company and we are heavy in the RF we did the rebate with Shure and got a bunch of UHFR's and they are great and the rebate is pretty nice too. You can always try to sell them to people in mexico or south america.

[museav]

There is another way to look at it and that is that you have probably been operating illegally anyways. In a way we created our own problem, most theatres, churches, etc. are not, and cannot be, licensed users of wireless microphones. For years the FCC sort of looked the other way on such operation unless you interfered with a wireless user, but that was done by essentially being a non-entity, you existed but you weren't really recognized. When it came to the 700MHz spectrum the FCC could really only consider the licensed users, which were limited in number, and not people that had no actual standing or license for the spectrum use.

If you want fair, the flip side would be the FCC charging for past licensing fees and penalties for operating without a license. So it is a pain but greatly a result of being allowed to operate in the first place and the alternative would have been either the sales of wireless mics to anyone without a license never being allowed or many users getting hit with huge fines.

[alfnuts68]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts. Personally, I would like the FCC to charge us for the use of the space. it should be part of the purchase price of the units. It would make it legal, the government would get their money, and I would get peace of mind knowing that my frequencies wouldn't get bought out by Qualcomm/Verizon etc...

The question still stands though. Did the manufacturers know that the 700 MHz space would be auctioned off when they were selling these units? If they did, then I think that is some shady business practice. Moreover, all they are offering me is 10% of my purchase price! Also, I'm wondering if there is collusion between the manufacturers. All these rebate programs seem to be similar. Maybe it's just conspiracy night for me.

[mbenonis]

The first auctions took place in 2002--so yeah, the manufacturers knew at least *part* of the 700 MHz band would go away eventually, but they probably continued selling for a while (at least, they flushed their inventory out). I can tell you that with the SLX, ULX, and UHF-R systems, Shure did not design for 700 anymore.

The first 700 MHz auction:
http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/def..._summary&id=44


The manufacturers are not required to help us in any way--we're not legal users of the spectrum to begin with, so they could easily turn their noses and do nothing. Also, theoretically speaking at this point, you could continue to operate in the 700 MHz spectrum just like you've been doing. The only difference is that you are much more likely to receive interference from other services (such as Qualcomm's MediaFLO service, as well as other new licensees), and they could report you to the FCC for interference and operation without a license. The fine can be as high as $11000/day/transmitter you are using.

[museav]

Originally Posted by alfnuts68

Thanks everyone for your thoughts. Personally, I would like the FCC to charge us for the use of the space. it should be part of the purchase price of the units. It would make it legal, the government would get their money, and I would get peace of mind knowing that my frequencies wouldn't get bought out by Qualcomm/Verizon etc...

It doesn't quite work that way. It is the user that is licensed, not the equipment. Licenses are for operation in a specific spectrum and renewed, I believe, annually. And that would not be any guarantee that you would have that spectrum in perpetuity, there are a number of licensed broadcasters who also had to move out of the 700MHz spectrum and to new operating frequencies as a result of the channel realignment as well as having to switch to digital transmission.

I'm also not sure what 'space' you are referring to, the 700Mhz (698-806MHz) spectrum wasn't space for wireless mics that was taken away, it was broadcast spectrum that was opened up via licensed user frequency reassignments that were part of the digital transition. In fact the possibility of unlicensed wireless mic users banding together to purchase part of the spectrum up for auction was suggested numerous times but was never found to be practical. Also realize that part of the 700MHz spectrum is assigned to new First Responder systems and not for commercial use. Unfortunately, since VHF and UHF wireless mics have always operated on locally unused broadcast spectrum, any dedicated space or spectrum that might be assigned specifically for unlicensed wireless microphone use would be outside that already assigned spectrum and thus likely obsolete even more, if not all, existing VHF and UHF wireless mic systems.

I understand the frustration with eth situation and the desire to have a better way to handle this. I actually think the latest changes help lay some ground for the future, especially in the recognition of allowing unused broadcast spectrum to be used by unlicensed users, which was led by the White Space advocates, accompanied by the decision that existing wireless technologies, in specific wireless mics, having precedence over new technologies. While not an ideal long term solution, unlicensed wireless mic users actually have more standing and protection now than ever before.

[jkowtko]

I don't know the legal details, but two thoughts/questions immediately come to mind --

1) cell phones, CB radios, family band walkie-talkies, RC hobby radios are all consumer devices that do not require the consumer to sign any sort of license agreement. So I would not expect purchasers of short-range wireless mic systems to be treated any differently.

2) Like cell phones, CB radios, etc, -- I would have to belive the makers of wirelesss mic systems were also licensed by the FCC to manufacture product to use the bands they were using. If they were not, that to me is a very big anomaly, allowing an entire industry to revolve around a "don't look don't tell" policy.

[museav]

Wireless mics were originally intended to be used as part of broadcasting. Essentially broadcasters had a license for some assigned bandwidth and part of that bandwidth could also be used for auxiliary services including wireless mics. Thus VHF and UHF wireless mics are considered part of Broadcast Auxiliary Service and fall under the relevant legislation.

Since analog broadcasting required buffer channels between local broadcasters and many channels were often not in use, it became common practice to use unlicensed VHF and UHF wireless microphones in the unused spectrum, keeping in mind that since completely legal use of the equipment was, and still is, possible by licensed operators it was the operation and not the equipment that is at issue here in regards to licensing. However, the VHF and UHF spectrum have always technically and legally been reserved for licensed broadcasters and thus most wireless mics operate in spectrum that was always legally limited to licensed broadcasters.

I say most because there are indeed wireless mic systems that operate in 'license free' spectrum such as the Sabine 915MHz and 2.4GHz systems. Operating in such spectra, which are also used for other purposes and by other unlicensed users, has its own problems. The possibility of a dedicated spectrum for wireless mics, such as exists for FRS, GMRS, CB, etc., has been discussed, however it would have to be outside the current VHF and UHF spectrum as those frequencies are already assigned for other uses. That would mean that while there could potentially be a 'legal' spectrum reserved for wireless mics, it would be limited and not compatible with existing systems. Making this even more difficult, the frequencies likely to be available for such a change at this point in time would tend to have their own disadvantages for wireless mic use.

Since you mentioned CB radios, that is an interesting history as well. As I understand it the situation was initially similar to GMRS radio today, the CB band was supposed to be for licensed users and you had a call sign. In the '70's the abuse and misuse of the CB spectrum and associated regulations by users became so rampant that the FCC gave up on the licensing requirements. No matter how many unlicensed wireless mic users there are, I do not see that ever happening to the VHF/UHF spectrum without severe limitations, which is pretty much what the White Space or TVBD issue was all about.

[mbenonis]

Brad covered all of the salient details above, though I want to elaborate on cell phones. Cell phones are licensed by your cellular provider for use, and then given to you under a contract. Those licenses are actually in fairly short supply, and this leads to situations where one major provider doesn't cover an area (think, "extended network" on Verizon).