This is no mere transfer of network title, though. Sprint plans to shut down U.S. Cellular’s network completely some time in those two metropolitan regions in the next several months (Champagne, Ill., and South Bend, Ind., will also be affected). And despite the fact that U.S. Cellular’s systems uses the same CDMA technology in the same PCS frequencies, Sprint isn’t supporting its existing handsets. All of those customers must either start over with new devices and new service plans on the Sprint network or go find a new mobile operator entirely.

Sprint Regional VP for the Midwest Kevin Gleason told GigaOM that Sprint planned to make the transition as easy as possible for U.S. Cellular’s customers by offering them plenty of incentive to move to Sprint.

“I believe our recapture rate will be high,” Gleason said. “We’ve already started communicating with them and several of them have already made the switch.”

Sprint has sent out an initial batch of letters notifying them about the transaction but Gleason said Sprint will soon follow up, detailing the timing of the network shutdown and the discount offers Sprint is making to draw those customers under the Sprint umbrella.

While Gleason wouldn’t give any specific details on the exact amount of the discounts, he said they would take many forms: device discounts over Sprint’s usual subsidies, trade-in fees for older phones, porting credits for making the switch and activation fee waivers.

Many customers will be able to get new phones and comparable service plans without having to pay a dime, he said. Many will also be able to upgrade to fancier devices such as the iPhone 5 or Samsung Galaxy S 4 for a much lower than price than other customers would pay, Gleason said. He added that switching customers would also have a great deal of flexibility in plan choices, since Sprint is extending the discount offers to its Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile prepaid brands as well.

In general, Sprint and U.S. Cellular’s contract plans are comparable, and in the case of its unlimited data plans, Sprint is actually cheaper. But depending on the circumstances, not every customer will be getting an equitable deal.

For instance if you happen to have just bought a new high-end smartphone or tablet, Sprint incentive discounts won’t cover the full cost of replacing it. What’s worse is that brand new smartphone essentially become useless in a few months when the Chicago and St. Louis networks go dead (though it would work on U.S. Cellular’s other networks). Some customers may also balk at the idea of signing new two-year contracts if they want to take full advantage of the discount offers.

Gleason acknowledged that some customers will feel like they’re getting a raw deal, but he expects those cases will be kept to minimum. He pointed out that 60 percent of U.S. Cellular customers in affected cities have let their contracts lapse and the large majority of them use feature phones. Those subscribers are ripe for an upgrade, he said.

That’s one of the main reasons why U.S. Cellular opted for a wholesale replacement of U.S. Cellular’s networks and devices, rather than a gradual phase out like Sprint is doing with its Nextel iDEN network, Gleason said. So many of those U.S. Cellular devices are old or obsolete that it decided to start fresh with phones optimized for Sprint’s new Network Vision architecture, which boasts the most up-to-date CDMA and LTE technologies.

We’ll know more details about the sunset timeline and the specific discounts in the next couple of weeks. And if you’re a Chicagoan, you’re probably wondering what will happen to the name of U.S. Cellular Field, the home of the White Sox, now that the carrier is leaving the city. Well, it won’t become Sprint Field. Gleason said U.S. Cellular is keeping the naming the rights.

U.S. Cellular Field hoto courtesy of Shutterstock user Alan Mars

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• New solutions for the evolving mobile network
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

The FCC on Thursday proposed to auction off more airwaves for commercial ground-to-plane broadband communications. We’re not just talking about a handful of frequencies here: The FCC is eyeballing a 500 MHz block of spectrum, which could boost the connection speeds available to aircraft by a factor of 100,000.

As my colleague Stacey Higginbotham explained in a recent post, current in-flight broadband is so pricey and low-bandwidth because airlines rely on expensive satellite or ground-to-air transmissions systems to link aircraft to the internet. The dominant airline provider GoGo uses what is in essence a 3G CDMA network pointed at the sky. That means a single 3Mbps EV-DO connection must be spread among all of the internet users in an aircraft. Your fancy new laptop may support gigabit Wi-Fi, but the bottleneck in the ground-based backhaul link can slow you down to dial-up speeds.

The FCC’s plans, however, key in on a proposal Qualcomm made last year to clear a massive swathe of spectrum in the 14 GHz frequencies over which a kind of super-LTE network could be built. That network would only sport about 150 towers but each of those nodes would blast a high-powered signal into the northern horizon. Airplanes would fly between these huge crescent-shaped cells just as our cellphones move from tower to tower on the ground. But each of these aerial cells would have a whopping 300 Gbps of capacity, which would be shared among all of the planes occupying the surrounding airspace.

That’s a lot of bandwidth, but it’s conceivable that the airlines and their passengers could find a use for it. Today’s in-flight Wi-Fi is priced for the business traveler with an expense account and the inability to go four hours without email access. But these days everyone in the cabin from first-class to steerage is carrying multiple Wi-Fi-enabled devices. And they don’t just want to check email — they they want to stream video and play networked games. Airlines could also use that bandwidth to offer on-demand entertainment and live programming from the cloud, not just from their on-board hard-drives.

As for costs, a more efficient network could allow airlines to drop rates — or maybe even eliminate in-flight broadband fees entirely — to make high-bandwidth connections available to all customers. GoGo’s current network uses 160 towers, making it the same the size as Qualcomm’s proposed system. The infrastructure investment would be about the same, but by using the latest 4G network technologies and hell of a lot more spectrum, we could shove a lot more bandwidth into that infrastructure.

The 14 GHz band is currently used by fixed satellite providers as an uplink path to their birds in orbit. The FCC proposal would require that the any new in-flight network share those frequencies with its current tenants. In its notice of proposed rulemaking, the Commission said it is seeking industry comment to ensure there will be no interference between those two uses.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• New solutions for the evolving mobile network
• Mobile 2012 and beyond

On Monday, the Sprint’s board announced that it has formed a special committee of independent directors to “carefully evaluate” Dish’s $25.5 billion offer to buy up the company. But it also wants to keep its original $20.1 billion deal with SoftBank deal on track — despite Dish’s attempts to put it on hold.

On Friday it asked the Federal Communications Commission to keep its official review of Sprint-Softbank going, keeping the deal on target for final approval this year. The FCC is already 140 days into its initial 180-day review, but the U.S. Department of Justice has asked the FCC to delay proceedings while its National Security division looks into foreign ownership issues.

When Dish countered SoftBank’s offer last week it asked for a suspension of the regulatory review, but Sprint said there is no reason to stop clock even as Sprint negotiates with Dish. In fact, in its FCC filing Sprint accused Dish of political maneuvering to muck up the SoftBank deal. From the letter:

“DISH wrongly suggests that it would be prudent for the Commission to derail this review while it waits until an alleged uncertainty – uncertainty that DISH itself is attempting to create by its unsolicited proposal – is resolved. DISH has this exactly backwards. The Commission has been working diligently on the pending applications, which now stand at day 140 of the Commission’s shot clock. The Commission must not be distracted by DISH’s latest maneuverings, just as it was not distracted by DISH’s original request, and, based on long-established precedent, continue the orderly processing of the applications to conclusion.”

Meanwhile, the special five-director committee will weigh whether the Dish’s bid represents, or will likely lead to, a “Superior Offer” to Softbank’s. Dish may be offering more money, but as TMF Associates analyst Tim Farrar points out, Sprint has to look at other factors besides value to determine if a Dish-Sprint tie-up is worth the trouble.

Dish may offer Sprint some strategic advantages — combining both companies’ spectrum with Sprint’s mobile network and Dish’s satellite TV service — but if SoftBank matches Dish’s offer, Sprint may figure it can buy whatever strategic advantages it needs with SoftBank’s cash.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• 2012: Data, spectrum and the race to LTE
• A look back at mobile in the third quarter

Softbank offers much-needed investment to the still struggling No. 3 U.S. wireless operator. But Dish doesn’t just bring cash; it’s got 4G spectrum and a huge pay TV network to boot. Informa Telecoms & Media Principal Analyst Mike Roberts lays out all of the advantages of a Sprint-Dish marriage:

“First and most importantly, Dish could combine its 2GHz LTE spectrum with the LTE spectrum of Sprint and Clearwire to build one of the strongest LTE spectrum portfolios in US, which would be the foundation for a powerful new competitor in the US telecoms market. Second, using Sprint’s newly-modernized mobile network would give Dish a cost-effective way to deploy LTE in its 2GHz spectrum and meet the FCC’s rollout requirements. Third, if the deal goes ahead, Dish and Sprint could quickly offer TV, broadband and mobile bundles to compete more effectively with larger integrated telecoms players such as Verizon and AT&T.”

In particular, Dish’s spectrum would give Sprint the immediate room it needs to grow its LTE capacity. Sprint’s current LTE network is bit undersized compared to high-capacity 4G networks its competitors are rolling out. While Sprint is planning to buy the remaining stake in Clearwire — which would give it Clearwire’s vast 2.5 GHz holdings — Clearwire is using a different type of LTE technology that could make getting the right consumer devices more difficult. Becoming part of Dish would give it the right kind of licenses to complement Sprint’s current network.

Also, Sprint taking over Clearwire isn’t a given. Several other companies have expressed interest in the 4G operator and its spectrum, and last week Clearwire revealed it just got a new offer from an unnamed entity to acquire its licenses in big cities for between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. The Wall Street Journal pegged that unnamed company as Verizon Wireless.

Given all of the crazy variables in this complex game of spectrum chess, it seems like a Sprint and Dish would form a good match, but the companies haven’t always seen eye-to-eye.

There was once talk of a partnership between the two, using Sprint’s new networks to host Dish’s LTE service. But those talks fizzled, and Sprint and Dish wound up becoming big adversaries, fighting over Clearwire’s future and squabbling about interference issues in their spectrum neighborhood.

Copious amounts of money certainly can heal old wounds, but there’s a question of whether Dish has enough money. Despite Dish’s big war chest, it would still need to go $9 billion further into debt to finance its proposed deal, Stifel Nicolaus analyst Christopher King said in a research note. Dish may have just set off a bidding war, but it might not have the money to see it through. According to King:

“We believe that DISH is more strategically desperate for Sprint than is SoftBank; however, SoftBank certainly has deeper pockets. … As such, we believe SoftBank is in a better position, financially speaking, to match DISH’s offer – or raise the offer further – should it choose to do so. It appears to us that Sprint is in a solid position from a negotiating standpoint.”

If the money’s right, Sprint may not care about any of the strategic advantages of a Dish deal. As with all carriers, Sprint’s foremost concern is spectrum and Sprint may be in a position to acquire better licenses with Softbank’s cash.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice advised the Federal Communications Commission to set rules for its forthcoming TV airwaves auction favoring smaller operators like Sprint and T-Mobile over dominant carriers AT&T and Verizon. If FCC does give Sprint an advantage in that auction, it could walk away with some very attractive 600 MHz airwaves without breaking the bank.

Chess photo courtesy of Shutterstock user Elnur

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• 2012: Data, spectrum and the race to LTE
• Mobile 2012 and beyond
• A look back at mobile in Q1

The news was first broken by The Guardian (see disclosure) on the weekend, and was subsequently confirmed to me by the National Audit Office (NAO) itself on Monday morning. The upcoming investigation was triggered by member of parliament Helen Goodman, who complained that the government “failed to get value for money” in the auction.

“It’s a little early to say exactly what we’re going to be looking at,” a spokesman for the NAO told me. “We will soon be in a position to put a remit of the study and a timescale on our website.”

This should be an interesting one. The telecoms regulator Ofcom, which has hailed the result as a success, has always been crystal clear on the fact that its auction was not designed to raise the maximum revenue possible (everyone has learned their lessons from the £22.5 billion 3G auction a dozen years ago, which nearly crippled the industry), but rather to keep the market competitive and make sure as many people as possible get coverage.

As for the source of the £3.5 billion figure floated by the government, there seems to be a disturbing amount of buck-passing going on. As I wrote on the auction’s completion in February:

“The reserve price for the auction was £1.3 billion, although the government had budgeted for it to bring in £3.5 billion. Does that make the result disappointing? That depends on whether you see the government forecast as politically motivated or focused on the actual worth of the spectrum. There was never much justification given for the £3.5 billion figure, and no-one appears to be taking responsibility for it — today the Treasury told me to take my questions about the figure’s rationale to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), and the DCMS told me to ask the Treasury.”

Now, according to The Guardian, the Treasury is claiming the figure came out of the Office for Budget Responsibility. Whoever came up with it, I’ve not seen a scrap of the rationale behind it.

It is worth noting that the £3.5 billion figure was floated last year at a time when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, was trying to maintain that the national deficit would fall, not rise, in 2013. Without the predicted boost from the spectrum auction, the margin would have been much smaller. And, as it turned out in last month’s Budget statement, the deficit for 2013 is indeed up on that for 2012, not down.

Disclosure: Guardian News & Media, which publishes The Guardian, is a minority investor in GigaOM.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The mobile backhaul market, 2011-2012: more innovation, greater competition
• Sprint’s tightrope walk: finding a balance for its network modernization plan
• Podcast: Mobile winners and losers in 2012 and what to expect in 2013

No one seemed interested in paying a subscription fee for TV programming they already got at home. Nor were they interested in buying the special MediaFLO phones necessary to receive that broadcast signal. After limping along for three years, Qualcomm shut it down in 2010 and eventually sold its spectrum to AT&T.

Now Qualcomm is back on the live TV bandwagon, beating the drum over a new video and data multicast technology called LTE-broadcast. Recently I had a chance to catch up with Neville Meijers, VP of business development for Qualcomm, and I asked him the obvious: Didn’t Qualcomm learn its lesson with FLO TV?

Meijers readily acknowledged that FLO TV was a failure, but he claimed it wasn’t a failure of technology. Nor did Qualcomm misidentify the demand for live video content, he said. “At the end of the day it came down to economics,” Meijers concluded.

Why FLO didn’t flow

FLO TV failed for many reasons, but the biggest one was the huge ecosystem every participating player had to buy into to make the whole thing work. FLO required specialty chipsets, and thus specialty devices. It required new spectrum and a new network, and it even necessitated the negotiation of content rights to redistribute any program being broadcast. Those are huge hurdles to overcome, requiring big investments from both carrier and consumer.

If FLO had been a cheap service that you could use over any phone, then it could have worked, but the argument is moot, Meijers said. Qualcomm isn’t trying to recreate FLO TV with a new technology. Instead, Meijers said, Qualcomm views LTE-broadcast as a different kind of service proposition altogether: a means of easing congestion on carriers’ mobile data networks to make all kinds of streamed multimedia content more accessible and cheaper for consumers.

Unlike MediaFLO, LTE-broadcast doesn’t require new phones and new networks, and it uses standards-based, not proprietary, technology. What that means is carriers will be able to use their existing LTE infrastructure and spectrum through hardware upgrades for broadcast and future generations of radio chipsets will automatically support the feature.

What’s more, implementing LTE-broadcast doesn’t mean sacrificing capacity on the regular LTE network, Meijers said. If the network isn’t broadcasting content — or if no one in a cell is watching that content — it simply reverts to its normal unicast LTE state. For those reasons operators are much more enthusiastic about LTE-broadcast than they were in MediaFLO’s dedicated network model. The first trial networks will show up this year, but we won’t see LTE-broadcast on a meaningful scale until 2014, Meijers said.

What can you do with a broadcast network?

If LTE-broadcast was just about live TV, it probably wouldn’t work. As I wrote in January, there just aren’t that many live TV events that would get multiple users on the same cell all watching the same program — the Superbowl, the Oscars and the State of Union Address don’t happen every day.

But Meijers said that there is a lot of content beyond video that carriers or third-party content providers can ship to multiple phones simultaneously. For instance, instead of having each phone individually downloading app, device firmware, OS updates; operators could ship a updates in a gigantic batches to all users. Take a widely used app like Facebook — an update to its iOS software could hit hundreds of devices in the same cell simultaneously, eating up a fraction of the cell’s bandwidth.

LTE-broadcast could also be used to provide unique content at specific locations, Meijers said. At a football game, for instance, all of the cells serving the stadium could feature live video from every TV camera pointed at the field.

And while FLO TV may have failed, carriers are still interested in other video models, Meijer said. Instead of trying to convince customers to watch TV on a schedule, carriers could turn phones into miniature DVRs. At set times of the day they would broadcast programming, whether its popular YouTube videos or HBO’s Game of Thrones, which your phone could then would scoop out of the air and store for later viewing – if you have a subscription, of course.

“There are operators that have close alliances with television providers, particularly overseas,” Meijers said. “They want to offer over-the-top video services of their own.”

Right now watching an entire season of Game of Thrones streamed to your tablet over a mobile network is prohibitively expensive given the amount of data you would consume. But what if HBO paid Verizon Wireless to broadcast every new series episode to all of its HBO Go subscribers when the show aired each week? Since the program is broadcast to millions of devices simultaneously and then recorded in memory, it would cost Verizon little in network resources. That would allow it to exempt what would normally be gigabytes of data from its monthly data caps. Now that’s a compelling case for LTE-broadcast.

TVs photo courtesy of Shutterstock user Peter Sobolev

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Who and what to watch in the new era of the living room
• What the shift to the cloud means for the future EPG
• Mobile 2012 and beyond

EE gets to do this because it is using 1800MHz spectrum – formerly dedicated to 2G services – for its 4G. As it is the result of a merger of France Telecom and Deutsche Telekom’s UK operators, Orange and T-Mobile, it has an unusually large amount of this spectrum to play with (even after giving some to rival Three), and it will double the speeds by simply doubling the amount of 1800MHz spectrum it dedicates to LTE, from 10MHz to 20MHz.

As well as warding off the threat of rival LTE carriers, the speed boost may also convince some consumers who see LTE as not that much faster than HSPA+, and therefore not worth the switch.

Here’s what EE chief Olaf Swantee said in a statement:

“We are ensuring that the UK remains at the forefront of the digital revolution. Having already pioneered 4G here, we’re now advancing the country’s infrastructure again with an even faster, even higher-capacity network, and at no extra cost to our customers.

“Since we launched 4G, we’ve seen a huge shift in the way people are using mobile. Video already accounts for 24 percent of all traffic on our 4G network – that’s significantly more than on 3G. Maps, mobile commerce, sat-nav tools and cloud services are all seeing a similar rise. Mobile users in the UK have a huge appetite for data-rich applications, and this will only grow as people become more familiar with and reliant upon next generation technologies and services.”

On the subject of take-up, EE said it hoped to have a million 4G customers by the end of the year:

“Among 4G network rollouts around the world, converting 10 percent of pay monthly base after 24 months is considered to indicate a successful deployment. More than one million 4GEE customers would represent around 8 percent of the EE pay monthly user base, upgraded or acquired from rival networks within just 14 months.”

The carrier added that it intended to trial carrier aggregation this year, combining spectrum from the different bands it has at its disposal – in addition to the 1800MHz spectrum, EE picked up 800MHz and 2.6MHz spectrum at the auction. Carrier aggregation is key to LTE-Advanced, the next generation of LTE and, technically speaking, the first mobile broadband technology that should be able to bear the moniker “4G”. EE also noted that it was working on supplying its customers with voice-over-Wi-Fi services — a move that might lessen the load on its LTE network — and voice-over-LTE.

Right now, EE’s LTE network covers 50 towns and cities in the UK. The doubling of the speeds will affect customers in 10 of those cities initially, namely Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester and Sheffield.

Here’s hoping EE also boosts the amount of data it offers for its 4G customers — the entry-level package there comes with just 500MB, which already doesn’t go far with 10Mbps usage speeds.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Sprint’s tightrope walk: finding a balance for its network modernization plan
• New solutions for the evolving mobile network
• Mobile 2012 and beyond

Since the network just went online and it doesn’t have an established user base, it will be several months before we start seeing reliable figures from testing companies like RootMetrics or OpenSignal, but we can get idea of how T-Mobile’s network will perform based on what we know about the spectrum and the technology its using. As I’ve detailed before, no two LTE networks are created equal, and T-Mobile has some advantages that will help its 4G service outpace its competitors.

A work in progress

Let’s tackle the spectrum first. T-Mobile is launching in the Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) band, using spectrum it has culled from the ongoing reconfiguration of its networks as well as the licenses it won from Ma Bell after the AT&T-Mo merger failed. That gives it enough to deploy a 20 MHz (that’s 10 MHz upstream and 10 MHz downstream) network in some markets, but only 10 MHz in others.

To put that in perspective, Verizon Wireless has launched a 20 MHz network nationwide, as has AT&T with a few notable exceptions in certain cities. Sprint is building a 10 MHz network nationwide. As we’ve seen from Root’s most recent report, AT&T’s and Verizon’s now fully loaded LTE networks are averaging between 14 and 18 Mbps on the downlink and between 8 and 9 Mbps on the uplink. Sprint’s half-sized — though relatively new — network is still managing an impressive 10 Mbps down and 4 Mbps up.

We can expect to see some correlation between those speeds and T-Mobile’s after it loads its new 4G network up with subscribers. But T-Mobile isn’t stopping there.

Neville Ray, CTO, T-Mobile (c) 2012 Pinar Ozger pinar@pinarozger.com

As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray refarms more 3G spectrum for LTE, he will be able to boost many of its 10 MHz systems  to a full 20 MHz, but the real prize comes after it closes its acquisition of MetroPCS (which at this point seems almost a given). Surgically adding Metro’s AWS spectrum to the current network will give it 40 MHz of LTE in some key markets. That’s twice the capacity of the systems currently run by Verizon and AT&T.

Sometimes it pays to wait

As for technology, let’s just say there are some advantages from being late to market.

By virtue of its dallying, T-Mobile is deploying the latest-generation Ericsson and Nokia Siemens base station gear. T-Mobile is fond of calling its network “LTE-Advanced ready,” and though the term really is just a marketing conceit, there’s a bit of truth in those words. LTE is an iterative technology that improves over time. Because of its relative newness, T-Mobile’s infrastructure will be able to take new LTE upgrades more easily and more cheaply, and as device technology improves, T-Mobile will be able to support next-generation radio chipsets sooner.

Technically even T-Mobile’s most modest 10 MHz network could today support a theoretical downlink of 37.5 Mbps (though real-world network speeds would be much less) when connecting to the latest and greatest devices. Once it gets to the 40 MHz networks, however, T-Mobile’s 4G service would be truly awe-inspiring, boasting a theoretical ceiling of 150 Mbps.

Of course, 150 Mbps may seem a bit ridiculous for your typical smartphone user, but the justification for those speeds isn’t to create individual super connections, but to produce more capacity that can be shared by more users. The more data T-Mobile can deliver to a large subset of user, the cheaper it can make data pricing. And making data cheaper is one of the main ways T-Mobile is setting itself apart from the competition.

Feature photo courtesy of Shutterstock user Villiers Steyn

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in the third quarter
• Mobile 2012 and beyond
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis

President Obama nominated Genachowski to the commission in 2009, where he oversaw some fairly momentous -– and controversial — FCC actions: the creation of the National Broadband Plan, the quashing of AT&T-Mo and the approval of Verizon’s plan to cooperate with the cable companies on residential broadband.

Here’s the full text of Genachowski’s statement:

“Over the past four years, we’ve focused the FCC on broadband, wired and wireless, working to drive economic growth and improve the lives of all Americans. And thanks to you, the Commission’s employees, we’ve taken big steps to build a future where broadband is ubiquitous and bandwidth is abundant, where innovation and investment are flourishing.

“To connect all Americans to broadband, we adopted a landmark overhaul of multi-billion dollar universal service programs, modernizing them from telephone to broadband and creating the Connect America Fund and the Mobility Fund, an unprecedented commitment to broadband infrastructure.

“To unleash the enormous opportunities of mobile, we pioneered incentive auctions and other cutting-edge spectrum policies.

“To fuel America’s innovation economy, we put in place the first rules to preserve Internet freedom and openness.
“To drive competition and empower consumers, we opposed and modified transactions where necessary, deployed technology to drive transparency, and took unprecedented enforcement actions.

“We helped harness the power of digital technologies to give students a better chance, people better health care, and make Americans safer in their homes and communities, while also guarding against digital threats and strengthening cybersecurity.

“Today, America’s broadband economy is thriving, with record-setting private investment; unparalleled innovation in networks, devices and apps; and renewed U.S. leadership around the world.

“While there are challenges ahead in this fast-moving, globally competitive sector, a revitalized FCC is prepared to continue taking them on. I’m deeply grateful to President Obama for his vision, friendship, and the opportunity to serve our country.

“I’m proud of what we’ve done together to harness technology to advance the American dream for the 21st century. I know you’ll continue to fight hard to fulfill this agency’s vital mission, and I look forward to continuing to work together until my last day at the agency, and to count you as family and as an inspiration for long after that.”

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• A look back at mobile in the third quarter
• Mobile 2012 and beyond

Update: A spokesman from the FCC Chairman’s office declined to comment on the Journal story.

Genachowski replaced Kevin Martin (and interim FCC chairman Michael Copps) in 2009 after being nominated by Obama. Genachowski worked on Obama’s first presidential campaign as chairperson of his Technology, Media and Telecommunications Policy Working Group. The working group germinated the seeds of Obama’s National Broadband Plan, which Genachowski oversaw when he took over the reins of the commission.

Since then Genachowski has been in the spotlight on many occasions, advocating the need for more cellular spectrum and proposing the reallocation of TV airwaves for mobile broadband use. Some of those spectrum proposals, however, landed Genachowski and the commission in hot water, such as the conditional waiver -– later retracted — they granted LightSquared to use its satellite spectrum for a terrestrial LTE network.

Perhaps the most controversial period of his tenure, though, was the nearly one year that the FCC weighed and eventually quashed AT&T’s planned acquisition of T-Mobile. The decision is considered a victory for the competitive market and consumer choice after a long period of unfettered consolidation in the telecom industry.

Not all of the commission’s decisions have been so consumer friendly under Genachowski. The commission let pass Verizon’s spectrum deal with the cable operators, which has big implications for competition in the residential broadband market.

Genachowski’s retirement, if true, doesn’t come as a huge surprise. News reports have indicated that the forthcoming departure of Republican FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell clears the way for Genachowski’s departure as well, as it leaves the commission with a 2-1 Democratic majority.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• A look back at mobile in the third quarter
• Mobile 2012 and beyond