CHAIRMAN REED E. HUNDT      
                            SPEECH BEFORE THE 
                    7th ANNUAL WIRELESS CABLE CONVENTION
                             Las Vegas, Nevada
                               June 22, 1994

Introduction

     Thank you, Bob, for that kind introduction and for this eagle
that will land on my shelf.  I would like to thank the members of
the Board of Directors of the Wireless Cable Association for
inviting me to be with you today.  I also would like to acknowledge
Jim Clark, who has put together such an outstanding convention.  
Finally, I want to thank my former colleague, former neighbor,
long-time friend and your very able Washington attorney, Nick
Allard.  I can't count the many ways in which he has given me
invaluable help in doing my job.

     I'm banging the drum for competition and I'm very enthusiastic
about wireless.  That message isn't necessarily welcome everywhere,
so here at least I'm playing at home.  

     This is your 7th Annual Wireless Convention.  We are here to
celebrate the acceleration of wireless cable as a viable competitor
in the United States and world markets.  This is the end of seven
lean years and the beginning of seven fat years.  I am sure this is
a celebration because I've seen people here lending money.  In
American business, debt financing is the highest form of
congratulation.    

     I am honored to be the first incumbent FCC Chairman to address
this convention.    And as some of you know from the reporting on
my six months in this job, I turned down all offers to address all
other conventions in Vegas just so my first trip here could be with
you.

     On a personal level, I know very well how far your industry
has come.  I know that each and every one of you deserves credit
for your patience, your persistence, and your skill in advancing
the cause of wireless cable.  You have created businesses almost
literally out of thin air.

     My own personal journey is similar.  After six months in my
great job I still ask, "Where am I?", but I always remember where
I came from.  

     I remember, for example, that I attended the first Wireless
Cable Convention in the basement of Washington's Ramada Renaissance
Hotel.  I think there were about 60 or so people at that first
convention.  As some of you may recall, I got FCC Chairman Mark
Fowler, who had just resigned his post, to speak to you.  Mark said
he had never spoken to such a small crowd but I said "Yes, Mark,
but they've got big hearts".  I am told that this year's convention
has attracted a record crowd of nearly 2,000.  Mark wanted to come
back but I wouldn't let him.

     Not everyone has survived the rough business journey of the
last seven years, the journey from the dark days of monopoly power
in cable directed at you to the brighter days of the opportunity to
compete.

     However, I do recall one far-sighted cable vet who attended
that first convention.  This fellow spoke up from the audience, and
indicated that he was interested in getting into the wireless cable
business, but his friends in the cable industry that he used to be
the head of were not thrilled about the prospect of his launching
a competitive alternative.  Now this fellow has more business
energy than he has kids and charities  -- and he has lots of kids
and charities.  I'm talking about Bob Schmidt. Bob is anything but
fainthearted.  So it didn't bother Bob or his legislative advisor,
Nick Allard, that everyone in Washington said they didn't dare take
on cable, that cable was the most powerful lobby around. Bob said
he didn't care, he had taken harder hits from the practice squads
at USC and Notre Dame.   

     In truth, a completely prudent person -- someone who hadn't
taken quite SO MANY hits -- might well not have entered the
wireless cable industry just then.  But, how have things turned out
for Bob and Nick and the business in the seven years since that
first convention?  Those seven lean years have given way to what
may be seven fat years and many things are different now.  You
don't have to pay cash in advance for your rooms.  Lenders -- a
previously invisible type -- not only attend, but give away free
food and drink to have a chance to talk to you.  And the hotels let
you out of the basement.  

     Earlier this month, The Wall Street Journal ran an article
saying, "Wall Street loves wireless."  As the headline said,
"Wireless Cable-Television Sector Is On Acquisition Binge; Stock
Offerings Fuel the Frenzy. . ."  Frenzy, Binge -- in Vegas they are
dangerous words but on Wall Street they're terrific.  Of course on
Wall Street a frenzy is when you go with just the belt and skip the
suspenders.
     
     I had the opportunity to tour the show this morning.  I was
sold on the virtues of the "Beambender."  I thought it was a little
unusual when I was told that if I asked for Scotty the product
could transport me to the Starship Enterprise.  But the truth is
that some of the two-way digital technologies on your convention
floor make real what seemed like magic only a few years ago.     

     I've been told that in the future all human interaction will
be digital.  Digital communication is a code language whereby an
electronic or photonic yes and no or on and off signal is used to 
communicate all messages.  Those of you who have talked to a
teenager lately understand that the era of yes/no communications
has already arrived.  

     But digitization and compression are the keys to extraordinary
change in the communications industry.  They are the keys to
convergence of delivery systems that can compete in delivering
product.  It is as if when they rebuilt the Santa Monica Freeway,
robust competitors raced to complete numerous parallel freeways at
the same time.  Here are some of the changes: 

     1) The telephone companies can use their networks to 
     deliver video.

     2) The cable companies are going to convert their networks to
     deliver voice communications.

     3) Broadcasters are developing new ways to use their
     spectrum.
     
     These technological changes and convergence of industries give
us the opportunity to encourage competition in the delivery of
communications services.  The benefits of competition are
historically proven in many industries.  Competition has always
lowered prices, improved service and stimulated economic growth. 

     As a framework for bringing about competition, I will look to
three principles:  choice, opportunity and fairness.  
Choice
     Choice is really the watchword for the wireless cable
industry.  Choice means choice for consumers.  It means you can go
to more than one provider for telephone services or cable TV. 
Right now there are not enough choices in the communications
market.

     In most places in this nation, as you well know, there is 
almost no choice available for video programming.  If you want
ESPN, preferred by my eight-year-old son Natty, or Nickelodeon, my
five-year-old Sara's favorite network, in all but 1% of the country
you have just a single company to which you can subscribe.  If you
don't like their prices or the way they treat you, it's take it or
leave it.

     We all know choice means lower prices for consumers.  And no
choice means higher prices.  For example, the average buyer of
basic cable service who had no choice except just take it or leave
it faced a bill in 1993 that was 141% higher than the bill ten
years earlier.  You all know that.
     
     It was only the Cable Act of 1992 that broke the back of those
continuing price increases.  That's why rates haven't gone up very
much in the last of couple years. In addition, in the Cable Act,
Congress expressed a clear preference for the type of competition
that the wireless cable industry provides.  Once effective
competition exists in a franchise area, regulation disappears.  And
you're bringing that competition to cable markets.     

     Meanwhile, you are exempted from rate regulation.  This was
done through the definition of "cable system" used in the Act  --
wireless cable systems do not transmit signals via a "closed
transmission path."  This is good public policy because you are not
the monopolists, you are the would-be competitors.  When you arrive
in a market and obtain sufficient penetration, there is no rate
regulation even for cable, so there's certainly no need to regulate
wireless cable as the new entrant.

     Already, consumers benefit from the additional choice you
provide them.  In Riverside, California, Cross Country Wireless
Cable TV entered the market in early 1991.  Cross Country offers a
package of programming for $18.95 a month. To meet that offer, one
of the wire cable incumbents charges $20.95 a month for comparable
enhanced basic service.  But in nearby Buena Park, where the same
cable operator faces no competition, it charges five dollars more
for the same service.  So the "captive" consumers that do not have
the choice of moving to wireless cable pay 24% more than the
consumers who have the option of switching to Cross Country
Wireless.  

Opportunity
     Competitive markets create more opportunities for new entrants
to participate.  

     Since wireless cable was first made possible by the FCC in the
early 1980s, the industry has grown to nearly 200 systems in
operation within the United States.  Over the past two years in
particular, the industry has experienced major growth.  Hundreds of
millions of dollars in investment money has been attracted in just
the last six months.  

     In Philadelphia, ACS Enterprises -- the first wireless cable
company to go public, in December 1992 -- has been adding
subscribers recently at a rate exceeding six percent a month.  
People's Choice TV Corporation, after its IPO last July, has gone
from 13,000 customers in Tucson to 22,000 currently.  It is not
surprising and it is not overly ambitious for Bob Schmidt to
predict, as he has, that the industry's subscriber numbers will
double each year for the remainder of the decade.

     I bet (that's Vegas talk) you are becoming increasingly
excited about your prospects overseas.  Millions of subscribers
already receive wireless cable in over 50 countries.  The explosion
of wireless cable overseas is a result of increased demand and of
wireless' low cost and its ability to reach areas with high rural
populations.
     
     For example, in Mexico, MVS Multivision has close to 300,000
wireless cable customers in Mexico City -- a 12-fold increase from
its level in 1990.  It predicts 540,000 Mexican subscribers by the
end of next year, including 420,000 in Mexico City.  I'm told that
in Eastern Europe, a wireless cable operator intends to use the
technology to introduce telephone service in the fourth quarter of
1994.   This international growth has already led to more than $100
million in purchases of United States equipment.  Your industry is
creating competition within the United States, and you're helping
our balance of payments, and you're making United States technology
the de facto worldwide standard, and you're helping build what the
Vice President calls the Global Information Infrastructure.  Not
bad for an industry that was down in the basement of the hotel of
opportunity only seven years ago.

     Now at the FCC, we needed to change our regulations to help
you take the opportunity to compete in the video programming
marketplace.  Here's some of what we've done:

     (1) Reduced the minimum programming requirements for new
     ITFS licensees for the first two years from 20 hours per
     channel per week to 12 hours per channel per week (1990);

     (2) Increased the maximum MDS and ITFS transmitter output
     from 10 watts to 100 watts so that signal strength would
     consistently reach 15 miles (1990);

     (3) Authorized use of channel mapping technology by ITFS
     licensees and wireless cable operators (1990);

     (4) Authorized the use of signal boosters, which are
     needed when line-of-sight transmission is not possible
     (1990); and

     (5) Eliminated restrictive time-of-day and day-of-week
     regulations, thus permitting ITFS licensees to fulfill
     their minimum programming requirements on any day and at
     any time of day (1991).

     Earlier this month, we took several additional actions to help
     give wireless cable the opportunity to compete.  On June 9,
     we:

     * Transferred MMDS to the Mass Media Bureau's Video
     Services Division in order to permit "one-stop shopping"
     for ITFS and MMDS licensing.  We are assembling a team to
     handle new MMDS applications and as soon as things are
     ready will lift the freeze on applications. 
          
     * We approved "channel loading" for ITFS licensees so as
     to maximize your ability to offer subscribers greater
     access to advanced television features like picture-in-
     picture and the ability to record one program while
     viewing another.  The wireless cable industry worked well
     with ITFS licenses to come up with the compromise that
     formed the basis of our decision.

     *  We decided to accept the filing of new applications
     for major changes to existing ITFS facilities, as well as
     any competing applications.  

     * We announced that we will use a window filing system
     for ITFS applications to eliminate duplicative review. 

     Most important, we are assembling 20 skilled people borrowed
from the Cable Services Bureau and the Common Carrier Bureau into
a team headed by Roy Stewart and Barbara Kreisman that is committed
to eliminating the backlog of MMDS applications and legal cases. 
I also know there is tremendous interest in the industry in
providing wireless cable system operators with some sort of
preference in securing fallow channels in their markets, and we
will explore that possibility.

     In addition, other moves we should consider include whether
the FCC should change its inside home wiring rules to give cable
competitors access to the wiring.  For example, should we change
the demarcation point from one foot away from the entry point to
some more distant point?  Should we shorten the time for cable
operators to pull out their wires when a customer wants to switch
to a competitor?  Would we promote the opportunity to compete with
cable if we gave subscribers greater access to cable home wiring
before they had in fact switched to an alternative provider?  These
are real and serious questions about the all important last few
feet of the information superhighway.  We are looking carefully
into these questions.

Fairness
     The third principle for competition is fairness.  You need not
just an opportunity to compete, but a fair opportunity.  No one
wants big companies to take unfair advantage of small companies
through prohibited exclusive dealing, illegal discriminatory
pricing or other unfair trade tactics.  Competition for the new
entrants will be tough enough;  incumbents will have to play fair. 

     This is especially so in the cable business.  Cable has annual
revenues of $22 billion and that's going to grow.  As recent deals
have shown, cable companies are generally strong and powerful
businesses.  The cable industry passes 97% of the country's homes. 
Cable has about 60 million subscribers, enrolling as subscribers
more than 62% of homes passed.  Those numbers are also going to
grow.

     By comparison, wireless cable today is about a $1 billion
industry serving half a million subscribers with a penetration rate
of about one-half of one percent.  You've got a bright sunny day of
opportunity ahead of you but you already know you have a  tough
road of competition to travel down.

     Congress ensured one very important way in which incumbent
cable operators will have to play fair when it adopted the program
access provisions of the 1992 Cable Act.   Although the Wireless
Cable Association and its allies were way outnumbered, you
prevailed on the program access issue because you convinced
Congress that vertically integrated cable operators should not be
able to thwart competition by locking up programming in which they
have an interest.  

     The program access rules are working.  Earlier this month, the
Commission issued its first two program access decisions.  In the
first case, Time Warner sought authority to enforce exclusive
distribution agreements for Court TV.  We turned that down.

     In the second case, the Commission granted an unopposed
request by New England Cable News, a regional all-news network, for
authority to offer cable operators in the New England states
exclusivity.  In that case, exclusivity was in the public interest
because it would help attract investment and secure distribution. 

     So this is a line we drew.  Following that line, late last
week, Time Warner withdrew a petition seeking to enforce exclusive
agreements with Prime Ticket, a sports channel that carries Lakers
and LA Kings games, for systems in nine southern California
communities.  That's good news, I hear, for Vanguard Cable, a
wireless cable operator in southern California.

     Now when I was in New Orleans at the cable convention, 150
programmers were there clamoring for clearance, and the cable
industry assured them that there is no space for them right now on
most cable systems.  If what I hear is true, compression
technologies are coming that will greatly enhance cable's channel
capacity.  

     Competition is coming for you, too.  With 150 programmers in
the wings, you have a challenge and an opportunity to offer these
programmers clearance.  There is a great explosion in creativity
and you can use it to your advantage.  By the way, no one has
locked those programmers into exclusive agreements -- yet.

     Another thing I want to learn from you is how you can help
complete the "information superhighway" so that it reaches all
Americans.  I'm particularly concerned about the 45 million
Americans who work and play every day in buildings largely cut off
from the modern information age.  These are our children in
schools, kindergarten through grade 12.  In only half of the
classrooms are there computers and in only 4% of the classrooms are
the computers connected to telephone lines.  Thus, only one out of
25 classrooms has the opportunity to connect to the communications
revolution.

     President Clinton has called for us to connect all classrooms,
libraries and health clinics to the information superhighway by the
end of the decade.  Farsighted legislation sponsored by Senator
Hollings and Congressmen Dingell, Markey and Fields would ensure
that the President's goal is met.  

     Is the wireless cable industry prepared to accept the
President's challenge?  Is it possible that building the
information highway to the classroom can be a business opportunity
for you as well as the gift you might make to our children of the
opportunity to participate fully in our economy?  

     Another thing I'd like to learn from you is how you plan to
ensure that all Americans share in the opportunities available in
the wireless cable industry.  Women and minorities should have
opportunities in employment and ownership in the industries that
are going to grow through the communications revolution.  As I'm
sure you know, for many years broadcasters and cable operators have
been subject to the Commission's Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
Rules.  Our 1992 Annual Report concluded that women and minorities
are to a degree under-represented in both the broadcasting and
cable industries.  
     
     As a result of the 1992 Cable Act, the scope of our EEO
enforcement responsibilities was expanded to include wireless cable
operators.  Wireless cable operators were sent EEO reporting forms
early this year.  Those forms were due to be filed at the
Commission on May 31, 1994.  We are just now beginning the process
of reviewing those forms, so I cannot tell you what they reveal
about the industry's EEO compliance.   But you should know that
from this date on we will be evaluating not just your EEO profile
but your hiring practices.   
     
     We also are conducting random on-site audits of wireless cable
operators to evaluate their EEO programs.  We recently completed
the first of these audits.  Others will follow.  

     EEO compliance should not be regarded as, and should not
become a paperwork problem or administrative hassle for you.  Equal
employment opportunity should be seen as perfectly consistent with
the equal competitive opportunity that you've long sought and long
deserved.

     As you take that opportunity, you'll be creating many, many
new jobs and ownership opportunities.  It is vitally important that
women and minorities share in those employment and ownership
opportunities.  Let's not get together again next year to talk
about how you've left undone what you ought to have done and you've
done that which you ought not to have done.  Instead, let's meet to
talk about how you've managed as an industry to start to look like
the people you serve.

     Finally, we're counting on you to keep your own house in
order.  The Association is to be complimented for your strong stand
against investment scams and the so-called "application mills." 
You have worked hard to comply with industry standards to protect
investors.  I think this work is essential for your business
reputation.

     More recently, the Association has helped securities
authorities focus on telephone sales operations that provide
inadequate disclosure to unsophisticated investors.  I note that an
official from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission will be
speaking on a panel here this afternoon about this problem, and
describing initiatives that are currently underway.  Everyone's
grateful for your good work in making responsible and ethical
conduct a priority for your industry.

Conclusion
     The older I get the harder it is for me to tell the difference
between luck and getting your just desserts.  I know I've been
lucky in getting this wonderful job that I have which includes the
great privilege of being able to come out here, talk to you, and
join Nick on one of his three trips to the gym yesterday.  

     We all also know that you can work very hard in the life of
business and in the business of life without necessarily having all
your dreams come true as you may well deserve.  That's because as
Clint Eastwood said to Gene Hackman in "The Unforgiven" before
shooting him, "It ain't about deserving."  But whether it's because
of luck or maybe your just desserts, notwithstanding Eastwood, the
fact is that for you in this room opportunity is at hand.  

     George Washington Plunkett was the boss of the political
machine called Tammany Hall in New York about a century ago.  When
asked at the end of his long and profitable career what was the
secret of his success, he said, "I seen my chances and I took 'em."

     Your chances have come your way because of good laws and your
hard work.  Your chances are part of this country's policy of
enhancing choice, opportunity and fairness for consumers and
industry alike.  But they're still just chances.  You see 'em.  And
it's up to you to take 'em.  As a consumer, I'm counting on you,
and I wish you much success as a full participant in the
communications revolution.