GSMAs case for licensed mobile access to at least part of the US 6GHz band hinges on how it reads early 6GHz Wi-Fi adoption. A critique argues that the underlying logic turns an early connection observation snapshot into spectrum-utilization evidencethen stretches it into a longer-term mobile forecast.
In the argument, GSMA leans on a report built from Ookla wireless-network testing samples. The counterpoint is that the sample window and comparisons are not like-for-like, and therefore cannot support reallocating 6GHz for mobile services.
GSMAs Ookla-based 6GHz adoption snapshot
GSMA published a report titled The Evolution of Mid-Band Mobile Spectrum in the US. The report is based on Ookla wireless-network testing samples taken in 10 US cities during June 2025.
The critiques core premise is that GSMA and CTIA misrepresented early 6GHz Wi-Fi adoption data to justify reallocating spectrum for mobile use. In that framing, GSMA suggested in its report that 6GHz Wi-Fi had been a disappointment.
From scans to a spectrum utilization claim
The objection is not that Ookla collected data; it is that GSMA treats it as proof of spectrum utilization. The critique states that GSMA is treating connection observations as if they were evidence of spectrum utilization.
It argues that a low share of 6GHz scans in June 2025 indicates mainly the installation curve for 6E/7 routers, smartphones, laptops, and ISP gateways as consumers upgrade. In that view, the low scan share does not prove that the upper 6GHz band is fallow.
The critique further says the analysis does not acknowledge how Wi-Fi traffic in the upper 6GHz frequencies accelerates as 6GHz installations proliferate.
Apples-to-oranges comparisons against mobile forecasts
The critique also targets GSMAs use of the snapshot. It says GSMA compares an early snapshot of 6GHz Wi-Fi usage with GSMA forecasts of mobile usage and 5G/6G spectrum demand out to 2040.
According to the critique, this comparison is not a like-for-like comparison and does not hold up under close scrutiny. It also characterizes the reports logic as apples-to-oranges arguments and out-of-context data.
The timing problem: adoption s-curves
The critique argues that wireless adoption does not arrive as one synchronized event. It states that adoption in wireless technologies involves separate early-stage adoption s-curves that need to align in time, place, and measurement to register adoption.
It says that when the GSMA data was obtained, 6GHz adoption was at an even earlier stage. It also states that this adoption-cycle alignment is not unusual for wireless technologies.
That framing connects back to the reports policy purpose: the critique says GSMA used its report to argue for a rethink about possible licensed cellular access to at least part of the 6GHz band in the US.