Short answer: almost never. Longer answer below, because if you’re a landowner trying to figure out whether the consultant you’re about to hire actually knows what they’re doing, award logos are one of the least reliable signals you can use — and you should know why.

The email that prompted this post

Last week I got an email from a publication called Telecom Business Review informing me that Steel in the Air had been shortlisted as the “Top Cell Tower Lease Valuation and Negotiation Consultant of 2026.” Sole honoree. Based on nominations from their 85,000 subscribers and a rigorous review by their editorial panel.

The price for this honor? $2,000. Logo and reprint rights included.

A competitor of mine received the same pitch — except they were offered “Best Cell Tower Lease Consultancy.” Different title, same magazine, same “sole honoree” language, presumably the same $2,000 invoice. The titles are so similar it’s genuinely hard to see what distinguishes one from the other, or what criteria the editorial panel could have used to assign them.

This looks like a familiar pattern

Telecom Business Review’s pitch reads almost identically to solicitations that have been discussed for years in Reddit threads, Trustpilot reviews, and BBB complaints against a cluster of other “awards” publications — CIOReview, CIO Applications, CIO Look, Industry Era, Enterprise Security Magazine, Silicon Review, and others. I don’t have proof that Telecom Business Review is affiliated with any of them, but several Reddit and forum threads have speculated that many of these outlets share ownership, staff, or infrastructure. I’d note that CIOReview lists a Fort Lauderdale office on its own about page, and Telecom Business Review’s email to me came from a Fort Lauderdale address. Draw your own conclusions.

The playbook across this ecosystem, as documented by dozens of recipients, generally looks like this:

  1. Scrape a list of companies in an industry.
  2. Email every one of them with a flattering “you’ve been shortlisted” message.
  3. Charge a few thousand for the logo, reprint rights, and a write-up.
  4. Repeat annually.

The BBB profile for CIOReview is full of complaints from companies “awarded” recognition in categories they don’t even work in. Google “[publication name] scam” for any of these outlets and you’ll find the paper trail.

Why this matters if you’re a landowner

If you own land with a cell tower on it — or a carrier has approached you about leasing your property — you are probably going to talk to a consultant at some point. That consultant may have a “Top Cell Tower Consultant 2024” logo on their homepage. Here’s what that logo actually tells you:

  • Someone at their firm had $2,000 and a willingness to spend it on a logo.
  • That’s it. That’s the whole list.

It does not tell you whether the consultant has actually worked exclusively for landowners for years, or whether they “double dip” by also taking money from tower companies and lease buyout firms. It does not tell you whether they charge a flat fee or quietly take 15–25% of your lease income forever (which, on a $1,000/month lease, can cost you $87,500 over the course of the lease). It does not tell you how many leases they’ve actually seen, how much data they have to value yours, or whether they’ve ever been quoted by a real publication — as opposed to one that invoiced them.

What actually matters when you pick a consultant

The real signals are the unglamorous ones: length of time working exclusively with landowners, disclosed conflicts of interest, flat fees rather than a cut of your lease, depth of industry experience, willingness to listen before pitching, number of actual paying clients, a real team behind the name, unsolicited references, a substantial lease database, and verifiable third-party citations.

I wrote a longer guide breaking down each of those ten factors — with specific questions to ask and red flags to watch for — here: Cell Tower Lease Consultants: How to Tell Good Ones from Bad Ones. If you’re about to hire someone, read that before you sign anything.

And if you have any doubts, ask to speak to real-life clients of the company- real consultants will readily share references for identical situations as the one you contacted them about.

A closing note to Telecom Business Review

Thank you for the nomination. I’ll pass on the $2,000, but if you ever run a “Top Consultants Who Didn’t Fall For It” issue, I’d like to be considered. I’m told I’m a strong candidate.

Ken Schmidt

Recent Posts

SITA’s Good and Bad for 2025

Good and Bad for 2025Rather than the usual brag-fest, here's what actually happened in 2025—the…

1 month ago

DISH Wireless Lease Excuse Letter

In October 2025, Steel in the Air obtained a letter sent by DISH Wireless LLC…

6 months ago

Edge Data Centers at Tower Sites: The High Bar and the Real Opportunity

Over the last decade, we’ve heard plenty of talk about how cell tower sites would…

8 months ago

Dish Network’s Wireless Exit Strategy and Its Impact on Lease Valuation

For the past several years, Dish Network’s entry into the wireless carrier business has been…

8 months ago

Why Lease Buyout Companies Buy Cell Tower Leases

By Ken Schmidt | Steel in the Air One of the most frequent questions we…

12 months ago