*Iridium and CDMA* Globalstar had an exclusive CDMA agreement from Qualcomm. Iridium could use some other CDMA but in a mobile environment, I doubt that was possible for Motorola to do because Q! owns the main patents.
The satellite switching, computers in space concept was reasonable enough. Until late 1996 there were still people, such as Ericy, Frezza and others who did not think that CDMA would work in terrestrial mode let alone a rapidly changing LEO with mobile mode. So it is perfectly reasonable for them to think that Globalstar would not succeed. Even if it did, Globalstar would not provide global coverage [even though George Gilder is under the misapprehension that it will in 6 months time]. Maybe Globalstar will provide complete coverage in 5 years, but that would still leave the Iridium as the pre-eminent global system for the life of its first constellation.
To me it was obvious in 1996 and 1997 that Iridium should not be launched and right up until they actually fired the first rocket into space you can see me ranting in SI about how they should not launch and how I was sure they'd see the light.
Okay, they didn't, but neither did the shareholders who bid Iridium stock right up to $72 last year. Any half-witted investor should be capable of reading these threads and figuring that "Duh! Maybe it isn't such a crash-hot idea". There was plenty of reasoning and facts to back up the "Iridium is a dog" claims. For Iridium investors to be whining now and people to be claiming damages seems a bit rich.
I hope the judges tell them to get lost, get a real job and learn about investing if they are going to buy shares in companies. This all assuming that this talk of litigation is simply in regard to "Oh heck, it didn't work. Now we want our money back" rather than some specific and legitimate claims such as fraud or breach of contract or something.
Iridium was a huge financial and technological adventure. People die at the top of Mount Everest, in Antarctica and in Space Shuttles. Sure, negligent O'ring providers might be liable, but there seems to a general feeling that if something doesn't work, then it's time to sue. But such big adventures are very likely to have human frailty as a weak link in the chain. Anyone who has watched The Simpsons gets training in how things can come to grief through 'people problems' and bad ideas.
I'm not aware of any Iridium negligence. Sure, Motorola was milking it, sure it was a bad idea, sure they failed to get it going right and yes, they didn't do a good job of selling it. So what? It was all out in the open. Even the claims when the Iridium management were being wildly optimistic after startup seem silly. Of course management think they'll succeed and say so even while knowing they are in trouble.
Maybe Motorola should sue the investors in Iridium for giving false comfort to the designers of the system. The designers use the confidence and expertise of the investors to decide whether their ideas are good or not. The investors have the overall point of view and their job is to correctly judge the engineering, marketing etc. The investors wantonly, selfishly and negligently led Motorola, their staff and others to continue pouring money and their lives into what the investors should have seen was a dog.
The investors should be sued for negligence.
Mqurice |
