Larry, Globalstar will be able to charge the same price for service to the hot-shot international jet-setting executive and since Globalstar's costs are so much lower than Iridium's, their profit will be much higher. That is usually considered to be "winning" in the investment world. Sure, there will be sufficient demand to fill both, though I hasten to add, the Globalstar business plan doesn't suggest that! They are expecting to take 5 years to fill the system. Heck, that is crazy in my opinion. More like 1 or 2 years.
If they are right, then Iridium will be in the same "boat" and there will NOT be more than enough demand to fill both to capacity. But I agree with you - but are going to fill very quickly.
Upgrading is easier, quicker and cheaper for Globalstar. As you say, Iridium has to replace ALL its satellites. Globalstar just takes 150 new plug in gadgets to the ground stations and plugs them in. I'm sure you know which one could be done quicker. There are only a few tens of gateways needed to cover the earth. The others are for political sensitivity and security. A mere 4 gateways will provide coverage for all of USA, Europe, China, Japan and that area, Australia , Indonesia. Another for India and neighbours and that would cover about 80% of the world's population and 95% of its people with a "high" income. While they wouldn't have global service, they would get nearly all their communication needs met.
But to upgrade Globalstar for W-CDMA and the latest email, voice, video and web services would require new satellites too and that would mean a full scale Iridium type replacement. I'm guessing there, but I'm pretty sure that would be the case. Maybe somebody could give the facts on that. Bent-pipes must be more than a hollow tube. Part of the idea of Globalstar was to enable low cost upgrades for technical and software developments.
Why are all the new systems - M-Star, Celestri, Teledesic being planned for satellite switching? Beats me! I assume you are correct that they are. It seems to make hard work of it and waste satellite resources. Satellites will need to have bigger batteries, bigger photovoltaic panels, bigger rocket launchers, more electronic gadgetry, risk obsolescence. But they must have figured that it has some advantage to overcome those drawbacks. I wish I knew what it was.
Qualcomm, whose epithet is "The Elegant Solution", are not shy about using sophisticated systems - the very basis of CDMA, so for them to choose a bent-pipe, was not because they are bamboozled by the confusion of electrons and photons in space switching.
Yes, people are a bit doubtful of pie-in-the-sky and want to keep their feet on the ground, so interest in Globalstar will have to wait until satellites fly and signals send. A bit like Qualcomm - investors want to see the dollars dropping out of the bottom line before they commit to it. Wisely so too! Too many people have come to grief with expectations being dashed. The technology sector is awash with "new technology", which never actually succeeds.
Okay, off to golf!
Maurice |
