Hi Tony. Here's an idea. ICO has been trying to get their satellite spectrum into dual mode status, meaning the FCC would allow them to use it for both terrestrial and satellite cellphones.
It makes sense [to me] for Globalstar too.
The spectrum allocated to Globalstar was sufficient to be shared with 3 or 4 competing constellations which was the original idea. However, there aren't going to be any more constellations the way things are looking, so Globalstar has access to far more spectrum than they can possibly use with the existing constellation or even if they launch another in the next 5 years.
So, they could get FCC, [and other countries around the world], to approve use of their spectrum for terrestrial networks as well as satellite. Then, a Globalstar phone would hook up to the nearest basestation [in terms of signal strength], which might be just a block away, or might be via a satellite to a gateway in another country. Soft handoff should look after that though I suppose the distance to the gateway would make handoff problematic. To use the satellite, there would need to be line of sight - though going under a bridge overpass in a car doesn't drop the call if it's quick enough and light foliage shouldn't interrupt the call.
Since spectrum in cities like New York is a large component of the cost of a network, there would be quite an advantage in using spectrum which otherwise is going to waste. Clark Hare or somebody who knows about these things might say the satellite spectrum would become too polluted if it was used for terrestrial purposes, but if a handset can't see a satellite, or a nearby base station has a stronger connection, then the handset signal wouldn't be polluting the satellite spectrum significantly. If there was no terrestrial base station, the handset would have to turn up the volume and connect via satellite and that would displace other calls which could be made from rural areas.
The base station radiation is horizontal, so it would produce little pollution of the spectrum [as far as the satellite's point of view is concerned].
I'm not a technical person so maybe this won't work, but it makes sense to me from what I know.
NextWave could take their money from their settlement with the FCC, buy a stake in a restructured debt-free NewGlobalstar, build out a terrestrial network in the big cities and bingo, we're in business, with almost worldwide seamless coverage.
The minutes could be sold really cheaply since rural coverage would be via Globalstar and the usual high network costs would be dramatically reduced. Globalstar could dramatically undercut roaming prices which are currently charged by terrestrial service providers.
With NewGlobalstar back in business in a big way, QUALCOMM could develop single-mode Globalstar phones which would work via satellite or terrestrial CDMA. Eventually, with RadioOne, I suppose they might include GSM and other modes in the one handset, but that's not necessary now. The current monster Globalstar phones could presumably be shrunk down to a much more convenient size with improved battery life.
I wonder how Motorola's fuel cell developments are coming along. They should be ready soon. Methanol refueling out in the hinterlands would be easier than recharging in the absence of electricity supplies.
The FCC is keen to see competition and improved cellphone services, so they should be all in favour of this idea.
Allen Salmasi was the ringleader for Globalstar's development and would know very well what such a dual mode system would be capable of. With QUALCOMM, NextWave and a restructured debt free NewGlobalstar in a gang of three, I expect that the original promise of Globalstar would be proven.
I wouldn't be surprised to see NextWave take a look at Globalstar. If ICO is allowed to use their spectrum for terrestrial networks, I don't see why Globalstar wouldn't be able to as well. It certainly makes sense [to me anyway] that a terrestrial network be integrated with a LEO system. That was the original Globalstar plan [using GSM, analogue and CDMA as terrestrial modes]. Why not terrestrial and Globalstar modes in the same frequency since there is so much of it available [at least for the next 6 or even 10 years].
Perhaps terrestrial service is so competitive that the infrastructure costs would be too high, even with 'free' spectrum. But people are building terrestrial networks in the PCS band so I don't see that they have any reason to fail if a Globalstar spectrum terrestrial network was built. "Total Coverage", "Always Available" are good claims to be able to make. Especially when allied with the normal advantages of CDMA by QUALCOMM.
I suppose this wasn't originally done because all the Globalstar spectrum was going to be needed for satellite communications and there wouldn't be room to use it for terrestrial, which was to be satisfied by PCS and cellular bands. Now though, we know how valuable terrestrial spectrum is and how short the supply is. When Globalstar was envisaged, few were thinking of petabytes of data swooping wirelessly around in mobile cyberspace.
Any comments please folks? Has my brain sprung a leak or does this make sense?
NextWave and QUALCOMM between them have got all the grunt necessary to do it if it's a good idea. Presumably they have thought of it. Maybe that's why NextWave gave up on the C-Block spectrum rather than fight it to the Supreme Court. Maybe phatbstd's post falls into the category of fools and children shouldn't see a job half done. Maybe there is a lot more going on than a grab for some cash.
< From a friend...
Mr. Wack,
After making several attempts to reach you and other NXLC officials to discuss material facts which would be able to be discussed by the general investing public, let alone securities analysts such as myself, I became concerned about the validity of the company press releases, position against the FCC and your business model in general.>
The concern I have is that maybe there isn't actually a shortage of spectrum and the big auction results for the C-Block and European spectrum are over the top, especially as QUALCOMM continues to squeeze more into 1.25MHz. Maybe OFDM, 80211, AirFiber and other technologies will handle much of the data traffic in urban environments. Maybe terrestrial wireless is going to be horribly competitive and the cost of infrastructure, even with free spectrum, wouldn't justify the investment, but in that case, how come NextWave was wanting to build out a network? Leap said they wouldn't know what to do with 25MHz.
Comments please anyone?
Mqurice |
