Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (38316)	8/19/1999 8:24:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

KyrosL: Perhaps. If so why the silence from the FCC? And even if you are correct, what about the effect in the real world right now? Is the "public interest" best served by stopping Nextwave cold? Chaz

To: KyrosL who wrote (38316)	8/19/1999 8:30:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Kyros, the FCC entered into a dumb contract of their own instigation. It's being resolved by bankruptcy law. The judge has ruled on the spectrum value in the context of C-block rules established legally by racist, sexist and anti-big-business politicians. Sure, if it was opened up to anybody, it would get a higher price. Bad luck! The politicians and intelligent regulators should have thought of that before they set the stupid rules. Now they have to sell the spectrum to NextWave at the price the judge said. And give Qualcomm some spectrum like the judge said. If they don't, then NextWave can get an injunction to stop them selling the spectrum outside the C-Block rules and sue the FCC for damages for breach of contract. If I was a lawyer, and knew what I was talking about, I'd really tell them what I think!! That taxpayers shouldn't have voted for the intelligent politicians and regulators if they don't like the C-block rules. In a democracy, the majority gets the government they deserve and the rest get punished. The FCC could have avoided the scenario you gave by demanding cash on the barrelhead BEFORE bidding started to the value of half the maximum bid a bidder could make. They could add to that money during the bid process if they wanted to raise their bid. With the money in the bank, there wouldn't be any fake bidders would there? Mqurice

To: KyrosL who wrote (38316)	8/19/1999 10:59:00 PM
From: quidditch	Respond to of 152472

If it is the case that the NW/NXTL fiasco (lots of telecommunications fiascos out there these days, Unicom, I, NW-NXTL) should be read in the context of the FCC protecting the "public good" in the gdichaz vein, then Mq is right: the FCC got behind bad legislation: charging big boy prices for spectrum to little tot players which could not afford those prices. So if the FCC is attempting to 1) redeem the integrity of spectrum and auction process, 2) protect the price points to be paid for spectrum, 3)not permitting "scams" by companies that come on bad times precisely and ironically because of the debt burden incurred to purchase that spectrum, fine. But the FCC ought to EXCORIATE itself and NXTL for the public perception created by NXTL that the FCC is tacitly or explicitly supporting NXTL's gambit. And again, remember, MOT comes out looking mighty good if NXTL comes away with tons of new spectrum (not gonna happen) for which infra, base stations, ASICS, phones are needed. Not a bad offset for the I miscalculation. BOTTOM LINE: For the FCC to use the NW bankruptcy as a test case to exalt the administrative power of the commission over the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court, and to do this in court while NW tries to re-organize, is a travesty. Where have you gone, Reed Hundt?