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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JGoren who wrote (1662)	9/18/1999 7:57:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 13582

JGoren: Like wow ! Have fought my way through the documentation and to a non lawyer it looks like the FCC has a weak basis for the appeal and seems to be simply delaying the bankruptcy judges decision. Is that anywhere close to the mark? Again, seems like this appeal is more like sour grapes than a well thought out legal position. Or vengeance in the old fashioned sense. Could the FCC really be engaged in action which on its face appears contrary to at least the spirit of its mandate, to destroy a company for purposes which seem less than admirable? Chaz

To: JGoren who wrote (1662)	9/18/1999 1:50:00 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 13582

JGoren, thanks so much for providing us the decision on NextWave's spectrum assets. To a non-lawyer, it sure looks like the FCC doesn't know its --- from a hole in the ground. There was one statement by the court that I wanted to mention here for anyone's comments: "...the evidence at trial would not support any finding as to the likelihood of a material increase in demand for wireless data transmission within the next five years." Seems to me that a responsible person testifying for the FCC could have provided considerable evidence of an increase in demand for wireless data transmission, if the FCC had been smart enough to recognize this demand. Thus, it appears the FCC through its own stupidity, arrogance, or what have you, succeeded in wasting over $3 billion of our taxes by failing to provide evidence of this growing demand (hence, growing value of the PCS spectrum for data transmission). Whoever ends up with the spectrum that in the end cost about $900,000,000 has, in my view, a great investment. Whether its bargain cost will result in faster deployment of wireless PCS services (hopefully using CDMA) is something I can't tell from the disposition of the case. Thanks again, Art Bechhoefer