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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Globalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: djane who wrote (7509)	9/23/1999 2:49:00 AM
From: djane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Assorted ICO info (via ICO yahoo thread) Top>Business & Finance>Investments>Sectors>Services>Communications Services>ICOFQ (ICO Global Communications) Smith Barney Report by: corgini 863 of 871 John Coates thinks that not only the equity holders, but also bond holders will get hurt. He did mention something VERY encouraging - which is that ICO can scale down the scope of this project reducing funding needs. They can reduce it down enough to warrent the extra funding. Cheer on GlobalStar! Posted: 9/21/1999 11:21 am EDT as a reply to: Msg 862 by one_dollar_chinese_food _______________________ Top>Business & Finance>Investments>Sectors>Services>Communications Services>ICOFQ (ICO Global Communications) ICO System Update by: one_dollar_chinese_food (39/M) 866 of 871 summary from: Satellite News, Sept. 20,1999 by Karekin Jelaian: Despite serious financial challenges, ICO has made impressive strides in a number of business-development areas. Industry observers give ICO credit for developing its global operating agreements, building a feasible global business plan, an identifying potential vertical markets. ICO isn't having any problems with equipment and service infrastructure. And the company has agreements with 10 of the 12 planned satellite access nodes (SANs). The remaining 2 SANs in China and Brasil are in the process of signing an agreement. 6 SANs have already been service checked. ICO is about where it should be with distrubution and roaming agreements. Telecomm service providers have agreed to distribute ICO's service in more than 100 countries. And, ICO has signed 54 roaming agreements, mostly in the US, Europe, and Asia. Roaming agreements allow allow cell users to roam into the ICO networkwhen they are out of cellular range and for ICO customers to roam into cell networks. ICO still needs $1.7 billion or about 36 % of the total $ 4.7 billion of the required capital. This is a large part of the total at such a late stage of the game. ICO's misfortunes are at least partially attributable to the Iridium fiasco, but ICO may be helped if Globalstar is successful. compliments of one_dollar_chinese_food Posted: 9/22/1999 2:42 am EDT as a reply to: Msg 865 by corgini ________________________ Top>Business & Finance>Investments>Sectors>Services>Communications Services>ICOFQ (ICO Global Communications) 1$cf - changing business model? by: pink_gecko 867 of 871 seems like the ICO model is changing from 'PCS satellite direct' to 'PCS however and if need be then MEO constellation' if the SAN sites become nothing more than telecom concentrator hubs for broadband satcom, then ICO becomes just another bandwith on demand service provider, does it not? i thought the sizzle behind ICO was direct (no middleware telco networks)communication anywhere on the planet? now it sounds like that may just be a pipe dream, and the financial reality is that ICO may just become another bandwith on demand provider? if this is the case, why put an expensive (GAsFET) switchboard in the sky? seems like you would still need extensive ground based packet switching out of the SANs and the telco tunks as well as the cell networks? if the model now caters to servicing broadband traffic and inter-hub communication, then that massive HS702 with its ultra-sophisticated packet switching payload is overkill. consider that TDRS could cover the earth with 3 balls in geosync and deliver bandwith on demand, that was 20 years age! seems like starting with 8 MEOs then jumping to 24 and eventually 28 balls with a dozen SANs is expensive and for that price we must deliver a new and innovative product/service. the international flavor of the alliances adds value yes, but thats not enough - we need to bypass middle man telco fees entirely to make any $$$ for the shareholders. point to point direct PCS is the only way. or, am i missing something here? Posted: 9/22/1999 8:54 am EDT as a reply to: Msg 866 by one_dollar_chinese_food