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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NAGINDAS J.O.PATTNI who wrote (2402)	9/26/1999 9:22:00 PM
From: brian h	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

Nagin, Huh? Per minutes cost again? Quality difference? A new element comes into play besides "per minute cost"? Please show up all your cards of what are the most important elements of phone systems. According to your previous post, you should say analog systems should be kept forever because their per minute cost should be about zero by now. Which SP is so irresponsible to get rid of some no cost systems (after recovering all capital costs invested before) (ATT in US do not do that, otherwise it will not have a success one rate plan to cover US at all). Besides, Tero mentioned it before analog phones are one of the most profitable elements in Nokia's businesses. He is knowledgeable, is he not? How can one GSM system cost equals to an analog system unless some manufacturers artificially raise the price tags on new analog systems to promote GSM systems. I think you mean these are public knowledge, Right? :-) Best, Brian H. PS. Quality difference and capacity issues are making GSM systems fading away fast because Nokia and ERICY are going to make EDGE, GPRS, or WCDMA compatible systems cost just about as much as installing some new GSM systems pretty soon. Later on you will tell me the Per Minute Cost of WCDMA systems will equals to new GSM systems installed world wide.