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: Drew Williams who wrote (7854)	3/23/2000 4:37:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

Drew: Your position is similar to that taken by Dr J in answer to a question on this subject. So you are in good company. But Dr J is trying to get the FCC to award spectrum to replace that denied years ago and needs to be careful in his open public comments. Not a good idea to go against "city hall" - or the FCC. Sadly this is all of a piece. The "big boys" fear caller pays. (as you say). It just so happens that the major operators and McCaw and a few other influential "groups" have a vested interest in not repeat not permitting caller pays. It is just coincidence of course that the FCC seems to be simpathetic to the powers that be and not the consumer in this matter. You are right that someone with a business account and many hours already paid for (usually by his company) doesn't really care. But this is an issue for "mom and pop" or "the man (now the person) in the street" or the "little guy or gal". Rightly or wrongly, and perhaps just as a matter of psychology, the reaction of these people is to turn off their phone to avoid the chance of paying for an unwanted call. If the FCC actually gave priority to the way to smooth wireless adoption, this factor would have weight. That it doesn't and the position of the "big boys" just happens to be that of the FCC speaks volumes, no? But again, I do not know all the facts, and may misunderstand. Best. Chaz PS At a minimum, it is difficult to see how caller pays could possibly hurt the ordinary consumer, and could help in widespread acceptance of wireless in this country. There seems to be little doubt caller pays has been a positive factor in adoption and acceptance of wireless by the ordinary consumer in those countries (many examples) where it is available and the norm.