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* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: justone who wrote (1055)	10/17/2000 10:14:44 AM
From: Valueman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

You almost got it! You assume the satellite costs $250 million and you only get to use the 24 Ku-band transponders. Actually, the typical sat up there now has a mix of frequencies in C and Ku band--thus they split the satellite between the two to serve the many demands out there. The part used by Starband, for instance, is only the Ku band. So, in essence, it would cost $125 million for that portion. Now, Starband is actually leasing the 14 transponders at a cost of roughly $2 million per transponder per year. That may help fine tune your envelope. I don't see how to make a business case here, until the satellites can handle double the capacity you noted. On the other hand, in the bit I didn't understand, you seem to imply you can go from 1.2 G per satellite to 20-40. Does that mean you can increase the number of subscribers per satellite by a factor of 30? That would do it. Yep--that's what I imply. For a glimpse at the capacity increasing technology to come, read the S-1 filing on Edgar for "Wildblue". They will be using a spot beam Ka-band satellite with ~7Gbps capacity.