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: tb98 who wrote (19382)	11/19/2000 10:33:04 PM
From: Pierre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Well, tb, I hope it comes as a shock to someone. After all, VOD (now selling product through Verizon outlets) was touted as the marketing arm for G. They are, after all, a partner in G. As for Maurice, I recall his sounding warning signals several years back that relying on the SPs to market the product may be a mistake. Though I don't think even he would have anticipated a scenario such as was described in the RB post. Again, anecdotal and 2nd hand, but certainly troubling if true. I hasten to add that I was one of those who applauded the business plan, particularly the marketing of the phone through established wireless carriers. I have come to conclude that that part of the plan was the most seriously flawed, and has been the biggest factor in bringing us to this rather desperate financial situation. Whether there's a remedy, or whether Gregg's elephants will take up the task forcefully (and maybe inject some cash in the process) remains to be seen. But yes, I'm shocked ... and appalled, at this apparent instance of shameful conduct on the part of a G* partner. Pierre

To: tb98 who wrote (19382)	11/19/2000 10:51:15 PM
From: kranmantazzz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Find it hard to believe that cellular companies fear G. I also don't buy the idea that it gives cellular a bad name just because it reminds us that cell coverage is less than perfect and that someone else offers service in areas where cellular can't go. G costs 50 times more per minute than the cheapest cell/pcs rates. The loss to cellphone companies would be when someone decides to switch to SAT mode in an area where reception is poor or if they decide NOT to wait until they get into cell range because they can now switch to SAT mode. Obviously, if they are completely out of cell range and will be for sometime they will use SAT mode but this is hardly a loss for cellular companies. Could the first 2 scenarios add up to so many minutes that Ver would find benefit in NOT marketing G*?