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: Win-Lose-Draw who wrote (19561)	11/27/2000 12:40:58 PM
From: Pierre	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 29987

just got off the phone with a San Jose G* employee. He was responding to a question I had about the new cheaper car kits. He did confirm that the new kits are less expensive ($799 US) and the lower cost is achieved by reducing the power of the transmitter. It also uses a new smaller antennae (hockey puck size). I asked why minute prices weren't dropping and was given standard reply of new pricing initiatives. I then asked if Globalstar can, on its own, lower prices. He replied that any price charged is solely at the discretion of VOD and that it took long and arduous negotiations to get to the point we're at. He had no comment regarding whether or not G* could at some point force a lower per minute price by bringing in another carrier. He confirmed G* general disenchantment with VOD efforts. He cited a situation existing in the midwest, where customers have been going directly to G* because Verizon won't talk to them. To make matters worse, when those customers get their G* pone (fed ex), they then take them to Verizon for the cell component activation. Verizon has been refusing to do even that for them. G* has been forced to intervene in those instances. I keep wondering what sources among the SPs Gregg spoke with. I am unaware of any indication that VOD has stepped up its efforts. To the contrary, they are adversarial. My take is that VOD sees G* as a great niche complement to cell so long as it stays out of the mainstream. Hence, it must remain expensive. They apparently can't or won't push the product where it exposes the lie in their own cell coverage maps. It is almost laughable when one considers our position. We are hanging on by a thread. We have been forced to employ our own sales force because our partner refuses to market the product - contrary to plan. And we are forced to beg that same partner to reduce per minute rates so that our own sales force can begin selling the phone in quantity. Doesn't VOD owe a fiduciary duty to its partners? Isn't this lack of effort (and in many instances, active interference with) selling G* phones and minutes a violation of that duty? They're a nice deep pocket. If we get wiped out do to their failure to perform, would they not be subject to damages? Surely someone at G* must be wondering how long it can refuse to act with regard to VOD exclusivity. To remain in partnership with an entity that is the primary obstacle to survival must be actionable at some point. BTW Gregg - we're a hell of a long way from your elephant scenario now. You advised salvation by elephant - we now face (and G* is confirming) death by elephant. I wonder if you're still long. Pierre