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: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/2/2001 5:36:59 PM
From: DWB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Here you go Maurice, something in keeping with what seemed to be a sherry-overload induced last few paragraphs... theonion.com DWB

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/2/2001 6:58:38 PM
From: oconnellc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Maurice, Interesting perspective on the constitutionality of the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. <Actually, Bill Clinton should require a referendum on the arbitrary law which says he is excluded from being President. It is unconstitutional and absurd for him to be denied full freedom as a citizen of the USA to stand for the presidency if he wishes.> Check this out for an interesting read on the constitutionality of the 2 term limit. access.gpo.gov Another fun thing about the US Constitution is that it provides that each state can run their own elections. The duly elected Secretary of State of Florida certified the election returns and reported that Bush did in fact win Florida. It is another interesting perspective that Clinton should use his power as head of the military to preserve our freedom by circumventing the Constitution. <As Commander in Chief, Bill Clinton ought to ensure the voting majority have their power to determine the political process recognized.> See the following for more fun stuff on how the US President is elected. Notice that very little of it is dependent on the current president making new laws regarding how the election should be carried out. At least let the people elected to make laws (congress) make up new laws, not the president. access.gpo.gov I wasn't sure where you were going with this one. I still follow this thread (even though I have dumped my G* shares and used the proceeds to purchase a cell phone), mostly to read your perspectives on things (although I wouldn't mind making a buck on G* at some point in the future). Interested in hearing the rest of what you have to say on the subject, Chris

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/2/2001 7:04:51 PM
From: pcstel	Respond to of 29987

Maurice: While I await for your "ANTI-VALUELESS IN BANKRUPTCY" thesis. Here is an article on one of the partners (France Telecom) of probably the largest Service Provider Organization for Globalstar.. Seems as though they think they have "Too Much Debt", and want to sell off assets!! In addition those 3G spectrum grabs by KPN and it's ensuing debt have been.. Well.. Depressing!!! public.wsj.com PCSTEL

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/2/2001 8:30:36 PM
From: Timothy R. Tierney	Respond to of 29987

PS: Bill Clinton should simply refuse to hand over the Presidency to a fake interloper who did NOT win the election. Bill should require another election or simply require an official recount in Florida of all the votes. Bill should remain in office until the democratic process is completed without an absurd bunch of politically-motivated political appointees in the Supreme Court or Florida Court arbitrarily cutting off the democratic process. If it takes longer, too bad. The important issue is the total votes, not some timetable. Ohhh....who needs a constitution anyway!!!!

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/2/2001 8:33:47 PM
From: hedgehog26	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29987

Maurice, Happy New Year! Marc and Aileen seem to fit the great description of Oscar Wilde. It goes thus, "Some men know the cost of everything but the value of nothing". Oscar was really cool! My very best to you. Hedgehog 26.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/3/2001 1:41:54 AM
From: pcstel	Respond to of 29987

Maurice: <S: Bill Clinton should simply refuse to hand over the Presidency to a fake interloper who did NOT win the election. Bill should require another election or simply require an official recount in Florida of all the votes. Bill should remain in office until the democratic process is completed without an absurd bunch of politically-motivated political appointees in the Supreme Court or Florida Court arbitrarily cutting off the democratic process. If it takes longer, too bad. The important issue is the total votes, not some timetable. > For once we actually agree!! The Supreme Court is nothing but a bunch of "political paupers".. My wife, as I have mentioned several times, is from Colombia. She was confused by the entire "Electorial College" process.. We were talking one evening about this subject and she made what I thought was a pretty profound view on the methodology! She said... "Look, The USA is the "template of Democracy" other "third world countries" are supposed to look to as an example.. She continued.. What if we were living in Bogota', and were watching the outcome of the 'Presidental Electorial Process' on the Television. A Graphic appeared that showed that Candidate A received 51.5% of the votes, and Candidate B received 49.5% of the votes.. Yet, the Graphic and the moderator indicated that Candidate B (whom received less votes than Candidate A).. What would you be saying" she inquired!! And what if I explained to you that our "Constitution of Colombia" has some stipulations that stated that "The Candidate with the most votes does not necessarily become President".. I thought about it for a few moments and said.. Well, If that happened.. I think it would be a matter of days before the US had denounced the election as a farce, and that it denied the "Rights of the People" to freely elect their own Representatives of the Executive Branch... She said "EXACTLY".. !! Here was an interesting Forbes article that resurfaced on the YHOO thread today.. From September 1999.. That, I thought you might enjoy!!! forbes.com A couple of interesting notes: <Now he's brutal. "There is no Iridium," he says, calling that $6 billion venture "an irrelevancy" as Globalstar braces for its commercial debut next month.> Ahh!! Bernie.. Arrogance! Now your irrelevant Iridium came back and stole your DoD Business.. <Its executives once jeeringly offered prizes to anyone who could locate an Iridium phone; now they are spooked by Wall Street's dark mood.> More Arrogance in the G* Executive Office.. Maybe they should have been working on the "System Roll-Out", and "Service Provider Marketing Progress" rather than "Trying to find Iridium Phones"... I guess all the laughing and smiling have been displaced!! The boys over at MOT and Iridum Satellite are probably the ones having a good laugh about trying to find Globalstar Phones, and especially those Fixed Phones.. Hey, What Goes Around, Comes Around!! "Iridium has really disturbed our market," says Globalstar Chief Operating Officer Anthony Navarra, who keeps a doll knotted in a Motorola necktie and an Iridium badge-holder in his office. "They set everybody's expectations way too high." Oh!! Iridium disturbed you market Ehhh?? You see, it's quite simple. Iridium disturbed their market. Yes, it is very clear to see that.. No problem with the Business Plan.. No sireee.. WHAT!! Iridium set the expectations too high.. I remember BLS telling everyone that he expected Globalstar to "make a profit" this year!! He projected 600,000 subs by the end of CY2000.. He delivered less than 50,000.. And the covenants that sent Iridium into BK protection were for only 52,000 subs and 30 million in accrued revenues by May 1999. <Globalstar will start at half Iridium's initial price, with phones costing $1,500 and calls pegged at $1.50 to $3 a minute. If consumers balk or competition rises, Globalstar is ready to cut prices 50%.> Funny, they must not consider that the, consumers have balked at the current prices!! <Letting the carriers drive Globalstar, even though Loral Space holds the biggest single stake, was "a major pain in the backside," Schwartz says now, "but it's been a critical differentiation.">> NO!! NO!! Don't do it Bernie!! Don't let them drive!! PLEASE!!! Listen to Maurice and "Wacky Wireless"!! <Staiano, who relaxed by pumping iron aboard his Gulfstream jet, was fired in April. He had tried to exert full control over Iridium's loose confederation of marketing partners, publicly sniping at the competence of its regional distributors. Staiano also matched Schwartz in competitive carping; at an industry dinner he bet Schwartz $200 that Globalstar would fail to start service on time this year.> At least Bernie does not do this.. He tells everyone what a great job the SP's are doing!! <Despite his partners' caution, Schwartz, never short on bluster, insists Globalstar can sign up 3 million users in three years. Never mind that Inmarsat, a forerunner satellite service, has just 140,000 users for its laptop-size phone after 20 years in business.> Let's see this article is 15 months old.. So that leaves ole Bernie another 21 months to dig up another 2.95 million subscribers.... And so it goes... PCSTEL

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (20739)	1/3/2001 5:34:25 AM
From: Mika Kukkanen	Respond to of 29987

Murice: First, Have a Great 2001! You recently wrote "My answer is that at 10c a minute for calls anywhere to anywhere, anytime, we could easily sell 100 billion minutes a year if the handsets were $100. That's $10 billion a year income. Even with the first constellation, we have 10 billion minutes to offer. The value of those minutes will be decided by subscribers, not by Vodafone, or Globalstar or anyone else." Well no, exactly. Anywhere anytime? Don't think so. To do that a call would have to go through many networks, with each operator demanding a slice of the action. Interconnection and transit costs are still high and Globalstar is not in a position to dictate terms (e.g., reciprocating call costs). I also saw your comment on one of the Q threads about roaming charges in Europe and why G* can be positioned to take advantage of it. Again I think not. Again i would mention interconnection coats, but more importantly the consumer would not stand for a high priced bulky phone that they would swap for their GSM everytime they went abroad. Most people over here are on pre-paid, in the UK only one network supports prepaid roaming (One2One). This proves that the 80/20 rule is in affect to roaming, i.e., power users. Yep, I am one. I do have two pre-paids (One2One and BT Cellnet for personal use and for friends if they haven't one) and a contract rate with BT Cellent (for business). In business we generally put up with cost for convenience, and hence no way can Globalstar crack the market. Now if I was going somewhere remote, such as the deserts of Africa, then yes I would have a G* contract. The simple fact is I don't and realistically how many do or would want to...500, a thousand, in the whole of Europe?