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: tero kuittinen who wrote (21362)	1/20/2001 1:02:17 PM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Tero: I think it comes down to my statement from the other day! "So I believe that BLS should have understood VOD's ideologies on the system when VOD bought ATI, and made other arrangements." Message 15212461 Regards, PCSTEL

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (21362)	1/20/2001 1:25:07 PM
From: KyrosL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

That seems to be a more plausible explanation as to why the Loral controlled SPs have not dropped prices, and why whenever price comes up, G* keeps insisting that current prices are fine. Perhaps Maurice's "wacky wireless" price scheme is pie-in-the-sky, and the only possible salvation for G* lies in some kind of airborne wireless data venture such as IFN, of air traffic control or such.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (21362)	1/20/2001 8:15:58 PM
From: rf_hombre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Tero, you make the valid point that Vodafone has in fact a disencentive to market and sell G phones, at least in the European market. However, I do question the assumption that “satellite phones can never be a mainstream market.” Satellite minutes are far cheaper to produce than terrestrial minutes. Not all base stations are lucky enough to be sitting at Heathrow. Some unfortunate $500k cells are actually condemned to cover G* challenged moose hunters in Lappland. Excuse my cognitive dissonance but I find no reason why an inherently cheaper, more reliable service should fail to garner customers. Sure, the phones are too big, the battery life is 10x less that of my 7110 and there is no inbuilding coverage as of yet. But at a discount to cellular, particularly with respect to roaming charges, I cannot envisage why there would not be a sizable market for the service. I will run out and buy immediately the new smaller and long awaited QCOM phone (jamming tomorrow?, you betcha!) and if roaming MOUs were at a discount to cellular, to &$*$ with vanity, I would just settle for the GSP-1600. And how many of your crème de la crème subs would want to have a “switch to satellite” option when their n’th access attempt is denied? I posit quite a few. Too bad our ineffectual management and marketing do not understand enough about mobile to position the service properly, as either a footprint equalizer for a coverage hungry SP or capacity infill for the bandwidth starved. If these folks don’t get it, others will. Call me a dreamer... rf_hombre

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (21362)	1/21/2001 4:04:49 AM
From: Tahoetech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

tero, >>Globalstar does not fit into this strategy and never has.<< all very well, but my core question was, and is, why did they (Chrsi Gent) partner with G* in the first place??? >>There is no reason to spin a conspiracy fantasy involving Vodafone plotting against G, goaded by secret envy and fear.<< I do not believe one is after a conspiracy, but an explanation. After all that you stated, wouldn't the prudent, logical and honest thing to do was tell G* upfront their product was one they (Vod) could not support - or, if so, not to the expectations of G*? >>Now - if Vodafone would push Globalstar heavily, it would be choosing a very risky strategy. << It is hard for me to believe Mr. Schwartz was made aware of that a year ago...There is a definite problem of perception here...or don't you see that?