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: verdad who wrote (25804)	1/25/2005 4:40:20 PM
From: verdad	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29987

Bernard L. Schwartz (with Irene) March 5, 2001 motherjones.com Bernard L. Schwartz, CEO of Loral Space & Communications, and his wife Irene are veterans of the Mother Jones 400 (ranked third in 1998, first in 1997, and seventh in 1996). They have historically been big supporters of Bill Clinton and his party. This year they gave $1,317,000 -- nearly every penny of it to the Democrats. In 1997 Schwartz celebrated his 71st birthday with the Clintons at the White House. The next year, he became the focus of a controversy when Clinton's critics suggested that the president had rubberstamped Loral's satellite launches in China. Mother Jones reported that the company had apparently ignored security procedures by faxing Beijing a draft report about a rocket crash that destroyed a Loral satellite (see "Heavy Metal"). An extensive federal investigation into the matter has since concluded there was "not a scintilla of evidence -- or information -- that the president was corruptly influenced by Bernard Schwartz," according to an internal document obtained by the Los Angeles Times. Congress responded to the controversy by transferring regulatory authority over satellite exports from the Commerce Department to the State Department, which was perceived to be less sympathetic to companies like Loral. Prudential Securities analyst Charles Gabriel predicted before the election that a Gore win could "reopen doors that were closed in the wake" of the scandal, boosting Loral's stock. The company's profits have long been tied to the government. The Loral Corporation, once a major defense contractor, changed its name to Loral Space & Communications and its business to telecommunications during the 1990s. Over the past year, Globalstar, a satellite communications company in which Loral claims a 38 percent stake (and of which Schwartz serves as president and CEO), has halted payments on its debts and is struggling to avoid bankruptcy, a fate that befell its competitor, Iridium. At first, Schwartz told worried investors not to fear: Globalstar would find a market for mobile phone service via satellites. "I can't argue with the premise that Iridium didn't find the customers," he told AFX News. "But we will find the customers." But in February, Schwartz announced that it was halting its investments in Globalstar, which had attracted only 32,100 subscribers. The company was founded by Loral and wireless technology developer Qualcomm, Inc., run by Irwin M. Jacobs (No. 100, $333,000).

To: verdad who wrote (25804)	1/25/2005 4:56:52 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

Yes, they were that stupid. Jacobs and co did not control the marketing. QUALCOMM was a minor shareholder though they agreed the marketing strategy originally, no doubt. But by 1997, they were a supplier, not a dominant shareholder with marketing clout. Vodafone and co had their contracts and control, but Loral's dopey marketers did the same dumb marketing strategy. Bernie Schwartz said that he doesn't know marketing's tits from its elbows. He thought he had hired the best and brightest to do it. He said it was criminal when they failed. Unfortunately, the best and brightest can do really dumb things, partly because they have an exaggerated sense of their own brilliance. I think it's called hubris. They thought they had a good strategy, leaving the marketing to the likes of Vodafone who were already established in wireless markets, had people around the world who knew and could handle the local regulatory and employment issues, build and operate gateways and backhaul and so on. Yes, it was that under-funded. They didn't have enough money to carry them through the filling of the system with subscribers. They had to sell the service cheap for a year or so, to build up demand, but they didn't. They wanted the dopey premium-priced strategy. With creditors breathing down their necks, they didn't have time or money. Once failure was looming, which loomed in the first three months [or three weeks in my opinion], they were doomed to run out of money unless they could get another $500 million to get them through the first two years of the new, revamped, cheap and cheerful marketing strategy. With Vodafone and others in control, Globalstar LP couldn't change the marketing strategy and investors wouldn't just pour money down a high-priced drain. Of course, having taught millions of people that satellite services are only for the super-rich, it's a hard job to go back and tell them "We've change our minds, you can afford it after all". People just hear "satellite phone" and know it's not for them due to price. I spent time talking in person to the "best and brightest" marketers at Globalstar and it was like talking to a brick wall. They KNEW what they were doing and didn't need no stinking low rent plan. MBA people do NOT sell on price - that's the lowest of the unimaginative low and beneath contempt and only losers try to do that. They don't get degrees and high salaries to say "Hey, if we make it cheap enough, people will buy tons of the stuff". They like product positioning and market segmentation going forward so at the end of the day the channel distribution high-end margins are maintained in stochastic analysis of premium vertical market loyalty programs and arpu maximisation flim flam blah blah blah is achieved. Mqurice