SI
SI
discoversearch

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: djane who wrote (3300)3/7/1999 10:30:00 PM
From: djane  Respond to of 29987
 
Genesis of the Wireless Data Super Industry: The Matchmaking Has Already Begun

stockhouse.com

March 6th, 1999
StockHouse News Desk

EMERGING SECTORS: STOCKHOUSE SPECIAL REPORT PART TWO

Part 2
Genesis of the Wireless Data Super Industry:
The Matchmaking Has Already Begun

Miami, Fla., March 6th /SHfn /-- The wakeup call for the convergence between computer
companies and telecommunications firms came in November 1998 when Microsoft and
Qualcomm announced a joint venture, known as WirelessKnowledge (WK). Its objective was
announced less than one month later in a Strategy Implementation Plan: to commercially launch the
first wireless/computer convergence platform - the Wireless CE Platform. The program calls for a
prototype platform operational in early 1999 and an announcement for the first commercial
contract by April 30, serving live customers a month later. These are optimistic targets, however
unreachable within those time frames. But certainly by the fourth quarter, we should expect a
Microsoft advertising/marketing campaign bombarding us about the virtues of wireless data: aka
the "Cellular Internet" or aka "wireless computer/convergence." Let's simplify matters in this report
and name this phenomenon "WCC" (for wireless computer/convergence).

The race is on between the computer and telecommunications industry for WCC dancing partners
and soulmates. Although the most major hurdle - data throughspeed - has not been resolved, it is
expected to be solved within the next 24-48 months. You might liken the problems of wireless
data transmission to the "rapidfax" of the early 1980s. Once used solely by major conglomerates, it
became an office fixture a few years later. Industry players regard WCC as a conceivable mirror
to the personal computer market. By the year 2004, corporate marriages will have yielded up to
20 new spin-offs and three to five WCC leaders. There will be WCC companies you've never yet
heard of and some you have.

There is a mad scramble that has occurred since early February for WCC positioning. It is
occurring behind the scenes, but in broad daylight. Several recent mergers and acquisition
announcements are creating a hyper-competitive climate within the telecommunications and
computer industries. None of these announcements revealed the senior emphasis placed upon data
transmission or the anticipated inroads these collaborations will have toward establishing a WCC
hierarchy. But they are.

If you were sitting in the CEO slot of a major telecom or computer company, it might appear more
like a sprint to collar a partner. To be left out would be the same as being sent to the locker room
a loser - a loser in the boldest expansion of the Internet, computing and telecommunications in the
early years of the 21st century. Within the next twelve months, this industry will emerge as
promising as visionaries found the Internet four years ago. By the year 2005, you will have
probably gone through your third or fourth generation WCC instrument.

Industry skeptics challenge the leap from a lab experiment to mass consumption of WCC. Ian
Gilliott, an International Data Corporation wireless analyst said, "Wireless data has been coming so
many times, it's not even funny. It's great on paper, it's great in the lab, but we don't have anything
yet." There are always the cynics who miss the train as it is leaving the station.

During the CTIA wireless conference in New Orleans, Motorola and Cisco announced they
would be investing $1 billion in wireless Internet technologies. Not to be left out, Nextel and
Netscape reported they would combine their energies for a wireless data/net access venture to be
called Nextel Online. Qualcomm and US West plan to offer a wireless Internet trial before
summer. Microsoft took their WK joint venture one step further by announcing their alliance with
British Telecommunications - a Windows CE version that would provide wireless Internet surfing.

Those are the sizzling pledges that the game is afoot. Some will follow through, others will drop off
and look for another opportunity. Skeptics may dismiss these are starry-eyed ambitions, but it may
not be more than three years from now when you can expect red-hot Internet speeds, remote
connections to your office and email conversion into voice calls through your new cell phone. Cell
phone manufacturers who adopt to the next-generation technologies will produce an Internet cell
phone that as closely resembles your current phone as an old-fashioned rotary phone does now.

Bugs over "data throughspeed" are being ironed out. The current standard is CDPD (Cellular
Digital Packet Data), based upon IBM's CelluPlan II, which moves data at 19.2 kilobits/second.
AT&T Wireless and a few Baby Bells are using this technology. Wireless data users would hope
for those speeds, often settling for as little as 8 kilobits/second. European and Asian users are
restricted to data transfer speeds of 9.6 kilobits/second on the GSM standard (Global System for
Mobile Communications). At some point in 1999 - and this is what is creating the excitement and
the acquisition binge - upgraded standards used by the U.S. wireless voice networks will offer
higher data throughspeed. Experts anticipate data delivery rates to jump to 64 kilobits/second by
the year 2000. Within a year, wireless data transmission might be faster than an ISDN line. The
third generation standard, which would deliver data at up to 2 megabits/second, should be
available by 2003 - that would permit the mass market Internet access, remote email and network
access and possibly include videoconferencing.


According to a November 28th Forbes article, "The future belongs to a new technique called
packet switching… Packet switching chops voice or data into small bites, each with the recipient's
address. The packets then fly over whatever line is available and reconnect at the other end... This
is far superior to circuit switching for the new data-greedy Internet world... Even telecom's old
titans acknowledge packet switching's supremacy and are revamping their own networks as
quickly as possible."

Many experts forecast that, within five years, about 10% of all traffic on most wireless networks
will involve data transmissions. Said F. Craig Farrill, vice president of strategic technology for
AirTouch, "It wouldn't surprise me if 30% of our business was non-voice in five years." The buzz is
over big bucks in a new revenue stream for the telecommunications industry. Studies show that
wireless data transmissions should increase the amount of time customers spend on wireless
networks - up to six times longer than the average voice call. Usage minutes define a telecom's
bottom line.


Marketing wizards are probably working out new uses for your as-of-yet-unbuilt new Internet
cellphone. Some wireless phone companies have already anticipated new billing paradigms for the
information delivery business, sort of like "Federal Express courier style" time-sensitive delivery
versus off-peak delayed data transfers. By 2001, annual worldwide spending on telecom services
should reach $1 trillion. Within five years, that figure could eclipse $1.3 trillion - and data
transmissions could account for 90% of that. Wireless data could eclipse $100 billion in that time
frame and rapidly grow to $500 billion before the end of the first decade of the 21st century.

According to the market research firm Datamonitor, the Internet is generating traffic at a pace of
1,000% annually. Next year, Internet data transmissions will blow by the traditional telephone
voice business, which is expanding at less than 10% annually.

That explains the rapidly forming alliances - some will make sense; others are likely to be ill
conceived and there will be many corporate divorces. Said Romtec technology research analyst
Colin Corrill, "Convergence is finally happening at least from the supplier side." Cash-rich global
telecommunications firms have jumped on the Internet bandwagon as the first step to wireless data.
Companies such as Siemens AG of Germany and Alcatel of France are making up for lost time in
buying, or reportedly planning to buy, Internet equipment-linking computers. Part of this strategy
includes gaining Internet access, but for the two germinating industries: computer telephony and
wireless data communications.

Alcatel's planned takeover of Xylan Corporation came about because Xylan makes
high-bandwidth switching systems, mainly for corporate data traffic. According to Alcatel's March
1st press release, it wasn't just the wired Internet that led the company to Xylan, "In addition,
Xylan technologies for carriers' data networks will remarkably complement other actions
underway to build a leading Alcatel offering for converged voice/data carriers' networks. Xylan
provides Alcatel with a superior portfolio of data switching equipment and a fast-growing position
in the enterprise data market, where Xylan is well above market trends… Xylan will become the
center of competence for all of Alcatel's enterprise data networking solutions. Xylan's expertise
will be combined with Alcatel's leadership in enterprise voice networks to provide converged
voice/data solutions." Studying this press release, one can check off the frequency with which
Alcatel refers to data solutions and converged voice/data solutions.

This Alcatel takeover followed the Assured Access Technology planned acquisition. The
California-based firm develops remote access solutions for the Internet Protocol market. The key
is in the joint statement by the two companies, "The company (Assured Access) provides public
data networking solutions for carriers and service providers, including scaleable, highly reliable
multi-service access products for data and voice over IP." We'll be seeing more about
"multi-service access products" as the computer and telecom industries converge.

Prior to the Alcatel takeover announcements was that company's alliance with Unwired Planet
(UP), a pre-IPO company that supplies open standards-based servers and microbrowsers to the
wireless industry. The agreement between the two companies allows Alcatel to provide
end-to-end Internet solutions to wireless carriers. Said Denis Attal, director of Internet Software
Solutions at Alcatel, "By promoting WAP (Wireless Application Protocol) products and services
today, we are creating a market that will allow network operators to migrate to GPRS and later
technologies, as they are rolled out." The plan is to market mobile phones equipped with
microbrowsers throughout Europe.

After announcing its first acquisition, Alcatel created a new Internet division as part of Alcatel's
"strategic approach to the market." Its March 3rd press release stated, "Alcatel will shortly
announce its vision for those established operators requiring an evolutionary transition to voice/data
integration with combined narrowband/ATM/IP technologies. Emphasis in this news release for the
new division was that it would embrace the "start up" spirit. The term is corporately used when a
company has a new launch up its sleeve - we expect within the next two quarters an Alcatel
announcement that also embraces the launch of a data wireless service.

On the heels of the Alcatel takeovers, along came Dutch giant Philips Electronics NV to acquire
VLSI Technology, which makes integrated circuits for cellular phones. 3Com incorporates
VLSI's data security chips into its computer networking products. Among other electronic devices,
Philips also manufactures cellular phones and broadband network systems. It can not be assessed,
at this time, how seriously Philips will participate in the WCC industry, but as Europe's largest
consumer electronics manufacturer, there should be some further acquisitions toward this market.

Siemens AG has been rumored by both the Financial Times and the New York Times that we
should expect Internet equipment manufacturer acquisitions with speculations over private data
networking companies. Two of the firms mentioned were Castle networks and Argon Networks,
both U.S. data networkers. Speculation also centered around Siemens buying a unit of 3Com that
sells networking equipment to phone companies, IP technology that provides high-speed,
high-volume data and voice communications over the Internet. The report also announced Siemens
planned to hire the general manager for global network computing solutions at IBM.

These European deals are get-even and move-ahead deals for Europe's largest
telecommunications companies. They become necessary acquisitions into a battleground where the
major firms are staking territory. Lucent recently acquired Ascend Communications, a leader in
data networking technology, to ensure its position on the Internet. Northern Telecom purchased
Bay Networks in 1998 for the same reason. Microsoft's alliance with British Telecom was in
response to the Symbian venture, organized by Psion PLC, which manufactured the world's first
digital organizer. Symbian is designing operating system software for mobile phones and other
"smart" devices. In December, Oracle joined Symbian, teaming up with cellular phone
manufacturers Ericsson, Nokia, and Motorola to turn your phone into a computer. One should
expect fireworks from this venture later this year.

The wireless data industry is only partially a goal for these industry giants. If it were merely a fight
over who gets to develop a way to surf the Internet or send/receive your email wirelessly, that
would only capture a minor segment of the overall plan. The Big Picture includes completely wiring
your home, and possibly wirelessly connecting all electronic products, in a sort of total
connectivity. Already there are plans to design household appliances that directly connect with
manufacturers for instant troubleshooting. Is linking your automobile wirelessly to its manufacturer
that far behind? Such ventures requires seamless networks encompassing an electronics (or
automotive, as the case may be) manufacturer, computer company and telecommunications
provider. Within those technologies, there must be systems integration providers that acts as a glue
to hold the entire network - wired or unplugged - together.

Phone companies have grabbed both horns of the computer industry and are rushing forward to
provide a "one-stop shop." Ultimately, the convergence of these technologies will bring us a
bundled package of services, which include phone services of all kinds, online services and
high-speed Internet connections, pay television, and wireless data messaging/Internet access. To
understand the potentiality of the global wireless market, you must first grasp how little of the
market has been penetrated. The U.S. market has achieved a market penetration of less than 20%
with less than 70 million wireless subscribers; the global market remains under 200 million - about
a 3% market penetration. Explosive wireless growth will fuel the demand for multiple services,
which the telecoms will be happy to provide.


In the current issue of Phone+ magazine, Charlotte Wolter wrote, "Internet protocol (IP)
architecture in the backbones of large long distance carriers is a new phenomenon in telecom… IP
has been tapped as the 'converged' network technology of tomorrow: a single economical network
architecture that will carry any kind of traffic and provide any level of quality of service the traffic
demands." Dan Sheinbein, vice president of network architecture and development for AT&T
said, "IP is a send-and-pray method of transmission. But IP will get there, and the reason is
because AT&T and other carriers will begin to provide virtual private networks using IP."

One of the ongoing developments is the nationwide backbone of IP build directly over SONET
(synchronous optical network) by Qwest Communications. Qwest plans to be in operation this
summer with 1.5 million miles of parallel national frame relay, which should help ease the Internet
traffic strain and offer a continuing evolution of data applications. Qwest differs from other carriers
in that its IP network can call up more bandwidth as necessary to maintain its service quality.
Others will have to follow suit because data transmission is growing so quickly that voice will
diminish to a small part of the IP network, and the ratio of IP data to voice will grow to 30 to 1.

These are some of the hurdles for the telecom/computer industry to jointly solve as the WCC
market moves closer to mass marketing. Over the next 24 months, most of the positioning will
have been completed in the major end of the wireless data market place. Some of the innovators
are likely to be swallowed up according to Andrew Seybold. The ultimate goal is to provide both
businesses and consumers the capability of complete interconnectivity on the next generation of
Internet, plugged and unplugged.

Who will be the Apple Computers of the wireless data industry? There are some that might
emerge as serious niche-industry masters while others are probable takeover candidates. Monday
night, StockHouse reviews the panoply of innovators and pioneers in this industry.

MONDAY: You Met the Goliaths - Here are the Davids

Home BullBoards News Releases Newsletters The Markets Member Services
© Copyright '99 StockHouse.com,
All Rights Reserved.




To: djane who wrote (3300)3/7/1999 10:57:00 PM
From: djane  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 29987
 
*SDUnion article. The China connection. Telecoms Space Race
(via QCOM thread)

uniontrib.com

By Dean Calbreath
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

March 7, 1999

At Chinasat' s expansive headquarters near Beijing, a bank of huge metal
dishes are trained on a set of satellites 750 miles into space.

Using technology from Qualcomm in San Diego, China' s state-owned
satellite company is linked to Globalstar, the network of communications
satellites created by Qualcomm and Loral Space Systems.

It' s the ' 90s version of the space race: Globalstar vying with other satellite
competitors -- Iridium by Motorola and ICO Global Communications by
Hughes Electronics -- to bring China into its worldwide phone system.

Like the old space race, some Cold War fears remain.

Over the last six months, Bernard Schwartz, the New York magnate who
heads both Loral and Globalstar, has figured prominently in a congressional
investigation to determine if his engineers passed sensitive rocketry
information to the Chinese.

At the same time, the National Security Committee in the House has been
investigating whether satellite ground stations in China, such as those that
Qualcomm is building in Beijing, Guangzhou and Lanzhou, can be adapted to
handle secure military communications for the People' s Liberation Army.

"Generally speaking, we' re concerned whenever there' s (been) an export of
satellite equipment to China that contains encrypted technology," says Bill
Klein, a military affairs adviser to Rep. Tillie Fowler, R-Fla., who has been
spearheading the investigation.

A spokesman for Globalstar, John Cunningham, bristles when he hears such
talk. "This whole issue of technology transfer to China is becoming too
politicized," he says.

Nevertheless, the government is clamping down on the export of satellite
technology.

Late last month, the Defense and State departments and the U.S. Arms
Control and Disarmament Agency, citing security concerns, denied permission
for Hughes Electronics to launch a satellite in China. The only government
agency to favor the launch was the Commerce Department, which has long
been criticized for supporting such high-tech exports.

Globalstar seems to be an unlikely target for a clampdown for it essentially is
a satellite phone network, which allows people to make calls and send faxes
and e-mail from almost any spot on earth.

The system relies on technology developed for the U.S. military during the
Cold War and was launched in 1993. It is a joint venture between Qualcomm
and Loral: Qualcomm provides cellular phones and ground stations -- or
"gateways" -- for the system; Loral is in charge of the satellite launches.

Over the last six years, Globalstar has become a key component of
Qualcomm' s business, ordering $792 million in cellular phones and gateways.
The system is committed to spending $870 million more with Qualcomm as
sales get rolling.

With the help of a dozen partners -- AirTouch, Alcatel, Daimler-Benz and
France Telecom are among them -- Globalstar serves more than 100 nations,
creating a network that can reach the entire globe outside the polar regions.

Because of the potential size of its market, China has become the biggest
sales target in Globalstar' s space race.

Globalstar sees China as an untapped market, where fewer than 5 percent of
people have phones, where 5 million are on the waiting lists for phones.


"China is installing 15 million lines of switching capacity and 100,000
kilometers of fiber-optic cables each year, but the built-up demand cannot be
satisfied," Schwartz says.

Just weeks after it was founded, Globalstar was holding seminars in China,
outlining plans to bring phones to the masses. Schwartz told the Chinese that
Globalstar could be "an efficient, affordable and timely solution" for meeting
the demand for phones, since it does not require the time or expense of laying
ground lines used by traditional phone networks.


However, because U.S. export laws tightened after the Tiananmen Square
massacre in 1989, Globalstar and its U.S. competitors at that time could not
export satellites and ground stations to China without obtaining waivers from
the State Department.

Schwartz, a lifelong Democrat, succeeded in getting waivers from both the
Bush and Clinton administrations to export some goods to China.

In the spring of 1994, Schwartz successfully urged Ron Brown, the late
Commerce secretary, to lift restrictions on transfers of technology, permitting
Schwartz to launch satellites in Russia and China.

He accompanied Brown on a trade mission to China, where he met with
leaders in the Chinese aerospace and telecommunications ministry, as well as
the military, to lay the groundwork for the push into China.

Schwartz wasn' t alone in lobbying to relax export controls.

One of the most active companies pushing to end trade barriers was
Motorola, part-owner of Iridium and one of Globalstar' s biggest competitors.

Richard Barth, assistant director of international trade at Motorola, wrote to
the State Department that controls put U.S. companies "at a significant
competitive disadvantage" in China.

Barth, a former national security adviser to President Bush, and other
Motorola executives lobbied the Clinton administration to shift oversight over
high-tech exports from the Defense and State departments to the Commerce
Department, which generally takes a pro-trade stance.

Over the next few years, the administration relaxed its trade

restrictions, shifting control over many products toward Commerce, even
though all government departments seemingly were becoming more open to
trade.

In 1996, for instance, when Schwartz applied for a White House waiver to
launch a Globalstar satellite from China and set up Qualcomm' s gateways, he
received approval from State, Defense, Commerce and the administration' s
Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Schwartz' plans to launch Globalstar' s first set of satellites from a Chinese
Long March rocket in 1996 went up in flames, however, when one rocket,
carrying several Loral satellites, plummeted to earth and killed 200 villagers.

Such explosions were not rare. At that time, one out of every four Long
March rockets failed, but the crash compelled Schwartz to shift Globalstar' s
launches to Russia and the United States.

By moving Globalstar' s launches out of China, Schwartz unknowingly saved
the company from becoming the flash point in a major controversy. It was the
1996 crash that sparked much of the interest into the technology transfer to
China.

After the crash, Loral launched an investigation and reportedly shared its
findings with the Chinese. That action, the Defense Department says,
provided the Chinese with the information needed to improve their missiles.

Schwartz says Loral' s probe merely confirmed the findings of a Chinese
investigation that determined the crash was caused by a failed solder joint.

Nevertheless, when the Defense Department' s findings were made public last
spring, they spurred congressional investigations, which also are examining
whether Iridium' s three launches in China aided Chinese rocket telemetry.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, has led the charge against further satellite
launches, saying Loral had revealed "highly sensitive aspects of the rocket' s
guidance and control systems, an area of weakness in China' s missile
programs."

Fearing that information gained by the Chinese could be used to improve
weapons launches, Hunter submitted a bill to ban all U.S. satellite launches in
China. The bill overwhelmingly passed the House with bipartisan support,
although it was rejected by the Senate, which feared the measure would
impose too many limits on exports to China.

Meanwhile, Schwartz continued to create inroads for Globalstar in China.

In November 1997, Schwartz signed a deal bringing Chinasat into the system,
allowing it to own and operate the gateways once they became operational.
Last April, China Telecom, the national phone service, paid $37.5 million to
become a 1.6 percent owner of Globalstar and will handle all land-based
hookups for the network in China.

Globalstar estimates that in the next three years it will have 200,000
customers in China, representing about 8 percent of its worldwide clientele.
The company hopes to make $250 million a year in China.


Still, it' s doubtful that Chinese villagers will be buying Globalstar cellular
phones any time soon. The Qualcomm-built phones carry a price tag of
around $1,000 to $1,500, making them much too pricey for the average
Chinese farmer, who make as little as $125 per year.

One solution is to set up Globalstar phone booths, bringing the service to
people who cannot afford the full price of a phone. Even then, the calls will
cost about $1.50 per minute.

So, who will be Globalstar' s primary customers?

Ming Louie, chief of Globalstar' s operations in the Asia-Pacific region, says
users will include government ministries as well as China' s emerging upper
class.

Louie contends the system is intended for civilians, not the military, but
Globalstar will have no control over that. Such decisions will be in the hands
of its partner, China Telecom, whose other duties include security in
telecommunications, building the government' s networks and handling
emergency communications in wartime.

Congressional critics of ground-station exports focus on whether they contain
encrypted technology, which is designed to protect calls from eavesdropping.

Fowler notes that some recent exports of satellite ground stations with
encrypted technology have gone to China Electronic Systems Engineering, a
trading company operated by the People' s Liberation Army. She is worried
that other exports could also be used for military purposes.

"When you' re in a situation like what we had two years ago, when China was
test-firing rockets over Taiwan and there were two U.S. carrier groups
headed into the South China Sea, you don' t want the Chinese to easily keep
their messages coded," says Klein, Fowler' s military aide.

A spokesman for Globalstar, Kerriann Hartman, declines to say whether
Qualcomm' s gateways in China are encrypted.

In general, she says, the calls do not need encryption, since Qualcomm' s
standard Code Division Multiple Access technology, or CDMA, does an
adequate job in protecting conversations.

Even some critics of trade to China concede that there are legitimate reasons
for exporting encryption there.

"If a business in Beijing wants to transmit information to one of its offices on
the other side of the country, it makes sense that it might want its messages
encrypted," Klein says.

Klein is not alone, though, in fearing that the security features used in a satellite
system could end up in the hands of the army.

"Western companies say they' re helping the Chinese people through their
investment and technology, but most people don' t have the money to use the
technology," says Chinese dissident Harry Wu. "In China, high-technology is
controlled by the government. And that usually means it is being used by the
military."

© Copyright 1999 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.



To: djane who wrote (3300)3/8/1999 3:23:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 29987
 
*GEO Competition, Quality, price and who'll provide service* Valueman, Geostationary is certainly cheap. For fixed phones, I suppose there would be big demand at 1c per minute in poor areas even if one had to say 'over' each time one finished talking and you couldn't interrupt the other person due to the inherent and very horrible voice delays. For mobile, it wouldn't be much use due to shadows and handset size and you say higher cost. One would need to ensure a clear path to the single satellite providing the service. Also, landline prices can go a long way down yet - fibre minutes are near free, so landline would compete with GEO and win on quality.

Since Globalstar minutes should end up at about 10c per minute when Constellation2 is full, I don't think many people will prefer to save 10c per minute to have a very awkward conversation with a big Geo handset with a battery going flat due to the huge propagation distance [even if the GEO has a huge antenna which enables a smaller aerial and power output to be used]. For WWeb communications [images, internet, data, email etc] though, I suppose a GEO might come into use because the cost will be too high via Globalstar.

I'll keep my money on Globalstar for voice, not GEO. Globalstar will probably include some GEO later as part of the multilevel constellations [this all my theory of course].

Just as Qualcomm is negotiating with Ericy to sell WWeb technology, it would be good for Vodafone/AirTouch to sell minutes to Sprint and others to get the Globalstar system full. There is some price where it would make sense for both. They just need to do a good negotiation.

Meanwhile, Iridium spent hundreds of millions on advertising. Maybe the cheapest advertising would be to give the first billion minutes away free. If the second billion minutes was priced at 10c per minute, that would mean $100m out of pocket, but a VERY busy system, with huge handset demand and lots of free publicity as such a bargain was discussed and publicized all over the place.

We have 12bn minutes to sell in the first year, so there are a lot to get off the shelf in a short time.

If there are 100,000 handsets sold in the first month, and they talk 1000 minutes each per month just in Globalstar mode [30min per day], that would only be an 'opportunity cost' of $10m. What a bargain advertising program. So we could run the 'introductory special' promotion for months, with a total cost of not much compared with Iridium's advertising - which didn't get them many customers. So Iridium spent heaps on ads, sold few handsets and few minutes. Now they have few users and no money left for advertising [other than cutting prices]. Their free advertising will now read like this; "Loser LEO slashes prices to try to salvage a disaster". Globalstar's will read "Super-efficient LEO offers amazing deal on high quality phones. Will there be enough handsets to meet demand?"

Maurice

------------------------------------------------------------------

From Loral thread:
Message 8193759

If we are invisible to the end user, they will not care which supplier their cellular provider chooses. In that scenario, price will inevitably dictate everything. Latency be damned!

This might be so except for the fact that our cellular providers are also partners in the G* LP. Thus, they will choose G* regardless of what the others are up to. Remember, Schwartz said the partners had invested $1.4 billion in this venture. They are likely to do their best to support it.

Price will be important in every scenario, but so will quality. The technology exists to put up a GEO sat that is mission specific--that is, it would be strictly dedicated to telephony. Such a beast is capable of 250 billionminutes of annual capacity. This could lead to service at a penny or two per minute, and a profitable business as well. The only quality issue there is latency. This is for a fixed system. The mobile GEOs have much lower capacity. My point is that price is NOT everything. If it was, this service would exist in the US right now offering penny per minute long distance. Hmmmm...maybe that is an idea....penny per minute with a little latency.....would people buy it? At a use rate of even 5% of capacity, at $.01/minute, this GEO would generate $125 million/year. Not bad! Maurice, you in?



To: djane who wrote (3300)3/8/1999 3:11:00 PM
From: djane  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 29987
 
Post on G* bonds (via yahoo thread)

Top > Business and
Finance > Stocks > Services > Communications
Services > GSTRF (Globalstar Telecommun.)


Globalstar 11.375% bond looks juicy!
priced at about $0.70
by: witmail
4786 of 4811
on the $1.00. recent price: about $700 for $1000 face value bond

effective yield: about 20%

it's less risky. if you buy now, 20% yield as long as Globalstar is live before year
2004.

if globalstar goes to chapter 11, stock holder will lose almost all of their money.
bond holder will still get some back.

Posted: Mar 7 1999 1:07AM EST as a reply to: Msg 4775 by seeburto