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.

Technology Stocks : George Gilder - Forbes ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Drew Williams who wrote (1179)	4/6/1999 1:40:00 PM
From: John Stichnoth	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5853

To sum up the consensus on the satellites (then a question): In a year or so the phones we'll be able to buy will have access to two or three wireless systems. They will access the latest digital (G3, CDMA or GSM) first, then try for a second type (AMPS?), and then try for a satellite. The software/firmware to do this would be built into the phone. The battery times in standby mode would presumably not be affected, since the phone would presumably stand by at the power needed to pick up terrestrial cellular calls (or not??--if it's out of cellular range, it could be set to look for satellite, at a higher power drain, I presume). The finances would be through the cellular cos. They might offer one of two packages--For $5 per month (or some fixed number) on top of the basic package, the user could access satellites transparently. The cellular operator would have a contract with the satco based on number of subscribers, say at $3 per month. Once the cellular cos have say 50 million subscribers out there paying $5 each per month, that gives the satcos $1.8 billion per year to keep their satellites running and pay the interest costs. A second alternative for cellular subscribers would be a per-use fee, perhaps $1.50 per minute. Low enough to be used in an emergency, but high enough to encourage the $5 per month fixed fee. Again, the subscriber would pay the cellular operator, and their would be an unseen arrangement with a satco. I like this setup, and withdraw my earlier objections to the economics of satellites. Now, my question: How might ISP bandwidth needs be addressed by the satcos? It is going to be years until the "last mile" is addressed universally (Cable, DSL, FBBW). The issue of bigger phones and power needs and power drain is not an issue with fixed-position users. What bandwidth will the satellites be able to provide, and at what cost? Can this be an additional revenue stream for them? Best, JS