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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (30058)	5/14/1999 1:09:00 PM
From: marginmike	Respond to of 152472

Gregg I agree with you and am long GSRTF, as well as Qcom(GSTRF indirectly). I am under the assumption that if the systems expences are in corelation to the buildout costs, then the new owners would be able to sell the product(minutes for less). I also read somewhere that the system was upgradeable to CDMA. if thats true then they might not be as cheap as GSTRF but they will be much closer in price of minutes.

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (30058)	5/14/1999 1:36:00 PM
From: Michael	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

<<If Iridium has a material and structural fully-loaded cost-per-minute disadvantage versus GSTRF (and others) it may be toast regardless of capitalization.>> My friend Gregg, I agree but the satellites are still up there at a cost of billions. Someone is going to do something with them, how long can anyone continue to throw money down the toilet on a failed system . sure is a nice day Michael

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (30058)	5/14/1999 1:54:00 PM
From: Caxton Rhodes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Gregg- I just got Iridium bird #1 for $5.25 on priceline.com. You think the price will go up for the next ones on the block? I know its early and the price could get cheaper, but I do want my own satellite! Caxton

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (30058)	5/14/1999 9:44:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

as I have often commented with regard to ATT Wireless...what would you pay for the world's most INefficient minute factory? Of course that isn't stopping them from signing up a gazillion subs is it? I can hardly count the number of Nokiii people are coddling, index finger pointing skyward, and you can be sure most of em are not Omnipointers... Dave

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (30058)	5/14/1999 11:26:00 PM
From: straight life	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

AT&T named in mobile phone law suit - WSJ NEW YORK, May 13 (Reuters) - A consumer-products distributor is suing AT&T Corp(T - news), contending the phone group accepted new mobile-phone users while aware it could not accommodate the added customers, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday. The suit, filed last week in New York State Supreme Court by the closely held Naevus International Inc. is trying to secure class-action status for all AT&T Digital One Rate subscribers, the newspaper said. The plan enables consumers to call anywhere in the country without being charged long-distance or erratic ''roaming'' fees, the newspaper said. In the suit, the New Jersey based company contends its employees were forced to deal with repeated dropped calls and busy signals while travelling, according to the Journal. The interruptions made the service ''grossly unreliable and virtually unstable,'' the Journal quoted the suit as saying. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages for alleged false advertising and fraud, according to the newspaper. AT&T acknowledged that demand outstripped capacity in some of its biggest markets, but it described the law suit as frivolous and part of a publicity stunt, the Journal said. (ROFLMAO!) SURE IS A NICE STORY! (I take back every bad thing I ever said about lawyers) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------