 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | We now know which pols are for sale to Lightsquared quote:
Reps. Jim Moran (D-VA), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rodney Alexander (R-LA.), Steve Rothman (D-NJ)and Ander Crenshaw (R-FL).
The puppets are dancing at Falcone's request. |
|
| A better solution I have a better solution. If LS wants to build a network, they need to get out there, find the money, and buy the spectrum they need. Perhaps they can sell the holdings they have now to partially defray the cost.
LS gambled on getting spectrum on the cheap, and they lost. Time for them to suck it up, lick their wounds, and do it the right way this time. |
|
|
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: We now know which pols are for sale to Lightsquared Politicians aren't for sale; they're for rent. "Sale" implies that you own one forever, which you don't. They simply rent their services until a higher bidder comes along. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to ISurfTooMuch
Re: A better solution LightSquared is attempting to do it the "right way" this round by getting its Congress Critters to weigh in on reallocating spectrum. I'm honestly surprised this tactic wasn't worked from the beginning. |
|
| how How exactly did they buy the original troublesome spectrum? Did the fcc sell it to them as usable ? If so, then yes, they do need to help them try to do a swap.. This idea might actually help nudge the big duo's in many areas to wakeup and build out.... /shrug |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | Bad means for a good end? It would be a good thing for unused spectrum to start being used. It would increase wireless competition, and not really cost anything.
However, the success or failure of Lightsquared shouldn't factor in to any DoD decision. Maybe they can use some more spectrum for their satellites, though it takes them decades to actually get a satellite up. They probably have some 15-year plan for all of their other spectrum, involving pagers or some other obsolete technology.
It would probably cost them 100 million dollars and 5 years to even decide on what spectrum to swap. Sorry, Lightsquared! |
|
| reply to howexact
Re: how The spectrum was not meant to be used for terrestrial use, it was designated for satellite communications. The FCC gave them a waver saying that they could try to make it work but if it caused interference they had to abandon it. |
|
 XiodenPremium
join:2008-06-10
Monticello, NY
kudos:1 | reply to howexact
said by howexact :How exactly did they buy the original troublesome spectrum? Did the fcc sell it to them as usable ? If so, then yes, they do need to help them try to do a swap.. This idea might actually help nudge the big duo's in many areas to wakeup and build out.... /shrug
They acquired spectrum through acquisition of a company that did mobile satellite communication. Said spectrum wasn't meant to be used for terrestrial service, but rather ground-to-satellite. They were attempting to get a waiver to use it for ground-to-ground use, which they couldn't get due to interference it caused. They gambled and lost. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to howexact
said by howexact :How exactly did they buy the original troublesome spectrum? I believe the spectrum came with SkyTerra during an acquisition by LightSquared.said by howexact :This idea might actually help nudge the big duo's in many areas to wakeup and build out. The "big duo" are already deploying infrastructure to the tune of billions of dollars. The "promise" of LightSquared offering a wholesale network is a belief that consumer prices would come down for mobile data. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | When the VP of 4G has nothing better to do... Take a look at the comment a LightSquared employee left on my blog this morning:
»www.markuhde.com/2012/06/lightsq···-me.html
Sorry to link to my blog, I'll delete it if you want. I have no interest in promoting myself. I just want everyone to see this in context what they're doing... Don't click on any of my Amazon links while you're there or anything. This guy is supposed to be developing their seemingly non-existant technology, not running around Google alerts and posting stuff like that to people's blogs... |
|
1 edit | reply to howexact
Re: how Although they tried and gambled, they also paid for the spectrum.
There are jobs and competition needed. If there are some open band can be used, they should have chance to pay for the worth of that airwave. |
|
 ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA | said by Cooljosh:Although they tried and gambled, they also paid for the spectrum.
There are jobs and competition needed. FCC might want to think about it.
Then they can sell the spectrum and use the money for something else more useful. Why should the FCC force the DoD to swap because some company wanted to use something for which it wasn't intended for. |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: We now know which pols are for sale to Lightsquared Politicians should be required to wear corporate sponsor logos, like NASCAR drivers. |
|
 djdanskaRudie32Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA
kudos:4
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon Broadban..
·Clear Wireless
·Time Warner Cable
| reply to Cooljosh
Re: how said by Cooljosh:Although they tried and gambled, they also paid for the spectrum.
There are jobs and competition needed. If there are some open band can be used, they should have chance to pay for the worth of that airwave.
They paid for the WRONG spectrum. Not the FCC's fault. Its their own. They played with fire and got burned. Only one to blame is themselves.
--
The day the child realizes that all adults are imperfect, he becomes an adolescent; the day he forgives them, he becomes an adult. The day he forgives himself, he becomes wise.
Alden Nowlan |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | reply to openbox9
Re: A better solution This isn't working because the spectrum they bought dirt cheap isn't worth anything. Nobody wanted it in the first place -- that's why it was cheap. Now, they cannot MAKE someone take it. |
|
 DataDocMy avatar looks like me, if I was 2D.Premium
join:2000-05-14
Greenville, NC
·Suddenlink
| reply to flashcore
Re: how said by flashcore:"but if it caused interference they had to abandon it."
Universally true, isn't it?
--
"Don't shoot, I am Che Guevara and I am worth more to you alive than dead." - his last words. |
|
| It's a shame the government is ruining this wonderful idea Fix the damned GPS system and this won't be an issue. All those receivers receiving out of spectrum signals are screwing this up, instead of ignoring the data they still process it. Can't believe how screwed up this is. FIX THE GPS! |
|
 tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
·Comcast
| reply to axus
Re: Bad means for a good end? Or they can hold on to it.
GPS is supposed to be off the l1/l2 freqs by 2020 (probably delayed 'til 2023-26 due to budget and technical problems) So LightSquared COULD petition to try again then.
OR the can use the spectrum for Sat. as intended.
OR the can sell it to someone else, for Sat use.
OR they could return it to the Gov't for resale (  like Falcone will let that happen) |
|
Reviews:
·Charter
| reply to NOCTech75
Re: It's a shame the government is ruining this wonderful idea said by NOCTech75:Fix the damned GPS system and this won't be an issue. All those receivers receiving out of spectrum signals are screwing this up, instead of ignoring the data they still process it. Can't believe how screwed up this is. FIX THE GPS!
I agree, the GPS makers have been outside of their spectrum for far too long, and no one seems to remember, that if it werent for their shitty, lazy manufacturing standards, this would have never been a problem. The problem, is that too many companies had weight with GPS systems that were receiving out of band signals, and it was going to cost them far more to upgrade or fix the stuff they have than it was going to cost to simply kill of lightsquared. |
|
 a333A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
·T-Mobile US
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Cingular Wireless
| reply to NOCTech75
Do you have ANY clue of how RF filters work? It is damn near impossible (or at least, VERY difficult / expensive) to build filters that can isolate two signals that are VERY close to one another in frequency (not to mention the doppler shift that occurs due to the orbital velocity of the GPS satellites themselves), with one signal being several orders of magnitude more powerful than another. You are comparing a GPS signal from a satellite thousands of miles out in space (which is transmitting maybe a 20W beam out over HUNDREDS of square miles of the Earth's surface.. and has to penetrate clouds & atmospheric fading effects in general), to a signal from a transmitter on the SURFACE that might be covering 10 or 20 square miles, and does not have to penetrate thousands of feet worth of clouds and moisture. The thought of those two coexisting is ABSURD to say the least, and reflects a general lack of understanding of the laws of physics (by the FCC, politicians, et. al). I'm all for the potential for letting LS use other frequencies, but blaming GPS is something that has already been covered both here and among technical experts in the field...
--
Physics: Will you break the laws of physics, or will the laws of physics break you?
If physicists stand on each other's shoulders, computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and computer programmers dig each other's graves. |
|
