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 StocksGlobalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: verdad who wrote (25177)8/25/2002 8:14:27 PM
From: pcstel
   of 29749
 
I would be interested to see the conclusive business case for G* w/AeroAstro soln...do all players make money? Does Q get any benefit?

I don't think BPSK is a royalty bearing protocol! So Q is out in the royalty dept. The only Q benefit would be any value they realize from their debt in the reorg. AeroAstro was originally planning to build this system from scratch using micro-satellites, which they produce!

As a matter of fact. The spectrum they were planning on using is coming up for Auction in October! Auction 46 for 5 Mhz Nationwide. But, I think the minimum bid has them second guessing on the Auction. So I think they just decided to use a COTS solution like Globalstar!

After the reorg. Globalstar should be quite profitable in a couple of years!

PCSTEL

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: pcstel who wrote (25178)8/25/2002 9:24:28 PM
From: verdad
   of 29749
 
You seem quite excited about it...or your exclamation key is stuck. Lots of players, and, as you've pointed out high fixed cost for entry (as if the spat of BKs hasn't proven that point). We shall see! g/ng

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: pcstel who wrote (25176)8/26/2002 12:04:29 AM
From: Maurice Winn
   of 29749
 
<One in San Diego, the backup fully redundant NOC in Las Vegas, (in case San Diego falls in the ocean!) Likewise Globalstar has two full redundant SOCC's one in San Jose, and the other in El Dorado Hills. In case San Jose falls into the ocean!>

PCS, More likely for the ocean to come to the gateways. Not because of the very gradual and minimal [1 metre] sea level rise due to the alleged greenhouse effect, but due to the certain, sudden and large sea level rise due to an incoming meteorite or comet hitting the Pacific Ocean and causing a commotion on the western seaboard.

Mq

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Jeff Vayda who wrote (25150)8/26/2002 8:37:49 AM
From: Jeff Vayda
   of 29749
 
Globalstar Needs Subscriber Gains
Satellite News 08/26/02
author: Paul Dykewicz
(c) 2001 Phillips Business Information, Inc.

Globalstar, the San Jose, Calif.-based bankrupt satellite phone service provider, needs to substantially boost its subscriber
base and revenues if it is to avoid liquidation. So, last week the company slashed prices to drive sales.

Management is convinced that the strategy will lift revenues and spur outside investors to help the company emerge from
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The price cuts will range between 30 percent for the company's most infrequent users
to 80 percent for high-volume customers.

Globalstar's new prices are well below those charged by Iridium Satellite LLC, its chief competitor in providing
satellite-based mobile communications via pocket-sized handsets.

The timing of the new pricing strategy followed finalization early last week of Globalstar's acquisition of assets previously
owned by Vodafone Americas Inc., a retailer of Globalstar service in the United States and the Caribbean. Vodafone
retains Globalstar franchise interests and operations in other parts of the world, Globalstar officials said.

Once held captive by the prices set by service providers in various regions of the world, Globalstar now has consolidated
its operations across North America and much of Europe through strategic acquisitions of service providers.

The new pricing structure initially will be limited to the United States, Canada, the Caribbean and parts of Europe where
Globalstar itself is the service provider, but efforts will be made to spur adoption of uniform pricing by all the company's
service providers worldwide in the coming months.

Once the Vodafone deal was completed, Globalstar officials wasted no time in announcing the huge price reductions to its
sales agents, company officials said.

Olof Lundberg, chairman and CEO of Globalstar, said that his company now will be able to set wholesale and retail prices
in the "extremely important" U.S. market. In anticipation of the Vodafone deal closing, Globalstar doubled its U.S. sales
force, he said.

"Before, we could not mandate the retail price of the service," said Mac Jeffery, Globalstar's director of communications.
"Until now, that was Vodafone's prerogative. Now, we can put all of the pieces together."

Globalstar President Tony Navarra said in an interview with SATELLITE NEWS that ship owners and cargo fleet
managers have complained to Globalstar officials about the lack of a single price.

Reduced pricing could help lure not only corporate customers, but also government agencies, Navarra said. The pricing
cuts could increase usage "very dramatically," he added.

Five new pricing plans introduced in the United States by Globalstar last week charged as little as 17 cents a minute for
the highest-use customers and no more than 99 cents a minute for the lowest volume users. A monthly service charge that
includes a varying number of free initial minutes also is contained in the pricing packages.

Much of the early reaction to the pricing cuts has been favorable, Navarra said. The reduced pricing also bodes well for
mobile satellite services (MSS) in general, he said.

Roger Rusch, president of the TelAstra consultancy in Palos Verdes, Calif., criticized the new pricing strategy.

"Cutting rates is a desperate action that is unlikely to attract sufficient new customers or use by old customers to offset the
ARPU (average revenue per user) drop," Rusch said. "It is a futile gesture. We have observed the results of this strategy
at ACeS Garuda in Indonesia and AMSC in the U.S. Dropping the airtime service rates will only decrease revenues while
operating costs are increasing."

Navarra countered that "efficiencies" gained by rolling up former Vodafone and France Telecom gateway operations into
Globalstar will be combined with incentives for dealers, sellers and retailers to sign up high-volume new users.

"In the past, commissions were given more on the sale of the product rather than incorporating the sale of service,"
Navarra said.

The new pricing follows the model of cellular services that charge less per minute for high-volume users, Jeffery said. For
the high-volume packages, Globalstar is the least expensive option among global mobile voice services, Jeffery said.

Regional providers, Thuraya and ACeS, also are low-priced but are geostationary satellite services with operating
limitations, Jeffery said. For example, they primarily serve finite regions of the world and are not suitable for users who
truly need global coverage, Jeffery added.

"Among the global providers, we are the least expensive and the new wave of price changes makes us even more
affordable," Jeffery said. "What we have in mind is to make our service still more practical to an even wider range of
potential customers."

The revamped pricing structure is aimed at helping Globalstar position itself to turn a profit once it emerges from Chapter
11 bankruptcy court protection, Navarra said. A restructuring plan to leave bankruptcy could be in place by year-end, he
added.

"We know what we have to do in sales volumes to improve our profitability," Navarra said.

Before the price cuts last week, Globalstar charged as much as $1.50 a minute or as little as 79 cents a minute for high
volume users. To qualify as a high-volume user, a customer would need to use more than 500 minutes a month and
commit to operate at least 50 phones, Jeffery said.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Jeff Vayda who wrote (25181)8/26/2002 8:38:06 AM
From: Jeff Vayda
   of 29749
 
Wary Investors Tighten Financing Reins
Satellite News 08/26/02
author: Paul Dykewicz
(c) 2001 Phillips Business Information, Inc.

The cold reality of current economic conditions is that investors are reluctant to back high-risk satellite companies.

A rash of bankruptcies in the telecommunications marketplace that includes WorldCom and Global Crossing has put
investors on edge and added pressure to financially needy companies struggling to survive.

One casualty of this climate could be Globalstar, the San Jose, Calif.-based mobile satellite communications service
provider that filed for Chapter 11-bankruptcy protection earlier this year. Industry experts doubt Globalstar can turn things
around, even with a new cut-rate pricing plan unveiled last week.

Globalstar is looking for a new investor to pump in between $50 million and $100 million in financing, said its President
Tony Navarra.

Promising satellite radio service providers XM Satellite Radio [XMSR] and Sirius Satellite Radio [SIRI] deserve backing
but are not readily receiving it, said Jimmy Schaeffler, president of The Carmel Group, a satellite consultancy in
Carmel-by-the-Sea, Calif. He believes that both companies can become financially successful if they receive needed
financial backing. He sees the prospects for satellite radio as superior to the performance of satellite TV startups in the
mid- 1990s.

The negative coverage Sirius, in particular, has received in the media and from Wall Street analysts has been damaging,
but undeserved, Schaeffler said. He remains bullish on Sirius and satellite radio in general.

Dulles, Va.-based Orbital Sciences Corp. [ORB] has struggled mightily in recent months to obtain new financing. Last
week, it succeeded in raising $135 million in private financing. But that success followed a setback last month when the
company failed to convince institutional investors to buy $100 million in convertible senior subordinated notes.

The challenges of gaining access to funds are even more staggering for Globalstar, one of the neediest companies in the
satellite industry. With or without the new pricing strategy unveiled by the company last week, Globalstar has a number of
problems to overcome that could deter investors from giving it help, industry consultants said.

One of Globalstar's biggest problems is that it continues to lose millions of dollars a month on operations, even though it
previously stopped paying any interest on its debt, Schaeffler said.

Those operational losses mean the company's ability to wipe out its debt upon emergence from bankruptcy court
protection would be impaired.

"I think the reduced pricing will enhance the sphere of the company's potential clients," Schaeffler said. "But at the same
time, if you can't educate the consumer to the value of a particular service, the price may not be as relevant. To get its
best message to a large consumer base today is going to take a lot of money and a lot of effort. That is where a solid
investor is needed to come in."

That investor probably would need to pump in between $75 million to $100 million to give Globalstar the opportunity to get
its message our there, Schaeffler said.

"There is nobody out there that has done extremely well in MSS [mobile satellite services] and only one, Inmarsat, that has
done fairly well," Schaeffler said.

Ultimately, the majority of cellular mobile phones will connect with satellites, Schaeffler predicted. However, key questions
are which company does it first and with what strategy, he added.

Two major issues that Globalstar faces are technology problems and competitive threats, he said.

On the technology front, the usefulness of the 48-satellite constellation is limited because the handsets do not work inside
cars or buildings when the line of sight to the satellites is blocked, he explained.

Competitive threats include rival satellite voice services such as Iridium Satellite LLC and Inmarsat, Schaeffler said.

Warren Brown, Iridium's spokesman, said his company should become more formidable with an additional investment by
its owners in short-burst messaging and other data capabilities to supplement its bread-and-butter voice services. That
investment will allow Iridium to obtain additional customers and revenues, he added.

"We're expanding where it makes sense," Brown said. "We are a very useful alternative to some of the other services that
are out there. Because of our success in expanding into niche markets, major telecom companies have been agreeable to
do business with us in increasingly numbers in the last few weeks."

Other marketplace foes for Globalstar include cellular services and the satellite communications system under
development by telecom pioneer Craig McCaw, Schaeffler said.

Globalstar's new pricing strategy may boost the number of subscribers but its "fundamental" problem is that it lacks a
viable business case, said Roger Rusch, president of the TelAstra consultancy in Palos Verdes, Calif. The reasoning is
that the cost of operations, advertising, and administration are excessive, he added.

Smart buyers of Globalstar service have been staying away for fear that the company would "collapse," Rusch said. "No
doubt a number of uninformed buyers of Globalstar equipment will be left stranded because they engaged in wishful
thinking," he added.

Globalstar's $34.8 million in cash on hand June 30 and its anticipated revenue from operations will not be sufficient to
sustain it as a going concern through the end of 2002, Rusch warned.

"Few bankers would be willing to dump money down the Globalstar drain," Rusch said. "Soon this will be clear to
everyone, including those who thought that it could be a successful enterprise if there were no debt. The bottom line is that
Globalstar might emerge briefly from bankruptcy and then spend the remaining cash reserves before closing shop.
Unfortunately, the price cutting decision will only hasten its demise."

Globalstar's latest financials results are not encouraging, Rusch said.

In the second quarter of 2002, Globalstar had service revenues of $3.3 million, equipment sales of $1.4 million, about
75,000 customers and 7.7 million minutes of use. However, out of pocket expenses were at least $16.4 million. As a result,
Globalstar's operating loss for the quarter was $11.7 million or almost $4 million per month, Rusch noted.

Despite the dim forecast, Globalstar management is optimistic the plan will put it on course for future profitability and help
it to entice big-money investors.

"If we can double our subscriber base in the middle of a bankruptcy, imagine what we can do when we are out of the
restructuring [process]," said Mac Jeffery, Globalstar's director of corporate communications

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Maurice Winn who wrote (25180)8/26/2002 1:36:12 PM
From: pcstel
   of 29749
 
ATT, Sprint, and Cingular whining like a 747!!

gullfoss2.fcc.gov

PCSTEL

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: pcstel who wrote (25183)8/26/2002 1:53:41 PM
From: Jeff Vayda
   of 29749
 
Is this a knee jerk reaction? Are they conditioned to scream like non-hush kitted 747s or do they really fear ATC?

Jeff Vayda

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)


To: Jeff Vayda who wrote (25184)8/26/2002 2:23:38 PM
From: RalphCramden
   of 29749
 
I think of ATC as a way to use satellite spectrum for terrestrial cellular. We know terrestrial cellular spectrum is worth a lot market value because we have seen it auctioned off. ATC is a way to sneak past having to buy cellular spectrum by allowing satellite spectrum to be used.

These other companies complaining about ATC are just being sensible. They paid for cellular specturm, they don't want to see other cellular spectrum being given away under the guise of ATC. Suppose there was a planned community allowing only 1 gas station per intersection and you paid a big premium to buy those gas station corner lots. Now all the sudden the bankrupt 7-11 on the other corners declared that it was an efficient use of time and real estate to have a gas pump out front so customers could fuel up while coming in to buy slurpies and rolling papers. You would cry big time foul, because you had paid the premium to supply gas with 1 gas station per corner.

Globalstar is trying to make a killing on their spectral license by getting it "rezoned" for terrestrial. Unless the FCC auctions the spectrum after re-zoning it, then this is totally unfair to people who had to pay for spectrum originally zoned for terrestrial cellular.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: RalphCramden who wrote (25185)8/26/2002 2:28:30 PM
From: Pierre
   of 29749
 
I think of ATC as a way to use satellite spectrum for terrestrial cellular.

Hey Ralph, how about the cell guys get some satellite spectrum for free. Sure, they don't have any satellites, but then G* doesn't have any cell towers. Fair's fair. <g>

FWIW, I tend to agree with you - real value of ATC is to an existing terrestrial carrier - though as pcstel has noted the price of existing spectrum has come down a lot since the heady days of yester year.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: RalphCramden who wrote (25185)8/26/2002 9:14:18 PM
From: pcstel
   of 29749
 
They paid for cellular specturm, they don't want to see other cellular spectrum being given away under the guise of ATC. Suppose there was a planned community allowing only 1 gas station per intersection and you paid a big premium to buy those gas station corner lots. Now all the sudden the bankrupt 7-11 on the other corners declared that it was an efficient use of time and real estate to have a gas pump out front so customers could fuel up while coming in to buy slurpies and rolling papers. You would cry big time foul, because you had paid the premium to supply gas with 1 gas station per corner.

Actually, I think you are a bit off on your reasoning. First of all.. Exactly how much did BellSouth, ATT, Bell Atlantic, Airtouch and the other 800 Mhz incumbents PAY for their 800Mhz CMRS spectrum? Was the spectrum auctioned to them, or was it assigned as part of a larger public service policy by the FCC? You didn't think about that? Did you?

But, getting back to your gas station concept. What we have here is the 7-11 was given a corner lot to provide a service that was not widely popular and did not have a known market but was envisioned by the city council as being part of a larger Public Service offering. So the 7-11was given a lot but, was allowed to only sell Natural Gas at their pumps.

Well, as bad luck turned out, the number of Natural Gas cars and fleet vehicles turned out to be lower than expected. So use of the 7-11 Natural Gas Station was lower than projections. Now the 7-11 Gas Station still provides a valuable public service in providing facilities to re-fuel Natural Gas vehicles, but demand is not great enough to provide a valid business model on a stand alone basis. So the 7-11 has now asked the City Council to allow it to sell Gasoline to supplement the cost of operating the Natural Gas Station. The other Gasoline Station Owners are now in a tizzy that the City Council is considering letting the 7-11 sell gasoline on property that was given to them by the city. (Even though many of these Gas Station owners were receipents themeselves of Free Cornor Lots, a couple of decades ago when the city issued these lots to them, to help stimulate growth in developing the undeveloped parts of the city at the time.)

As a matter of fact, the other Gas Station operators believe the city should resend the grant of the corner lot to the 7-11 and other companies who were provided a cornor lot to offer Natural Gas services (but have yet to build their stations due to lack of demand and market conditions). Of course doing so would inhibit those using Natural Gas vehicles a "convenient" location to refuel their vehicles, and possibly decrease the demand for Natural Gas vehicles since there would be fewer convenient refueling locations. Forceing more people to buy traditional Gasoline powered cars! Which is the ultimate desire of the competing Gas Station Owners in the whole proceeding.

So the question is:

Should the City Council allow 7-11 to sell gasoline which it will have to do against extreme competition, and hopefully use the profits from this operation to offset the losses in their Natural Gas portion of the business, which the City Council may view as a necessary Public Service?

PCSTEL

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10