Re: Apple To Own Wireless 700Mhz Network

The rf spectrum is part of our infrastructure. It should not be taxed by
selling it to the highest bidder. The current process ensures that any use
will be expensive enough to repay the auction price.

Infrastructure needs to be subsidized.


"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-E4C12F.21155116112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> Well, here's the word. Apple with or without Google/AT&T will bid on the
> 700Mhz spectrum that will be auctioned by the US Government in January
> of 2008. They need to buy about 22 Mhz of the spectrum (60Mhz is being
> sold) to cover the entire country.
>
> Now you understand why Apple didn't want to be locked into the old 3G
> standard.
>
> As you may know, AT&T bought Aloha Partners 700Mhz... about 10 Mhz or
> about half the country. They need more. The market has vastly
> underestimated Steve's influence at AT&T as well as the money Apple is
> getting from AT&T.
>
> The 700Mhz frequency is Gold in the sky! A wireless internet will one
> day be all there is. Whoever owns this beach front property owns the
> cell phone world. And no one will ever sell this to a competitor. Apple
> must buy in or control this area if they are to control their cell phone
> experience. And here's the best part.
>
> As this network is already built out for analogue TV, it will cost
> little to change things for Wimaxx. Instant nationwide network that goes
> through walls way easier than any other Mhz band. So reception is
> better, distance travels longer and coverage is nationwide just as
> analogue TV is...and it will cost very little to maintain relative to
> what cell phone companies compete with... you only need 1/4 of the sites
> as the 1.8Ghz that most cell phones use. So others use a weaker signal
> which equates to more lost calls and static, more sites, higher
> expenses, etc..
>
> Apple could pull of the coup d'etat of the century, if they said, buy
> your cell phone and use our Wimaxx to dial any number in the US and
> receive any call fo the monthly price of $0 for 2 years.... the iPhone
> would be the hottest product even more so than the Razor was... just
> think of a cell that is free for 2 years.. that's huge... what does
> Apple gain from this...they could probably sell 100 million iPhones at
> $299 each over a 2 year period or less and own the cell phone market.
>
> Then charge $50 per month for unlimited calling plans... still a good
> deal... and half or more of that would be profit! At say $30 per month
> multiplied by 100 million iPhones that's 3 billion a month or 36 billion
> per year... or $40 per share in earnings added to whatever else they
> sell... you're talking a stock price over $1,000 a share... maybe even
> $1,500.
>
> If this takes 2-3-4-5 years... that's a 10 bagger! Apple will be the
> largest publicly traded company in the country and own both the computer
> and cell phone market.
>
> ---

"Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

> > Well, here's the word. Apple with or without Google/AT&T will bid on the
> > 700Mhz spectrum that will be auctioned by the US Government in January
> > of 2008.
>
> As we all know by now - Oxtard is (always) wrong.
>
> Here is the real deal...
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13...l?tk=nl_dnxnws
>
> Google is making the necessary preparations to bid for wireless spectrum in
> an auction be held in the U.S. in January
>
> The company is planning to finance that bid alone, without partners,
> according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.

You are forgetting that Apple and Google are partners in many areas,
Eric even sits on Apple's Board of Directors so what Steve says, Eric
does.

Google simply doesn't have any experience in hardware, nor any sales
experience to go it alone, and while an mutual Apple/Google bid is
possible. Apple can easily outbid Google if needed.

As Todd mentioned the deadline for submitting bids is coming up soon.

Apple would probably use a shell company to protect the use until the
iPhone using this band is ready.

MacWorld is coming up very soon, only 58 days away! So we should know
something by that morning. (the Keynote is on the 15th)

http://www.macworldexpo.com/about

DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:

> Oxford wrote:
> > Well, here's the word. Apple with or without Google/AT&T will bid on the
> > 700Mhz spectrum that will be auctioned by the US Government in January
> > of 2008. They need to buy about 22 Mhz of the spectrum (60Mhz is being
> > sold) to cover the entire country.
>
> Yahoo message board - http://tinyurl.com/2mgk3q
> Posted by "ace_92029"
> "http://profiles.yahoo.com/ace_92029
>
> [quote]
> Well, here's the word. Apple with or without Google/AT&T will bid on the
> 700Mhz spectrum that will be auctioned by the US government in January
> of 2008. They need to buy about 22 Mhz of the spectrum (60Mhz is being
> sold) to cover the entire country.
>
> > The 700Mhz frequency is Gold in the sky! A wireless internet will one
> > day be all there is. Whoever owns this beach front property owns the
> > cell phone world. And no one will ever sell this to a competitor. Apple
> > must buy in or control this area if they are to control their cell phone
> > experience. And here's the best part.
> > As this network is already built out for analogue TV, it will cost
> > little to change things for Wimaxx. Instant nationwide network that goes
> > through walls way easier than any other Mhz band.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ywpwdn
> Authored by: By Cade Metz in San Francisco
> [quote]
> The FCC calls the 700-MHz band "beachfront property." As TV stations
> vacate this wireless real estate, making the move to digital
> transmission, it could potentially house a nationwide wireless network
> that's faster than WiFi and more adept at passing through walls.
>
> Would you like salsa to go with the egg on yer face?

why are you so obsessed with me?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

> > And your point is? Everything points to you as the poster.
>
> Oxfart posts something here, and when questioned about its source, goes
> to that forum and says "but look, it's published elsewhere"--when in
> reality that "forum" simply reposts whatever anyone posts to the Usenet.

they are not talking about that elmo. what i posted came from yahoo's
message board, not usenet. learn to read.

Oxford wrote:
> why are you so obsessed with me?

Why are you so obsessed with making yerself look like a fool, fool?

Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:

> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote:
>
> >i'll be sure to let the author know your thoughts.
>
> Why don't you just tell us who the author was?

it's no great secret, DTC had nothing better to do so he dug around and
found it.

Yahoo message board - http://tinyurl.com/2mgk3q
Posted by "ace_92029"
"http://profiles.yahoo.com/ace_92029

i did feel like digging it up, so now go ***** at the author, not me. i
was just the carrier pigeon.

Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
154469.22035017112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net:

> Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote:
>>
>> >i'll be sure to let the author know your thoughts.
>>
>> Why don't you just tell us who the author was?
>
> it's no great secret, DTC had nothing better to do so he dug around and
> found it.
>
> Yahoo message board - http://tinyurl.com/2mgk3q
> Posted by "ace_92029"
> "http://profiles.yahoo.com/ace_92029
>
> i did feel like digging it up, so now go ***** at the author, not me. i
> was just the carrier pigeon.
>

That would be the clueless carrier pigeon, newbie.

"Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> > Appears the only place Goggle could find this was in one place...
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/34lt5r
> >
> > My gawd...you are so clueless.
>
> And if you go back to read it again, It posted by Oxturd. His name is at the
> top.

talk about clueless Kevin, you win the award for the above comment.

what you pulled up was just a mirror of usenet in a phpBB format.

the post didn't originate with me, you were just too clueless to
understand that.

the mildly smarter DTC found the correct info, just as I had said.

http://tinyurl.com/2mgk3q

the joke is on you Kevin!

George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> When you author a post as you did with no attribution you are taking
> full responsibility for the accuracy because they are *your words*.

go cry me a river george. you forget, i simply don't care as long as the
information is interesting. it was, so i posted it. deal with it.

Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
68CA0E.22145017112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net:

> George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> When you author a post as you did with no attribution you are taking
>> full responsibility for the accuracy because they are *your words*.
>
> go cry me a river george. you forget, i simply don't care as long as the
> information is interesting. it was, so i posted it. deal with it.
>

And there lies the problem, newbie- most of us would rather post something
factual, as opposed to "interesting". The fact that you posted it all
simply shows that you know nothing about the subject.

DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:

> Oxford wrote:
> > why are you so obsessed with me?
>
> Why are you so obsessed with making yerself look like a fool, fool?

you don't have to get nasty about it. I'm a helpful person filled with
exciting news about the future of the cell industry.

apple is going to totally transform it, so I'm here to keep you up to
date.

yes, you're welcome!

Oxford wrote:
> Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote:
>>
>>> i'll be sure to let the author know your thoughts.
>> Why don't you just tell us who the author was?
>
> it's no great secret, DTC had nothing better to do so he dug around and
> found it.
>
> Yahoo message board - http://tinyurl.com/2mgk3q
> Posted by "ace_92029"
> "http://profiles.yahoo.com/ace_92029
>
> i did feel like digging it up, so now go ***** at the author, not me. i
> was just the carrier pigeon.
Yes, and that guy is SO CREDITABLE!

What I am saying is that you should not believe everything you hear on
the internet and usenet

Oxford wrote:
> "Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Well, here's the word. Apple with or without Google/AT&T will bid on the
>>> 700Mhz spectrum that will be auctioned by the US Government in January
>>> of 2008.
>> As we all know by now - Oxtard is (always) wrong.
>>
>> Here is the real deal...
>>
>> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13...l?tk=nl_dnxnws
>>
>> Google is making the necessary preparations to bid for wireless spectrum in
>> an auction be held in the U.S. in January
>>
>> The company is planning to finance that bid alone, without partners,
>> according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.
>
> You are forgetting that Apple and Google are partners in many areas,
> Eric even sits on Apple's Board of Directors so what Steve says, Eric
> does.
So? They don't need Apple to slow them down anymore.
>
> Google simply doesn't have any experience in hardware, nor any sales
> experience to go it alone, and while an mutual Apple/Google bid is
> possible. Apple can easily outbid Google if needed.
No, Apple cannot outbid google.

And guess what, GOOGLE HAS SALES EXPERIENCE!

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-68CA0E.22145017112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
>
> go cry me a river george. you forget, i simply don't care as long as the
> information is interesting. it was, so i posted it. deal with it.

Yes, you "don't care" about the truth - that has been proven repeatedly.

Now... if you'd admit to trolling & sock puppets primarily to be an asshole,
we'd actually be getting somewhere.

"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@supersmart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-8DD1AD.21571517112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...

>
> why are you so obsessed with me?

Why are YOU so "obsessed" with trolling groups with fanboy crap?
Why are YOU post complete crap where it doesn't belong.
Why do YOU try so hard to be a complete ass?

Answer those - and you will have answered your question.