Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Re: funding issues.....]

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:14:47 -0400

-------- Original Message --------
From: "George Crouch" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Re: funding issues.....

One other major interference factor is tower height and zoning. Most of
the interference problems are with low site NEXTEL and cellular sites
40' to 60' off the ground. In areas of the Country like SC who do not
have extensive restrictions on tower heights most of the NEXTEL/cellular
antenna systems are above 100' and interference has not been a problem.
NEXTEL also confirmed that they were not seeing problems in areas where
the NEXTEL/cellular antenna system were over 100'. Zoning boards didn't
think about this problem. 

Also NEXTEL doesn't even completely cover the interstates in SC and in
rural if you go 5 mile from the interstate their is no NEXTEL coverage. 

>>> [email-masked] 08/15/03 10:49AM >>>
I believe that you are correct with regard to WHY there isn't
interference in 
more rural areas.  However, carriers (cellular AND Nextel) will be
building 
those areas out, and thus Nextel will still have the need to re-band
there.  
Plus, Nextel will not be able to arbitrarily stop the re-banding.  It's
$850 
million, not after $300 million Nextel decides that doing N. Dakota is
no longer 
necessary so lets stop.  It's a good question, though.

As to your "money up front", as I said, if that was the sole thing
standing 
in the way, I bet that it could be worked out.

Alan T.

In a message dated 8/15/2003 3:39:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> Some more thoughts and opinions from my febrile (feeble??) 
> brain........ :-)
> 
> Even if the "parallelization" of the project speeded it up by only 
> tiny amount, it would likely be a worthwhile increase in speed. 
Since 
> this whole interference situation is so critical, any improvement in

> speed is extremely valuable.
> 
> In the places where there is little Nextel interference, I would 
> suggest that this is because of one of three things; Nextel doesn't 
> have that many sites in these areas (in other words, Nextel doesn't 
> have a lot of customers there); there are no 800MHz systems in the 
> area; or one heck of bullet proof 800MHz public safety system has
been 
> built.  Any of these tell me that Nextel wouldn't be out much if 
> Nextel didn't get the benefit of the plan in that area.
> 
> 
> 
> I can understand why Nextel would want any excess money back. After 
> all, Nextel is a profit making company and as such, is supposed to do

> things that will turn a profit.  However, if $850 million ($700 
> million for PS and $150 million for everyone else) is the very close

> estimate of the actual costs of completing this project that it is 
> supposed to be, then there won't be much money left over. The way I 
> see it is that if APCO gets the whole $850 million up front and 
> manages to get things done for less than this, then they should keep

> the extra money as a reward for a job well done.  In return, APCO 
> would free Nextel from the unlimited expense cap and take care of any

> excess costs.  If APCO believes the $850 million estimate is 
> accurate, then there should be no problem in doing this.
> 
> I believe this would prove to nearly everyone that APCO is 
> **carefully** looking at the plan.
> 
> 
> 
> Eric
>

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/