Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Re: Nextel recommends EFJ as replacement for Motorola

From: Marcelrf <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:01:03 -0500

-------- Original Message --------
From: Jack Daniel <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Nextel recommends EFJ as replacement for Motorola  (Was:
Nextel sav...

We agree.... I think. I used "precursor" only in reference to content of
the FCC letter.

Do you get an agreememt BEFORE you support an FCC ruling that will force
eventual relocation or AFTER the rules become binding on you?  Obviously
the only sure approach is PROIR to an FCC ruling.

And you better be very sure you understand EXACTLY what you may get as a
result of the agreement, such as; used equipment, different brands than
you are familiar with and equipped to integrate into your system, does
Nextel buy and supply or does the other party have to buy the equipment
then negotiate how much they will be reimbused, what's the recourse if
there is a disagreement or failure to reimburse promptly, who takes on
the liability if property or life is lost durung the
retune/restock/retrain/rework transition, etc. 

I'm sure these and many more details have been discussed, but is there a
standard contract format or even a 'check list' displaced users can
reference?

Does Nextel consider such agreements confidential and, if so, on what
basis can a public agency enter into a 'secret' contract of this nature
using large amounts of public funds? 

======================================================

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> No, no, no......... such a statement shouldn't be merely a precursor for
> support, but rather much more in the form of a contractual term in every
> relocation agreement regardless of whether one is a supporter or not.
> 
> Alan
> 
> In a message dated 2/21/2004 9:22:29 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [email-masked] writes:
> [the original message was edited by the respondent]
>
> Try this test: ask Nextel to provide a written, plain language,
> guarantee to YOUR agency specifically will not experience any service
> outage or additional expense if you support their consensus plan.  Sweet
> talk over a nice dinner, or 'confidential' side comments won't stand up
> in court.  Until the consensus plan is approved, they will tell you
> anything you want to hear.
> 
> Jack Daniel
====================================

-- 
    "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL"
  Note The New address 
Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1

  "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS"
Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2

  "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP"
     The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security.
Subscribe to WFHSG:  http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEXTEL-1/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     [email-masked]

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

---

From: Marcelrf <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:03:52 -0500

-------- Original Message --------
From: Jack Daniel <[email-masked]>
Subject: Nextel recommends EFJ as replacement for Motorola  (Was: Nextel
saves City, County of San Diego $$$$ in replacement radio costs)

I hope every one, especially public safety agencies, in the 800 MHz band
carefully read the short but telling letter Nextel sent to the FCC
disputing the City and County of San Diego cost estimates to comply with
the consensus plan. Here's an excerpt:

" As to funding, the radio replacement costs cited by the City warrant
brief mention. These costs estimates may not reflect the discounts
possible through volume purchasing, for example, the prices for Spectra
and Saber models appear to be $500-$1000 higher than pricing we are
aware of for the same models. Equipment manufacturers such as EF Johnson
offer comparable public safety radio models to the Motorola models the
City of San Diego uses today at more favorable pricing levels. Many EF
Johnson radios are designed for use on existing Motorola public safety
systems and may be a desirable replacement radio at significant cost
savings. "

Is this is a precursor of the kind of lengthy negotiations everyone may
be facing if Nextel's 800 consensus plan is approved by the FCC ?

Who knows, Nextel may have already negotiated a 'volume purchasing'
agreement with EF Johnson radios as replacements for Motorola radios.
This could save Nextel a lot and maybe Nextel would sell RF Johnson
radios to the agencies at a lower cost than any dealer or agency could
get dealing with EF Johnson themselves. Maybe Nextel can buy them so
cheap Nextel can make a profit reselling Johnson radios to displaced 800
MHz licensees.

Without any bias towards either brand, the radio people in these
agencies know a brand change/mix is not so simple or cheap. 

Nextel has again demonstrated they have no real understanding of public
safety communications operations, they think substituting a different
radio is as simple as buying a new cellular handset. In otyer words,
"radios is radios".
(I hope Radio Shack doesn't start selling 800 MHz portables.)

When agencies add a new brand, they have to increase their spare parts
inventory, set up additional purchasing procedures, pay for additional
training and any brand specific technical support items like test sets,
programming software, develop 'same as' programming and fleet cross
indexes, learn any subtitle operational differences, retrain the users
to know the differences and how to use a different radio, deploy
additional chargers and batteries to each sub-station, etc. etc.  

This also opens the door for incompatibilities and finger pointing
between the infrastructure and the mobile/portable radio manufacturers.
What if Motorola software or system upgrades conflict with the users
radios in years to come?

Any 'savings' on the basic radio unit can disappear rapidly in real life
practice. 

But more importantly, the deployment of different radios using different
batteries and accessories is NOT conducive to "interoperability",
especially in major disasters like San Diego just experienced with the
wild fires. And having a radio the user doesn't know how to operate is
the same as having no radio at all.

Bottom line, Nextel is doing exactly what everyone should expect; make a
profit on every aspect of the consensus plan. 

That's the way business gets done. 

Jack Daniel

 
Yahoo! Groups Links