LightSquared Proposal Poll Results

Chuck Zimmerman

In our latest ZimmPoll we asked the question, “What do you think of the LightSquared broadband internet proposal?” This controversial issue has pitted GPS services and hardware manufacturers against those who want better broadband internet service in their area and agriculture is only one of the industries that could be impacted. Interestingly, our poll results were mostly against the proposal until one afternoon when almost all of the “positive” results were posted. That suggests that there was a concerted effort to impact the results. So here they are. We had 73% say that the proposal would be Good for ag/rural America and 23% say it would be Bad for ag/rural America. What do you think about that?

Our new ZimmPoll is now live. We’re asking the question, “Do you think there’s currently an “Ag Bubble”?” Let us know what you think.

Post Update: After getting a text message asking me what an ag bubble is, I offer the following definition from Wikipedia that might help him understand.

An economic bubble (sometimes referred to as a speculative bubble, a market bubble, a price bubble, a financial bubble, a speculative mania or a balloon) is “trade in high volumes at prices that are considerably at variance with intrinsic values”. It could also be described as a trade in products or assets with inflated values.

ZimmPoll is sponsored by Rhea+Kaiser, a full-service advertising/public relations agency.

ZimmPoll

Comments 8

  1. It would not surprise me in the least if there had been a concerted effort by supporters of broadband internet and/or LightSquared to skew the results of this poll.
    I’m a great fan of broadband internet but I am very concerned about how it’s going to effect GPS bands. It could be dangerously disruptive.
    I have not heard anything about research into this potential problem and such research should be mandatory.
    Do farmers realize how broadband disruption of GPS could effect their farming operations??

  2. It would not surprise me in the least if there had been a concerted effort by supporters of broadband internet and/or LightSquared to skew the results of this poll.
    I’m a great fan of broadband internet but I am very concerned about how it’s going to effect GPS bands. It could be dangerously disruptive.
    I have not heard anything about research into this potential problem and such research should be mandatory.
    Do farmers realize how broadband disruption of GPS could effect their farming operations??

  3. Lightsquared is a failed proposal at this point. I’d put money on DISH network or other competitors to roll out a non interfering solution that gives rural America the broadband access without the GPS interference issue.
    Also it seems Lightsquared did prove it is very effective at spamming internet polls.

  4. Lightsquared is a failed proposal at this point. I’d put money on DISH network or other competitors to roll out a non interfering solution that gives rural America the broadband access without the GPS interference issue.
    Also it seems Lightsquared did prove it is very effective at spamming internet polls.

  5. Elizabeth, There has been much testing done to determine what GPS disruption would occur from Lightsquared’s proposed network. In the spring, using Lightsquared’s original technical proposal, all GPS devices tested were impacted negatively, i.e. they lost the ability to track satellites, with some GPS units affected up to 180 miles from a Lightsquared cell tower. Lightsquared modified their proposal to reduce the interference (claiming in prolific press releases that they had solved the GPS interference problem), and government testing in November determined that although things were better, the majority of stand alone GPS units still suffered “harmful interference”, including state-of-the-art aviation GPS receivers costing 10’s of thousands of dollars. Lightsquared was quick to blame all of these units for the problems, but the fact remains that the waiver they requested from the FCC to convert their low-power satellite frequencies to high-power cell tower frequencies was approved on the condition that Lightsquared solve any interference issues. Out of technical solutions, Lightsquared has taken the position that they will now ‘solve’ this problem by blaming the whole GPS industry, and forcing the costs on owners of the GPS units of purchasing new GPS units that can handle the interference. Unfortunately the head of the FCC was asleep at the wheel when all this started, and they are in a position now to have to withdraw their conditional approval, as Lightsquared cannot start service without producing harmful interference to GPS services. Lightsquared is just about out of money and apparently go bankrupt in a few months, unless they receive miraculous approval to offer service (and disrupt GPS operations) from the FCC.

  6. Elizabeth, There has been much testing done to determine what GPS disruption would occur from Lightsquared’s proposed network. In the spring, using Lightsquared’s original technical proposal, all GPS devices tested were impacted negatively, i.e. they lost the ability to track satellites, with some GPS units affected up to 180 miles from a Lightsquared cell tower. Lightsquared modified their proposal to reduce the interference (claiming in prolific press releases that they had solved the GPS interference problem), and government testing in November determined that although things were better, the majority of stand alone GPS units still suffered “harmful interference”, including state-of-the-art aviation GPS receivers costing 10’s of thousands of dollars. Lightsquared was quick to blame all of these units for the problems, but the fact remains that the waiver they requested from the FCC to convert their low-power satellite frequencies to high-power cell tower frequencies was approved on the condition that Lightsquared solve any interference issues. Out of technical solutions, Lightsquared has taken the position that they will now ‘solve’ this problem by blaming the whole GPS industry, and forcing the costs on owners of the GPS units of purchasing new GPS units that can handle the interference. Unfortunately the head of the FCC was asleep at the wheel when all this started, and they are in a position now to have to withdraw their conditional approval, as Lightsquared cannot start service without producing harmful interference to GPS services. Lightsquared is just about out of money and apparently go bankrupt in a few months, unless they receive miraculous approval to offer service (and disrupt GPS operations) from the FCC.

  7. Maybe if LightSquared spend another $1.5 million on lobbying they could change the laws of physics. I tried to get filters from them and their partner company and could not even get a quote let alone a lead time.

  8. Maybe if LightSquared spend another $1.5 million on lobbying they could change the laws of physics. I tried to get filters from them and their partner company and could not even get a quote let alone a lead time.

Comments are closed.