http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19001940 en Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:26:20 EDT Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:26:20 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19002152 tiger72 : i have to agree. This would have been a sweetheart deal with minimal startup costs for M2Z (a company i've never heard of) - and something which would have hindered broadband development. I'm glad that the FCC rejected this proposal for what in 10 years would be equivalent to today's 300 baud modem.
--
|- The LP »www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml -|
|- Cato @ Liberty »www.cato-at-liberty.org -|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19002152 Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:56:07 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19002004 TKJunkMail : Even the 2 Dems on the Committee saw this proposal as not in best interests of the country. What M2Z was trying to do was block out any competitors and get a sweetheart deal for itself. Better that all proposals be considered and that the spectrum be put out for auction.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19002004 Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:17:22 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19001940 keyboard5684 : 60 day trial? The company was talking about a 10 year deployment. I could set up a tower myself with the right equipment and "show" the FCC anything I wanted in 60 days.

Who is M2Z? I never heard of them. I have to find there books... Nope.

Anybody that can provide NATIONWIDE broadband can afford the license. It is a very big line of crap the company seems to be feeding, cell companies cannot even get nationwide coverage!

I think it would be better spent to offer a wider band with more restrictions so WISPs and other small companies can fill the gaps that the major players leave out.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19001940 Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:05:17 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19001919 jc100 : What would the FCC lose by issuing this company a 60 Day trial period? Obviously, we know whose pockets are lining their board. Quite disgusting. I think this is a good idea to some degree. It at least warranted a trial period to see if it was feasible or not. If it was feasible, would it draw enough customers to generate free revenue for the FCC? While that would have to be determined, I suspect it would. If it was truly nationwide broadband, I can see a necessity for such a service.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19001919 Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:00:13 EDT