 Michieru2zzz zzz zzzPremium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL | Speakeasy 2.0 Well I usually am always interested on what my ISP is up too and usually the tech's are more than happy to talk about and sometimes vent some frustration's but I got some information and nor who I am going to state from that Speakeasy plan's to create there own nationwide WiMAX network and of course starting in the top major market's.
Although this is just me and some other tech talking and you should take this information with a grain of salt, they have been testing WiMAX in seattle for a while now and although Speakeasy has moved into a more business only company they want to also improve the consumer side.
As we look at past of this forum, ADSL2+ was the biggest ticket, of course that never happened and some of those that represented Speakeasy have jumped ship. Speakeasy's silence over the long term was simply nail biting and wondering what to do with their current situation.
Maybe it's just me but I have a little faith in this company because they have proven to be a reliable company, always was there when I needed them and have lowered my rates below that of advertised prices and faster speeds just out of a techs kindness.
Although I don't know who really did this, someone gave me 1.5/768 for around 47 dollars per month. I even reported it just out of kindness and not to get any surprises in the long run only to have the tech's say "don't worry about it." As if it was a gift.
Maybe I am just being naive, but I have been proven wrong before and if Speakeasy has the possibility to launch a WiMAX network, then so be it.
This is what I would like to call Speakeasy 2.0
--
The only limits we have are the one's we set ourselves. |
|
surtin
join:2001-12-09
Chicago, IL | 1.5/768 for $47? Sounds like a dream that I'd love to be apart of...
Too bad the chances of that happening are slim to none.
Anyways, SE has been quiet for far too long, it's about time they did something. |
|
Michieru2zzz zzz zzzPremium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL | 
--
The only limits we have are the one's we set ourselves. |
|
| reply to Michieru2
said by Michieru2:Maybe I am just being naive, but I have been proven wrong before and if Speakeasy has the possibility to launch a WiMAX network, then so be it. This is what I would like to call Speakeasy 2.0 Speakeasy sold their WiMax network a few weeks ago. As far as I know they never offered a non-beta service over it.
»seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b···m30.html |
|
Michieru2zzz zzz zzzPremium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL | From the article
"In addition, the two companies agreed to create a partnership in which Speakeasy will resell Towerstream's wireless broadband in the seven markets where it operates. Details of the partnership and financial terms of the sale were not disclosed."
But they are sharing there network's in exchange. So Speakeasy has just acquired reselling privileges of Towerstream's wireless broadband which is fixed WiMAX solutions.
--
The only limits we have are the one's we set ourselves. |
|
|
|
 b4
@sprintlink.net | Re: Speakeasy 2.0 - IPO - via Girls gone Wild So Towerstream merges with University Girls Calendar (Shell) and trades on the over the counter and does a deal with Speakeasy. WOW sounds like a WiMAX power house - University Girls + Towers + Speakeasy = Bruce is Brilliant.
Who couldn't believe in SLAs from the Girls Calendar at a Speakeasy?
On January 12, 2007, Towerstream completed a merger with a wholly-owned subsidiary of University Girls Calendar ("UGC"), a publicly traded shell company. As a result of the transaction, the former owners of Towerstream became the controlling stockholders of UGC and UGC changed its name to Towerstream Corporation. Accordingly, the merger of Towerstream and UGC constitutes a reverse merger. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| This is not an uncommon financial ploy...merging with a "shell" public company in order to "go public" on the cheap. Many have done it...some with remarkable success...but I think the general feeling on "the Street" is that when a company does this, it's because they don't have the financial wherewithall to enter the public markets in a more traditional manner, i.e. IPO. For me, this isn't a sign of strength so I don't hold out great hope for the longterm viability of the company. |
|
