Subject: Re: [NEXTEL-1] The "Plan Scam" changes names again-"Public Safety Consensus P...]

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:28:01 -0500

Thank you Robert Foonser.........

Bob,

Your Wisdom is Amazing...........(NOT!)

------- Original Message --------
   From: "radiopro1" <[email-masked]>
Subject:  [NEXTEL-1] The "Plan Scam" changes names again-"Public Safety Consensus P...

>
> Ok, now that the jury's in and most of the shouting and political
> juxtapostioning is over, can someone tell me in laymans' terms why
> getting Nextel to clean up their relatively few sites was not
> a "viable solution" in the face of billions of dollars spent on
> moving everyone?
>
Without all of the shouting and irrational behaviour exhibited by
many here are the BASIC facts.
1.  The problem is not only Nextel.  They are the largest contributor
of the "near-far" or overload scenario.  The cellular companies, to a
degree have contributed to the intermod scenario.  The SMR's have had
a minimal impact.
2.  The original band plan was conducive to interference since both
PS and BILT have been interleaved (simplistically - adjacent channels
could have business or PS users)
3.  Nextel is not "Breaking any rules".  The growth of their
technology was never foreseen by the industry and the FCC.  By the
time it was recognized as a problem it was too late.
4.  The reallocation of channels, while disruptive, will ultimately
result in more usable spectrum for all users.
5.  The question of "how much" is still in debate -- more than 500
Million but less than?????

Lets not get in a debate over this please.

---

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:30:06 -0500

-------- Original Message --------
   From: Jack Daniel <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [NEXTEL-1] The "Plan Scam" changes names again-"Public Safety Consensus P...

You are both right.

Nextel is only 90% of problem and the FCC approved this situation so
there is no LEGAL blame.

Let's not beat this dead horse any longer, but let's clearly understand
everyone's comments including mine include biased OPINIONS and are not
all based on undisputable facts.

If anyone doesn't understand the issues and alternatives please read the
archives over the last year. Don't re-hash them here unlkess yoiu have
soemthing new, file your comments to the FCC or write your
congressperson.

But I may be wrong.........
Jack Daniel
==============================================

---

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 18:23:15 -0500

------- Original Message --------
   From: "bob_c_89431" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [NEXTEL-1] The "Plan Scam" changes names again-"Public Safety Consensus P...

Regarding someone's report which Alan T responded to :

.......> Update on 800Mhz Spectrum Reconfiguration, Following "The
Private Wireless Summit 2002" in Washington, DC...........

.......> A panel composed of Alan Tilles, Esq., of Shulman, Rogers,
Gandal, Pordy & Ecker, representing the Private Wireless Coalition
(PWC); Robert Foosaner, Esq., SVP and Chief Regulatory Officer of
Nextel, representing Nextel Communications (NXTL); and Robert Gurss,
Esq., of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, representing the Association of Public
Safety Communications Officials (APCO) spoke about the outstanding
consensus Plan........

........> In conclusion, there appear to be no other viable solutions
available at this time; however, we believe the Consensus Plan will
cost Nextel more and may take longer to get approved........
---------------

BobC