Whew!!! Couldn't have said it better myself... errr.. I couldn't have
spelled most of it myself.
Thanks for a lesson in letter writing.
Excellent.
Thanks again from all of us.
Gil, W1RG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@comcast.net>
To: "Towertalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:07 AM
Subject: [TowerTalk] FW: BPL
>
> OK...my last post here on this topic. I googled IDG and
> found the managing editor. This post is to close the loop,
> and give you the email addresses. Let's not flame
> the boss, though, it'll just annoy her. Probably the same
> goes for Gross. Let's see if they respond.
>
> 73, N2EA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Jarvis [mailto:jimjarvis@comcast.net]
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 14:02
> To: elizabeth_heichler@idg.com
> Cc: grrant_gross@idg.com
> Subject: BPL
>
> Dear Ms. Heichler:
>
> I am writing to raise your sensitivity on a topic of serious
> concern. There is a great deal of power industry hype at
> present regarding a "new" technology, broadband over power
> lines, or BPL.
>
> This was the subject of a recent article by your Washington
> correspondent, Grant Gross. Unfortunately, Mr. Gross fell
> victim to power industry hype, and outright lies by some of
> their representatives. The result is highly misleading to
> the investment community, and to your readership in general.
>
> The first point, completely missed in both of Mr. Grant's stories
> on the topic, is that the power industry ALREADY HAS BPL. It is
> subject to restrictions on radiation. They're asking that those
> restrictions be relaxed, permitting increased interference.
>
> The second point, completely missed by Mr. Gross, due to apparent
> reliance on power-industry handouts, is that other nations have
> evaluated BPL and elected to ban it on technical merit.
>
> Austria has recently joined the ranks of Japan and the UK to
> stop their BPL trials. vide infra for details:
> http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/08/2/?nc=1
>
> Against that background, consider the following quotations from
> Mr. Grant's most recent article:
>
> "Our experience in the field contradicts what (the ARRL is) alleging,"
> Kilbourne said. "We're entirely satisfied that there won't be any
> interference."
>
> and...
>
> "(Interference) just doesn't exist," Birnbaum said. "They based a lot
> of their assumptions on outdated noise flow analysis."
>
> If you can figure out what 'noise flow' is, let me know. Gobbledygook.
>
> The final point is this: If BPL isn't working within present
> noise restrictions, and the power industry is asking for a relaxation of
> those restrictions...can it be for anything BUT increased noise? And at
> what price to society? Public safety, general business, emergency
response,
> air traffic control and navigation are only a few of the affected
services.
> Amateur radio plays a very minor role in that equation.
>
> More importantly, I believe IDG/InfoWorld has a responsibility to fully
> inform its readers, not mislead them. You're in a technology driven
field.
> What is the merit of the underlying technology?
>
> Does it make sense for the power industry to invest billions in broadband
> data transmission over transmission lines designed to carry power, when
> that same industry very clearly demonstrated last year that it can't
> reliably
> supply power itself?
>
> The disagregation of power suppliers from power distributors...selling the
> outside
> plant off...transfers a lot of deferred maintenance to companies without
the
> economic base or regulatory supervision to demonstrably maintain service
in
> the
> long run. And THESE are the people whom the FCC suggests will bring us a
> great
> new technology? I don't buy it. I don't think once-burned dot-com
> investors will
> buy it either. Not in today's climate.
>
> Might I suggest assigning Mr. Grant a research piece on the underlying
> economics
> of BPL? Not only does BPL not present compelling technology, it's far
from
> a
> compelling investment. I'd be happy to point him to market theory which
> would
> explain the relationship between market share and ROI.
>
> With best regards,
>
> Jim Jarvis, BS, MBA
> International Business Development
> Salesforce Development Programs
> Strategic Marketing Analysis
> 410 439 1073 office
> 443 618 5560 cell
> jimjarvis@comcast.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any
questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|