|
|
ONLINE FEATURES
Book Reviews
BW Video
Columnists
Interactive Gallery
Newsletters
Past Covers
Philanthropy
Podcasts
Special Reports
BLOGS
Auto Beat
Bangalore Tigers
Blogspotting
Brand New Day
Byte of the Apple
Economics Unbound
Eye on Asia
Fine On Media
Green Biz
Hot Property
Investing Insights
Management IQ
NEXT: Innovation
NussbaumOnDesign
Tech Beat
Working Parents
TECHNOLOGY
J.D. Power Ratings
Product Reviews
Tech Stats
Wildstrom: Tech Maven
AUTOS
Home Page
Auto Reviews
Classic Cars
Car Care & Safety
Hybrids
INNOVATION
& DESIGN Home Page Architecture Brand Equity Auto Design Game Room SMALLBIZ Smart Answers Success Stories Today's Tip INVESTING Investing: Europe Annual Reports BW 50 S&P Picks & Pans Stock Screeners Free S&P Stock Report SCOREBOARDS Hot Growth 100 Mutual Funds Info Tech 100 S&P 500 B-SCHOOLS Undergrad Programs MBA Blogs MBA Profiles MBA Rankings Who's Hiring Grads | |
MAY 17, 2004
No One's Ambivalent About The Boston Red Sox First, let one long-suffering Red Sox fan assure you that there are no curses in baseball "Breaking the curse," Cover Story, Apr. 26). Red Sox fans don't watch over their shoulders for the ghost of Babe Ruth, and we certainly do not believe our franchise is haunted by anything more than poor management and a little misfortune. The "Curse of the Bambino" exists only in the minds of the media. Second, I question the statement that the members of Red Sox nation hold our ballpark in deep reverence and that replacing it would be unpopular. While it is loved by many, most would agree it needs to be replaced. Owner John W. Henry and his management team have done a remarkable job of squeezing every dollar out of the cramped, worn-out ballpark. Chris Cullinan Arlington, Mass. As a Cleveland Indians fan growing up in the '60s and '70s, I can assure you that the Red Sox were much more hated than the Yankees. While we in San Diego hold Red Sox President and Chief Executive Larry Lucchino in high esteem, this payroll battle can only bring baseball closer to extinction. One of the premises of Moneyball was that good offense is always more important than defense. Pokey Reese replacing Todd Walker is contrary to the sabermetrics plan. Strike one. Thomas C. Werner, Red Sox chairman and former Padres owner, almost destroyed San Diego. Who can forget the fire sale that resulted in the loss of Gary Sheffield and Roberto Alomar, among others? Strike two. John Henry abandoned a team that won the World Series last year. Strike three. Outside of New York and New England, the Yankees and Red Sox are the most reviled baseball teams in America. Until there is some sort of plan to level the playing field, like a salary cap, we will continue to hope the Red Sox and Yankees battle for last place. Kyle Long Poway, Calif. "Breaking the curse" tells us that the revenues from the Red Sox's New England Sports Network are the biggest moneymaker for John Henry. This is precisely why blowing the Alex Rodriguez deal was a bigger blunder than losing Babe Ruth. No matter what they paid him, even if Rodriguez never played a game, the revenue generated would put the Red Sox on a more level playing field with the Yankees. Rick Lisi Barrington, R.I. The sidebar "Blame it on the Babe" brought back memories. As a kid of 9, I was listening to the radio on our farm in Michigan when the 1946 World Series slipped away from the Red Sox. To this day I can still hear the sportscaster describing the scene as Enos Slaughter unexpectedly rounded third base for home and Johnny Pesky hesitated for a moment and missed by a split second cutting down the sliding Slaughter at home. John Siewert La Verne, Calif. The "Curse of the Bambino" sounds like an excuse. Actually, an inept Boston front office deserves the blame. Boston sold Ruth to New York. Boston let the Yankees have Joe DiMaggio. The Red Sox let Tris Speaker go. Poor management saw Roger Clemens and "A-Rod" become Yankees. Richard M. Brown Detroit Your arguments are squarely on the side of the New York Yankees. But for our beloved Red Sox, it is simply time. John Henry has done a masterful job of assembling the second-best team money can buy. I can smell it and taste it: sweet October and breaking an 85-year curse. Jim Eskin San Antonio Please stick to your knitting. If I wanted to read about sports -- and frankly, I'm an Indians fan -- I'd subscribe to Sports Illustrated. Jonathan B. West Salt Lake City What Wireless Broadband Can -- And Cannot -- Do "No wires, no rules" (Special Report, Apr. 26) captured the excitement and opportunity inherent in "the next revolution in wireless." As a contributor to the last revolution, cellular radio, in 1973, please permit me to correct a few misconceptions. First, broadband wireless will embrace both licensed and unlicensed spectrum. Second, the article does not clearly discriminate between mobile and fixed services. WiMax is a mobile service that delivers the same freedom to consumers for Internet access that cellular telephone delivers for voice. In this mode, WiMax and Mobile-Fi will reach out only a few miles, but they will do a far better and lower-cost job of delivering data than cellular or any other approach discussed in the article. Finally, ArrayComm Inc.'s iBurst system, manufactured by Kyocera Corp. (KYO ), is already in commercial service in Australia. Martin Cooper Chairman and Co-Founder ArrayComm Inc. San Jose, Calif. The best wireless broadband technologies available today, using indoor fixed-location customer premise equipment (CPE) that costs upwards of $400 to $500, can deliver speeds slightly better than cable and DSL, but only over distances of two to three miles in a typical suburban environment. How is it that Intel (INTC ), Siemens (SI ), Alcatel (ALA ), and Motorola (MOT ) are going to double the data rates, enable mobility, extend the range by an order of magnitude, and take $300 out of the cost? The answer is, they can't. The limitation is not manufacturing volumes, it's physics. Extensive field tests have already proved that such a modem will result in base station ranges in cities such as Atlanta, Louisville, and Columbus, Ohio, of a few kilometers at best. I hope the people at WiMax will get real with their exciting and promising technology. Hype of this magnitude discredits their good cause. Russell A. Wiseman Southlake, Tex.   Infosys Isn't Trying To Wangle Tax Breaks In California A reference is made to Infosys in "Ban outsourcing? Bad idea" (International Business, Mar. 29): "On Mar. 5, California State Senator Joseph Dunn greeted an application for a tax exemption by Infosys Technologies Ltd. (INFY ), India's premier software-services company, with an accusation that such companies 'want to steal jobs' and 'taxpayer dollars."' We would like to clarify for your readers: Infosys pays taxes in all jurisdictions where it operates, based on domestic regulations and also using internationally recognized practices. Infosys has filed income-tax returns and paid income taxes in the state of California as per regulations laid out in the domestic tax regulations. Infosys is not requesting any tax exemption or incentives but has requested an alternative filing methodology that is permitted by the laws and regulations of the state of California. Our position to the specific case of Separate Accounting under California Revenue & Tax Code section 25137 has been mentioned in the filings with the Franchise Tax Board. We would be grateful if you could publish this clarification, as otherwise it would give an impression that Infosys is unjustly seeking tax relief. Nandan M. Nilekani CEO Infosys Technologies Ltd. Bangalore, India
| | |
 Copyright 2004, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of Use | Privacy Notice |
Printer-Friendly Version
