cecilia kang, tech reporter with "the washington post." this is the second half of our interview with sanjiv ahuja. >> you are at the center of at least two investigations by lawmakers on capitol hill. there is a lot of question as to whether relationships the company had with the white house and meetings with the fcc, fast process for getting the approval to needed to get your network up and running. you defend yourself in full-page ads, as peter mentioned. what is wrong here? are you misunderstood, in your mind, and why? >> cecilia, lightsquared has gone through probably the most extensive regulatory process i have seen anywhere in the world. the spectrum has been going through a process for eight years now, and i am an engineer, an entrepreneur, i have built businesses. telecommunication is my passion. i came back to the united states after having worked in europe for almost seven years because i saw a need for american consumers. when i used to come back and visit my children here, when they were going to school and college, i would lo

cecilia kang is the guest reporter. cecilia kang? >> guest: you are right now at the subject as well as the regulatory agency, the federal communications commission, of at least two investigations by people, lawmakers on capitol hill. there's a lot of question as to whether relationships that the companies had with the white house and meetings with the fcc, a fast process some say at the fcc for getting approve -- approvals you need to get up and running. you defend yourself in full page ads as peter mentioned. what's wrong here? are you misunderstood in your mind, and if why, can you explain? >> guest: lightsquared has gone through, in my recollection, probably the most extensive regulatory process i've seen anywhere in the world. the spectrum has been going through a process of eight years now. i'm an engineer, i'm and entrepreneur. i built businesses. telecommunication is my passion. i came back to the united states after having worked in europe for almost seven years. we used to come back here with my children when they were goin

and cecilia kang, a technology reporter for the "washington post." cecilia, beginning with you, netflix only lost 3% of its customer base. why would it stock absolutely tank like this? >> well, i think the problem with netflix or the lack of confidence that these decisions had on the company and its subsequent stock thaw had to do with the fact that the company was rising so quickly and growing its customer base so quickly because the story of netflix was of a company that really got its customers and really understood consumers. and then it made these series of decisions that really showed that it one decision after another really wasn't listening to its consumers. it might have been working too fast in making business decisions and technological changes. that consumers really weren't ready for. and so that signaled a bigger lack of confidence for investors in the stock market and that's what really lead to the decline. this is a company that was known for making your life easier, no late fees, cheaper service, alternative to cable. and suddenly it s

. >> host: cecilia kang is the guest reporter with "the washington post." >> guest: if there is a technical collusion to the interference problems, and you have to do more testing of the devices, of course, the federal government asked of what. what about the costs? i know you have committed at lightsquared more than $100 million; is that right? to defray costs or solutions or filters and ect.. the federal government, i believe, the general sheldon mentioned other federal government officials mentioned it could be in the billions of dollars, that the federal government would have to insur. there's a big discrepancy in the dollar figures here and the cost of how to resolve this problem. can you talk about that, and what that does then for sort of the future? can that be affected if you live harmoniously? how can you get some place in the middle? >> guest: cecelia, we heard it would take ten years to solve this problem technically. it took us less than ten weeks to demonstrate that the problem can be solved. it's not as hard as what some people might have believed. our estimate is that the fe

cecilia kang is our guest reported with the "washington post." >> even if there is an engineer in solution, a technical solution to these interference problems and you have to do more testing of some portion of those devices, of course, the federal government has asked about the, and the fcc, what about the cost? i know you have committed at lightsquared more than $100 billion come is that right, to defray some of these cost that would have been for some of these solutions, the filters, et cetera? the federal government i believe, general shelton has even mentioned other federal government officials that it could be in the billions of dollars, that the federal government would have to incur. is a big discrepancy in the dollar figures here, and the costs of how to resolve this technical problem. can you talk about that and what that does been for the future, to live harmoniously, if you have such a huge gulf of dollar figures how can you get someplace in the middle? >> guest: cecelia, a few months ago we were hearing that it would take 10 years to solve this problem technically. it took us

host: well now best week we interviewed sanjiv ahuja the chairman and ceo of lightsquared and cecilia kangof the "washington post" was her guest reporter and she asked them specifically him specifically about these e-mails. >> how would you respond to questions raised by this center of public integrity that e-mails were exchanged and you know between white house officials and lightsquared officials to get meetings with white house personnel at the time when you are donating to campaigns, company officials were? >> cecilia when you are building a significant network and when you are making a significant technology investment in a country, and you look at whether they are telecom operators, technology companies, you pick up the newspaper, open it, the ceos from all of these companies are meeting with various government officials. they have -- i have set up businesses in 30 countries. >> host: mr. schulte? what did you hear that answer? >> guest: well, what did he say? he didn't say anything about the campaign contributions. i mean i think he seems to be saying that this is sort of business a

. >> host: last week we interviewed sanjiv ahuja, the chairman and ceo of lightsquared, and cecilia kang of for washington post was our guest reporter, she asked him specifically about these e-mails. how would you respond to questions based by this -- brought by the center for public integrity that e-mails were exchanged, you know, between white house officials and lightsquared officials to get meetings, um, with white house, um, personnel at the time when you're donating to campaign, the company? company officials were? >> guest: when you're building a significant network and when you're making a significant technology investment in a country and you look at whether they're telecom operators, technology companies, you pick up the newspaper open it, there are ceos of all of these companies meeting with various government officials as they set up businesses in 30 countries over my career, you go meet with different government officials all the time. >> host: mr. schulte. what did you hear in that answer? >> guest: well, what did he say? [laughter] he didn't say anything about the campaign