More on Cyberstar from the Fool - and an article in the SF Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/03/03/BU92912.DTL&type=printable)
From the Fool -
==================
Subject: Cyberstar partner revisited
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 1998 14:30 EST
From: Fozziebare
Message-id: <19980306193001.OAA20036@ladder03.news.aol.com>
First thanks to Readware for the synopsis, now a question for Readware - I noticed that you mention C* driving the cost-per-byte 10-fold from the current cost. How much more attractive does this make C* for that elusive "internet partner"? I mean, with costs being cut so much, it seems that a lot of companies -- phone, cable, etc in the telecom biz, would be quite interested in becoming the partner of the C* venture. Were there any signs that the
list of possible partners is getting any shorter, because if memory serves, we came up with a fairly long list. Can we begin to remove any groups as yet? I mean, last time we checked, we had large telephone companies - GTE, MCI, WCOM, Baby Bells, etc, cable companies TCI, Time Warner, etc. I recall that they needed a lot of cash, and Readware seemed to think that a large user base was also a pre-req (please correct me if my memory fails).
I was just hoping to stir up a little discussion about who the partner may be now that so much has happened.
geoff
Subject: Re: Cyberstar partner revisited
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 1998 14:48 EST
From: Readware
Message-id: <19980306194801.OAA22333@ladder03.news.aol.com>
You are on the right track. |
