Broadband can be accessed though wireless/satellite.
I have heard that the problem with satellite solutions is that there are some physical limitations that make this solution limited in appeal. For example, there is an inherent latency problem which makes response times slow. I believe that this is a problem with wireless solutions, although less so.
ATHM has only 300000 subscribers and will get another 1 mill through AT&T sale of their
ISP. That still pales to the 70 mill+ AOL users around the world.
How do you get 70 million AOL users? It is my understanding that there are 15 million AOL users, 2 million CompuServ users. Are the rest in other international offshoots of these services? If so, what is the breakout, by country? Or are you counting the users who don't have AOL accounts but access their website properties?
On the other hand, if a subscriber were to get cable IT DOES NOT MEAN THEY WILL USE
ATHM AS A PORTAL
If they are a TCI subscriber, then they must pay for the ATHM portal, whether they use it or not, and must pay for AOL separately. While users can opt for this, there is still a great disincentive not to.
( Keith Hankin are you there?, gg,)
As uninformed as ever, I am :)
Don't misunderstand me -- I generally agree with your assessment, it's just that I like to play devil's advocate. I don't think that cable or broadband in general is too much of a threat. But AOL needs to be proactive about it. All of the projections about the slow uptake of broadband could be wrong and AOL needs to be ready. Besides, broadband really is the future, and AOL needs to get there sooner or later. However, even if T sells off their ISP service to ATHM, it does not guarantee that ATHM will be able to know how to pick it up and run with it. After all, T has only managed to get 1 million users of their service, and it is not clear if ATHM will fare much better. |
