Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron Dior who wrote (10711)	6/7/1999 12:41:00 PM
From: Panita	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

Strong institutional buying. thomsoninvest.net They want it around $90 before they completely have loaded up.

To: Ron Dior who wrote (10711)	6/7/1999 12:53:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

If this case holds, even if it emboldens others across the country to follow suit, I don't see anything happening materially for quite some time. I've been involved to some extent with other groundbreaking decisions which have opened up other venues where T and the ILECs have been a party, and I can tell you that there is no end to the stonewalling, foot dragging and mutually agreed upon decisions that must be reached, to the smallest levels of minutiae, before the RF can ever meet the photon. Without such detail, service level agreements could never take hold, much less service creation in the first place. Of course, the strategy that they may be forced to employ, for their own benefit, is to accelerate such matters. I say this because delays may impact their own rollouts, as well. But I don't know what those factors are yet, and what their primary strategy would be in that event, at this time. If it holds, and if T holds true to form, then we may see the following take place, as one possible scenario. Beyond the arm wrestling stages, there are then the engineering and implementation processes that all parties must agree to (which must be specified by the encroacher to within the parameters that can be supported by the primary, which for all intents and purposes have not been defined anywhere, as far as I know), in order to make it all work. These are far from being trivial matters, if it's going to be an across-the-board form of openness for all comers. And what else could it be? I don't think that any decision could favor only one or two interloping service providers (which might actually be very feasible at this time without too much fuss... but that would be discriminatory to the other providers), if it did hold fast. It would have to be all-encompassing, unless the decision itself is such that it could be cited for being discriminatory. And then there is the subscription transition, the migration, itself, dislodging extant users from their existing habits and comfort zones. It would be a while, again, if it holds.

To: Ron Dior who wrote (10711)	6/8/1999 1:19:00 AM
From: chirodoc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

ron, you and i agree this open access issue plays into the hands of T. after swearing up and down the halls i bet armstrong already planned his next move and betcha it will be a winning hand. the isp's need T and cable more than cable needs the isp's. unless you think that we will end up a socialist state, it is quite obvious that with DSL on the horizon and wireless threatening from a distance only a moron would think that T/ATHM has a monopoly. i would love to hear the meeting where the bean counters talk about how much they will charge AOL to rent pipe space. and i own quite a bit of AOL! bullish on ma bell and therefore athm curtis curtis