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: E. Davies who wrote (12049)	7/3/1999 1:13:00 AM
From: E. Davies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

This one comes a little closer. It appears to be the one we have heard about previously. I dont see any references to cable. thomas.loc.gov I also didnt find anything about such a bill on the web site of either of the representatives mentioned in the article. Maybe it was a hoax article. Eric

To: E. Davies who wrote (12049)	7/3/1999 11:04:00 AM
From: Panita	Respond to of 29970

Re: Article: Seems that the writer made a mistake. The bill will give AT&T, and others the right to build the infrastructure without government mandate/controls. At least that is my understanding. The writer's email is: pfusco@internet.com Go ahead and send her a polite note so that she can make the necessary corrections to her article. And remember be nice. We don't get anywhere by annoying people.

To: E. Davies who wrote (12049)	7/3/1999 1:39:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 29970

"Open cable networks to the RBOCs? This has got to be a major misunderstanding." Not if cable matures to the higher levels of features and functionality, as its promoters have promised, and is viewed as a vehicle of common carriage. Not in those emerging Greenfield Communities that will be supported in large part by cable cos. And not any more that ATHM's adoption of DSL and wireless to support workers. But cable would have to demonstrate vast improvements in both capacity and reliability before this comes to pass.

To: E. Davies who wrote (12049)	7/3/1999 5:24:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

Eric, after giving this issue of BROCs using cable facilities some more thought, I see some very compelling reasons for an RBOC wanting to do so. The most compelling of these at the moment would be for one RBOC to use cable in an out-of-region area to compete with another BOC, for both voice and Internet data access services, if not video as well. In fact, wasn't this just what USW did initially when they consumed Continental Cable before it was renamed UMG? I can just as easily see BEL taking a run at SBC's lucrative markets, by reselling portions of T's capacity. Whew..! What tangled webs we weave. Regards, Frank Coluccio