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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (4638)	7/14/1999 1:27:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 12823

Mike, I think that there may actually be some pivotal balance point which tends to lend credence to what the company's party line states as they preach the ills of intrusion into their system, and I do believe that there may be some genuineness, albeit some arbitrariness, to it. I also feel, however, that there also exist a number of strategies in the background that T doesn't have to show in their hand at this time. This is all taking place in Internet Time. I doubt that the principals have had years to think about the outcomes to each of their potential strategies that they elect to deploy. I therefore do actually think there may be a little bit of just in time jockeying for position taking place here, relative to the planning cycles and time frames of yore. The more we see decisions like those in Portland and FL, the closer they (T) are to accepting the change of balance in the the opposite direction (possibly with more gusto, as time goes on IMO, due to the promising results they are ostensibly seeing in SLC), despite whatever it is they may be saying in D.C., today. It makes for a great contingency plan, wouldn't you agree? To be told that you must accept more paying customers than you are willing to solicit? The question I grapple with is, Why does it make sense for T to voluntarily leave cash on the table? Cash that will undoubtedly fuel the cash flows of their competitors who will eventually eat away at their (T's) subscriber base? If you think that this is silly, just think back to the USW-QWST-Ameritech deals of two years ago for "marketing" the discount voice services of QWST (which were eventually overruled). At the time Ameritech and USW baldfacedly admitted that they were in principle against these moves, but if anyone were to take advantage of them, it was going to be them. Anywho, it makes for interesting analysis, and some not so implausible outcomes, IMVHO. Regards, Frank Coluccio

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (4638)	7/14/1999 2:13:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12823

Mike, and Thread, I can think of a few Yogi Berraisms which could be viewed as appropriate here. Concerning Armstrong's presence in Washington today: "I want to thank all those who made this day necessary." Concerning AOL's strategic direction: "You got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there." Regarding all the chatter on SI, Yahoo! and Raging Bull: "It was impossible to get a conversation going, everybody was talking too much." Concerning T's ultimate strategy under the pressures imposed by the dynamics of Internet Time: "When you come to a fork in the road, take it!" Regards, Frank Coluccio