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 : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RTev who wrote (9596)	7/15/1999 3:13:00 AM
From: PatrickMark	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

RTev, Thanks for your post re the Broward County decision. While it's far too early to panic, I'm sure feeling apprehensive about this ruling. In my mind, I was able to write the Portland decision off as an isolated incident (Kennard's statement/rebuttal helped), but with this latest, I worry about the beginnings of a trend developing among municipalities. To review today's decision (from the Broward County website Public Hearing Agenda): 5. MOTION TO CONSIDER enactment of an ordinance, the title of which is as follows: AN ORDINANCE CREATING A SECTION IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO ACCESS TO BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS TRANSPORT SERVICES; REQUIRING CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISEES TO PROVIDE SUCH ACCESS ON RATES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS AT LEAST AS FAVORABLE AS THOSE ON WHICH IT PROVIDES SUCH ACCESS TO ITSELF; CREATING A PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION AND ENFORCEMENT BY COUNTY; PROVIDING A MOST FAVORED NATIONS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN CODE, AND EFFECTIVE DATE. From the standpoint of an HSAC investor, I'm not too bothered. I am of the opinion that cable access will outpace DSL and wireless (in the near term, at least) and what I am reading is that the cable operators will get paid one way or another (I don't know exactly how the revenue gets split, but they'll do fine). It may even be an advantage for them because there will be no incentive to develop competing cable systems or competing technology systems (DSL, wireless) if there is open access to their systems. However, as a GNET investor I am greatly bothered because for some time now, I have been convinced that GNET's continued stellar growth is dependent upon their position as the gateway portal for the Charter/HSAC system. When the Broward decision becomes effective, there will be an advertising blitz by local (and national) ISP's and they'll capture a certain percentage of the market. Even though neither of the two recent decisions involves Charter, future ones will. It's important to differentiate between your feelings as a consumer and your feelings as an investor. I'm dying for a high speed connection for my home. I'm outside the DSL "three copper mile" zone, so I'm patiently waiting for cable service, which is scheduled for this fall. I'd prefer a DSL connection because I'm aware that I have no choice of ISP with cable; but this is my consumer sentiment. As an investor, what I want for GNET is for cable subscribers to have to pass by GNET's "storefront" everytime they go online. I realize that GNET has a lot of other things going for it, but to sustain the growth rate we've all enjoyed, I think they need this advantage. One additional point, I totally agree with Kennard's (FCC) position that government should take a hands-off stance at this time. The most efficient way to develop the infrastructure is to let the natural competitive forces dictate the outcome. Let them build the infrastructure, take some profits and then impose regulation when the system is in place. Unfortunately, it looks like Kennard's position may have little influence. I'm hoping that this doesn't turn into a mis-guided David & Goliath ego trip for the muni's. Quoting from the article RTev linked on Reply #9596: "Unfortunately, the losers in this vote are consumers in Broward County who may not enjoy more choices in high-speed Internet access and lower prices for local telephone service," Florida Cable Telecommunications Association President Steven Wilkerson said in a statement. "GTE and AOL conducted an aggressive lobbying campaign and their motives are clear--in order to protect their monopolies, they are seeking to place road blocks in the way of consumer choice and competition," Wilkerson's statement said. As I am trying to better understand this issue, any replies (agree or not) would be greatly appreciated. PM