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: RTev who wrote (12542)	7/16/1999 8:29:00 PM
From: Jing Qian	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

T is not controlling the content at this moment. They let ATHM as a proxy to do that. But T has a say to ATHM what she wants in the future. T has ultimate control although she is not controlling it. If T abandons ATHM, T has no choice but to be forced to work with AOL like the Baby Bells. Then T loses the controlling leverage that she is enjoying now. T is envisioning a system that she can control from end to end. That means ATHM on one end. With AOL, T loses the end-to-end connectivity. T becomes a plain old transport carrier. The technology changes very fast, T is not controlling the content doesn't mean T will not control the content INDIRECTLY in the future. Video on demand and Cable TV Internet access are 2 examples. It's easy for T to work with ATHM to meld Video-On-Demand together. To T, AOL is not in the same family. Do you rather partner with your brother or partner with a total stranger? Despite AOL's huge sub numbers, T is confident that ATHM can ramp up to be as strong as AOL with its monopoly status.

To: RTev who wrote (12542)	7/16/1999 9:54:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 29970

RTev, Thread, RTev, you bring up some good points. "You say you think that T wants to control the user's "first page", but don't say how you believe they can do that with ATHM. How would they do that? Is it enough to set the easily-changed default home page on a browser, or do you believe they'd do something more like what AOL does?" But I would take it a step further. It's not T's front page to control, to start off with. It's ATHM's, a quasi-subsidiary, a kind of new media experiment that seems to be working out just fine, but who has many, perhaps too many, owners to answer to. Unless I'm missing something, it is not T's to control. Please correct me on this matter if I am mistaken, RTev, someone. Thread, On the other issue that has been discussed in several recent posts, that of abandonment, I sense that this might be traceable to several posts that I have made which in all likelihood were misconstrued. I did not suggest (at least I don't recall doing so) that T wanted to abandon ATHM outright, rather, I stated that there are compelling reasons for them to want add on new tenants to their broadening systems, and go for the whole bowl of what would otherwise be someone else's bowl of aphabet soup. T doesn't relish the idea of leaving even one red penny on the table for others to walk away with, in this regard. As you yourself have stated, their expertise and primary core businesses are, and have always been, in transport, not content. And they are not showing any signs of ware from making any attempts to change their stripes in this regard. Taking on additional revenue-paying customers is what they are all about. And the wider their pipes become, the more revenue potential they must fulfill. Another thing that has been on my mind is the sizing of the much publicized new 5 Gb/s (dual OC-48) backbone that T is installing ostensibly for ATHM's sole use. Does anyone think that a 5 Gb/s backbone is being put in place solely for the purpose of serving a couple million ATHM users, eventually, in as widely distributed a footprint as they currently exist? This seems a bit extreme to me, given the concurrent level of caching provisions that are being put in place closer to each of ATHM's participating head ends. And I have never known T to be lavish about its bandwidth. So, the question that begs to be answered is: Why are they putting in such a large pipe, when the current assortment of T1s, T3s and OC-3s operating at a mere fraction, a mere splinter, of the higher proposed backbone speed seems to be getting such rave reviews already, *without any of the future caching taking place, yet*? These are just a couple of questions that I cannot answer myself without being closer to the players. Help me, someone, I'm all eyes. Regards, Frank Coluccio