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: tom offenbach who wrote (14139)	8/11/1999 11:56:00 PM
From: Ron Dior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

REPOST OF Message #14139 Tom I reposted this message so all could read it more easily. I thought that it was very good and would be of interest to others. I think you might of forgot to de-select the *use Fixed Font, option. Hope you don't mind. <<Message #14139 from tom offenbach at Aug 11 1999 11:34PM ahhaha, I don't take your berating personally but you seem to employ very shallow and short term rational which I will address in my responces to yours. For the record, alot of folks employed by ATHM read this board and your input and contributions are heard: "Your profile says that you work at home and that you have "posted once, today, though you have been a member "before ATHM became public. I don't work there anymore and didn't realize that I had offered employment information in my personal profile. I was employed by ATHM for a little over 2.5 years and know enough to have not posted on this or any other board discussing anything directly or indirectly related to ATHM. "I am astonished by your comments. They sound as "though they were extracted from the prospectus. While my comments weren't directly extracted from the prospectus, they do reflect certain facts that the prospectus puts forth. Generally, a prospectus is a pretty good resource for fact finding so I don't know how you're surprised by that. "We have discussed this over the years. This is an element "of distribution. ATHM needs to wean itself away from overt "dependence on MSOs and physical network, because in the "final or intermediate AOL-Att analysis, open access is a "lock. Ask the RBOCs how valuable is the plant. It returns "something like 2%. I know this has been discussed over the years. It wasn't my intention to imply otherwise....I wanted to address the associated issues with the uniqueness of the MSO's infrastructure and the difficulty or inability in scaling it(space wise....NOT bandwidth). I originally stated that IMHO, @Home(the ISP/access provider) will evolve into what I called an ISP for ISP's. Reality is that there is a finite amount of space in RDC's which will not permit re-selling of real estate to other ISP's. I too, believe that open access will prevail and it will NOT be a result of govt regulation but market evolution. Given the space constraints, it is highly unlikely and almost impossible for multiple ISP's to co-lo equipment. IMHO, this issue will force the emergence of the equivalent of a cable CLEC. You'll probably argue that the MSO itself would be this entity but that is not their expertise....if it was, ATHM wouldn't be around. You might also argue that T could easily address this issue as well and they could but they would be limited to doing this in areas where they own the coax and would certainly give the other LD's reason to cry to the FCC, local munis and whoever else will listen. Having ATHM be the HFC CLEC is technically doable. ATHM could simply sell HFC peering to ISP by directly connecting ISP's to the @Home backbone. This makes the most sense because WHEN consumer internet fees trend to $0, ISP's will account for infrastructure as a liability.>>

To: tom offenbach who wrote (14139)	8/12/1999 12:20:00 AM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

You'll probably argue that the MSO itself would be this entity but that is not their expertise....if it was, ATHM wouldn't be around. You might also argue that T could easily address this issue as well and they could but they would be limited to doing this in areas where they own the coax and would certainly give the other LD's reason to cry to the FCC, local munis and whoever else will listen. Having ATHM be the HFC CLEC is technically doable. ATHM could simply sell HFC peering to ISP by directly connecting ISP's to the @Home backbone. This makes the most sense because WHEN consumer internet fees trend to $0, ISP's will account for infrastructure as a liability. This puts the issues right on the table. Question - isn't @HOME's backbone actually connected via AT&T's backbone?