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 : America On-Line (AOL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Smart Investor who wrote (30869)	9/16/1999 7:03:00 PM
From: Thomas J. Smith	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 41369

FACT ON AOL , FACT ON AOL, AOL who? AOL never spent this many days below it's 200 day moving average. As a matter of fact, In AOL's history of being a public company, it has never been below it's 200 DMA. Something going down here!

To: Smart Investor who wrote (30869)	9/16/1999 8:19:00 PM
From: tang	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 41369

Years ago, all credit cards charge membership fee, ranging from $45 - $90/year. You must 'pay' the credit card company first before you can use their card to 'buy'. Then Visa/Master cards lowered their annual fee, American Express did not, the market share of Amex card started losing ground. When Discover Card started 'no member fee' card, all Visa/Master/Amex cards are losing market shares, but Master/Visa cards turned to 'no fee card' quickly, so they held the largest shares still, but not Amex card, so Amex card lost ground, their stock went down to $20 - $22 in early 90, Amex old Chief resigned. Amex stock gains ground started in 1995 because the new chief recognized the 'free' trend, Amex issued Optima card to gain market, they also stepped into Visa/Master territories, so Amex is now $138. It took Amex 5 years to recover and now they are issuing another card called 'Blue'... I wonder how many of us here not having 1 or 2 'free member fee' credit cards today and also use them to purchase? I hope AOL seriously recognize the new trend of 'lower fee' or 'free' and cope with it as soon as possible, don't treat them lightly and don't wait. With MSN's $6/month ISP fee and NetZero, AltaVista's free ISP, their combined names is enough to stick in the mass market, they are not local small timers. ATT sees their advantage because CABLE won't go for free for quite a while, holding the pipe is good for them becuase they can own the next wave's ISP to 60% in USA after free dial-up became irresistable trend. Today's USWEST's offer of $19/month for a DSL connection will become a trend too, just look at MCI's 5 cents/minute forced ATT to lower their fee and followed by a lay-off... I think AOL should plug in Netscape for free ISP in USA as soon as possible to swallow all the markets before too late, as AOL Britain chief said 'if we have to bleed our customer out to other free ISP, we might bleed them into our own free ISP', at least the eyeball counts hold. My 2 cents.

To: Smart Investor who wrote (30869)	9/17/1999 9:12:00 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 41369

Smart Investor I am waiting to see if the shareholders grant's AOL's management request to increase the number of shares. I have a gut feel that something is up with Steve Case and the boys. They have finalized their strategy on their next move. I surely believe that this request is not for a stock split. It is for a purchase. Now let me start a rumor here. ATT is straddled with Excite at least for the next 2 years. ATT wants out of it and throw cable access open to all the ISPs due to the revenue potential that Armstrong is aware of. Currently, they are unable to do so since they have a contract with Excite until 2002. AOL wants cable access from ATT but Excite is standing in their way. So why not buy/spinoff or whatever with Excite. Maybe deal with ATT and ATT can help AOL do that. Even if ATT chimes in with half of their expected profits from OpenAccess between 2000 & 2002, they maybe willing to step up and help AOL.