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: Sam Asava who wrote (15848)	10/3/1999 1:36:00 PM
From: John Carragher	Respond to of 29970

Sam thanks for the article I really enjoyed it. I believe Armstrong had best get this resolved before t takes another big hit. imo

To: Sam Asava who wrote (15848)	10/3/1999 2:17:00 PM
From: E. Graphs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

>>...City officials seemed disinclined to back away from their decision. "By taking this action and supporting open access, we have ensured that our citizens will continue to have the freedom to choose their Internet provider," Councilman Scott Silverthorne said in a prepared statement.<< No intelligent company is going to spend loads of bucks building these people a high-speed network all the while knowing that every move they make thereafter will be dictated to them by highly politically-motivated city officials. Instead of competitive company negotiations they will be told who to let on the network and under what terms, and eventually they will be subject to set fees and an endless string of tacked-on regulations. We all know that when you open the door to government regulation they just barge on through and then never leave. Let's face it, this isn't about "open access", this is all about "government regulated access", and the only thing these officials are ensuring by their foolishness is that their citizens will have nothing competitive to choose from! What idiots.

To: Sam Asava who wrote (15848)	10/3/1999 3:39:00 PM
From: Solid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

Sam- AOL helped start this pot boiling and yet so many want ATHM to go to bed with them. Give them their way because they whined the loudest? <Another possibility is a municipal overbuild. A source close to the situation said early respondents included a California-based firm specializing in helping local governments to fund and build their own telecommunications networks. "And the mayor is on record as saying that's something we would look at," the source added.> In an era where even NASA is considering privatization these guys want to start their own municipal government owned and operated BB network...right. Their statement seems mighty inflammatory to me trying to turn the heat up. <"We have a company withholding broadband access," Portland franchising director David Olson said. "The FCC keeps saying that there's plenty of broadband competitors out there. Well, rather than sitting on our hands, let's find out."> I'll bet this guy is great at irritating folks at meetings. In other words, Mr. Olson is saying to AT&T, in effect, spend all your doe on making the system, assuming the risk and let anyone on who wants to be on because we say so, or else. Whats next? Oh, and we don't think you should be able to charge too much either. Free Market? The FCC and BB providers have said suits like this will gum up the works- and they are. Heck, why don't we just go back to the pony express days... So, the ultimate question if you are an ATHM sharholder may be, 'Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?' IF AOL merging, somehow, with ATHM and others WILL help quell this slippery slope it may have to happen. Does open access have enough momentum to live on its own though already? Its starting to look so. Thanks for the article Sam.