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 : Exodus Communications, Inc. (EXDS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: William F. Wager, Jr. who wrote (1362)	10/8/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3664

Thanks Bill, Explains todays weakness.... bp

To: William F. Wager, Jr. who wrote (1362)	10/9/1999 8:36:00 AM
From: Richard Tauber	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3664

Just got finished reading the Baron's article. By the way, where can one get a preview of upcoming Baron articles? As you reported, the article was very negative for Exodus. I certainly hope that Ellen Hancock has her forces and admirers lined up on Monday to defend Exodus and critique Ms. Einhorn's relentless attack. The last line "This company is a disaster waiting to happen." says it all. As a long term holder of Exodus, I believe in the company and its prospects. I know that some on the board believe that Exodus is a prime candidate to be bought out by a company like Quest. I think that it can prosper along with all the new guys on the block. We are the leader at this time. Ellen Hancock didn't get where she is by running a company with a flawed business model. The article points to reporters going to the sites and their lack of security. This has also been reported previously and discussed on this board. I have to believe that the company has addressed this issue. Richard

To: William F. Wager, Jr. who wrote (1362)	10/11/1999 7:03:00 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3664

William and Exodus thread, RE: "Barron's will carry a piece which will purportedly bash EXODUS on competition grounds. Last week it was Intel." -------------------------------------------------------- Hi! We (I'm an Intel investor) had our turn last week. : ( What do you think about the challenge Barron makes regarding the lack of network ownership? This issue applies to Intel, right? Also, I don't understand how Intel can compete (on cost) with any company which has network relationships in place (which reduces their costs). Us folks on the Intel thread would appreciate your thoughts and insights into this business. Would someone explain all of this to us. This (i.e. web hosting/server farms) isn't my area of focus. Please reply to either Intel posts: Message 11498525 Message 11504156 Thank you! And please feel free to commiserate with us on the Barron articles! : ) From Barron's: "Other competitors include big, well-known names like AT&T, MCI WorldCom and GTE, which is soon to merge with Bell Atlantic. These firms all have greater name recognition, larger customer bases and greater financial, technological and marketing resources than does Exodus. More importantly, they can bundle their Web products with other services, making it more difficult for Exodus to compete. ...The company, however, has one big problem. While it has the biggest server farms by far, it doesn't own a network to transmit the enormous volumes of data that travel in and out of those server farms every day. ...When spikes occur, competitors like Qwest and AT&T have the ability to reroute traffic across their networks if necessary to ensure that data arrive without any glitches. For example, if the lines are busy between New York and Chicago, a company with a network can instantly reroute that traffic through Atlanta. Bottom line: "If you don't own a network you cannot guarantee the connection," says William Klein, a data communications analyst at Wasserstein Perella." Regards, Amy J