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 : METROMEDIA FIBER NETWORK (MFNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (650)	10/26/1999 7:56:00 PM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1983

> It'll also be interesting to see how divisions of revenue take place for the voice services over VoDSL, since, as a CLEC, NP is competing with BEL, who, in turn, is a part-owner of NP's partner, who is MFNX [don't you just love how freely that word partner is used these days]. Got that? Can you spell dilution? Whew! < I must be missing something, as I don't see any 'problem' here with division of revenue. As this co-location deal is between Network Plus and MFNX they each benefit. BEL, due to their equity in MFNX, thus benefits also. What am I missing here?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (650)	10/28/1999 4:55:00 PM
From: Beltropolis Boy	Respond to of 1983

just in case you needed a reminder ... ----- Fiber Leasing Becomes More Attractive 10/26/99 By: Erik Kreifeldt Fiber Optics Online fiberopticsonline.com{5A176AA9-8937-11D3-9A68-00A0C9C83AFB}&Bucket=HomeFeaturedArticles As new carriers increase North American fiber supply by finishing national fiber builds, leasing fiber is becoming a more attractive foundation for building a service provider business case than it was a few years ago, conclude experts gathered at the 22nd Annual Newport Conference on Fiberoptics Markets (Oct. 18-20). Nevertheless, the experts expect fiber deployments to continue, even as the geography shifts from long-haul to regional projects. A few years ago, conventional carrier wisdom indicated that leasing fiber to provide communications services was a less attractive business case than owning a network, in part because fiber scarcity generated excessive cost (see Conference Chronicles New Trends in Fiber Deployments). While building a new network may no longer be a requirement to put forth a viable service provider business case, reselling services delivered by incumbent local exchange carriers is not attractive because it yields prohibitively thin margins and too little control of facilities, says Banc of America Securities analyst David Adler. A carrier must at least control the intelligence of its switches to generate a viable profit margin, he says. Carrier's carriers While the fiber-scarce environment of 1996 lent itself well to launching a facilities-based, carriers' carrier strategy, Adler notes that carriers may find it difficult to preserve attractive profit margins if carriers don't own their own customers. Carriers' carriers that demonstrate that they have anchor tenants, however, can win favor of investors, Adler says. One carrier taking a novel angle on the carrier's carrier business is Pathnet. Whereas most new national networks target the top-tier North American and European cities, Pathnet plans to assemble some 15,000 km of fiber (approximately 12 fibers/route) in a network linking 233 second and third tier North American cities by 2004. It plans to build about half that network from scratch, and swap assets for the other half. "We have no penchant to build," says Robert Rouse, Pathnet's executive vice president of network services. "We'll build as little as we can." Although Pathnet covets the value proposition of not building out new fiber, it has made some handsome right-of-way agreements to leverage, and potential anchor tenants would prefer Pathnet build the fiber it provides, Rouse reveals. To build or to buy Despite the proliferation of fiber projects, PB Telecommunications president Robert Bellhouse observes that neither equipment manufacturers nor network operators possess the wherewithal to do the "boring" stuff of fiber construction, such as securing conduit across a bridge, or securing an environmental study for a project—the kind of stuff his company makes a business of. However a carrier decides to evaluate the build/lease fiber proposition, Bellhouse advises carriers not to waffle over the decision. He believes that quick decision-making can keep construction costs down —the longer alternatives remain under consideration, the more long-term cost carriers incur. Despite his company's interest in the construction business, Bellhouse acknowledges the advantages to buying versus building fiber networks (rapid time to market and low capital cost). The number of national fiber projects drawing to a close has introduced enough flux into the fiber optics market to keep barters going on, he observes, but he doesn't see a glut of available fiber, nor does he anticipate a slowdown in construction. Bellhouse anticipates a shift from fiber projects that connect the obvious tier-one "NFL [National Football League] cities" to both smaller cities and deployments closer to the last mile of the network. He already sees nearly as many short-run fiber builds of less than five miles as long-haul projects, and he doesn't see a maturation of these local builds occurring any time soon.