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: E. Davies who wrote (16540)	10/31/1999 5:34:00 PM
From: E. Davies	Respond to of 29970

Forced Access Requirements Found Premature by King County Expert Review Panel SEATTLE, Oct. 29 /PRNewswire/ -- The following is being issued by AT&T: biz.yahoo.com ===== An Expert Review Panel, appointed by the Metropolitan King County Council, is advising the Council to wait until next year, at the earliest, to consider ``forced access' regulations for high-speed cable Internet services. The panel concluded that it would be inappropriate to impose any such regulations now because the marketplace for broadband Internet access is still undefined. Four panelists, including former Chair of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission Sharon Nelson and former U.S. Representative Rick White, recommend that King County monitor the market carefully and regulate cable modem services only if anti-competitive market conditions actually develop. Other panel members would support the imposition of ``forced access' on September 1, 2000, if AT&T (NYSE: T - news) does not agree to provide access to unaffiliated ISPs voluntarily before then and if the marketplace does not appear to be competitive. ``There is no basis for regulating now -- and we're confident that there never will be,' said AT&T Senior Vice President Scott Morris. ``AT&T is still completing the upgrade of its cable system in unincorporated King County, and is not able to offer cable modem service there yet. US WEST, GTE, and other companies are well along in rolling out their own high-speed services. As these marketplace developments unfold, the Council will better be able to evaluate the level of competition in King County and determine whether any regulatory action is necessary. ``AT&T is willing to assist the King County Council in monitoring conditions in the coming months through semi-annual reports on the marketplace. We're also committed to offer cable modem services in unincorporated King County on the same rates, terms, and conditions as it does in Seattle, where the benefits of competition are already being realized.' During the past year, more that one thousand local communities have had the opportunity to consider forced access regulation for cable modem services. Only 4 communities have chosen to adopt forced access rules; the remainder have elected not to impose regulations or have reserved their rights to do so a later time, if market conditions warrant. The City of Seattle chose not to regulate in favor of letting the marketplace work. Its decision has been highly successful in encouraging competition -- AT&T has completed its deployment of broadband facilities ahead of schedule, numerous competitive alternatives (including DSL, satellite, and fixed wireless) have entered the market, and prices have dropped. ``AT&T is ready to continue its investment in unincorporated King County, begin deploying its high-speed @Home service, and, in the very near future, offer consumers a choice in local telephone service,' said Morris. The Metropolitan King County Council established the panel following its approval of the cable franchise transfer from TCI to AT&T last February. The panel was charged with addressing any anti-competitive implications associated with the deployment of AT&T's high-speed cable modem Internet service.

To: E. Davies who wrote (16540)	10/31/1999 10:45:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Respond to of 29970

"The answer is they've got to cut deals,' said George Reed-Dellinger, a policy analyst with Washington Analysis." This is exactly what the consortium doesn't need to do. What else can you expect from a policy analyst but surrender when you're ahead. If a community doesn't want Att to provide service, then the community can get someone else to do it. Like, like, like...The fact is no one wants to tackle the costs inherent in the last mile. Who can blame them? How are all those rich RBOCs reacting? They're trying to hide with wireless or look contemporary with Edsel. The community should be free to choose whatever they want, but if they want cable the only provider who has been willing to provide is Att. Any and all decisions to communalize cable will be met with the reality of backwardization. That means the community remains in the dark waiting for risk taking entrepreneurs to bail them out. When Godot doesn't show they suddenly make a mad scramble for Att and there is nothing that court can do about this inevitability.