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: Ron Dior who wrote (19241)	1/25/2000 12:47:00 AM
From: E. Davies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

I hope everyone realizes that if the utilities actually did provide a fiber alternative to cable it would be a great opportunity for @home. The only industry having to do with electronics that is more low tech than cable TV is the power industry. They won't have the slightest clue how to run a broadband ISP. With fiber it should be fairly easy to have "open access" and @home will be one of the providers. By the time the utilites get their acts together @home will easily be known throughout the country as the top broadband ISP. Heck, the utilites might even need to hire a firm to provide services branded with the utilities name. YourPowerCo@home. I doubt it, but why not? Eric

To: Ron Dior who wrote (19241)	1/25/2000 1:30:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

Hello Ron, You bring up several interesting points. "Being as pure fiber is the real deal, I am surprised that MSFT has not attempted such a partnership as opposed to ORCL. Makes me wonder if this is why MSFT has not made any real attempts on the BB sector as of late." One thing that occurs to me is that the consortium may have some predefined notions about set top box architectures which are not friendly to Gates' directions. Also, the web-based computing paradigm would seem to me to be more in line with Ellison's mind set than with Gates'. Wouldn't this appear to be the optimal form of cable breakout for Paul Allen to pursue? His absence here is more conspicuous to me than MSFT's own. "I read of the utilities planning this several years back but never thought deals would be talked of so soon. I too just finished commenting about the same thing, i.e., the apparent acceleration in scheduling which this space will be going through. If you are interested, the post is at: Message 12666829 Here's an excerpt which touches directly on what you were saying: ----begin excerpt: What I think we're going to see, however, which was not anticipated to take place for another four or five years (and some have said much longer), is a more serious focus on making FTTH a reality through the use of "passives," a lot sooner than was previously thought. I think that the anticipated lag time, i.e., the previously anticipated time lapse between the end of 3G wireless deployments and the commencement of FTTHs may have narrowed very significantly during the past couple of months due to mounting pressures and blossoming opportunities which didn't exist before "for sure." These new pressures and opportunities have been spawned in part by: (1) the OA initiatives by the ISPs; (2) the recent merger of TWX and AOL; (3) the mounting bandwidth demands of a maturing Internet model; and, (4) recent successful field trials of passive optical components and network elements, which have demonstrated satisfactory results, both in technological and economic terms. Whereas, it may have originally been thought that the next generation wireless deployments might have been half-way completed by 2002, and FTTH might not have begun until 2004 or 2005 at the earliest, the actual gap may be one of only a year or two now, rather than 2 to 4 years, and they may be even overlapping in some instances, in those locales which are slated for early deployments of FTTH. -----end excerpt You note: "Wonder how Case will try and buy his way in to this one, and how the government will react with such issues? That question stands in stark contrast to another opinion I heard this evening, that being that AOL might not want to hold on to those cable assets much longer, since they are now top heavy with content. Does that make any sense to you, or anyone else? I can see the logic to this to some extent, if it becomes a matter of outsourcing efficiencies, and avoiding the drudgery of lower level maintenance tasks. But I also see how AOL would not want to find themselves in a position similar to Home's present predicament at some point, beholding to another set of partners with fickle intentions, when their entire multimedia farm was at stake at a much later date. AOL has a lot riding over those pipes, and when they start selling music and videos as they now plan to do with TWX-EMI, they'll have a lot more riding over those pipes, and I personally think that they will keep them. What cable folks do and what I think, however, are seldom in sync. Until they come around to smelling the coffee and seeing things more clearly. -g- Regards, Frank Coluccio