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 : Advanced Fibre (AFCI) ** IPO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (3007)	5/22/2000 10:55:00 PM
From: E_K_S	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3299

Hi Mike - GVN is the company AFC recently acquired for stock. AFC Completes Aquisition of GVN Technologies PETALUMA, Calif., May 18, 2000 - Advanced Fibre Communications©, Inc. (AFC) (Nasdaq; AFCI), a leader in multi-service access solutions for the telecommunications industry, announced today that it has completed its acquisition of GVN Technologies, Inc., Largo, Fl., a leading developer of Integrated Access Device (IAD) equipment for the service provider market. Under the terms of the agreement, approximately 1.1 million shares and options to purchase AFC common stock will be exchanged for all outstanding shares and options of GVN. This acquisition will be accounted for as a pooling of interests. =========================================================== "As you may know, ATM is the telco solution to quality of service(QoS) issue required to do toll quality voice and broadcast quality video..." It appears that AFC is focusing on meeting the telco demands first and the ATM solution is a good one. I will have to check out the "last mile thread" as I have not read any of the postings for awhile. EKS

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (3007)	5/23/2000 7:14:00 AM
From: lml	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3299

Funny in lml's first paragraph reply to you, I believe he slipped in the same way. Hmmm..something Freudian going on in the wishful thinking department? VDSL Yes, Mike, I caught that myself. I used the word "that" instead of "than." Notwithstanding, I don't know whether I would use the word "concerned" to describe the lack of attention given VDSL by the CLECs, but let's just say they have their plate full right now & VDSL is just not their present area of focus. But that may change in a couple years, particularly among the largest players (ie. COVD) if they wish to take the CLEC model to the next level & compete with the more aggressive ILECs on the broadcast front in direct competition with the MSOs & DBS providers. It will be no small challenge to take on, but it would make a CLEC an excellent target for a MSO who seeks to enter markets they presently do not operate in -- a la AT&T. Going forward CLECs, IMHO, will represent opportunities for existing competitors in other markets to enter new markets by buying rather than building new infrastructure. IOW, sooner or later the CLEC market will first consolidate, then be subject to acquisition by the larger more aggressive communications companies that seek a national footprint. Its just a matter of time. GVN/Telecommunications Coverage Surprised you are unaware of AFCI's GVN acquisition with all the reading you do. Mike, you might be spreading yourself a little then these days. Don't want to sacrifice quality for quantity, now do we? Telecommunications (& broadcast cable & satellite) is no small area. It is huge; it is a major segment of our economy. You don't want to lose site of the enormity of what you've chosen to bite off. I call to your attention the analogous misperception by many pundits on Wall St. who still view "hi-tech" as a particular sector of our market of stocks, denying its underlying central importance to each & every sector they define as not high-tech. IMHO, I pooh-pooh those who say "high-tech stocks this" & "high-tech stocks that. Its analogous saying "industrial stocks this" and "industrial stocks that." In sum, one could analogize the telecommunications sector today to the "high-tech" sector a decade or two decades ago . . . a sector, but a huge one. Line Sharing Yes, this issue is presently being debated on Capitol Hill right now. The CLECs obviously don't like what SBC's Pronto DSL does & doesn't do in terms of unbundling the loop. Their argument is well-founded, and SBC's strategy is shrewd. IMHO, I don't think SBC will prevail in the long run because the underlying legislative intent of the 1996 Act was to bring about competition in the local loop, and if SBC's infrastructure deployment is designed to undermine this intent, Congress will most likely act to cut it off at its knees. Nevertheless, IMHO, it is SBC's strategy NOT to PRECLUDE the CLECs from ever operating in Pronto-provisioned loops, but to basically forestall their entry as long as possible while they attempt to solidify as strong as possible their market position among their existing incumbent-held customer base. Right now SBC is driving the cost of DSL down to hurt the CLECs where they are most vulnerable, their bottom line, at the cost of QoS. I can only expect that once SBC feels it is solidly entrenched with its customers, QoS will improve, because if it does not, it will be the vulnerability as this is likely to be the only platform upon which the CLECs will be able to compete as they enter the newly unbundled portions of the local loop. Certainly, they will not be able to compete solely on price; SBC will drive their economic model into the ground. Remember, you heard it here first. SBC is shrewd, shrewd, shrewd.