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: ahhaha who wrote (22659)	5/26/2000 1:27:00 PM
From: GBarr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

Its a given that "competitive access" will exist in 2002. I wonder, though, if we might see it sooner with respect to MediaOne. Though once fixated on Portland and the importance of keeping the artificial, unsustainable noncompetitive environment going on as long as possible, I have become convinced by you and others here of the folly of such thinking and realize that it would have been much better to have long ago embraced "open access" and the business opportunities such an environment would bring. With respect to MediaOne, we are hampered by the private status of RR in that we don't know the underlying commitments amongst the parties. The DOJ consent degree (the details of which I would love to read if somebody has seen it somewhere) only has T and MediaOne as parties and hence cannot bind TWX and RR. However, TWX has its own date with the DOJ real soon. In the end when all the dust settles, we may have a competitive access environment on MediaOne properties before 2002, either imposed by the DOJ or, more likely, as part of the divestiture since it may be the case that both ATT and AOL now want to void the exclusives as quickly as possible. The Prigel's of the world may be shocked to see that ATHM can indeed flourish in such an environment.

To: ahhaha who wrote (22659)	5/26/2000 1:29:00 PM
From: GBarr	Respond to of 29970

Its a given that "competitive access" will exist in 2002. I wonder, though, if we might see it sooner with respect to MediaOne. Though once fixated on Portland and the importance of keeping the artificial, unsustainable noncompetitive environment going on as long as possible, I have become convinced by you and others here of the folly of such thinking and realize that it would have been much better to have long ago embraced "open access" and the business opportunities such an environment would bring. With respect to MediaOne, we are hampered by the private status of RR in that we don't know the underlying commitments amongst the parties. The DOJ consent degree (the details of which I would love to read if somebody has seen it somewhere) only has T and MediaOne as parties and hence cannot bind TWX and RR. However, TWX has its own date with the DOJ real soon. In the end when all the dust settles, we may have a competitive access environment on MediaOne properties before 2002, either imposed by the DOJ or, more likely, as part of the divestiture since it may be the case that both ATT and AOL now want to void the exclusives as quickly as possible. The Prigel's of the world may be shocked to see that ATHM can indeed flourish in such an environment.

To: ahhaha who wrote (22659)	5/26/2000 3:53:00 PM
From: KailuaBoy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 29970

Here's my attempt: (i)if TWX has a right of first refusal on MediaOne's stock, What is the value of any stock that MediaOne might have in RR? If a third party bought the MediaOne interest in RR they would only have purchased that percentage of RR until whatever exclusive contracts that are in place expire. Upon expiration TWX/AOL would be incented to dissolve RR and take control of the TWX/AOL footprint outright. Who would purchase this temporary control other than TXW/AOL? Why would TWX/AOL pay anything to T? T must divest and there will be no buyers for what TWX/AOL will own anyway. Maybe transferring control of RR will be part of a AT&T TWX/AOL telephony deal. In exchange AOL may get access to T footprint for Internet access. (ii) the RR exclusives in place currently prevent AOL to have access to TWX cable, When AT&T divests RR TWX/AOL will dissolve any contracts that prevent them from operating in TWX footprint. The contracts were drawn up by UMG and TWX before the AOL bid for TWX. Take UMG out of the equation and TWX/AOL get rid of RR and brand high speed Internet in TWX territory AOL Broadband. Or they keep the RR brand and it serves as just what it is....brand. (iii)whether MediaOne has any veto rights that could prevent the amendment of the exclusivity provisions to allow AOL onto TWX cable, or UMG won't have the right, if it exists, after they divest. Even before they divest DOJ has made it clear that they shouldn't mess with RR. I read the DOJ decision regarding RR as "disolve your mutual interest in this thing called RR and each of you take your cable plant and go your separate ways. If you want to get together in the future and do anything you must get our permission first. Now SCAT!" (iv) whether MediaOne can get out of the exclusivity provisions upon divestiture. I read divest as meaning they lose any control including exclusivity. KB

To: ahhaha who wrote (22659)	5/26/2000 7:07:00 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

Let us understand the current state: Cable subscribers are segregated into regions. Each region is served by a particular MSO. Each MSO can serve more than one region. Straightforward, now let us introduce a network layer between the MSO and the regions. This layer itself is partitioned into two parts, consisting of RR and ATHM's networks. If the DOJ allowed the MediaOne merger to proceed, with AT&T retaining an ownership interest in RR, AT&T would have monopoly power over this network layer. The DOJ decision prevents monopoly power of the network, but also makes the network layer transparent, because now each network partition is owned, principally, by the MSOs that "own" the regions the network serves. If this is true, then we can say the network layer vanishes as a separate entity from the MSOs. Therefore, there will be no competition at this level. Further, if there is no competition at this level, then there must be competition at a higher level, therefore this DOJ decision guarantees open access at the "ISP" level. Obviously, the network level is too valuable for any one company to have monopoly power over it. The battle of the network level is over, and both ATHM and RR lost. They, particularly ATHM, created too much value.