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: gpowell who wrote (22686)	5/27/2000 2:59:00 AM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

The DOJ ruling ensures profitability in the cable BB sector, there won't be any net zeros in BB cable. I don't see what you mean. DOJ could never assure profitability. DOJ has never made a profit! They're a cold loss! In Essence, the DOJ ruling says the MSO's are free to own the distribution and the networks, but no one company should control the entire network (treating RR and ATHM as connected for the moment). I think we'll see the MSOs beginning to cooperate at the network level to a much greater extent than was possible in the past - with an eventual melding of ATHM and RR networks (not at the corporate level). You've got me completely lost here. And you thought I was lost in eminent domain. Their should and will be competition at the user level. This is what consumers want and this is what the MSOs want. It isn't what ATHM wanted, so they lose. I have a different view. I don't think either public or MSO cares whether there is competition although both make like they ant it, actually both prefer that it isn't there. This is proved by the history of CATV, a history of squelching the free market. ATHM definitely seeks protection just like the public did against what they perceived as profiteering CATV operators. Those operators only sought protection from profit eliminating public control types. ATHM management likes the idea that government would control and limit their profitability, because otherwise they have to go up against AOL and others, and ATHM management knows they can't cut it. ATHM is the MSOs cash cow and as such is too valuable to be independent. This assumes that anyone knows what ATHM is. No one does. Its corporate mission is completely lost. It's whatever AOL needs it to be. If cable companies cooperate then what ATHM gains from RR is a wash - nothing really created. What is needed for the cable BB companies to succeed, beyond what was conceivable last year, is the value added features that come from agreeing to compete at the user level. That is the prescription for creating content and services that will compel dial up users to abandon that pathetic 56k internet. I don't agree. I pay ATHM for the BB service. I could care less about anything else they try to provide. I've tried to like their stuff, but always it ends up neglected.

To: gpowell who wrote (22686)	5/27/2000 2:05:00 PM
From: FR1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

What is needed for the cable BB companies to succeed, .....is the prescription for creating content and services that will compel dial up users to abandon that pathetic 56k internet. I totally disagree. Everybody I know that went to BB did so because they wanted to move around faster on the internet. Down load things faster, etc. People set their defaut home pages to CNN news or something like that. The idea that you have to have a multimedia site to attract people to BB is wrong.