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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (106)	6/8/2000 9:53:00 AM
From: ftth	Respond to of 46821

Clearworks had some similar wording in one of their releases. I suppose it means they pull in all programming material from all the satellite's transponders simultaneously, and remultiplex it onto a cable-like format that allows the dbs programming to be received by a "cable box" via their FTTH network. In other words, no DBS equipment (dish, recevier) needs to be purchased and the multiple receivers you'd need with DBS gets translated to multiple tuners (which likely already exist in the set top box). This raises other questions, but we'll deal with those later. So that's my interpretation of what that press release means RE: DBS. Ya never know with marketing hype because there's always some portion that is technically inaccurate (either by design or by carelessness) and operationally sparse in its description. We may never get a detailed description. Hell, anymore it seems the fashionable cop-out by company officers across the globe is to say "it's proprietary." That's always an easy mask to hide behind, even if it isn't proprietary since people back off their questioning after that is said. If they (the companies) don't have to expose details of what they're doing (by hiding behind the "it's proprietary" mask), those pesky shareholders will never know if they fail to execute, or if it doesn't turn out to function as extensively as planned. But I digress.....

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (106)	6/8/2000 11:53:00 AM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Frank (& Dave): That was my question. What's DBS doing in the "picture"? IMHO, sorta takes the wind out of the video capabilities coming over the single strand fiber, huh? Notwithstanding, I hold the belief that the RBOCs will be partnering with the DBS providers in their effort to bring video over twisted pair (or fiber in BLS's case) in a joint effort against the MSOs & overbuilder operating on the cable (HFC) platform. At least this is how I see SBC playing this hand. AT (another topic)/Attn: MikeM from Florida FWIW, Yesterday I rec'd a return call from the Pronto area manager for my area (LA Metro & SF Valley). In addition to "local" issues, I asked him about the co-loco space issues at the RT. He says that the independent sub (ASI) idea I had learned about a few weeks ago from another source has now been abandoned, & that SBC will be providing "some" space for CLECs & their cabinets at the RT "going forward." Its going to be interesting, because I question how much space does a CLEC actually wish to lease out in the neighborhood gateway? Is a CLEC willing to lease space & install their own cabinets to serve just one subscriber? May 2-5 subscribers? What's the threshold in terms of perceived demand or demonstrated demand? At what point does a CLEC say, yeah we're interest in leasing space in a particularly RT vs. telling the would-be customer "no, we don't provision copper in your area." As we know, these are neighborhood gateways designed to service subscribers within a proximate 12K ft radius, in typically less-than-urban dense populated area. IMHO, I just don't see that much CLEC demand for space except in those locations serving relatively dense or more upscale neighborhoods where there is believed to be sufficient demand to warrant the investment of leasing space & installing cabinets. Comment welcome, as always.