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 (121)	6/8/2000 2:30:00 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 46821

Thanks, Frank, for some insight on CLEC leasing. With line sharing now supposedly finalized; see biz.yahoo.com; as I see it, if the CLEC doesn't want to invest in its own cabinets & space at the RT, it can provision the copper to serve the customer by simply leasing the ILEC's line, I presume along the lines of a Type 3 lease, as you describe. The crux of my discussion, however, is not whether or how CLEC will provision lines to subscribers situated along the outer portions of the loop, but whether or not they will choose to invest in their own cabinets & space at the RT to provision their own proprietary flavors of DSL not readily provisioned via the incumbent's cabinets. Digging a little bit deeper, my hypothesis is that the economics of co-loco space at the RT are significantly different than the same at the CO, & as a result the CLEC should think twice before making such an investment. It should pick & choose its RTs wisely as the POTENTIAL market, & thereby potential ROI, is going to be that much more limited than a similar investment at the CO. I would imagine that the potential market of customers via an investment at the CO is going to be larger than a similar investment at the RT by factor of 10 or more. This has certainly got to enter into the investment decision.