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 (136)	6/9/2000 5:16:00 AM
From: lml	Respond to of 46821

Frank: How so? Dollarwise for the rental? Or, because of support issues? By "digging deeper" I meant to get to the crux of my hypothesis which is I truly question the economics of CLECs installing their own cabinets at the RT, particularly at the outermost portions of the loop where there is certain to be a fraction of the customers that they could service if similar investments were made either at the CO, or at RTs situated closer to the CO, where there is likely greater line density, and hence a greater likelihood of fully utilizing the cabinets and the space rented. Again, I don't know what the backhaul charges are in a situation like that. You appropriately point out another cost factor in the economic equation that I have failed to identify. Nevertheless, I would imagine, in theory, that the economics of such backhaul charges should be no different than what SBC is charging its own local carrier operation. Wouldn't this be correct in terms of the spirit of the Telecommunications Act and FCC regulations promulgated thereunder? Perhaps, MikeM from Florida could help out on this point.