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 : John, Mike & Tom's Wild World of Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chip McVickar who wrote (1319)	6/14/2000 2:47:00 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2850

I don't think that it will go down much further. I think that they are certainly a value play. They are going to be experiencing greater amounts of competition and they will be spending lots of money on new infrastructure. But I think those things are priced in. Currently on a P&F sell signal, but looks to be forming a bottom. I kinda like T

To: Chip McVickar who wrote (1319)	6/14/2000 3:24:00 PM
From: John Pitera	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2850

Hi Chip, I think that T is oversold and ready for a bounce to 40 or into the mid 40's. Bigger picture, they have taken on a lot of debt and have accumulated large cable properties , and must hope that cable is the last mile winner in the broadband rollout to the customer. I am very cautious on T beyond a trading bounce. and the fact that HLIT has been such a big customer, has had me a bit cautious on HLIT as well. I may have mentioned that about HLIT 3 or 5 months ago. Here is a nice rundown by Jim Seymour, who knows his technology. --------- Mike Armstrong's Dumb Decision By Jim Seymour Special to TheStreet.com 6/9/00 3:18 PM ET On a Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq - news - boards) chat with Jim Cramer last night -- you can find the transcript here; I think you'll enjoy it -- I said AT&T (T:NYSE - news - boards) has turned into a heart-breaker of the highest order. A number of TSC subscribers who were on the chat wrote overnight and Friday morning to ask why I'd changed my mind. After all, a year ago I thought AT&T was a promising investment. You bet I did. But a year -- a week, even a day! -- can change things a lot in this business. And AT&T is a great example: AT&T is caught in a downward spiral -- almost a death spiral, the business equivalent of a pilot's terrifying flat spin -- on revenue from its voice-based long distance. That shouldn't be a surprise -- the voice business stinks for everybody, with market-rate per-minute charges plummeting through four cents and rapidly approaching zero -- but it's a bigger deal for AT&T than for most of its competitors, because AT&T still has a huge long-distance business. Just not a very profitable one. Though I applauded AT&T's moves last year to become a "single-pipe" provider of all sorts of digital services to the home -- from voice to fast data connections to cable service -- the problems have proved overwhelming. The cable business, especially -- despite AT&T's semi-successes here in the regulatory arena -- is a swamp. AT&T wanted that cable line into your home as a delivery mechanism for lots of profitable noncable services and also as a "last-mile" answer, cutting off the local-loop carriers' control of your service. But so many problems still stand in the way of providing constant, high-reliability phone service over the cable systems for which AT&T spent so much money that I'm beginning to wonder if the company will ever unravel that one. As opposed to its forecast of two million cable-telephony customers by the end of this year, I doubt that AT&T will have 500,000. Maybe not even 400,000. Not good. AT&T has been showing a political clumsiness more characteristic of "the old AT&T" than of CEO Mike Armstrong's reign. The idiotic long-distance rate increase it unilaterally imposed on customers earlier this month -- bumping its nondiscounted residential long-distance customers up to a 24x7 flat rate of 29 cents a minute, up 81% from the former weekday rate and a whopping 152% hike on weekends! -- showed that. The company this week rescinded that increase ... but then this morning Armstrong is saying in The Wall Street Journal that he's going to refile a new tariff schedule that will have much the same effect. "I am not going to give this up," he said. A tip, Mike: Give it up. The irony, of course, is that AT&T badly needs those higher long-distance revenues. But with everybody and his brother offering nickel-a-minute calling, how can AT&T possibly ask six times as much? Doing this at a time when the FCC is already growling about the company's moves is political insanity. Has it hired the same strategy advisors who guided Microsoft (MSFT: - news - boards)(MSFT:Nasdaq) over the past year? With the stock down by half, Armstrong's reign -- once so solid and promising -- is starting to look shaky. But who'd want the job? As I said last night on Yahoo!, "T is a heart-breaker. I'm scared of it -- too many uncertainties, too many regulatory and tech pits ahead. I don't need that grief." Neither, I suspect, do you.