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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: silicon warrior who wrote (9048)	11/1/2000 7:29:11 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

There is not enough information for me to formulate an intelligent assessment. At first viewing, my money says it's probably more trouble than it's worth. But I'll give it a try. Are you saying that the "equipment/lines" that were installed "under the building" were abandoned by the ILEC? What do you mean by "under the building?" In the basement? Is it a fiber-optic or copper cable? 35,000 lines would represent an OC-48 operating at 2.5 Gb/s, including overhead. So, I guess the equipment that you referenced is an add-drop mux rated at this speed attached to a fiber cable. If true, it's beyond weird that the carrier would leave the hardware there. Where does the other end of the cable go? I cannot see the same level or value here that the "consultant" assigns to it, unless the building itself was going to be turned into a colocation center, or a CLEC site, or web hosting site, and you could get the ILEC to share it. Yeah, right. But even then, you would need their complicity, and it's their right of way that's being used. And supposedly, the ILEC also sits at the other end of the cable. If they saw the value they would reclaim it, themselves. If it were truly abandoned and the original route from the central office had any appreciable length to it, then it was most likely snipped at the time that it was abandoned and left as a stub to nowhere, and someone forgot or stil hasn't gotten around to go out and reclaim the mux. I could be wrong, but like I said, there isn't enough info to go on.

To: silicon warrior who wrote (9048)	11/1/2000 10:07:23 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 12823

Hi silicon warrior, I've seen commercial buildings with multiple generations of telco gear layered on top of the previous iteration. I've just read Frank's reply and have nothing to add except that it is extremely doubtful to me that anything of current value would be abandoned by the ILEC. Almost invariably, the practice of Ma Bell over the decades has been to abandon old gear in customer's premises in situ and save the cost of demolition and scrapping. The correct answer from the accountant's perspective, yet pretty sloppy from that of the engineer. :) R.

To: silicon warrior who wrote (9048)	11/3/2000 7:53:26 PM
From: Hands Off	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Silicon Warrior - UNE = Unbundled Network Elements. I work for a RBOC as a programmer on their billing systems. We are working on a large mandated project titled UNE. I can't answer your question direclty. I only see things from a very narrow perspective on my little portion of the huge billing system. However, it is my understanding that currently if a CLEC wants to use our circuits we bundles things like call-forwarding, call-waiting, 3-way calling, etc. and require the CLEC to take the package- bundle. With UNE the CLEC will be able to say I only want call forwarding, etc. and therefore we must be able to price and bill our services (elements) independently. Hope this helps Marshall