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 (1570)	12/26/2000 3:00:24 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Frank, First up LOL over bandwidth pooling sites (that's where a bunch of euphemisms gather), Thanks for that one. :) This whole "bandwidth trading" thing reminds me a lot of Priceline and its band of cheapskate customers. In the sense that the ENE bandwidth trading must be carried on with customers who have marginal needs and most likely would never be foolish enough to use a trading desk approach to maintaining a stable network environment. I'm reminded of the 25 year SLAs and IRUs that most mature organizations use. This is the complete opposite, in my mind, to the minute to minute mentality that pervades to trading desk environment. If we want a good picture of what an ENE telecoms universe would look like, we need go no further than to examine the chaos that reigns in the California energy market. Of course, the idea is to seduce users into the ENE system with the promise of cut-rate bandwidth. Which apparently is available. However, once the system has become inured to this candy, then the magic of the market can commence, supply can be withdrawn and voila, bandwidth reflates with a vengeance. As far as the basic question, what is bandwidth, I'd say that your discussion in your prior response is spot on. Though I'm perfectly willing to accept the alternatives that get bandied about by Joe Kernan and the traders. In the essence, then, we are in agreement that the entire usefulness of the telecommunications infrastructure is keyed into the transformation of electricity into bits of information. Beyond that, we have, ta da, the energy markets, be they gas, oil, falling water, nuclear or alternative sources. So, the internet is truly dependent on the energy infrastructure and intimately entwined with it. FWIW, I kinda get a quesy feeling about Joe Kernan as a source of useful information on bandwidth trading. then trading bandwidth really amounts to spot leases Everything I've read would tend to agree with this view. Some traders claim to have gotten around this gap, by maintaining bandwidth pooling sites I'm more inclined to think of this as private peering, rather than pooling. Now this places them in a venue where they have to compete with incumbents. Are these energy trading firms really ready for this? From all I've read about their plant, the answer has to be that they are ready willing and able to provide transmission plant, but that their capacity to function as a full-service carrier is severely limited. They're only interested in the wholesale end of things. Or, can they turn the incumbents, possibly, into their largest customers? Why not? Just as MFNX provides the basic resource, dark fiber, for VZ to transmit LD telephony from NYC to White Plains, I see no reason that the pipeline guys can't provide backbone capacity to ILECs, who would then become more marketing and service oriented. I'm certain ENE has no intention to send out monthly bills to residential phone customers, so they'll just allow the ILECs to continue to offer dial tone to America. JMVHO, Ray

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1570)	12/26/2000 3:06:44 PM
From: axial	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi, Frank - Have been watching the natural gas situation fall apart for over a year now. This is just another deregulation nightmare, at its core. In Alberta (the people we used to call 'blue-eyed arabs' 25 years ago) they have pursued deregulation so inexpertly that they now have insufficient electricity, AND insufficient natural gas. Companies are going out of business as I write. I think the ugly side of deregulation, in both the US AND Canada, is beginning to show its face: to completely abandon stewardship of declining resources (i.e., to throw caution to the winds, and say "Let the markets decide!") is madness. In telecomms, and in power, I think the Euro model would have served us much better: recognize that there is a strong and legitimate public interest in planning. Let the players pursue their strategies within a framework that recognizes that stewardship must lie with the users, and their proxies, the regulatory agencies. Much good has been done by deregulation, but I wonder, when we face the extinction of fossil-fuel resources in the next 20-30 years, if we can afford to leave the issues that WILL arise, solely to market forces. I'll append a couple of links that might give some insight into some of the current natural gas problems. The present scarcity is a shame, that need not have occurred. canadianbusiness.com canadianbusiness.com Best regards, Jim

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1570)	2/21/2001 11:57:35 AM
From: TheStockFairy	Respond to of 46821

A late response to this...I'm typing quick and off the top of my head, so I hope it makes sense. 1) Pooling points. Look into companies like Lightrade (www.lightrade.com) for neutral pooling points. ENE endorses their own pooling points, as well as interconnecting what the market would term IXC PoPs. RateXchange and Band-X endorse their own pooling points (as well as the other now defunct eBTO companies), but I don't think that is their long term goal. Williams endorses using their IXC PoPs as their pooling points. 2) Metro connectivity to pooling points Save a nickle on the trade of long haul, lose a dollar on the metro connections between the pooling points. The more pooling points there are, the more local loops that are needed to connect the points. If the BTO contract holds for QoS, there has to be equipment on each end to moniter uptime, data bits lost, time of circuit activation, ect. Traditional carriers do not have this equipment in place as they are not liable for missing FOC dates for one, and it is up to the customer to prove there was data loss and unscheduled circuit downtime. 3) Long term solution He who has the corporate customers win. Whichever energy company is fastest in establishing the retail customers will win. First, the customer buys via retail using a sales rep, then they establish "why use a sales rep when you can purchase your bandwidth on a web page." This would create an trading market. 4) Metro market solution Fiber or other types of connectivity (SONET) to the customer. Virtual pooling point pricing (IE, 0-10 mile circuits are priced the same). The energy companies are making a push to be the closest to the customer as possible. 5) BTO coming alive When the giants (WCOM, Sprint, ATT) view the long haul bandwidth that is being dumped on the market by the energy companies, added with the SLAs in the BTO contract, they will see that when it comes alive they will lose market share. Plus, since they can dump, I would estimate, 10-20 points off their SG&A costs by going to a web based trading model, I feel we will start to see some large scale participation. Make any sense?