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: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (10873)	4/5/2001 5:00:40 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Frank- Nice posting. Nothing there that warrants a counterpoint from me. Wonder if we are also looking at a chicken or egg dilemma that is causing demand problems? I can't even pull up what's showing at the local theaters on my so called, "always-on" cable connection. It's easier to pull the phone book off the shelf and dial up the voice recordings on the telephone. I kid you not. Same with the TV Guide. Online it's tedious to pull up the web page with all the listings. Though when it does come up, it's quite nice. It's easier to turn on the TV, pull up the MSO's online guide and scroll up about 20 times to see what's showing 10 channels at a time. Both are frustrating experiences. About the only thing that has worked consistently well for me is shopping at Amazon. And look where that has gotten them. I have twin nieces in MI who I would love to video conference with. I'm somewhat of a technology buff, YET I dread purchasing the video conferencing software and hardware for both systems. Trying to get it to run on my system I know would be a nightmare (I never did get my wireless LAN to work reliably. Ugh.). And on her end, getting their system configured is next to impossible. So what do I do? Nothing. And to think, we both have cable modems! Thank you MSOs for making your service so unreliable and thank you Microsoft and Intel for my zero confidence level in trying anything new. Anyway, just some griping about broadband's failure to capture a larger audience on what could already be very practical and lucrative applications. IMO, it's still digital TV that is going to drive the MSO to get their network into a reliable state. How exactly? I don't know. -MikeM(From Florida)

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (10873)	4/7/2001 1:21:57 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

FCC protects the ILECS. In ten years time you will have most people with cell phones and part of the charges will be used to subsidize pay phones idle by the road side. FCC not ready to hang up pay phones By The Associated Press Special to CNET News.com April 6, 2001, 10:00 a.m. PT WASHINGTON--The pay phone industry, facing stiff competition as millions of Americans switch to cell phones, could see its revenue go up under action taken by federal regulators. And if pay phone providers can take in more money, some who are near a decision to quit the business may be persuaded not to pull out. Industry leaders say they are heartened that the government cares enough about the service to try to keep it viable. "There were pay phone providers wondering whether anyone cared about pay phones," said Vincent Sandusky, president of the American Public Communications Council, a trade group representing 1,600 independent carriers who operate about 500,000 pay phones. Specifically, the Federal Communications Commission set up a clear system Thursday to ensure that pay phone businesses are compensated when people make toll-free, dial-around or prepaid calls. Sandusky said the action will help pay phone providers recoup some $300 million they are shortchanged annually. It's unclear whether long-distance companies or resellers will pass along the charges through higher rates for customers. Each time a caller uses a calling card, a 10-10 number or a prepaid card to make a long-distance call, the pay phone operator is supposed to get 24 cents from the phone company handling the call. The call may travel a winding road to get to its destination, being passed off between different long-distance carriers, resellers and local phone companies. So who's responsible for paying the pay phone provider? Finger pointing among telecom industry players has meant that 20 percent to 50 percent of revenues for those types of calls go uncollected, the APCC says. Incurring such losses provides just one more reason for pay phone companies to get out of the business. Plummeting prices of cell phone calls and exploding growth in numbers of subscribers poses another serious challenge. The number of pay phones nationwide has dwindled from 2.6 million to 2.1 million in the past five years, since lawmakers freed telecom services to become competitive. Early this year, BellSouth said it would get rid of all 143,000 of its pay phones by the end of 2002. Seeking to boost competition in the pay phone market, the FCC clarified Thursday that the first long-distance carrier to handle the call must compensate the pay phone provider. Then that company can turn around and recoup costs from resellers who package long-distance phone service, sell directly to the consumer and make the profit. The long-distance carrier also needs to track the calls to see if they are completed and provide figures on how many calls it receives from a particular provider's pay phones. With the FCC settling the issue of who must compensate them, providers can make a better business determination about whether operating their pay phones are profitable, Sandusky said. Pay phones have long been seen as not only a convenience but also a matter of public safety. Despite the growing popularity of cell phones, pagers and other devices, wireless service is spotty and unreliable in some part of the country. Copyright © 2001 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.