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.

Non-Tech : Amati investors -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pat mudge who wrote (28362)	11/5/1997 4:22:00 PM
From: Logain Ablar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31386

Pat: I hold her opinion on stocks and selections as much as I do yours regarding AMTX (which means in high regard). Have fun tomorrow at the gathering tomorrow. Tim

To: pat mudge who wrote (28362)	11/5/1997 6:29:00 PM
From: Alex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31386

Think this PR was missed! biz.yahoo.com

To: pat mudge who wrote (28362)	11/5/1997 8:00:00 PM
From: Chemsync	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 31386

[More Hong Kong Tele News] Hi Pat, Hope I'm not overplaying the Hong Kong VOD story, but I find it a fascinating story. Not everyone in Hong Kong is happy that HK Telecom IMS has been selected the sole supplier of VOD. This monopolistic development is scrutinized by the authors of two articles which appeared in Nov.6 South China News. Now, what I would like to know is, just what are the components of their VOD system that the government liked so much? Cheers Steve ThursdayÿÿNovember 6ÿÿ1997 Monitor Consumers the losers in one-sided VOD race SIMON PRITCHARD Governments generally give monopolies a hard time rather than a leg up. Hongkong Telecommunications appears the exception to the rule. Allowing it to jump-start competitors with Hong Kong's first video-on-demand (VOD) service affords a huge advantage. The local leviathan will inevitably dominate the video highway with its technical expertise and marketing clout. Now, it has a turbo-charged head start. With other licence bidders still bickering, the second operator will struggle to catch up. Faced with an embarrassing delay in launching VOD, the Government opted for a fudge. Having developed the project, Hongkong Telecom was always going to get a licence. It did not expect a free run at the market. How to regulate VOD was fumbled from the outset. Initially, Hongkong Telecom was to be subject to programming content oversight. Later, competition issues ruled that licences should be awarded. After bitter opposition from Wharf Cable, the terms were finally set in August. Potential bidders balked at the line rental cost from Hongkong Telecom. At $500 per subscriber, per month, the likes of New World Telephone and Hutchison Telecom did not even bother. Of the three that did apply, two are embroiled in a legal battle. Future TV alleges that Star Telecom Interactive stole its ideas. Faced with this, the decision to investigate before awarding the licence makes sense. Should Star Telecom Interactive win the contract, only to be ruled against by the courts, the Government would look foolish. Yet, this seems no justification for allowing Hongkong Telecom to launch early. Having gone down the licensing route, there is surely an obligation to give both operators an even start. If the idea is to foster competition then delaying the launch a few months is surely the price consumers must pay. The Government has tied itself in knots. Hongkong Telecom developed VOD at considerable expense and is agitating to move early. It claims to have favoured a free market where anyone could rent its lines and beam videos. While content is a matter for regulators, the laissez faire argument has merit. Firms with VOD expertise could have gone head-to-head paying an inter-connect fee to Hongkong Telecom. Instead, the regulator set the fee so high as to make competing almost pointless. Worse still, Hongkong Telecom will now launch with no rival service. Government arguments have stretched credulity. Defending the $500 inter-connect fee, it claimed Hongkong Telecom Interactive Media Services (the VOD operator) would pay the same toll for using its parent's network. Little matter that Hongkong Telecom is one company working for a single group of shareholders. Having lost much of its international call traffic through market deregulation, the Government appears to have gone soft on Hongkong Telecom's VOD. Quite why is intriguing. Could it be that a sop has been thrown out with negotiations over termination of the international monopoly at an advanced stage? Or could the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications' arrival as a shareholder be paying dividends? Around the world, regulators are wrestling with problems thrown up by powerful telephone companies running interactive media services. Most agree that unless regulated properly, monopoly pricing, disadvantaging consumers, is inevitable. A solid case can be made that Hongkong Telecom should be banned from offering VOD and limited to collecting line rental revenues. But with the decision made, emphasis should be placed on giving competitors a fighting chance. For sure, it invested big in VOD and will need to upgrade its network to full fibre optic cabling. Yet the company remains a market leader and hardly in need of government assistance. Tilting the playing field in its favour is a perversion of the deregulation trend and bad for consumers. A solid case can be made that Hongkong Telecom should be banned from offering VOD and limited to collecting line rental revenues ÿ ÿ Archived Stories: FutureTV launches campaign with bravado Internet key to Star Interactive TV plans Elmsdale eyes VOD licence Interactive TV set for launch next year ÿ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright c1997 South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All Rights Reserved. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ThursdayÿÿNovember 6ÿÿ1997 Editorial Video demands However much the Government might deny it, yesterday's decision to initially award only one video-on-demand licence has given Hongkong Telecom an enormous advantage over its rivals. It allows the company to be the first to introduce interactive television services that may eventually become a major money-spinner. This is not especially desirable, but it may be inevitable since two of the other applicants are engaged in litigation, while the third submitted a low-profile bid. Telecom was always going to enjoy a head-start, given that the company began working on its video-on-demand blueprint many years before other contenders came on the scene. Now that the Government's decision has further extended this lead, the priority must be to ensure that Telecom is not allowed to abuse its initial monopoly over the provision of such services. This will require a tighter regulatory regime than has been evident recently, especially in July, when government regulators agreed that Telecom could charge its rivals a crippling $500 per user per month for access to its phone lines to distribute video-on-demand, a decision that scared off several heavyweight bidders. However, there was no evidence of a tougher approach yesterday. Instead Director-General of Telecommunications Anthony Wong Sik-kei defended the high-access charges on the grounds that the winner of a second licence, which the Government is still promising to grant as soon as possible, will not be required to use the company's phone lines. That is scarcely a realistic attitude when this represents the only feasible means of reaching most Hong Kong homes. Telecom has already hinted the charge may be cut once large numbers of subscribers start to come on-line. But its new-found monopoly status means such reductions should now be larger and sooner than previously expected. The ultimate goal must be to ensure that its upgraded network is eventually available to all its rivals at a realistic price. Only then will the full benefits of interactive television be made available to the community. But this will require a firmer hand on the regulatory tiller than has been visible so far. The priority must be to ensure that Telecom is not allowed to abuse its initial monopoly over the provision of such services ÿ Related Stories: Telecom gets VOD nod Telecom green light for interactive TV Consumers the losers in one-sided VOD race Copyright c1997 South China Morning