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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Zacks who wrote (929)	12/13/1997 11:02:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

SFA? It's a real dog. Unimaginative management hanging on to dead technology that seems so hot but always has paper-thin margins and never contributes enough to pull them out of Dullsville. About twenty years ago they were interesting. Now? A short sale. But who wants to short at 19 and cover at 16? That range has been in place for 5 years. Would this development break them out of the range? Well, it might contribute 5% to top line in 5 years, but... As far as HFC goes, all they have is better wires, and plenty expensive. It's a toss-up whether to lay more 155 mbps OC3 cable wires or go with a new single doped 20 gbps fibre. Even then you have the same old SONET boost problem although it's been pushed out further. At this time most of the cable laid is OC3 and is adequate for a few more years. No one and certainly not TV Malone wants to put in the dough to upgrade the mass infrastructure. Marginal revenues are not even worth marginal costs yet, with existing plant. Far more important is the cost of headend, RDC, and site equipment and associated installation costs. That is where the ATT investment could be of significance to ATHM. TV Malone and many of you believe in this couch potato TV internet concept. The existing installed base of tvs is not going to be upgraded. It's a perfected technology. Lasts forever. So you have to run the cable either into your computer and then to the tv, or to a box from which a cable runs to your computer and another runs to your tv. If you don't have a computer, then the installed box is a little different because it must be directed by a hand held device from remote. Is that device going to be a keyboard? No. It'll be simple. Can you interact with a computer only with mouse? Not really. Will the remote be a mouse? No way, since the tv screen would have to have a windows-like gui with all the complexities that entails. Maybe you don't need the complexity attending local storage. But you still need a 486 level processor and a way to do screen command selection. Email on the tube needs larger fonts and software management. Any valuable interaction needs much of what a pc delivers. That box with its gui, software, 486 is going to cost you at least $500. So why not put $700 into a pc if you don't own one, and control the tube with aplomb? Else the cable co. will have to pay for the $500 box. Great thinking TV Malone. I have stated that this guy has been a thorn in the back of ATHM because he clings to this relic of a gone age called TV and he is invested to his eyeballs in it so it has to work. Why not leave the TV alone. It's good for what it does. It would be enhanced by what the computer can do. But trying to hide the computer because most people are slobs is a totally failed concept. It assumes people aren't clever like those great engineers at those great tech companies. Underestimating the public intelligence is the worst mistake any company can make. And I see that INTL is starting to take that tac. Why, ahhaha, you can't tell them that they are wrong. You are nothing and they are great. Sounds like something you'd hear from the ORCL illiterati. No matter how you slice it, it won't work. What will happen is a continuing explosion in pc sales and an explosion in software that controls the tv totally. What will happen to TV Malone's ad dollar theory when the tv can be programmed to cut out all ads? On the fly. So tell me where the added value lies. And tell me who is going to put out all the investment dough on a risky deal that won't work. The telcos didn't want DSL; they sure were right. Now, clever guys they are, they're jumping in to cable. If I were a telco would I want my investment to go into TV Malone's hole-filled pocket?