To: Jonathan Quick who wrote (28073 ) 2/22/1998 5:16:00 PM From: Kashish King Respond to of 33268
To: Rod Macpherson From: Marshall Thursday, Nov 27 1997 9:27PM EST ...I don't think cable modems are going to make it except in some scattered areas . The cable companies are in trouble - not only have they been operating on a low profit basis but the recent explosion of DBS Satellite reception equipment is starting to make some significant dents in their subscriber base... Actually, cable operators have a steady, reliable cash flow and it seems that the banks can't wait to lend them more money. Moreover, I think we can call cable modems reasonably, though not wildly successful. Needless to say, we don't have to think about BT's making it, and this, ah, prediction from an unit which has been warning people that getting second telephone line is difficult if not impossible dream in the unit's neck of the woods. Daniel, BT is a PROPRIETARY solution offering DISCRESIONARY benefits to those who currently employ standards-based products to e-mail, fax, voice-mail and what have you. There is nothing stopping the roaming employee from calling in for messages, faxing, sending e-mail, et cetera. In other words, they are not going to throw good money away on some proprietary tangle for questionable enhancements only to have to replace it with a standard, integrated solution in the not-too-distant future. As for the non-roaming, work-at-home employees, ISDN has been serving that market for years and is experiencing something of a rebound as emerging technologies sort themselves out. In short, BT is a non-factor in an increasingly competitive market. It's not the unique "technology" the 'bot would have you believe. I will leave the name-calling to the auto-response robots, it only bolsters my case that there's nothing concrete for them to fall back on. Look, if they could point to growing revenues and earnings there isn't a thing anybody could say to keep the stock from increasing in value. That market is not as stupid as the 'bot and like-programmed units would have us believe.