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 : Voice-on-the-net (VON), VoIP, Internet (IP) Telephony -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Darren DeNunzio who wrote (386)	4/3/1998 8:43:00 PM
From: STK1	Respond to of 3178

To Darren Would you agree that the possibly the worst 1st phase charges would be per minute flat tax on voice calls via IP.That is what some of the still regulated countries are looking at.The 2nd worst would be charging ITSPs a fee for regulatory reasons "tax" for access to an already regulated mediun "switched Routing".The 3rd most horrifing would be a consumer tax an ITSP access tax and a tax on the switched carriers to route calls to ITSPs.Just a moment to reflect. If asend ,csco and the other major providers install their VOIP cards at the cost of 600 to 800 for asend and 2000 to 4000 for csco even though this would be an enormous undertaking considering the installed base it would give us 50 million voice connections in the US alone. They can count packets and charge what ever the want to the reciever or the provider or both.Granted the vast majority of this eq is probably still under private intranet controll by the companies who own them the could be turned around.Companies who can provide billing and settlement within the complex enviroment will ultimatly benifit greatly.This is of course where standards come in.If you can not rebill you can not do business in this market now or particularly in the future when the FCC finally get s a strangle Hold on the Net. I hold Voclf Ftel and many other eq related companies and in my opinion the ones who are going to suceed are the ones who can cater to the FCC and manage Global networks in a pricing regulated enviroment. I'm not touting the stock but read this recent report from Dr Ganor Their best products just came out the lab and are designed to do just what the FCC is going to Require.Now and In the Future. April 3, 1998 LAN Times 1900 O'Farrell Street Suite 200 San Mateo, CA 94403 To the Editor: VocalTec would like to correct an error in the "Voice Over IP" product comparison review in the March 30 issue of LAN Times. We would also point out that the review tested an earlier version of our product and overlooked very important issues for large networks. The VocalTec Telephony Gateway 3.1a was incorrectly listed as only supporting IP. Our product also supports protocols such as Ethernet, ATM, frame relay, ADSL and ISDN. The system can support virtually any major network protocol. Introduced and shipped after the review editorial deadline, the VocalTec Telephony Gateway_ Series 120 is a DSP-based IP telephony gateway supporting 24 to 120 lines for corporate enterprise networks. It is highly scaleable with line density supporting multiple T1, E1-spans. The Series 120 is centrally managed and is also open, enabling future enhancements and seamless integration of third party software. It also has a high level of interoperability being the first product of its kind to conform to H.323 RAS Version 2. The review somewhat passes over interoperability and central management. This is unfortunate as in our extensive experience with carriers and enterprise network providers worldwide, these are absolutely critical features. It is also unfortunate that if the testers found issues with quality, our support team was not contacted. Normally our engineers work with users on installation and deployment to tune the gateways to obtain the best possible performance. We never had the opportunity to do this for this test. In incredibly rigorous carrier network testing and nearly two years of real-world deployment, our systems -- including the one in the review -- have repeatedly been chosen over those of competitors based on quality, manageability, scalability and performance. While a dispersed architecture such as one mentioned in the review may provide a theoretical benefit in some form of scalability, the costs and management issues associated with such a deployment boggle the mind. VocalTec is diligently developing ever-improving innovations in Internet telephony. While recognizing that LAN Times remains a valuable industry resource, we strongly urge readers to keep updated by checking the VocalTec Web site (http://www.vocaltec.com) between issues. Sincerely, Dr. Elon A. Ganor Chairman and CEO VocalTec Communications

To: Darren DeNunzio who wrote (386)	4/3/1998 11:05:00 PM
From: Mike Bretherton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3178

Darren, Supporting your post... Whatever,the reason, all homeowners with more than a single phone line should get ready to pay an extra $1.50 a month next, year, and: more in coming years, under rules passed spring Federal Communications Commission. Every phone fine carries a called a subscriber line charge." That fee will stay at.$3.50 per month for the first phone line in a home, but on Jan 1, it will increase to $5 a month for every additional line Residences that have two or more lines on the same account will see the higher charge on their January bills, but Bell Atlantic said it probably take the company till March to identify consumers who have multiple lines on separate bills. The charge for each extra line will Increase to $6 a month as of Jan. 1, 1999, and by the year 2000 it could go as high as $9 a month based on a formula set by the FCC. But the FCC expects that the charge nationally will average $7.60 a month. Bell Atlantic, which serves New York State, probably will keep the extra-line charge to around $8, said Frank Gumper, vice president of long-range public policy. The rule changes came in May, when the FCC overhauled the system through which long-distance companies pay local phone companies for the portion of calls carried on the local company's network. Some have labeled the increase in the subscriber-line charge a "modem tax" because consumers often buy second lines to hook computers to the Internet, but the FCC has said it sees the increase as a way to stop unnecessarily subsidizing homeowners' extra phone lines. As of Jan. 1, the per-line charge for businesses will increase from $5.92 a month to $7.77 a month in New York State. Although experts disagree on just how much residential phone service is being subsidized by revenues from business lines and other sources, the industry group United States Telephone Association estimates that, without subsidies, residential phone service would cost about $35 a month on average, lower in urban and suburban areas. Bell Atlantic Corp. said about 30 percent of its customers will be affected by the change in subscriber-line charges. The increases in subscriber-line charges probably will turn some consumers away from having additional phone lines, particularly if the rate goes to $9 a month, said Ron Cowles, research and development manager for Northern Business Information a unit of the Gartner Group. "That's a fairly sizable increase," Cowles said. He estimated that demand for second lines, which has grown at the rate of about 20 percent a year, will slow to 1 percent to 3 percent a year with the new charges. Meanwhile, the FCC is considering scaling back subsidies at least for the first six months of next year that would provide schools, libraries and rural healthcare facilities with discounted hookups to the Internet. The FCC expects to vote soon on an order providing $625 million in subsidies to schools and libraries and $50 million for rural health-care providers for the first half of 1998, FCC Chairman Bill Kennard said yesterday.