SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Qwest Communications (Q) (formerly QWST) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1109)4/10/1998 1:49:00 AM
From: Duane L. Olson  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 6846
 
Frank, the issues you illuminate are precisely those which cause QWST investors to get just a bit more cautious about their commitment. The fact that the issue of access charges will be debated brings with it some risk that access charges will be applied --to the detriment of QWST and QWST's investors.
As regards a justification for access charges at current rates, pardon me if I demer... the last time I participated in a serious discussion of those charges was back in my college days. To my knowledge, the state of the issues which then existed continues the same today, without resolution. I have no hope of resolving them any time soon. Cheers dlo



To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1109)4/10/1998 11:34:00 AM
From: John Klein  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 6846
 
You bring up some excellent points. The major argument against taxation is the same made against early regulation of the Internet - it stymies development of a technology still in the earliest stages of widespread adoption. This would be the tragedy of the FCC ruling, and it would show, yet again, the extent to which the incumbent LECs still thoroughly monopolize the end distribution of telco services.



To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1109)4/10/1998 5:38:00 PM
From: Francis Gaskins  Respond to of 6846
 
[RBOCs target Level 3 & Qwest business plans?] "Carrier bloc opposes new RBOC move to compete for long-distance data"
See reply #3 at
Subject 20194