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 : CAWS - Wireless Cable (New and Improved) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zorro who wrote (4928)	4/14/1998 7:05:00 PM
From: Boris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5812

Mgmt out for sure... sale impending TechnoMusik Apr 14 1998 5:21PM EDT "The ousting of management has been a consistent sentiment among all threads. To be sure, management has verged on criminal. At the very least, they are incompetent. I confess that I have holdings in CAI, but my words aren't driven by bitterness. I bought CAI (.43/share) because their spectrum has value. Project Angel, however denounced in the press, is still entirely feasible. If AT&T is even considering cable television, those of us who still hold stock should feel relatively at ease. Wireless is a far better play than cable. Do the math. CAI's debt load is oppressive, but compare it to any single cable system. Then, let's not forget that CAI covers not just a single county or city, but the best market in the U.S. For AT&T (or the like), CAI is a one shot deal for 25% of the U.S. telecom market (local). Management sucks. So what? Their spectrum is worth oodles. They should and will be ousted. I've talked to folks at Stanford Telecom, ADC and others, and the technology is there for local services. In fact, the technology is a relatively simple modification on existing cable television technologies. Cable has had a rough shot because they need to spend so much on upgrading their systems (not to mention maintenance). That's the beauty of wireless and CAI. It's a massive cable system without the mess. The spectrum can't be used for video, but who cares? Video is a low margin business, and the bandwidth will be earn much more $$$ for telecommunications services. If you don't believe the technology angle, just look at LMDS. MMDS can use the exact same technology, but what's really interesting is that MMDS doesn't need to build 2-3 mile cells (like LMDS). MMDS can reach 10 miles comfortably, but not need do so. AT&T (and others) must understand this. There's lots of smart folks out there, and AT&T already did their homework on wireless. The problem with Angel before was that PCS didn't have enough bandwidth. MMDS has at least double if not triple the spectrum of PCS. Again, if the "market" thinks that AT&T might go for cable, people should start hoarding MMDS. If Armstrong doesn't like the cost for MMDS equipment, he will be equally displeased with cable or LMDS. All this stuff costs about the same. MMDS is great because the wireless infrastructure is cheap, especially when you consider that it costs at least $500 per subscriber to upgrade cable networks. So, i'll leave with this: common sense says that MMDS is the warn poridge of the local loop world. It's cheap infrastructure, and the technology costs about the same compared to other options. CAi's management sucks, but who cares? the spectrum has value. Some smart folks will or have already realized this. Bubbada..please be carefull to separate your disdain of management from the inherent value of the spectrum." Loisel CAWS: Quote \| Profile \| Research This Is a Reply to: Msg 11 by COMMCON <- Previous Message 1162 of 1162 Reply This message is off the Yahoo Board. Interesting.