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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Beltropolis Boy who wrote (1523)	7/1/1998 6:30:00 PM
From: Ray Jensen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Chris, I read some posts in the AFC thread today. Didn't appear that there was much to say about the UMC 1000, or how it is typically used in telecom networks. Since this is AFC's main (only??) revenue source, it's logical that AFC would have a more volatile share price than a big, diversified telecom vendor like LU, NT, or Alcatel. It's not surprising that a 50% earnings warning along with a CEO resignation could pummel the share price of just about any high altitude, small cap tech stock, no matter how good their product. In a job that I worked in until a few months ago, the UMC 1000 was just beginning to be deployed for the niche application that you mentioned, i.e., as a universal digital loop carrier system in sparsely populated areas. The fact that newcomer AFC was selected by a big telco for this application from a very competitive bid process, over much more established rivals like DIGI, NT and LU speaks something for the UMC 1000. In addition, most big telcos do not like to deploy every new toy and gadget that comes out of the factory. Once a piece of equipment is in the network, it has to be supported with training for lots of technicians and needs a big spare parts inventory. So, the tendency is to keep the number of new systems to an absolute minimum, and prolong the lifecycle of existing technology when feasible. With the proliferation of demand for services like ISDN, T1 and additional voice lines in rural areas, many telcos have struggled to meet the demand with earlier generations of digital loop carrier systems. The problem with the earlier DLC systems (like LU's SLC-96 or SLC Series 5) is that they were primarily intended for POTS, and often needed separate shelves in remote terminals for non-POTS plugins. The top selling features with most telcos regarding the UMC1000 is that you can mix and match POTS, ISDN, T1 and any other special service plugin within the one remote terminal shelf. In addition, you can feed a UMC remote terminal from the central office via fiber, T1 over repeated span copper pairs, or T1 over HDSL copper pairs. UMC1000 remote terminals can also be fed in series with each other, or in a lot of tree and branch combinations. This is more flexible than any DLC system that I have seen, but there may be some others out there that can do this too. I have a hunch that DIGI's next software release 8.XX of Litespan 2000 will handle all this plus some, but I don't know what the price differences are. In a rural area that you don't want to spend a lot of time and $$ in with re-engineering, the things I mentioned above are a big deal, and are a big reason that AFC was able to get a foothold in the extremely competitive market of DLC systems for telcos in the US and elsewhere. In metro and suburban areas where there is usually a need to place large DLC systems, some of the unique features of the UMC1000 in rural applications are not as much of a big deal. Next generation DLC systems to be released over the next year for suburban and urban applications will be SONET add-drop multiplexors with flexible shelf plugin configurations that support almost any voice and data service. A remote terminal site like a controlled environmental vault that today is equipped with a standalone SONET OC-12 add-drop mux for large quantities of data services, and a standalone DLC system for voice, ISDN, and other narrowband services will merge into a single, integrated product from a single vendor. This SONET + DLC combo system is what lots of telcos are holding out for. I'm not surprised that GTE or any telco is holding back a bit on DLC long term contracts until they see the new stuff in their labs. Just my .02 worth. Ray.